Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/April 2024

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

April 22[edit]

April 22, 2024 (2024-04-22) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology

  • NASA announces that it has received decipherable data from the Voyager 1 space probe for the first time in five months. (CNN)

(Posted) RD: Joel Breman[edit]

Article: Joel Breman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

NY Times obit published 22 April. Thriley (talk) 14:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is sufficiently sourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Voyager 1 contact resumed[edit]

Posted and will remain so. Stephen 23:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: Voyager 1 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NASA announces receiving decipherable data from Voyager 1 for the first time in five months. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Over five months, NASA resolves a failure in Voyager 1's flight data system and resumes receiving decipherable data from the probe.
Alternative blurb II: ​ After five months of attempts, NASA resolves a failure in Voyager 1's flight data system, and receives decipherable data from the space probe again.
News source(s): NASA JPL CNN
Credits:

Article updated

After rearranging code from a defective Voyager 1 chip, NASA is finally getting back data from the furthest probe in the Solar System! Honestly, it's a little miracle that they managed to save the half-century old probe. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 08:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Significant, and a nice departure from our normal doom and gloom and elections. BilledMammal (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Just heard about this on radio news in Australia. An impressive feat. HiLo48 (talk) 08:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Notable, and the article is of sufficiently good quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per above, and of particular interest due to the ingenuity of humankind. Kcmastrpc (talk) 11:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support though I don't think the blurb is really sufficient. First off we don't need to say "NASA announces..." but thats minor, there's something to be said that they had been troubleshooting V1 for the last five months (over that great distance and with age of the computer) to resolve that. --Masem (t) 12:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added altblurb, what do you think of it? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 12:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have simplified Alt1 down but that I think is more reasonable. --Masem (t) 12:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        Great, thanks! Alt2 (my own attempt at simplifying) probably isn't needed then. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 12:12, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - well-written and In the News. Great find! Staraction (talk | contribs) 13:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Interesting and great news! ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Always nice to see more science news pop up in ITN, especially in regards to one of the most ambitious space exploration programs in history. ArkHyena (talk) 17:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT1 per above. Science! The Kip 18:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 19:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support I thought we were witnessing the end of one of the greatest spacecrafts to ever leave this planet. Very good that it's gonna last a little longer atleast. TwistedAxe [contact] 22:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, I don't get why this is so important, but I see I am in the minority. But the image... is it possible to have one showing it against the black background of space? White is jarring. Abductive (reasoning) 23:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably File:Voyager, 1977-Present (8981696768).jpg. Aaron Liu (talk) 02:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not white. It's a transparent background Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 02:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose. This and the recent Ichthyotitan description just don't seem important enough to slap on the front page. I get that covering deaths and genocides and election cycles is exhausting, but we shouldn't be straining to find 'positive' stuff to cover. wound theology◈ 04:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Cringe. This is far more encyclopedic than those death and protest news. This is what ITN should be about. 113.160.44.130 (talk) 13:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Deaths and disasters and election cycles have direct consequences for people. That is why they are immediately newsworthy. Voyager 1 regaining contact and the description of a new species are very minor in comparison. I think that Wikipedia editors are biased here: our interests will lead us to give undue weight to events in the sciences. wound theology◈ 23:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The new ancient species thing does seem somewhat arbitrary and inconsequential. Now, if that lifeform were intelligent, different circumstances. However, Voyager 1 resuming communications means we get a couple more years worth of data about the universe we are temporarily a part of that we simply have no other way of obtaining, that does seem consequential. Kcmastrpc (talk) 23:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Each time the US Supreme Court went from a 5-4 to a 4-4 to a 4-5 to a 3-6 left-right split had somewhat big consequences especially collectively some of which we've seen already and few non-Americans on ITN gave a shit. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 06:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is WP:WHATABOUTISM, I personally think that most of Wikipedia exhibits a strong American bias, including coverage of Voyager 1 -- let's not forget the political and cultural context of the Space Race. American vanity projects, big woop. That's not really relevant here though; the nominator here explicitly mentioned wanting a counterpoint to the negativity in the news. Unfortunately, life sucks and then you die. It's a lot easier to do evil than to do good...at least, it's a lot easier to do evil things that are notable. wound theology◈ 06:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC) I misread the tone of your argument here. wound theology◈ 06:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Voyager 1 spacecraft wasn't really the Space Race. While it's true it was 1964 when science realized the planets briefly spiral
once per 175 yrs allowing a sane rocket to kick a small probe to Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and the stars* with enormous travel time savings but this wasn't really on White House radar till 1970. And was cancelled '71 ("resurrected" '72) and V1 would've seen Uranus+Neptune if the other V broke so the late 1970s was the only time it could gravitationally slingshot out the spiral.
2 wasn't slingshotted as good as 1 to see moons & stuff, it even passed Neptune on the momentum-robbing side
*that'd take tens of millennia - it's only 4x farther than Pluto so far which is barely enough to discover some of the stuff beyond the solar-stellar wind fighting area before it dies (like interstellar sound). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 09:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Man, these photos are really fucking up this thread. wound theology◈ 10:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They largest is a third a full nomination width on my oldest phone (very low resolution) with default WP image settings (220px). Are they bigger for you? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:15, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • [T]he nominator here explicitly mentioned wanting a counterpoint to the negativity in the news. No, I did not, and that was not the reason for this nomination. I was just pleasantly surprised that Voyager 1 was unexpectedly saved, and figured out it deserved attention. I only mentioned offsetting the negativity on the Ichthyotitan nomination, but that was as a possible consequence of the nomination rather than as a reason for it. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 06:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here -- admittedly I was too lazy to track down the Icthyotitan nom. Regardless, I struck my comment anyway. wound theology◈ 07:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I too was surprised it had so much support. It's the furthest human object (besides turning on outdoor lights and things like that) from 1998 to forever unless something faster is launched in the future (which has never been a serious proposal) and its power source is estimated to deplete to the point of communication and data gathering ability loss around 2025. Is that enough? I dunno, I'm not you or consensus. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support A lot of folk may expect ITN to be basically a ticker purely for big geopolitical news, but they'd miss the point that Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, isn't focused on just that, but on things of encyclopedic importance. This means covering a lot of science news, which is something that universally most mainstream news sources relegate to be buried far below the front-page headlines. And this is definitely one of those stories that, while it gets relegated on geopolitical outlets like NYT or BBC, is certainly a major news story. This reflects how Wikipedia has a different focus than sites like those. Nottheking (talk) 04:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia, despite being an encyclopedia, is not on a mission to prove that science news is more important or even as important as geopolitical happenings. Straining to find things that are positive to offset the dirge of negative stories is giving undue weight to relatively minor things -- geopolitics concern real human lives, which is why they are given so much attention in mainstream sources (and Wikipedia is biased towards mainstream sources.) Encyclopedias cover the entire realm of human knowledge -- not just geopolitics, but also not just geopolitics and science news. Wikipedia editors are more similar than we are different -- let's be honest here, we're all a bunch of nerds and of course new species descriptions and astronomical events are going to stand out to us. wound theology◈ 06:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The US election ongoing got a pile of opposes with little to no sympathy. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 06:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The US is not the only country in the world, and the actual election is in half a year. I don't see how these are really comparable at all. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 06:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not the only country in the world, but it is one of the most populous, and one of the most influential geopolitically. wound theology◈ 06:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We're an encyclopedia, so we should be trying to weigh all fields of knowledge equally - space probe news is equally as important as anthropology which is equally as important as US politics which is equally as important as what's happening in Gaza - because these are all areas of knowledge that get significant coverage that we can document as a reference work. We're not a newspaper which would weight politics and wars higher than space news or discovery of ancient bones. We also work to fight the systematic bias that occurs from 24/7 media channels. Masem (t) 16:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull how is does this possibly rise to blurb-level significance? 'Spacecraft continues operating' is not of ITN importance. If NASA had declared Voyager 1 lost, that would be worth posting as the end of its mission. Merely recovering from a glitch is not enough for me. Such temporary setbacks are common (TESS and Hubble have both had recent ones) and this one only took so long to resolve because of the great distance (hence slow communications) with Voyager. None of the !votes above convince me that this is anything more than an ephemeral hiccup in the mission. I'm generally in favour of posting scientific news but this is minor stuff. Modest Genius talk 10:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull While I don't feel particularly strongly about it, I have to agree with Modest Genius. Voyager was never declared lost and the spacecraft continues to operate after an interruption. Also, the transparent image on the front page doesn't look very appealing. Johndavies837 (talk) 10:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull - I don't really enjoy pulling blurbs. But the current one is misleading and implies that the spacecraft had become lost or defunct, and this is not the case. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I had suggested the alt blurb, that is what makes the story (and doesn't make it seem like V1 was lost) - NASA engineers fixed Voyager 1's systems which is a massive engineering achievement given the age and limited capability of the equipment, distance it is away and thus the time for communications. Masem (t) 16:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support - per supports and global significance. This and Voyager 2 are furthest-traveled probes in human history. Losing meaningful contact was big news, and reestablishing that coherent contact after months is also big news. Opposers and pullers utterly fail to convince that the consensus-posted blurb should be pulled. Jusdafax (talk) 00:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has been getting more readers than all the other articles that we're blurbing currently and so it evidently makes the grade. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Brian Tobin (tennis)[edit]

Article: Brian Tobin (tennis) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:

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

President of the International Tennis Federation.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article meets bare minimum requirement. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Cecil Williams[edit]

Article: Cecil Williams (pastor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KQED
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American pastor and civil rights activist. Funcrunch (talk) 02:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support. Williams' death has received very little coverage outside San Francisco; nevertheless he was a pretty relevant figure in the civil rights movement and I could see a case being made for this RD. Support I have just been informed that the above information is irrelevant to this discussion. Thank you. In that case, everything else looks good to me. Poxy4 (talk) 14:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Poxy4 Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. The only thing to discuss is if the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - reason is the same as above, it meets quality standards LuxembourgBoy42 (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Lead needs at least a sentence or two more on his notability.—Bagumba (talk) 07:49, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba: expanded as well as I could from article prose. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 21[edit]

April 21, 2024 (2024-04-21) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

RD: Jerome Rothenberg[edit]

Article: Jerome Rothenberg (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Jacket2.org; Zeta Tijuana
Credits:

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

This poet, anthologist, translator and interpreter has been a fundamental American literary voice for 60+ years. His book Technicians of the Sacred is a classic. But this article’s RD status is not ready, and has been tagged since 2012. Apparently the SOP is to list this under date of death, even if it takes a few days for a credible source to verify death.Note: this is listed under April 23 b/c that’s the earliest, credibly sourced date available in English confirming Rothenberg’s death (tho a source in Spanish was dated April 22, and social media reported it hours after his passing on April 21). Trauma Novitiate (talk) 04:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Quite a few footnote-free paragraphs. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 10:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Sri Lankan Fox Hill Supercross race crash[edit]

Article: 2024 Fox Hill Supercross race crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A car crash in a motorsporting event in Sri Lanka leaves seven people dead. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated

It has been the news headline due to the significance of the return of the said motorsport event in Sri Lanka after five years. Abishe (talk) 10:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Oppose - this is worthy, however, the page still has a long way to go for polishing and wiki linking before it should be added LuxembourgBoy42 (talk) 21:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - well cited and seems notable Abo Yemen✉ 14:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – I've posted my concerns about WP:NPOV on the article's talk page. Schwede66 21:14, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Michael Cuscuna[edit]

Article: Michael Cuscuna (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WRTI
Credits:

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

Fairly short Mach61 02:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article do not have {{Infobox person}} and the awards section is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrinceofPunjab Both of those issues have been resolved Mach61 13:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support looks just about long enough to post, and everything looks sourced. Note that having an infobox is not an article or ITN requirement, as per MOS:INFOBOXUSE. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - article is short but seems just long enough to post ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:05, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is short on biographical detail. The WRTI source has a lot of content that could make this a much better bio. Schwede66 21:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Terry A. Anderson[edit]

Article: Terry A. Anderson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ReutersThe New York Times
Credits:

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

Held hostage in Lebanon.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:10, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 01:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nomination. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 03:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose due to a large amount of unsourced text in the hostage in Lebanon section. And just a reminder that notability does not matter for RD's. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As WP:ITNQUALITY notes, Articles should be well referenced; one or two "citation needed" tags may not hold up an article, but any contentious statements must have a source, and having entire sections without any sources is unacceptable. Overall the article is well referenced. And I added several references to address one of them. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 17:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I removed the cn-tagged paragraph after questioning its relevance to Anderson himself, so should be good to go now ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a few {cn} tags in the Post-captivity life section. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 23:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan–Pakistan floods[edit]

Article: 2024 Afghanistan–Pakistan floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 130 people died in floods in Afghanistan and Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, CNN, VOA, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, CBS, DW, Washington Post, BBC
Credits:

Ainty Painty (talk) 03:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support in principal but the article needs a little bit of expansion. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per Andrew and a combined blurb. The AP (talk) 12:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment With articles (some of which I think we've blurbed previously) like 2023 Pakistan floods, 2023 Afghanistan floods, 2022 Pakistan floods, 2022 Afghanistan floods, 2021 Afghan floods, etc. it's hard to see how this is even notable, let alone blurb-worthy. Nfitz (talk) 19:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Its only notable because it is a continuation of the rain and flooding that hit the Middle East, hence while that one system should be a single article and covered that way. Regular seasonal flooding of that area that comes from normal storm patterns may be appropriate for ongoing once that season starts, but we shouldn't be posting regular annual weather aspects otherwise. Masem (t) 19:17, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CheetasOnMission (talk) 12:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose there's an ongoing merge discussion. If merged, then blurb should be updated, and if not merged, then this event on its own isn't ITN worthy (and the article is questionably notable on its own anyway). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 20[edit]

April 20, 2024 (2024-04-20) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

(Posted) RD: Andrew Davis (conductor)[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Andrew Davis (conductor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Famous conductor Andrew🐉(talk) 12:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Andrew, thank you for nominating. Next time, please under the day of death, and yes for updated only when done (not yet).There's a lot about contracts, and little music, and refs missing for the recordings, also there must be more, no? He held chief positions in three continents! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Now everything mentioned also has a source. I can't fix the note on the article talk to here, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article looks good. One cn tag, but that shouldn't keep this from getting posted. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Now sourced. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks good. Well sourced. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 19:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Lourdes Portillo[edit]

Article: Lourdes Portillo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): IndieWire, Los Angeles Times, Variety, Deadline Hollywood
Credits:

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

Mexican filmmaker and activist. 240F:7A:6253:1:DBD:7A2C:458C:FE69 (talk) 07:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Howie Schwab[edit]

Article: Howie Schwab (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

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

240F:7A:6253:1:DBD:7A2C:458C:FE69 (talk) 07:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose We don't post stubs. Schwede66 00:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • With merely 208 words of prose, this stubby wikibio needs an expansion to qualify. --PFHLai (talk) 03:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's at 1960 B (323 words).—Bagumba (talk) 07:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's on the short side but ok. Once the two citation needed tags are gone, I'd say it's good enough to post. Schwede66 21:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has enough details & references now. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Roman Gabriel[edit]

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

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

Needs a lot of work. Natg 19 (talk) 01:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BeanieFan11: can you work on this? Natg 19 (talk) 01:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You know, I was just thinking about doing that. I probably should be able to do it soon. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:00, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I've turned out to be busier than expected and I haven't had a chance to work on this. I don't think I'll be able to with the NFL Draft going on today and tomorrow. Sorry. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Gediminas Kirkilas[edit]

Article: Gediminas Kirkilas (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:

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

Needs some work. Natg 19 (talk) 01:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the article needs so much expansion. There are just 3 lines covering his premiership. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Kunwar Sarvesh Kumar Singh[edit]

Article: Kunwar Sarvesh Kumar Singh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Credits:

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

Needs some work. Natg 19 (talk) 01:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the article needs more sourcing. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 19[edit]

April 19, 2024 (2024-04-19) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

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

Article: Bill Tobin (American football) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

NFL executive.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait there is no obvious issue here, but the career section needs some expansion and early life section could use a bit more referencing. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No mention of playing career in body, just unsourced details in lead and infobox, even if he is most notable as executive. Here's a source for a sentence or two,[4] which should be sufficient.—Bagumba (talk) 07:08, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Time for another review, please? --PFHLai (talk) 21:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 04:38, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Leighton James[edit]

Article: Leighton James (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport
Credits:

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

Former Wales footballer. Lead needs expansionPharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is in a good shape. Only problem is that the last two lines of Club career section needs sourcing. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Three {cn} tags remaining. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 03:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Daniel Dennett[edit]

Article: Daniel Dennett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

American philosopher.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article looks good to me - went to add it here myself and got edit-conflicted. --Opus 113 (talk) 20:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support there is one cn tag but that should not hold this article from getting posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Too many unreferenced paragraphs. Stephen 05:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At his point, it's two unsourced sentences tagged. —Bagumba (talk) 06:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've tagged a lot more unreferenced stuff. And the citation style where his works are referred to in the prose, with the citation just giving page numbers, is also not up to scratch. Schwede66 20:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Francis Omondi Ogolla[edit]

Article: Francis Omondi Ogolla (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

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

Ainty Painty (talk) 16:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there is one cn tag and the last line of death section is not sourced. It would be better if reactions section is merged with the death one and replace a tweet source with a better one. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:57, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing : 2024 United States presidential election[edit]

(NON-ADMIN CLOSURE)
Early by seven months. The Kip 15:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 2024 United States presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chinese coverage, British coverage,Indian coverage, African coverage, Qatari coverage
Credits:

Article updated

Alright. There is a large scale interest in this election, not even just in the US but also in European countries and India. Elections have been posted to ongoing before and I believe this would be beneficial to Wikipedia. Lukt64 (talk)

Oppose - Unlike India, the election isn't "ongoing", a campaign that's still going to last more than half a year is. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The general election is already WP:ITNR and I don't see how any other events would be ITN worthy (aside from a theoretical Trump conviction, which wouldn't really be covered by the election article anyway). Estreyeria (talk) 13:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - In India, the voting stages have begun. In a UK election, parliament would be dissolved a set time before the election. The US election just isn't 'ongoing' in either of these senses. It's many months away, and the party conferences haven't even happened. The US electoral process is absurdly protracted, but let's not get way ahead of ourselves. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose seriously no. There is no argument to support this nomination. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:09, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) 2024 Indian general election (ongoing)[edit]

No consensus to post. Stephen 05:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 2024 Indian general election (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera, The Times of India, The Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is world’s biggest election in the world's most populous country. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we don't generally post elections onto ongoing. Also, there's about 1 election a week, so it's unlikely that there will be significant updates every 1-2 days, which is a requirement for ongoing. The article itself has no prose updates to even say election started. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Joseph.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - We have posted elections into ongoing before - For example we put the 2020 U.S. elections in ongoing, mainly due to the long vote count that took place. India is the most populous country in the world, nearly 1 Billion people are eligible to vote. The election is massively in the news, its organisation itself being notable as this is the largest democratic vote held in human history. Absolutely deserves to be ongoing for the duration of it. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only problem is that ongoing is massively clogged at the moment. My personal opinion is to take off Myanmar and Sudan, while merging the Red Sea Crisis into a 'Spillover' item. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not nearly the only problem. This is a contentious topic which will tend to attract campaigners seeking to influence the outcome. DYK embargoes election coverage for 30 days ahead of the poll -- see WP:DYKELECT. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's DYK, not ITN. Even then, no election candidates are in this item. How would this rule apply here? We've posted many contentious topics that were even more controversial than this PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Elections are ongoing in the UK – I'm getting leaflets and canvassing currently. And the US has its presidential election and whatever else. Politics is endlessly ongoing everywhere, it seems. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andrew I think it is wrong to compare these elections with UK or US elections. Next United Kingdom general election have no fixed date in sight, we do not know whether the voting will take place next month or the next year. 2024 United States presidential election will take place on November 5th. I put this up for nomination today because official voting have started from today even though the campaign for these have been going on from the start of the year. PrinceofPunjabTALK 09:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Voting hasn't begun in the UK yet. India is such a massive and populous country that it takes a month for everyone in the country to vote. Here's an interesting video about it . 1/8th of the world is voting in this election, nuts PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That video is four years old because this protracted process is not new; it was much the same last time. ITN posted the results at the end in the usual way. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The FIFA World Cup has happened before even more regularly, yet we put it in ongoing. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    FIFA is explicitly stated for ongoing and outcome blurb entries in WP:ITN/R, and it was perhaps by its entry in ITN/R that allowed it to be posted as ongoing despite what could had been a no consensus close in the last discussion. Going by ITN/R, only the election results will be posted. If you have issues with FIFA getting an ongoing entry, it can be discussed on the talk page. – robertsky (talk) 14:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    With FIFA, there's ongoing results as matches are played and teams eliminated. So there is "result" news happening every week FIFA is going. With elections, the "result" news is typically when the election is over and reported, so it is normally just a singular blurb. Masem (t) 15:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Andrew, that's disingenuous. The current UK election period is for local elections and one single parliamentary by-election. The Indian election is a general election. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have a general election coming too. That has had an article for over four years and it has averaged more than one edit every day throughout that period. It's in the news often and its readership is comparable with the South Korean election that we're currently blurbing. Such politics is ongoing all the time here. It might be nice to live a country which doesn't have party politics. But then there's the weather per our current lead blurb... Andrew🐉(talk) 15:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It should be noted that this is not the election campaign, but the election itself that is taking place over several months, unlike in places like the US. Also, the results progressively coming from each phase of the election mean we might have significant updates every few days. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 09:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the world's largest democracy is holding a election that is biggest in the human history and it is regularly getting large number of page views. LiamKorda 10:33, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't what ongoing is for. When the election results are announced, they'll certainly be notable enough for a blurb, but there are unlikely to be a sufficiently high number of updates, as per Joseph. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Putting any election into ongoing is a bad use of it. If we put India's, we clearly have to put the US's because of how important this one is, and that starts a slipperly slope for all election seasons. We will absolutely post the results (assuming the article is good). To add that adding the unknown factors in the 2020 US election after election day into ongoing made sense, since at that point the news cycle was not about campaigning any more but all the legal challenges to the vote. Should the Indian election turn that way after the campaigning is over, leaving a major question of who won, then that might also be worth ongoing. But in the pre-voting period, the bulk of the news is all about campaigns, and that's something we shouldn't give attention to at ITN. --Masem (t) 12:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, we're not in the pre-voting period. The vote started today, and lasts a whole month. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it is different to other countries as the voting is over a longer period of time (not one day like most other country elections, and a few days for EU elections). Nevertheless, the article doesn't meet the criteria of WP:ONGOING: In general, articles are not posted to ongoing merely because they are related to events that are still happening. In order to be posted to ongoing, the article needs to be regularly updated with new, pertinent information. There are no recent regular updates on this article at present, and these regular updates would need to be maintained throughout the election period to keep it on ongoing if posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    When will the votes be tallied? During the voting period or after its over? If they aren't being tallied over this month, then this is still in the campaigning phase, and we can wait to post the results. — Masem (t) 15:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A country having general elections in most cases isn't newsworthy unless the country is new to the democratic process, or returning from an undemocractic one (even then, this would have been events separate from the elections). India having month-long elections is a procedural one designed for its circumstances. Is it noteworthy, yes, news worthy? No. However, if there is/are (touch wood) major disruptions to the election process, we can consider them for blurb(s). Also to note that the 2019 elections generated... one nomination. – robertsky (talk) 15:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As per the election schedule section of the article, voting will be taking place with around one week breaks, meaning there will not be enough updates for this to go in ongoing. Gödel2200 (talk) 16:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Even though India is the biggest democracy, we only post the results of the election TheAstorPastor (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Regardless of the amount of people voting in this election, I don't think we should post anything about it until the winner of the election is announced (unless a major disruption occurs, per above, but we will cross that bridge if we ever come to it). Moncoposig (talk) 21:08, 19 April 2024 (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.

Israeli retaliation (ongoing)[edit]

Article: 2024 Iran–Israel conflict (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Still breaking, but MSM is both reporting and mentioning israel and iran. You may remove oil prices, but i just screenshotted it on my phone and is almost 3% up. User:37.252.95.10

  • Support but needs its own separate article when official info is ready. 142.117.133.114 (talk) 02:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should try to wait until we have confirmation what actually happened, beyond reports of explosions. That said, if we're going to have this tit-for-tat conflict here, that's probably where one page summarizing these events as a whole are needed, not individual articles for each attack. (This is a long-standing NOTNEWS problem). Masem (t) 02:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like olympics or other events, could be ongoing. Would need a chronology article. Do you thinking ongoing is better than a bump? There is going to be a counter from iran too. (speculative on my end, i admit, but chronology still adds up since its all inside a week).37.252.95.10 (talk) 02:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming we get a decent article covering the 2024 Israeli - Iranian Crisis, I'd probably support this as an ongoing item. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the original article doesn't even consolidate Iranian seizure of the MSC Aries. Clearly they are related.37.252.95.10 (talk) 03:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming that the reports are that this was a single strike at a site near an Iranian nuclear facility, this is absolutely better suited for an ongoing item on the conflict than an individual article. — Masem (t) 03:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hear (not substantiated yet) there was a strike on some outpost in Syria and something in Iraq. Probs more reason for ongoing. If anyone wants to create that page.37.252.95.10 (talk) 03:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the newsbox above has this 2024 Iran–Israel conflict. Maybe ill convert this to an ongoing thing.37.252.95.10 (talk) 04:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
done.37.252.95.10 (talk) 04:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update the existing blurb about the previous strikes. When that scrolls off, we can consider Ongoing if the tit for tat is continuing. In any case, we need more clarity and confirmation as "Officials are saying there has been no attack...". Andrew🐉(talk) 08:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update and put it in Ongoing when that rolls off. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 09:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Ongoing—The situation is evolving dramatically by the day, and has two of the most powerful countries in the Middle East at the brink of all-out war. If any conflict merits an Ongoing, it's this one. Kurtis (talk) 10:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Red Sea into Spillover - Very notable event, but would be best to merge with the Red Sea Crisis item into one 'spillover' of the Hamas War. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The conflict in the Red Sea is still ongoing as long as it is having an impact on shipping and economic activities. If the ships have started to use the channel normally then the spillover link can be removed. This conflict is only more notable than the Yemen conflict because of the disruption to shipping.
    Shironese (talk) 14:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Waiting until the entire conflict ends to take the item off is an arbitrary metric, conflicts often last for decades without any major events. Best to merge PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The events of this conflict can be adequately covered in ongoing by either the Spillover of the Israel-Hamas war article, or the Timeline of the Israel–Hamas war (12 January 2024 – present) article, one if which (preferably the latter, IMO) seems to have consensus to replace the Red Sea crisis item in ongoing with. Gödel2200 (talk) 16:35, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, if we're going to post it then let's post it independently, it is not a part of red sea crisis or any other ongoing news, it's a separate event with loose connection to other ongoing wars. 3000MAX (talk) 17:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - both sides have said it's over. The pundits seem to agree. That seems to be the opposite of ongoing to me. And is the final volley of 3 missiles even notable? If it ever happened - Iran is saying it didn't even happen! How many different countries has Iran fired missiles at recently ... Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Isreal ... did I miss any? Nfitz (talk) 23:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's true. If there's any further engagement between the two countries then we can re-review, but the situation seems to have cooled down PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - as Nfitz said, both sides said it's over. Fileyfood500 (talk) 17:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as it is spill over from a conflict already listed as ongoing. Yakikaki (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - As Chamberlain might say, we missed the bus. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 18[edit]

April 18, 2024 (2024-04-18) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Sports

Vasuki indicus (Reviewers needed)[edit]

Article: Vasuki indicus (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Vasuki indicus, possibly the largest known snake, is formally described. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Vasuki indicus, possibly the largest known snake at 10.9–15.2 metres (36–50 feet) long, is formally described.
News source(s): Scientific Reports, AP News, CNN, CBS News
Credits:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaylockjam10 (talk • contribs) 07:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support although, unlike Ichthyotitan, it should be noted that the length estimates overlap heavily with Titanoboa, with only the higher estimates making it the largest. Either way, this really seems to be the giant fossil season and I'm all for it! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 08:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The uncertainty is why I wrote possibly in the blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mandisa[edit]

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

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

American gospel and contemporary Christian recording artist.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there are several paragraphs ending without a reference, multiple cn tags and the Awards section is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:00, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article subject's death is notable and newsworthy as it has been covered by news sources worldwide. A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 14:00, 23 April 2024 (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. This vote doesn't take that into account in any way. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Dickey Betts[edit]

Article: Dickey Betts (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:

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

Guitarist for The Allman Brothers Band. 240F:7A:6253:1:A1DE:A47F:63DC:BD77 (talk) 16:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there is an orange tag and several cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 17:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Croatian parliamentary election[edit]

Article: 2024 Croatian parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The HDZ-led coalition wins a plurality of votes in the parliamentary election in Croatia but fall well short of a parliamentary majority. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: As always with these elections it'll be now coalition negotiation time, but the main news is HDZ won but maybe not as by much as they would like. A slightly bigger aftermath and commentary on the results would be nice, but it's not a bad article at all. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support as it is under ITN/R LuxembourgBoy42 (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There is virtually no prose in the "results" and "aftermath" sections. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:33, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Chaotic Enby: how about now, since both have been expanded? Abcmaxx (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much better, count me as support then! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Admin comment I'm willing to post this once meaningful prose has been added to the "Results" section. Please ping me when it's done. Schwede66 19:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Schwede66: I have expanded it significantly, although it's difficult not to overlap with the aftermath section. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cool. I’ll be out for the next 6 or 8 hours. If another admin wants to have a look in the meantime, that will be good as well. Schwede66 21:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted and apologies for the delay in getting onto it. Schwede66 20:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 17[edit]

April 17, 2024 (2024-04-17) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

(Posted) Ichthyotitan[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Ichthyotitan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ichthyotitan (pictured), the largest marine reptile ever known, is formally described. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Ichthyotitan (pictured), the largest marine reptile ever known, measuring around 25 metres (82 ft) long, is formally described.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Ichthyotitan (pictured), possibly the largest marine reptile ever known at around 25 metres (82 ft) long, is formally described.
News source(s): Peer-reviewed article in PLoS One The Guardian CNN
Credits:

Article updated

What about a scientific discovery, to change a bit from the wars, politics and disasters? A new species of ichthyosaur of absolutely gigantic proportions, nearly as big as a blue whale and possibly still growing at the time of death. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 08:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support – Hell yeah, back to our encyclopedia roots. However, there is a lot of insecurity about whether or not it actually would be the longest ever. I don't think we can make such a certain claim in our lede. The article could use some expansion too I think. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Down to help with the expansion part! Just added an altblurb for the "possibly" thing. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 08:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I expanded the article quite a lot, it should be fine now. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh beautiful work! ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 1. Paleontology is a science where facts (especially animal size) are changing all the time with new discoveries and new analysis from other researcher. 2. It's only partial skeleton (heck, there is only jawbones), scientist speculate all the time so it's not really newsworthy Afif Brika1 (talk) 10:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While the size was given with a margin of error, it's not fair to say that it is only speculation—all of science changes in light of new evidence, that doesn't mean we shouldn't have scientific news on ITN. The bones found are very much larger than those of Shastasaurus sikanniensis, its cousin and predecessor as record-holder. Plus, the news is the discovery (being formally published), not just scientists making a new length estimate. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 11:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Chaotic Enby. This is more than just a theory or hypothesis, this a scientific discovery backed by evidence. Unless someone proves otherwise, then these are the current set of facts. The earth was verifiably flat until it was proven it definitely was not and the sun revolved round it, until it was proven it was the other way round etc. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What an utterly bizarre comment. Black Kite (talk) 18:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support scientific discoveries like these should be posted. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - already a B-class article and seems notable Abo Yemen✉ 14:37, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is fine. This is the sort of thing we should be featuring. Black Kite (talk) 18:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Peer-reviewed finding covered in news, and article looks fine. --Masem (t) 19:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Fine article, important discovery. Yakikaki (talk) 19:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 05:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You beat me to it by a few minutes. :-) Schwede66 05:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And User:Spencer protected the picture, so he was on the ball too! Stephen 05:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support Just wanted to say I was very happy when I went to Wikipedia today and saw this on the main page. I hope we start posting things like this more often, ITN has the potential to be so much more than just a bullet-point list of horrible tragedies. Glad to see many others feel the same way. Great idea nominating this & many thanks to the editors worked on the article!  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks a lot! I'll try to nominate and write more of these if I find about them! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support Agreeing with Vanilla Wizard. Good to see some none-tragic news hitting the headlines at Wikipedia. ITN could benefit from more stories like this getting blurbed (scientific achievements, etc.) --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Sue Chew[edit]

Article: Sue Chew (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://idahocapitalsun.com/2024/04/18/longest-serving-democrat-in-idaho-legislature-dies-from-pancreatic-cancer/
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.

American politician, Member of the Idaho House of Representatives. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 03:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there is no information about her political career and otherwise have very little prose. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article is practically a stub. Schwede66 19:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Austin Murphy[edit]

Article: Austin Murphy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Observer-Reporter
Credits:

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

Former U.S. representative from Pennsylvania. The article needs work but the linked news article reporting his death has a lot of details which can be added. Curbon7 (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Article needs some ref work and there's little information about his political career, especially his tenure his congress (besides the extensive info about scandals). Nothing about committee assigns or anything other besides his scandals are mentioned. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I've placed three citation needed tags. Schwede66 19:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Schwede66: I referenced everything that needed a citation. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Persian Gulf floods[edit]

Article: 2024 Persian Gulf floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Floods in the Gulf states killed 18 people in Oman, while the United Arab Emirates experienced its heaviest rainfall in 75 years. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Flooding in the Gulf states leaves 20 people dead.
News source(s): NY Times, Al Jazeera, Reuters, The Guardian, Khaleej Times, BBC,
Credits:

Ainty Painty (talk) 07:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The event is notable and the article seems to be of sufficiently good quality and sourcing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 09:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle. 'Heavy rainfall in the Gulf states' had been an excellent example of an oxymoron before this happened.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:20, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. 10 inches of rain poured in 24 hours in parts of the UAE, highest since Emirati climate records began in 1949! Unprecedented in a normally arid part of the world. Droodkin (talk) 10:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle but the article is currently a bit small and needs to be expanded. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, oppose on quality seeding has already been dismissed as the cause, this was just a very unusual storm pattern that caused flooding. The BG section of the article doesn't mention the weather system at all and focuses too much on the seeding part. Masem (t) 15:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, unique meteorological event with a major impact. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 17:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability Abo Yemen✉ 18:06, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a rare and notable weather event --Μιχαήλ Δεληγιάννης (talk) 22:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality some places got 2-3 times their annual rainfall in a matter of hours, and the 2nd largest airport in the world was closed. However, article is orange tagged, which needs fixing. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article looks quite a bit better now, so changing vote to support. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Article still fails to explain the fundamental weather system that caused the rainfall and focuses too much if seeding and long term climate change. Our weather disaster articles nearly always dip into details about the weather systems that lead to these disasters. Masem (t) 18:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 02:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Blurb is wrong, there have been floodings in yemen too (which is not a gulf state) and a person died there. Maybe change it to the statesof Arabian peninsula or something close to that Abo Yemen✉ 08:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Iran is not in the Arabian peninsula though, and the floods do not cover the whole Middle East either. Abcmaxx (talk) 14:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Arabian Peninsula != Middle east
    Just change it to "the states of the Arabian Peninsula and Iran" Abo Yemen✉ 15:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Stephen: The blurb is incorrect. Currently, the blurb states “Flooding in the Arab Gulf states leaves at least twenty-four people dead.” This is factually incorrect as Iran has had eight casualties and is not one of the Arab states of the Persian Gulf. The blurb should instead state “Flooding in the Persian Gulf leaves at least thirty-two people dead.” --Bijanii (talk) 23:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • With the fatality in Yemen now, it could also state “Flooding in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula leaves more than thirty people dead.” The current blurb - “Flooding in the Arab Gulf states leaves more than thirty people dead.” - is still incorrect and needs to be changed. --Bijanii (talk) 18:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Chernihiv missile attack[edit]

Consensus to post is unlikely to develop. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 03:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: April 2024 Chernihiv missile strike (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A missile attack kills 17 people in Chernihiv, Ukraine, while more than 60 people are injured. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Al Jazeera Reuters The Guardian Washington Post ABC News Kyiv Independent NY Times
Credits:
NYMan6 (talk) 15:48, 17 April 2024 (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.

April 16[edit]

April 16, 2024 (2024-04-16) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

RD: A. T. Ariyaratne[edit]

Article: A. T. Ariyaratne (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hiru News
Credits:

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

Sri Lankan activist, the legendary founder of the Sarvodaya Movement. Titanciwikitalk/contrib 07:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the Ariyaratne's Buddhist Ideas section have several unsourced statements and is using just one sources numerous times. Same with Buddhist Economics section. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as it is poorly cited. For example, most of the "Honours and awards" section is unreferenced. Schwede66 19:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Palitha Thewarapperuma[edit]

Article: Palitha Thewarapperuma (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Ada Derana
Credits:

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

Sri Lankan politician, former Deputy Minister of Social Empowerment. Titanciwikitalk/contrib 07:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support there is no obvious issue with the article. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bob Graham[edit]

Article: Bob Graham (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tallahassee Democrat
Credits:

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

A titan of Florida politics. Article is almost there, a few spots need citations. Curbon7 (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to the nomination! Will try to iron out citations today or tomorrow. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Almost ready there are just 2-3 cn tags that needs to be solved. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should be good now I've fixed the 2 CN tags and have added more REFs to previously unsourced statements. Article should be ready for ITN/C. RIP to the GOAT of NCT '90s/'00s VP selections. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 13:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - looks good to go now ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 23:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Carl Erskine[edit]

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

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 16:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I am not seeing any issues with the article. PrinceofPunjabTALK 18:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Børsen fire[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Børsen (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The historic Børsen (pictured) in Copenhagen, Denmark, catches fire. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Børsen, a historic building in Copenhagen, Denmark, catches fire.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The historic Børsen (pictured) in Copenhagen, Denmark, catches fire.
News source(s): CNN BBC Guardian
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Developing story. Article is not sufficiently updated yet, but Scandinavia just got its own Notre-Dame fire. Cart (talk) 09:21, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait for more updates and information. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 09:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not comparable to the fire in the Notre-Dame de Paris. The Notre Dame is a UNESCO heritage site, Børsen is not. So ITNR-wothiness in this case is questionable. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We've had plenty of fires on ITN of buildings that were not on the UNESCO heritage list, the significance for ITN is interest and the coverage in media, and this is front page stuff on what we usually refer to as significant media. Cart (talk) 11:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, oppose at size of update - CNN is reporting that at least half the building has been consumed by the fire and that they're still historical art and furniture that is trying to be rescued from this. But one paragraph is far too small to cover whats happening and it may be a few more hours before we can suitably expand. --Masem (t) 11:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when properly updated. I don't like the word "ancient" in the proposed blurb. Børsen was "only" 400 years old, "ancient" is usually reserved for stuff like the Roman Empire. "Historical" would be a better word. Thue (talk) 12:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops! Good point. Fixed. Cart (talk) 13:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support when the article is ready. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when ready. Well known famous building. Nfitz (talk) 13:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article has been sufficiently updated. Support on notability, Oppose on quality This is an historic building which was previously the headquarters of the Danish Chamber of Commerce, and the fire seems to have caused significant damage. However, the article has two cn's, and the paragraph the fire is not ready yet. It doesn't actually say if the fire has ended, and doesn't indicate the full extent of the damage. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been updated now and I've found refs for the cn's. Please take another look. Cart (talk) 15:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support seems fine now. Wait until there's enough information for a proper expansion of the article. Estreyeria (talk) 14:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not seeing any significant problems and it's in the news. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support when ready. LiamKorda 15:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: There are photos of the building on fire, but they aren't so great blurb-wise since they don't include the significant spire, all the scaffolding hides the building and will only present us with an ad for Batman. I think the best alternative is the suggested pre-fire photo. Cart (talk) 16:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as nominator. The article is now sufficiently fixed and as up to date with the fire as we can get it at the moment. There will be more in days to come, but I think it's ok to post. Cart (talk) 17:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The inevitable 2024 Børsen fire has just been created, but it's so far just text copied from the original Børsen. So I don't think the link in the proposed blurbs should be updated. For now, I think it's good to have the background and the new article will fill its purpose later. Cart (talk) 18:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about using File:Brand i Børsen, set fra Ved Stranden.jpg instead of the image suggested here. "The historic Børsen in Copenhagen, Denmark, catches fire. (fire pictured)" Sebbog13 (talk) 19:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It now has an article so link to 2024 Børsen fire. Sebbog13 (talk) 19:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That just shows smoke and could be anything on fire. Secretlondon (talk) 20:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The new article is mainly a copy of the text in the original, and will be more useful as the aftermath develops. Right now, the history behind the building will help readers. And as of now, the blurb is posted without photo. I think that's a good call since the Iran-Israel conflict is way more serious than this fire. Cart (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the new article is expanded further, we can switch it. I am going to swap to the "not on fire" photo now. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Batman ad is more visible than the building... Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After research, it appears that Denmark's freedom of panorama is limited to non-commercial uses for artistic works in public places (Article 24(2)), so this is a copyright violation and should, at best, be hosted locally under fair use be marked as a de minimis use, and very much not go on the main page. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which picture are you talking about? The one that we're currently using showing the building in question is fine as the building is 400 years old. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The photo discussed is File:Brand i Børsen, set fra Ved Stranden.jpg with a very visible Batman ad. Cart (talk) 22:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was your 'research' to read the first sentence of Danish copyright law? The second sentence on article 24(3) states that "buildings can be freely reproduced in pictorial form." Stephen 23:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But I'm not talking about the building, I'm talking about the advertisement on the building. Which, on File:Brand i Børsen, set fra Ved Stranden.jpg, is the giant Batman promotional poster, and falls very much under 24(2) and not 24(3). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 00:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Surely a crop of the photo could be made, cropping out all of the ad whilst just keeping the words "fear nothing". Happily888 (talk) 11:06, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support given the broad coverage. Added alternative blurb 2. Now that there is an article for the fire, I suggest wikilinking to that, and bolding said text.Gust Justice (talk) 22:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I feel like 2024 Børsen fire should be linked in the blurb.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 03:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Børsen § 2024 fire seems to have more information than the 2024 Børsen fire spinout (or at least as much).—Bagumba (talk) 07:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a parallel discussion about this at WP:ERRORS. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Closed as mooted by the merging of the article. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • New images of fire present at Commons:Category:2024_Børsen_fire. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: I've replaced the fire photo in the article with a cropped and perspective-corrected version of the image, where the copyrighted logos are cropped and cloned out. It's avaliable if you want to use it on ITN. Personally, I think people will recognize the "before the fire photo" easier from visits (movies, media, etc.) to Copenhagen, than just smoke and scaffolding. Cart (talk) 13:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is still the logo in a couple of different places on that banner. One, on the shoe, another is in the lower right corner. Granted, it's significantly more obscure but I don't know if that matter when it comes to copyright law. (IANAL) Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those logos are so small, they fall under the de minimis rule and not a problem. I didn't want to clone more things than necessary . Cart (talk) 15:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 15[edit]

April 15, 2024 (2024-04-15) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Naomi Polani[edit]

Article: Naomi Polani (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Naomi Polani, veteran performer and director dies at 96 (JPost)
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.

Israeli musical director, theater director, singer, producer, actress and dancer. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 04:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the honors and Personal life sections needs more references. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:05, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've placed four citation needed tags and the biographical details are insufficient. Schwede66 18:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jerry Savelle[edit]

Article: Jerry Savelle (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Christian Post
Credits:

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

American televangelist and author. 240F:7A:6253:1:C0E0:EC3C:2013:6568 (talk) 05:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there is an orange tag and 4 cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted to RD) RD: Whitey Herzog[edit]

Article: Whitey Herzog (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USAToday
Credits:

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

Hall of Fame manager.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose there are two orange tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 18:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in my view, the expansion needed tags were redundant - I have now removed them. The section they were in was summarizing his record as a manager for each of the various clubs he supervised, and beyond the few sentences present, there is not much more to say. The entirety of the article is well-sourced (including those very same sections). It would be a shame for Mr. Herzog to miss out on RD with that in mind. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:17, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. SpencerT•C 04:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD/blurb: Josip Manolić[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Josip Manolić (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Josip Manolić, the second prime minister of Croatia, dies at the age of 104. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Former prime minister of Croatia, Josip Manolić, dies at the age of 104.
News source(s): Nacional, Jutarnji list Index.
Credits:

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

Josip Manolić was the second and last prime minister of Croatia as the Socialist Republic of Croatia, and “first” prime minister (caretaker) of the independent Croatia. Co-founder of the important Croatian political party Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) and also Croatian Independent Democrats (HND). First official Speaker of the Chamber of Counties of Croatia. Major political player in Croatia's history. The article is ok, could be more detailed, but has been updated with his death. Seems like a notable figure, so I think it makes a strong RD; mixed about the blurb. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 18:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One side note, obviously topics dealing with SFR Yugoslavia and its former constituent republics can be very contentious. Vandalism would be a concern. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 18:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Classicwiki: If vandalism is a concern, should the page be semi-protected? --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 06:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MtPenguinMonster, not to be too wp:crystalball, but if it gets to the front page via blurb, it would be advised. Doesn't seem like the blurb or the RD are going to make it at the moment. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 06:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose There's some cn tags in the article, but I feel like these can be fixed. I'll support RD, but I'll oppose a blurb as the article doesn't really mention his legacy/overall impact he had in Croatia. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb as nothing in the article gives a good reason he was a major figure that created an impact or estaish Ed a legacy for the country. Oppose RD on quality issues (cn's, etc) I'll also note much of the article is sourced to a single work (#6 as I type this) which begs again on how important he was in considering a blurb. Masem (t) 19:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb He was only PM of an independent Croatia for less than 1 month, I see no reason for this being majorly influential or leaving a legacy. Also Oppose RD at this time as there are too many CN tags on the article. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 05:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb given his short and apparently not very influential tenure as Prime Minister. The article only spends half a paragraph on it, and doesn't even explain what he did during his term. Oppose RD given the 5 citation needed tags still in the article. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 09:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blurb He was not the most influential Croatian leader of all time therefore no blurb. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a note to the nominator, any biographical article on Wikipedia can be featured for RD provided they meet quality guidelines, see WP:ITNRD. Natg 19 (talk) 15:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blurb per above. LiamKorda 15:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Though he was prime minister at time of the declaration of independence, he had little role in the declaration itself and the succeeding wars were litigated moreso by President Franjo Tuđman than his prime ministers. Curbon7 (talk) 22:35, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose RD Still four citation needed tags. Schwede66 18:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Derek Underwood[edit]

Article: Derek Underwood (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, BBC
Credits:

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

English cricketer, former world number 1 bowler. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 13:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is ready for RD. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Willie Limond[edit]

Article: Willie Limond (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport
Credits:

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

Boxer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, most of the article is currently unsourced. Suonii180 (talk) 17:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the article has a orange tag and has only 3 sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 14[edit]

April 14, 2024 (2024-04-14) (Sunday)

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

(Posted) RD: Käthe Sasso[edit]

Article: Käthe Sasso (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.noen.at/in-ausland/zeitzeugin-widerstandskaempferin-kaethe-sasso-98-verstorben-417808267
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.

Austrian child resistance activist. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 01:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the article does not have {{Infobox person}} template and very much lacks inline citation. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Infoboxes are not mandatory. Anarchyte (talk) 13:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ready Looks ready to me (all paragraphs are cited; long article). Don't want to post it since there's a lack of support votes. Schwede66 18:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Werner Spitz[edit]

Article: Werner Spitz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Detroit Free Press
Credits:

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

Noted forensic pathologist.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is ready for RD. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All taken care of, PFHLai! ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, unsourced issues have been dealt with! Looks good to go. :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for the new footnotes. Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 11:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Steve Sloan[edit]

Article: Steve Sloan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News
Credits:

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

American Football coach.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost ready Head coaching record section needs sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrinceofPunjab: Added. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please take a look seems okay to me.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is ready now. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ken Holtzman[edit]

Article: Ken Holtzman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [6]
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 17:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Four {cn} tags remaining. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 21:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They're all taken care of. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the new footnotes! --PFHLai (talk) 00:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 00:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Beverly LaHaye[edit]

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

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

Looks alright citationwise. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 06:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Masters Tournament[edit]

Article: 2024 Masters Tournament (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In golf, Scottie Scheffler (pictured) wins the 2024 Masters Tournament. (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

The Masters is a recurring event, so I will nom it right away. TheCorriynial (talk) 00:18, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose the article is currently a bit of mess, IMHO. Much of it consists of large lists without clear/consistent citations - particularly the "criteria" section. The whole thing also just strikes me as somewhat oddly formatted. For example, there are italicized subheadings with no content underneath ["Thursday, April 11th"], even though content slightly further down pertains to parts of the tournament that happened on April 11th. With this being said, taking a brief glance at the 2023 Masters page, this does seems to be "par for the course" (pun intended) for past years tournaments as well - so I will defer if others don't think the formatting is an issue. FlipandFlopped ツ 02:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the article has very prose and is filled with tables, some of which lack citations. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose like a lot of golf articles that get nominated here, it has far too much detail on qualifying system, and very little prose on the actual event (2-3 sentences per round and none on the final round is too little). Joseph2302 (talk) 08:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • And the scorecard section also violates MOS:COLOUR, as it's using colours as the only way to display eagles, birdies, bogeys and double bogeys, in violation of the first bullet point of that MOS section. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opposethe article is mostly a list of players taking the part in the tournament and some daily leader tables. Not enough prose to justify posting on ITN. --Bcp67 (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jalapeño: I feel as though this was a bit of an early SNOW close. Quite a few opposes were based on the quality of the article, which can (and hopefully will) be fixed. Might have jumped the gun with this one, my friend. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 13:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've undone the close. The Masters is on ITNR and can still be posted provided the article is updated appropriately. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 14:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are a total of 3 sentences in the article about the final round and/or Scheffler's win. Nosferattus (talk) 15:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Removed) Ongoing replacement : Red Sea crisis with Spillover of the Israel–Hamas war[edit]

Articles: Red Sea crisis (talk · history · tag) and Spillover of the Israel–Hamas war (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)
Article updated

Attacks have largely stopped and situation has largely cooled down in the red sea, and the spillover is more general. Probably Israel–Hamas war (spillover) Lukt64 (talk)

  • Neutral, leaning support Although the Red Sea situation has calmed down significantly from the past few months, it's still far from over. Technically, the crisis itself is a result of the spillover from the war, and as the war is starting to drag in other parties other than Hamas (mainly Iran), this could be a good nom, especially after the April 13 strikes - marking a clear escalation. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Twistedaxe. FlipandFlopped ツ 02:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I once again oppose a stand-alone spillover item in Ongoing on account of the fact that said spillover is intrinsically linked to the war itself. However, I do think that like how we have items such as "War in Sudan (timeline)", perhaps we could do "Israel–Hamas war (spillover)". That I would be favorable to. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, didn't read the nomination comment. I'm a support to the above mentioned idea, though my comments on a distinct ongoing item still stand. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Broader scope, includes both the Red Sea Crisis which has been winding down (though still ongoing) and many other related ongoing events, including but not limited to the recent escalations between Israel and Iran. Target page receives updates any time another significant spillover event occurs. Very good suggestion.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 05:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Was initially against this, but having the spillover in brackets next to the item would be a good option, especially as coverage and interest in the Red Sea Crisis has slowed. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:26, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I think it would be better of have something akin to Middle East crisis (Gaza, Red Sea, Iran-Israel) with better wording. I equate the OP to concluding that the Is attack in Russia was a spillover of the Syrian Civil War which seems to come across as pigeonholing. CheetasOnMission (talk) 10:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that we'd jump the gun to give the series of conflicts right now a new term. That's up to future historians, not us. Perhaps in 10 years this will be known as the "Middle Eastern Wars of the 2020s" but for now as per commonname, spillover would work PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Someone already suggested the idea of formatting it as "Israel-Hamas War (spillover)", and I think I agree with that idea, as it makes every relevant conflict related to it accessible on ITN without cluttering it via individual listing. If any mentioned conflict leads to something beyond the scope of being spillover, perhaps the formatting/labeling could then be changed, but for now, this should work. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 11:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal The Red Sea Crisis has somewhat winded down, and the article is no longer getting sufficient updates for ongoing, so we can remove it. However, I don't see a reason as of now to replace it will Spillover of the Israel–Hamas war, as that article has nowhere near the amount of updates needed for ongoing. Instead, we should replace with the Timeline of the Israel–Hamas war (12 January 2024 – present) article, which has enough updates, but also seems to cover most of the topics in the scope of the Spillover article. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Great suggestion. Timeline of the Israel–Hamas war (12 January 2024 – present) lists spillover events too but receives far more updates, so it's a very good choice for a target.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 17:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal of the Red Sea Crisis as the situation has calmed down significantly, and is lacking updates that would qualify as ITN Fileyfood500 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
  • Attention needed Seems like the above discussion has unanimous support !votes and something should've been done by now, but this discussion is about to get archived. While there wasn't a full discussion on the merits of doing (spillover) versus doing (timeline), I think if nothing else, Red Sea Crisis should be removed. We might need a second discussion anyways to come to an agreement on the spillover/vs timeline thing, but I hope this won't turn into another situation where we have a discussion and everyone agrees on something and then nothing gets done and it gets archived. There's been too much of that lately.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 20:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wholeheartedly agree with the above - to avoid a pointless renomination when there is a clear consensus for removal + to make subsequent discussions more focused, could a passing admin please make a decision and close this accordingly? FlipandFlopped ツ 21:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removed Red Sea crisis from ongoing, further discussion needed for a spillover/timeline addition. Stephen 21:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2023–24 Bundesliga[edit]

Article: 2023–24 Bundesliga (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Bayer Leverkusen won the Bundesliga for the first time (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In association football, Bayer Leverkusen win the Bundesliga.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

RD: Sergio Melnick[edit]

Article: Sergio Melnick (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Tercera
Credits:

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

Bedivere (talk) 04:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The article is just 13 lines long. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article a bit short. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • With only 181 words of prose, this wikibio is too stubby for ITN. Anything useable available from es:Sergio Melnick to help expand it? --PFHLai (talk) 22:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PFHLai Yes, the Spanish Wikipedia article looks good and has several sources. Unfortunately I can't help out with expanding, and it will be probably missed... Bedivere (talk) 03:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, well... this nom still has a few more days of eligibility. Maybe someone can expand this wikibio over the weekend based on a new obituary. We shall see... --PFHLai (talk) 23:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 13[edit]

April 13, 2024 (2024-04-13) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Robert MacNeil[edit]

Article: Robert MacNeil (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

Thriley (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there are several cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Citations have been added. Article appears ready. Thriley (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ron Thompson (actor)[edit]

Article: Ron Thompson (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

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

American actor. 240F:7A:6253:1:C0E0:EC3C:2013:6568 (talk) 05:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Theater, film and television sections have no sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lorenzo Palomo[edit]

Article: Lorenzo Palomo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABD de Cordobá
Credits:

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

Spanish conductor and composer who worked in Berlin for 38 years but composed always based on Andalusian roots. The article was an unsourced stub but is better now, and I'm convinced that a composer whose songs were performed by Montserrat Caballé in Carnegie Hall is worth mentioning. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Faith Ringgold[edit]

Article: Faith Ringgold (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Will need to be updated. Staraction (talk | contribs) 00:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think the article is ready. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article looks good Lajmmoore (talk) 09:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Orange tag at the top needs to be addressed before it's ready, and skimming through the article I can see multiple cn tags. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as well-sourced. Works are all cited, orange tag is addressed. One passage needs a citation, but otherwise this looks ready. gobonobo + c 23:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There's four outstanding "citation needed" tags along with a "clarification needed".—Bagumba (talk) 05:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • No {cn} tags left. Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 11:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Iran retaliation[edit]

Posted and will remain so. Stephen 03:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following an attack on the Iranian embassy, Iran retaliates against Israel and the Israeli-linked MSC Aries. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In retaliation for an Israeli airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Iran conducts missile and drone strikes against Israel.
Alternative blurb II: ​ After an Israeli airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Iran strikes back against Ramon Airbase.
News source(s): dronesship
Credits:

Article updated
STILL Ongoing, but someone will create an article or subsection as it is hardly 2 hours old.37.252.94.105 (talk) 20:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does it, though? I see the IDF saying some drones will show up in several hours. Maybe they'll be shot down, like Palestinian missiles. That's how it's supposed to work. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Very likely, however the ship has already had reactions from katz, the WH and the uk.37.252.94.105 (talk) 20:48, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just added the ship to the blurb.37.252.94.105 (talk) 20:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If the extent of this is the boarding of a ship, count me out. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not cool to title an article after strikes that haven't landed (and I've changed "Israel-linked" to "Portuguese" here for clarity). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed, titling an article about something that is expected to happen as if it has happened surely violates at least some policies and guidelines. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Multiple RS are mentioning "israel-linked". bbcftreuters. it is not my added context. Further, the update has the same info on the page.37.252.94.105 (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As I said, it was for clarity, not to accuse you of making things up. Reliable sources also say it's a Portuguese ship and I think that's the part that can't be inferred from the blurb. Anything you add to this blurb will inherently be Israel/Israeli/Iran/Iranian-linked. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Until we know what their payload and targets are, and whether they actually strike (before Israel can shoot them down), this is an unclear situation. --Masem (t) 20:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Hasn't actually happened yet, so we need to wait to see if the strikes even occur in the first place. If they strike (or even if they don't hit but just get shot down) then definitely support. Gödel2200 (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ship is already in Iranian waters and india has reached out to Iranian diplomatic channels. [7]37.252.94.105 (talk) 20:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when it happens We should theoretically wait, but it's better to have the consensus ready for when it happens. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that was the point in the original comment37.252.94.105 (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Also, hundreds of cruise missiles are underway, and Iran is readying many dozens of ballistic missiles for firing. Apparently, the plan is to time the drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles such that they arrive at roughly the same time at the targets in Israel. Count Iblis (talk) 21:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the results of the impending cruise missile/drone attacks are more clear. Even if they are unsuccessful though, I still support an eventual blurb as even a failed strike of this magnitude is very likely to result in dramatic military escalations in the region. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait to see what happens. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Sufficiently significant even if the attacks are intercepted. This is, to my understanding, the first direct attack on Israel by a sovereign state since the '73 war. JDiala (talk) 21:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Inclined to support on notability but this news is as breaking as it gets.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 22:02, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Iran has now attacked and this attack is being televised and shown globally
NYMan6 (talk) 22:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Heatrave (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Once we know the impact on Israel and western response, then 100% Support Roan314 (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support, It's Happening - For the last hour hundreds of Iranian drones and missiles have been flying over Israel. Israel is in a state of emergency, huge media attention, the U.S. is increasing its military readiness, this marks the first time Iran has directly attacked Israeli soil. This is textbook breaking news, and we should post this immediately. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also like to draw attention to Iran-Israel relations. Like a lot of 'relations' articles, the article is really poor quality. There is no information on Iran's involvement in the Gaza conflict, plus this event urgently needs to be added PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support First attack of Iran on Israel in their proxy war which becomes a direct war. Givibidou (talk) 22:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't think any of the !votes here are saying that this may be too insignificant to be covered by ongoing, even if all the drones and other missiles laucnhed are intercepted, the attack would still be significant. We should however wait until we actually know what the attack ultimately is, and can update the article appropriaetly for this. --Masem (t) 23:05, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We know the nature of the attack. Iran, for the first time, launches a massive drone and missile barrage against Israel in retaliation for the embassy airstrike. Let's post this now, and any further information about loss of life, destruction, targets can be added when we have more info. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 23:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, because the article is not yet of quality until the event actually completes. We are not a news ticker, we can wait until ultimate damage occurs. Masem (t) 23:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support "This is the first direct military confrontation between the two countries since the beginning of the Iran–Israel conflict."

Oh shit, it's really happening. Bremps... 23:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: these attacks are real, there are sirens in Jerusalem and there have been missiles seen fired across the Middle East LuxembourgBoy42 (talk) 23:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Blasts heard above Israel after Iran launches drone attack" per Guardian. Post immediately. BilboBeggins (talk) 23:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it's been confirmed and is a major escalation. Banedon (talk) 23:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, does everything have to be posted immediately? Nothing, in terms of impact, is clear at this moment. ITN is not IT Breaking N. ---Sluzzelin talk 00:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Iran says the attack is concluded barring an Israel counter-attack. Not saying this doesn't likely change the reason to post this, but we should be considering posting soon now. --Masem (t) 01:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's saying the whole tit-for-tat has concluded, not the tat. But yeah, that includes the tat. I think it was handled pretty well, all things considered, and don't think anyone's to blame for where shrapnel lands; get well soon, little girl! InedibleHulk (talk) 01:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The attack ended and it is quite important of an escalation. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 01:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Or a conclusion. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted A rough consensus appears to support posting and the article now appears to be adequate in quality. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article presents this as if it were WW3 with long lists of world leaders including Biden, Macron and Sunak. The reality seems to be that it was a lot of "sound and fury signifying nothing" as the Middle East has been a free fire zone for some time and this seems to be more of the same but with less impact than most. As it's just the latest round in an ongoing conflict, it would be better to have a more general entry such as Spillover of the Israel–Hamas war in Ongoing. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Andrew Davidson, yes this feels quite similar to the response to the assassination of Soleimani (which in fairness we did post). Curbon7 (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We posted a composite blurb in that case: "After a U.S. airstrike kills Iranian general Qasem Soleimani (pictured), at least 56 people die in a stampede during his burial procession in Kerman, and Iranian forces attack two military bases in Iraq." This is another similar tit for tat. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: gotta love how wikipedians took 15 days to place this "on the news" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.244.136.69 (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What? This is the Iranian response from yesterday (that was posted after a few hours once the quality issues were fixed), the earlier Israeli airstrike was already posted when it happened. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Look at the time I nominated it ;)37.252.95.10 (talk) 14:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Removed) Ongoing removal : Haitian crisis[edit]

Article: Haitian crisis (2018–present) (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian (12 April), Miami Herald (12 April), LA Times (12 April), ...
Article updated

Attacks have largely stopped and situation has largely cooled down. Lukt64 (talk)

  • Support removal This doesn't seem to be something that has near daily widespread coverage (compared to the Gaza or Ukraine conflicts). --Masem (t) 13:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose What an odd claim. There is only one functioning hospital in the capital, women are dying in childbirth, schools, universities, hospitals and ships have been looted and burned in the last week, and kidnappings are reported daily (including the entire crew of a container ship). Most international papers (Le Monde, Toronto Star, BBC, Washington Post, etc.) reported on Haiti yesterday, since the Transitional Council was just officially created by decree *yesterday*. Currently, Sudan and Haiti are two of the largest humanitarian crises in the world. See above for three stories in the last day (I did not bother reporting *all* of the dozens of different sources reporting on the transitional council). As J. Charles says the situation today is one of [...] panic. You don’t know what every day is going to bring. You wake up and you hear the gunshots. People are telling me that when they don’t hear the gunfire, that’s when they start to panic and wonder what’s wrong, because it’s become such a constant for them now. Unfortunately, with the vandalism, the burning, and the looting of hospitals, it’s very difficult to get health care. source (12 April 2024)-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 13:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that it's probably too early to remove this, but if the current status quo continues for another few months, as awful as it is, I don't think it should be ongoing. So, Oppose, but we should re-evaluate the item in the next few months PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also. Haiti may be horrible, but gaza, ukraine and sudan is worse. Lukt64 (talk) 15:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it isn't really a competition. Bremps... 17:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as significant events are still being reported. And agree with Lukt64 that the Sudan conflict is worthy of ITN, although it's a separate discussion. One confusion I have is that we acted on this discussion (Haiti was removed) when there was a majority but no consensus, but did not add Sudan which also had a clear majority and lack of consensus. Probably a meta discussion about how we are evaluating the discussion Fileyfood500 (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal It has been ongoing for quite a long time now. Long ongoing events such as Yemen's (2014–) and Syria's (2012–) respective civil wars don't have a chance to be on the ITN template. And I agree that the Haitian crisis doesn't seem to have near daily widespread coverage compared to the situations in Ukraine or Gaza. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:2828:34A4:A394:A86F (talk) 19:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal Still ongoing (and tragic), but not in the dynamic sense which gives it widespread, daily coverage and makes it ITN-worthy. Yakikaki (talk) 22:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal per nom; article lacking significant recent updates over the past 7 days. SpencerT•C 22:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal per nom and above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal Article does seem to be having a fair amount of dates listed for the last week or so, but those updates don't seem to be that significant. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose removal given the recent formation of the Transitional Presidential Council yesterday. The situation is still developing. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removed Stephen 22:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stephen Respectfully, given that a new significant development of the crisis was just nominated as a blurb an hour ago, this might not have been the best moment to close the discussion. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Slightly more defensible than the actions on Sudan since there was a 2:1 majority when the story about the Transitional Council first broke. Of course, the situation hadn't and hasn't cooled down, as any brief survey of the news shows. Calls for reparations have come up again and are getting significant coverage, but the main thing remains migrants being deported back, violence in the capital and many towns throughout the country, and of course the dispute over whether or not the TPC folks would be appointed directly (which they were on the 16th). (NYT, BBC, Reuters, The Guardian, etc., etc. Views dropped by 75% overnight, so the early closure helped keep the bots in the dark. :) Imagine if Charles de Gaulle Airport or Heathrow or La Guardia had been shut down for two months, I wonder if that would be in the news at en.wp. (I'll refrain from comparing it to the treatment of the mall closure at Bondi Junction just below...) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 23:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Bondi Junction stabbings[edit]

Article: 2024 Bondi Junction stabbings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A knife attack in Sydney, Australia, leaves seven people dead. (Post)
News source(s): [8]
Credits:

Article updated

Stephen 10:08, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait death of seven people in a attack is very notable but currently the article is nowhere near ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
trivial event by 2024 in the West, just look at the us where things like that happen daily in Chiraq Kasperquickly (talk) 13:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really think it's fair to compare routine gang violence to a mass murder incident targeting random civilians in a place where significant violent acts are extremely rare to begin with. Koiramainen (talk) 15:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The West" isn't a homogenous entity PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
except for if it didnt happen in the West, it wouldnt have even gotten nominated with just 7 deaths lol @PrecariousWorlds Kasperquickly (talk) 20:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is a significant event. Mass casualty crime is extremely rare in Australia. Article quality is now adequate for posting and will improve as more information becomes available via ordinary editing and expansion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - no indication this will have a lasting impact. --RockstoneSend me a message! 17:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unfortunate event but given that there does not appear to be any tied to terrorism or other larger scheme, this is just a domestic crime. --Masem (t) 17:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is a significant event. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 17:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A rare event to happen in Australia. Aircorn (talk) 17:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Fairly high number of casualties and it's a very unusual event for Australia. Koiramainen (talk) 17:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This event is rare, is currently having a major impact on the country of Australia, and is being widely reported upon across the world. It is therefore "in the news"... that's enough. The section is called "in the news" and not "articles about events that Wikipedians speculate will have a lasting impact", for a reason... FlipandFlopped ツ 17:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That logic is used all the time to refuse posting stories that take place in the US. Would we post a stabbing spree if it happened there? Probably not. So no reason we should post this. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 18:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A fair criticism, but for the record, if it was an American stabbing spree which was similarly rare in its nature, involved multiple deaths, and was generating global coverage, I personally would support it. FlipandFlopped ツ 20:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A stabbing spree that kills 6 people in the US would be more unusual than a mass shooting that kills 6 people in the US. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You have to remember though that this basically never happens in Australia. Mass shootings and mass stabbings are very rare in Australia because of our strict gun laws and our strict knife laws. In America there is a mass shooting every two days. The last mass stabbing in Australia was in 2017. Schestos (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The issue is the lasting impact. We are far too quick to create articles on these types of events that ultimately fail NEVENT and only are created because of the burst of coverage. Unless there was a terrorism or similar angle to these attacks, it is unlikely to change Australian laws. — Masem (t) 20:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - A sad event, but not of the level of notability of ITN. Would we ever post this if it wasn't in a Western country? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose per this logic, unless the motive indicates something that might make it have a wider impact such as terrorism I don't believe it should be posted. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If it made international news, yes. Schestos (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How convenient then that 90% of the sources we use to judge the "international-ness" of news are based in the US, UK, Western Europe, or Australia. AryKun (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While this does have a fairly high death count, the article as of now does not indicate this will have a lasting impact. Gödel2200 (talk) 20:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A stabbing spree that kills 6 people (the attacker was killed by a cop) is unusual & notable enough to post. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: this was a tragic moment and it is currently the top story in Australia. Special editions of Australian news programs are being aired and the stabbing has made international headlines since such an attack is very rare in Australia (this is the first mass stabbing in Australia since 2017).
Schestos (talk) 23:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm on the fence, but leaning toward support given the rarity of such an event in Australia and international reaction. I do agree that it may not have a lasting impact (which in itself is a WP:CRYSTALBALL discussion), but while I acknowledge that as an issue in terms of WP:GNG, this is not a deletion discussion, and I don't think that matters for ITN. Melmann 00:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ITN is not a deletion discussion, but our bar should be at least higher than GNG. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 01:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If there is an argument as to whether there should even be an article on the event due to lasting impact, then there really should be no question that it's inappropriate for ITN. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 03:36, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rockstone35 @Chaotic Enby Why? The purpose of ITN as far as I understand is to highlight the news-related content of enwiki. As there is no significant dispute around the veracity of the facts presented in the article, and the article is not currently being considered for deletion, why is ITN the right venue to adjudicate WP:GNG concerns?
    As I said, long term notability of this article is WP:CRYSTALBALL, but Wikipedia is WP:NOTPAPER, and there is no WP:DEADLINE, so why not simply wait to discuss WP:GNG concerns if an when they become evident, which they are not currently. Melmann 10:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While WP:DEADLINE is an essay pertaining to more general cases, there is absolutely a deadline if we're posting news-related items on the main page. That's how news work. And ITN's purpose is to highlight encyclopedic news-related content (we're not a news ticker), so if there's a doubt about the article being encyclopedic, it shouldn't be here. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 12:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t see why there’d be doubts about the article being encyclopedic. There are plenty of articles about less deadly attacks. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: This is a notable event with coverage from many international news sources. It is also a rareity in Australia for an event like this to happen (compared to (for example) a shooting in the US or an incident in a non-western country)). HoHo3143 (talk) 04:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rare events are significant and notable, and are likely to have long-term significance. Article is comprehensive and well-written. Happily888 (talk) 07:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because it appears to be a crime with no geopolitical significance. Very sad event, but we routinely don't post news items with this range of casualties. Jehochman Talk 15:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- I removed the "ready" marking. There are 10 supports and 6 opposes -- hardly a consensus to post. --RockstoneSend me a message! 21:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Continued coverage on the event: "Bondi Junction stabbing offender Joel Cauchi diagnosed with schizophrenia at 17", ABC News, 17 April; "Sydney mall attacker may have targeted women, police say, as more details emerge of his six victims", CNN, 16 April; "The Sydney Mall Attack Was Horrifying. It Could Have Been Worse" , Time, 16 April; "Bondi Junction stabbing: French man who confronted attacker with bollard to receive permanent residency, The Guardian, 15 April. 15 of 18 attacked were women,[9] and authorities are investigating whether they were targeted.[10] We should post this as we would apparent targeting of those because of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. whether or not this is technically called by governments as terrorism.—Bagumba (talk) 05:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Marking for decision. 3+ days of discussion should be enough to decide yea or nay.—Bagumba (talk) 05:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Worldwide coverage, article looks good and this appears to be an overall uncommon event. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not a significant enough crime to feature on ITN, in my opinion --TorsodogTalk 11:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Continued international coverage today: "Sydney's Bondi Westfield mall reopens for tributes after fatal stabbings", Reuters, 18 April.—Bagumba (talk) 18:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's a shame we haven't posted this already. Plenty of global news coverage and it's a notable and rare event. Flyingfishee (talk) 21:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request @Admins willing to post ITN:  : Please consider closing this one way or another. Thanks in advance.—Bagumba (talk) 01:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. Anarchyte (talk) 09:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this still on the front page seven days after the event?! Such twisted priorities... I vote to remove it. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 23:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, the fact that it took 7 days to post seems to lean heavily against posting it. But oh well. I'm sure if this happened in a non-western country, we'd totally post it just the same, right? --RockstoneSend me a message! 07:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't participate in the discussion as I was too involved in editing the article to be impartial, but there absolutely was consensus to post it. None of the opposing rationales were convincing. It really went no higher than speculative "what would happen if it happened in X country" and concerns about lack of enduring notability without much explanation as to why. It was outweighed by the support rationales. The closer made the right call. Local Variable (talk) 18:00, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 12[edit]

April 12, 2024 (2024-04-12) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

RD: Don Donoher[edit]

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

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

Basketball coach.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the article has a orange tag and multiple cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transitional Presidential Council constituted[edit]

Article: Transitional Presidential Council (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Haiti prepares to temporarily transfer presidential powers to a collegial executive. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.lapresse.ca/international/caraibes/2024-04-12/haiti/le-conseil-presidentiel-de-transition-est-officiellement-cree.php
Credits:

Chetsford (talk) 21:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support on notability if the Ongoing item is removed, Oppose otherwise. Added links in blurb. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if the council takes power, the blurb should be updated as an ITN/R development. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support due to the ongoing item being removed. Lukt64 (talk) 22:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait It doesn't seem like the situation regarding the council is fully clear. The article says in the lead that it was "constituted" on 12 April, but it still has not been "established through appointment of its members and is not operative." I think we should at least wait until it is officially established, which the background section explicitly says has not yet happened. Gödel2200 (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see the rationale in waiting. On the other hand, the newsworthiness of the council is merely the fact that it was constituted as even that simple step marks the culmination of nearly six months of negotiations. This is currently the leading story in all Haitian media. (Realistically, the council is probably never going to get off the ground and its eventual failure will be the fulcrum on which the further deterioration of the situation turns.) Chetsford (talk) 01:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, certainly the mere fact that the council is being constituted is being widely reported and is a big event. But it seems premature to post a blurb about it, when the blurb only says that Haiti "prepares" to form the council. In my mind, the main notability of this would be the council becoming the head of state. I think we should treat this like any other change in such a position, and not post until we actually know who, if anyone, will take up the new positions. Gödel2200 (talk) 03:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gotta disagree here. We've known such a council was going to be created since Ariel Henry announced he was stepping down. This is no more notable than said announcement and will be less important than when it officially takes power. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. It will technically become ITNR only when the council takes power, but the formation itself is newsworthy now. The ultimate fate of the council - including whether it ever becomes "fully operative" - may take a long time to more clearly materialize; it could fall apart completely and spur another major development, or the next step after this might just be a symbolic/bureaucratic milestone that generates lesser coverage if all goes to plan. FlipandFlopped ツ 02:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "As of 13 April 2024, it had yet to be established through appointment of its members and is not operative". Stephen 03:48, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait/Oppose. Said council has not taken power yet. Yes, it is in the news now. It will also be when the council takes power. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Subject is more thoroughly treated in the main article Haitian crisis (2018–present)#Transitional Presidential Council. The fork should list the members and should note that the Transitional Council has rejected the presidential decree. Surprisingly, neither entry mentions the opposition to foreign meddling. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 04:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"neither entry mentions the opposition to foreign meddling" It does have six paragraphs about that, but I suppose there's always room for more. "fork should list the members" There are no members to list. The propositional council had members. The council as legally constituted has no members. Chetsford (talk) 05:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, I did miss that you had included some foreign criticism (Kim Ives in Brooklyn, a Canadian activist) under domestic reaction. As you know, the Council has rejected the decree as modified by the lame duck government. The composition of the council has been reported on by multiple sources and should be included in the article. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 05:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. It sounds like you also missed domestic criticism in the domestic reaction section like Jacky Lumarque, Camille LeBlanc, etc. "The composition of the council has been reported on by multiple sources" It seems as though there's some confusion. The council as constituted (the subject of the article) has no members. The propositional council (also called Transitional Presidential Council) has nine members. The two are legally separate entities and, until the members of the latter are appointed to the former (not a sure thing) have no relational overlap other than their names are spelled the same. Chetsford (talk) 05:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The published decree does indeed include 9 members (as you correctly wrote in the entry), (all of whom reject the decree as published because it does not list the names of the representatives and adds requirements concerning accounting clearance). Will check back this evening to see if this has been updated. (I would much rather be able to support). -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 07:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I think you're being cheeky and I missed it so I'll just leave this note for the awareness of others and move on (but, if there actually is confusion, I'd be happy to discuss it at the article Talk page). The decree does not include nine members. It includes provision for nine members. The TPC that is the subject of this article is a body with no actual members that was created on April 12. The TPC to which you're referring is a legally separate body that has nine members who earnestly expect to be appointed to the former body to fill its nine vacant slots. But per CRYSTALBALL we can't list members of a board based merely on the confidence of candidates they'll be appointed to it anymore than we could list Keir Starmer as the PM of the UK because he's really confident he'll win the next election. Thanks! Chetsford (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should definitely not confuse "cheekiness" with rigor. There is a history to the Transitional Council which should be identified. There were nine names set out, as documented in the parent article. That they were not validated by the outgoing government is, in itself, part of the story of the TC. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 16:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I didn't mean to suggest anything untoward, I just thought you were being jocular. Again, this is an article on a body that was legally constituted three days ago, whereas the TPC to which you're referring is a body of the same name that conjured itself into existence in March to advise the creation of the regularized body (and whose members are making a political claim to also being the April TPC, which may be the source of the confusion). Not sure how better to explain it, but happy to continue discussion at the article's Talk page if there's still incertitude. Sorry again if I misinterpreted you. Chetsford (talk) 17:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the TPC is operational. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prefer returning the main article on the crisis to ongoing, but I think I've fixed all the misinformation that was in the article, so I've removed my oppose vote. FWIW, errata were published in Le Moniteur Tuesday appointing the members that had been nominated by the TPC in Kingston, and specifically acknowledging that the TPC was formed from Kingston. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 23:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) AMIA bombing ruling[edit]

No consensus to post. Stephen 01:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: AMIA bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An Argentinian court rules that Iran was responsible for the 1994 bombing of a Jewish Community Center in Argentina, and characterizes Iran as a terrorist state (Post)
News source(s): https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/12/world/middleeast/argentina-iran-1992-1994-attack.html
Credits:
BilledMammal (talk) 06:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article has only three sentences about this update, and doesn't actually describe the implications this will have. If this is just a ruiling, and won't actually bring about any changes, then I don't think it is significant enough (even though Iran is being labelled as a terrorist state). Gödel2200 (talk) 13:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gödel2200: I've expanded the article; it also declares the attack a crime against humanity, and it allows families of the victims to pursue cases against Iran in the ICC by ruling that states who finance and plan terror attacks can be held responsible for them even if the attack itself is carried out by a non-state actor. BilledMammal (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Good faith nom but not really that notable in the grand scheme of things. Unless this ruling actually causes any diplomatic or geopolitical consequences then it isn't that significant (per Gödel2200). TwistedAxe [contact] 23:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Could reconsider if there are further diplomatic consequences. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - little to no practical consequence here, and barely "news" given the actual event happened, checks watch, thirty years ago. nableezy - 11:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - relevant in view of the latest Iranian attack on Israel. Do I need to explain? Vegan416 (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2024 (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.

RD: Eleanor Coppola[edit]

Article: Eleanor Coppola (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP News
Credits:

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

Wife of Francis Ford Coppola and filmmaker herself. Several unsourced paragraphs. Masem (t) 02:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the article needs more sources particularly the filmography section. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Her career, filmography and early life have long stretches without citations. Bremps... 17:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Roberto Cavalli[edit]

Article: Roberto Cavalli (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

Mooonswimmer 20:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very famous designer, but there are many citation needed templates, so this needs to be addressed. BilboBeggins (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose missing key section about his shutting down his North America business, that was added w/ copyvio.Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: Robert MacNeil[edit]

Article: Robert MacNeil (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

Thriley (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there are several cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Citations have been added. Article appears ready. Thriley (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, good to go after I fixed those unsourced issues! Thanks to Thriley for adding the ISBNs as well! Pinging Staraction and PrinceofPunjab for the update. :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 19:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) B.O.A.T. cause established[edit]

No consensus to post. As noted regarding the DYK comments, this wouldn't quality for DYN for newness, which leaves 5× expansion.—Bagumba (talk) 07:22, 16 April 2024 (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.

Proposed image
Article: GRB 221009A (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Brightest Of All Time (pictured) was caused by an exploding star but heavy elements are missing (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Researchers find that the Brightest Of All Time (pictured) was caused by a supernova, but lacks the expected heavy elements.
News source(s): BBC; Nature Astronomy
Credits:

Article needs updating
I missed the news about the B.O.A.T. at the time and I don't recall ITN covering it. This was off-the-scale huge, making the eclipse seem quite insignificant. A peer-reviewed analysis has been published and there seem to be two significant findings. One is that it was caused by a supernova, which wasn't established before. And, second, that there was surprising lack of heavy elements produced by this big bang. We seem to have work to do to reflect this. But, as there are often calls to wait for peer-reviewed analysis of such science, here's an opportunity to follow up. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - this is interesting, but the time to have posted it was when it happened... two years ago. --RockstoneSend me a message! 18:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as these results are quite inconclusive. But Rockstone is wrong: the story here is the findings, which were released recently, not the BOAT itself. GenevieveDEon (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Maybe unorthodox, but I always like to see more scientific discoveries featured on ITN. The blurb should make it clear that the news is the publishing of the peer-reviewed results. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Don't see this information in question included in the target article, and even if it were, information regarding potential implications of such would be nice as well. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don't see this fundamentally changing the understanding of astrophysics, and Earth witnessed the event 2 years ago. I would recommend if this could be DYK to be posted there. --Masem (t) 18:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support given that 1) the information is included in the target article and 2) the absolute magnitude of the event is included within the relevant spectra. High encyclopedic value with the timeliness element, and of interest to a significant proportion of our readers. Not all ITN-newsworthy events are crimes, wars, political and sporting events, or life-threatening geological disasters. 142.117.133.114 (talk) 22:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Should be DYN. Didgogns (talk) 00:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting, but better suited for DYK. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Because the word "All" in the name "Brightest Of All Time" is just plain stupid. HiLo48 (talk) 01:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's how it is called in sources, that wasn't made up for the blurb. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 02:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's irrelevant who uses the word, it's inane. HiLo48 (talk) 10:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Whether you like the name or not shouldn't be an argument to post/not post. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, it is. It's a stupid, unprovable claim. We should not post stupid, unprovable claims. HiLo48 (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You are entitled to your own opinion but it is referred to as "Brightest Of All Time" in [11] scientific literature that concluded it was the "brightest ever detected by the measures of peak flux and fluence"]. And regardless, we should refer to everything by its WP:COMMONNAME. Staraction (talk | contribs) 05:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That link doesn't work. And "Brightest Of All Time" is not the same as ""brightest ever detected by the measures of peak flux and fluence". HiLo48 (talk) 06:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Link fixed. And what's the difference between the two? As far as I'm concerned, it's the brightest we as humans have ever been able to detect, which to me is certiainly significant... Staraction (talk | contribs) 06:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, but it's not what the blurb says. HiLo48 (talk) 06:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How does, "Researchers find that the brightest and most energetic gamma-ray burst ever recorded was caused by a supernova, but lacks the expected heavy elements" sound? Staraction (talk | contribs) 06:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Much better. HiLo48 (talk) 07:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Oppose While I'd argue that it's at least as notable as the eclipse, it is more suitable for DYK, as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As people keep saying this, note that articles qualify for DYK by being new, expanded fivefold or passing a GA review. None of these apply and so the suggestion is irrelevant. The topic does however qualify for ITN because it’s in the news — that’s where I noticed it. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:54, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There currently aren't any mentions of this update in the article. So, without knowledge of what implications this finding might have, it seems premature to post this to ITN. Gödel2200 (talk) 20:38, 13 April 2024 (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.

RD: Gordon Balser[edit]

Article: Gordon Balser (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV
Credits:

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

Canadian politician and educator The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose although the article is sourced enough, it is bit short and there is no information about his life between 2003 and 2024. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A short wikibio with only 236 words of prose. Anything more to write about this guy? Perhaps what he did while in office (and between shuffles)? --PFHLai (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 11[edit]

April 11, 2024 (2024-04-11) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Anna-Greta Leijon[edit]

Article: Anna-Greta Leijon (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/anna-greta-lejon-ar-dod
Credits:

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

Swedish politician. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 23:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article meet the bare minimum requirement. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Park Bo-ram[edit]

Article: Park Bo-ram (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Korean Herald, The Korea Times
Credits:

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

240F:7A:6253:1:FCE8:2031:6457:A266 (talk) 04:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the article is filled with various tags and is no way near even ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:46, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) British Academy Games Awards[edit]

No consensus to post—Bagumba (talk) 07:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 20th British Academy Games Awards (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At the 20th British Academy Games Awards, Baldur's Gate 3 wins Best Game. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian, NME
Credits:

Article updated
The Wikipedia consensus has been to post The Game Awards results only. However, previous discussion on The Game Awards nomination threads has suggested that the gaming BAFTA's would be more appropriate. As such, for the sake of discussion, I am nominating this item. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The problem with the BAFTAs is that while I, speaking as a WP:VG editor, would consider them more presidgious than the Game Awards, it lacks the same coverage and viewership as the Game Awards. Even in the gaming media, the number of articles covering the BAFTAs is extremely small compared to what I see for the Game Awards.
    Regardless of that, the article has several issues like unsourced quotes, no section on the ceremony, etc. — Masem (t) 19:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per Masem PrecariousWorlds (talk) 20:49, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both on significance and article quality. The article has a couple of BBC sources which seem reasonably routine, and the rest are primary sources. This means the article is not good enough to meet WP:ITNQUALITY, but also helps re-affirm the position that ITN worthy levels of coverage probably isn't there for this event. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The Game Awards are fine. We don't need any more gaming awards and, to my knowledge, these awards are not in fact more noteworthy. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in Principle - Received good coverage (I followed it on the BBC) and substantially more independent than the Game Awards. However, the article needs some work, as noted above. GenevieveDEon (talk) 07:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability the BAFTAs are very popular wards therefore they are pretty notable but the article needs some work like mentioned above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:48, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Not sure on notability yet, but the article doesn't seem to have any prose about the event itself (though there is a good amount of prose for the leadup to it). There are also a few unsourced statements, and there are unsourced sections for games with multiple awards and nominations. Gödel2200 (talk) 20:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Fritz Peterson[edit]

Article: Fritz Peterson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [12]
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 17:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support and ready to be posted the article is very well sourced and there is a no apparent issue. PrinceofPunjabTALK 11:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I was going to post, but the exact death date is not in the cited source. The New York Times wrote on April 13: "Neither announcement said when or where he died or cited a cause."[13] @Muboshgu: Courtesy ping.—Bagumba (talk) 06:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Bagumba, revised. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Muboshgu: Should the lead and ibx say "c. April 2024"? There's no guarantee how long the family waited before making this public.—Bagumba (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Bagumba, yes, you're right. Circa added. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Bagumba, boy were you right on that one. Look what I just found: Peterson died of lung cancer at his home in Winona, Minnesota, on Oct. 19, according to death records from the Winona County Vital Records Department. His body was cremated. News of his death began to emerge Friday with an announcement by Northern Illinois, his alma mater, which erroneously said he was 82. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Anecdotally, this seems to be something that's become more and more common (perhaps not to this extent), but news releases giving very little specific details as to when the death occurred and merely stating that the person has died. Connormah (talk) 00:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I will pay more attention to that in the future. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not singling you or anyone out, just a general observation! It is good that high-quality sources like AP, NYT, Washington Post, LA Times, Globe and Mail (and other newspapers of record), etc. are usually quite thorough. Connormah (talk) 00:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh believe me I didn't take your comment personally. It's a good reminder for everybody to read through the details. That includes "X has died" vs. "X died on Y date". – Muboshgu (talk) 00:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted—Bagumba (talk) 16:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Truong My Lan conviction[edit]

Article: Trương Mỹ Lan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Truong My Lan is sentenced to death for a massive banking fraud in Vietnam. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Truong My Lan is sentenced to death for a banking fraud in Vietnam.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN
Credits:

Article updated

"...the largest corruption scandal in Southeast Asia's history." Andrew🐉(talk) 12:35, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - Literally one sentence in the article about the decision. Doesn't appear to be that notable either. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The verdict is the culmination of the trial and the article has several paragraphs about this. As for notability, note that Bernie Madoff was posted at ITN three times for a fraud on a similar scale. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose there is one sentence about the decision (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 14:05, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Death sentence and scale of embezzlement seem notable Belugsump (talk) 18:01, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support given the scale of the event. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, is this on ITN because of her execution? this blurb send the vibe that execution is a rare thing in Vietnam. If the "biggest fruad" in southeastern of Asia is true then we might need an altblurb. 3000MAX (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The idea that she's getting a death sentence for executing the biggest fraud in southeastern Asia is blurb worthy. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not seeing the notability in the sentencing itself. Yes, it is a death sentence, but the article does not indicate it is that notable. The event that the sentence was for happened nearly two years ago, so that is stale now. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Capital punishment in Vietnam says "Between August 6, 2013 and June 30, 2016, Vietnam executed 429 people." More recent figures are not shown. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC) p.s. I'm not sure we would want to post news about criminal activities before the trial has concluded and in many countries that can take a long time.[reply]
Support This is bigger than FTX in terms of money swindled, and we posted the SBF conviction last year. Bremps... 16:24, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - A government sanctioned death sentence for a financial crime and the scale of the financial crime is very notable. If the crime itself wasn't on ITN when it was committed, this should be. Berry (talk) 16:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Have to disagree with the seemed consensus (if narrow so far). Yes, we should have covered the crime itself (though, interestingly, I can't find an article for it in spite of supposedly how large it was), but that doesn't mean we post a smaller update to compensate. Conviction is a big thing, but manner of sentencing is a very personal thing, IMO, and not really suitable for ITN. That capital punishment for white collars crimes is rare shouldn't be relevant - that seems to be bordering on trivia. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative support but oppose on article quality If this was a similar event or crime in the western world, we'd likely have a 5000-word article if not more about it. I don't expect a similar size here, but there absolutely must be more about the details of the crimes and the trial before we can post this, as otherwise right now, the article nowhere matches the intensity implied by the blurb. --Masem (t) 18:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability I don't think I have ever heard about death penalty in a fraud case so I think it is a blurb worthy item but sadly the article is not fit to be posted yet. PrinceofPunjabTALK 11:02, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality per Masem and PrinceofPunjab. FlipandFlopped ツ 20:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Akebono Tarō[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Akebono Tarō (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Akebono Tarō, the first non-Japanese-born wrestler ever to reach yokozuna, the highest rank in sumo, dies at age 54. (Post)
News source(s): SCMP NYT Independent
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
  • Support, article does have one orange tag but is in a section, and seems written well enough (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 11:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Orange tagged and generally needs more citations. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 13:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose blurb who? This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For someone who is quite active at the ITN/C, you seems to have forgotten WP:ITNCDONT. PrinceofPunjabTALK 11:04, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The First Gaijin Yokozuna of Any Age, that's who. But yeah, the death itself is not a story. And the article is too poorly written right now for a Photo RD (which aren't popular, anyway). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Orange tag needs to be solved and update on death is not significant enough to warrant featuring I think. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:33, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A fairly well-written article, and recent changes suggest that it is no longer a stub. - OtharLuin (talk) 09:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Simply being the first non-Japanese sumo champion is not really an indication of being a major figure in that field. And from reading, he was good but nowhere close to the greatest figures within Sumo history. RD is fine here. --Masem (t) 18:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm just going to take the time to respond to what seems to be a not very well informed and poor take... Only one sumo wrestler out of 400 reaches the rank of yokozuna, and even though Akebono is not the most successful in terms of results, the simple fact that he is the first non-Japanese-born wrestler to reach that rank makes him a leading figure in the sport. The news of his death continues to generate a ton of reactions two days after the announcement, and caused a sensation in the specialised press (see Nikkan Sports, Tokyo Sports, Sports Hochi) when the international press reports the death of "a legend" or "a pioneer" (see The Japan Times, CBS Sports, The Guardian) - OtharLuin (talk) 07:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb (provisionally). I have to agree, too many ill-informed "who?" comments here. To get to the top of a sport and be the first non-native to do it is very much an achievement as well as being able to branch out into other combat sports/sports entertainment endevours I think is worthy of a blurb. However, I clarify my support is only provisional based on the article getting more sourcing but I definately think he is notable enough at the top of his field for blurb. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Looks to me to a similar case as Sidney Poitier, who was blurbed. Article looks fine. Orange tag mainly refers to his post-sumo wrestling career - a quick fix could be to just delete the unsubstantiated parts of that. So overall worthy of a blurb, and it would be nice for once to feature a non-Western sport on ITN. Khuft (talk) 16:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral on blurb Certainly a notable person and a unique achievement — being a yokozuna, and the first foreign-born one at that, he was definitely at the top of his field. Unfortunately, might not be enough of a household name to be blurbed, and the meaning of the achievement might not be obvious to most readers. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose blurb, support RD Although I am very sympathetic to the arguments that he is a major figure in his field and his death is objectively 'in the news', a lot of the current death articles in major sources are very brief obituaries. In the case of Sidney Poitier mentioned by Khuft above, he was continuously ITN because he appeared at the Oscars, centres were being named after him, etc, in the decade preceding his death - and there was a lot more substantive coverage of his life/legacy beyond just mere news obituaries. In the case of OJ Simpson, you can also see this greater degree of "buzz" around the major highlights of his life being discussed, as opposed to just brief obits. By contrast, I'm not seeing much of that sort of content in the article -- in fact most of the content for the past decade are just local Japanese-language sports articles and periodic updates about his health. However, if the article were updated accordingly I could change my vote. FlipandFlopped ツ 20:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs more sources. It seems there is a good bit of unreferenced content in this bio, including (by my count) 13 paragraphs that need additional citations (even if not all are cn-tagged) and several tables that may need sources. I also don't think this is blurb-level; doesn't seem to be near as well-known a figure as O. J. Simpson, for example. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Was marked "Ready", but still multiple unsourced sections.—Bagumba (talk) 08:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 10[edit]

April 10, 2024 (2024-04-10) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Eric Sievers[edit]

Article: Eric Sievers (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SI
Credits:

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

NFL football player in the 1980s—Bagumba (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is ready for RD. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 South Korean legislative election[edit]

Article: 2024 South Korean legislative election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the South Korean legislative election, the Democratic Party-led opposition alliance increases its majority in parliament. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the 2024 South Korean legislative election, the Democratic Party-led opposition alliance increases its majority in parliament, although falling short of a two-thirds supermajority.
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

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

117.53.77.84 (talk) 17:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support altblurb for conciseness. MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Might be good to also mention that the People Power Party won the popular vote by a large majority PrecariousWorlds (talk) 19:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is nowhere close to "won"; sum of DP vote and Korea Reform vote exceeds 50%. Korea Reform's slogan is "3 years is too long", and they would do anything to elect next president earlier than 2027. Didgogns (talk) 22:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I meant Rebuilding Korea Didgogns (talk) 22:13, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By a plurality (36.7%), not a majority. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and propose even shorter blurb Not sure why the two-thirds majority is even mentioned - it's rare in any democratic system for a party/alliance to achieve such a supermajority. New blurb should be sufficient. Article is fine. Khuft (talk) 17:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb 2 per Khuft. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted It took me a while to understand why editors are voting for altblurb 2 without that blurb showing. Stephen, when you move blurbs around, it would be good to leave a note in the discussion section so that others can make sense of it all. I've posted Stephen's blurb, which above shows as the original blurb and is close to altblurb 2. Schwede66 00:17, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mister Cee[edit]

Article: Mister Cee (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Article may need more updates. Staraction (talk | contribs) 17:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted as RD; later posted as blurb) Blurb/RD: O. J. Simpson[edit]

Proposed image
Article: O. J. Simpson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American former NFL player O. J. Simpson dies at age 76. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ American football Hall of Fame running back O. J. Simpson dies at age 76.
Alternative blurb II: ​ American football Hall of Fame running back and murder suspect O. J. Simpson dies at age 76.
Alternative blurb III: ​ American football Hall of Fame running back, murder suspect and convicted criminal O. J. Simpson dies at age 76.
News source(s): Variety, BBC, New York Times
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
  • Weak oppose on quality -- almost the entire filmography is unsourced. Oppose blurb as his death is not that notable. Estreyeria (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...as his death is not that notable is not a reason for oppose. It could be that his death was unceremonious. What do you expect? Get shot by a family member of that double murder, get beaten to death in a cell or be found hanged there. SpacedFarmer (talk) 17:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb The news is that he died of cancer, not his football career or the double murder he was acquitted of. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, defendant of the most publicised trial in history definitely deserves to be posted. TwinBoo (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose, the filmography is unsourced but otherwise there's a single {{cn}} tag and that shouldn't be too hard to fix. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Strongly oppose blurb due to WP:BDP concerns of blurbing someone for being defendant at a murder trial. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not Ready for RD for the usual reason. Oppose blurb No where near significant enough for a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As of this cmt, there are at least 10 CN tags, plus the poorly sourced filmography. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support RD Good enough now. Still opposed to a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support on RD if the sections and filmography is sourcedand improved. Oppose blurb since he is not that notable worldwide. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Football player, movie star, criminal and as the result famous all over the world. He was one of the most talked figures of 90s. The news about his death was always going to be big story in the news. BilboBeggins (talk) 15:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The white bronco chase, the trial, and the result were a big deal. He's still talked about now and multiple documentaries have been released in recent years regarding the events.
    Noah, AATalk 15:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a valid argument, but the blurb should clarify the notariety e.g. "Infamous murder suspect and convicted criminal..." Tonymetz 💬 17:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb but oppose on quality the article is not ready but since he is a household name, I think his death should be blurbed when the article is improved. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb The main thing for which he is known is being the defendant in a murder trial in which he was found not guilty. Without that, he would just be another sportsperson who did a bit of acting. So what it really comes down to is - does Wikipedia blurb people just because there was a media circus surrounding their criminal trial? My answer to that question is an emphatic "no". I note with interest that the blurb describes Simpson as "American former NFL player", but if we were to determine his merit based on his football career alone, it's doubtful he would be blurbed. A more honest blurb would refer to him being the defendant in a murder trial. Chrisclear (talk) 15:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is akin to saying "The main thing which Peter Higgs was known for is discovering a boson particle. If not for that, he would be just another physicist who did a bit of research" or "The main thing which Ronald Reagan is known for is being President. If not for that, he would be just another actor turned politician". You can make anyone's death sound non-notable if you phrase it in this way. Yes, his notability stems from his criminal trial. It was the trial of the century and made huge cultural shockwaves around the world. And for the record, I am actually supportive of adding a reference to his trial in the blurb itself as you specify. FlipandFlopped ツ 15:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Peter Higgs comparison (or just about any other blurb) is a poor comparison. With Higgs, it's that he did something. Whereas with Simpson, it's that there was a media circus surrounding a court trial. So it's not that Simpson did something notable, (as I assume you are aware, he was found not guilty) but rather that the media turned the trial into a big spectacle. Chrisclear (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is, a death blurb being about being defendant at a murder trial, especially one where he was found not guilty (rather than, a major scientific discovery or a presidency) raises major WP:BLP concerns (or in this case WP:BDP as a recent death). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good grief, hyperbole much. Listing his death as a blurb would be a BLP concern? Maybe tell that to the Guardian, who've led with it on their front page this afternoon, warn them that they may be sued... The bottom line is that Wikipedia doesn't decide whether people are famous or not, and we certainly don't apply "value judgements" in deciding whom to feature. It's about time we honoured our mission of taking people to articles that are in the news rather than just following the whims and preferences of the regulars here at ITN/C.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No need to bring legal issues into this, our BLP policy on Wikipedia has nothing to do with what the Guardian is legally allowed to do. The value judgement is in the fact that, yes, people "famous" for legal issues are afforded a certain level of privacy over them (more than in some traditional newspapers, as you observed), and we wouldn't blurb "X person, famous for being accused of a crime, is dead". Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has more first page coverage in to sources than Higgs' death. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb currently also dominating the headline outside the US, so clearly there is international significance. He is of course famous for the trial, which was a historically significant trial, in particular with regards to its impact on race relations and debates on race. 2A02:908:676:E640:EC4A:197C:9331:E949 (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose blurb He was not a transformative figure in any of his fields, plus the circumstances of his death are not out of the ordinary at all. As others have mentioned, not ready to be listed as RD. rawmustard (talk) 15:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There has never been a condition where the circumstances of someone's death has to be itself a notable event. Harizotoh9 (talk) 15:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd argue that he was transformative in the field of crime. NorthernFalcon (talk) 15:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But his escape from murder scene and trial transformed the media and the way things are depicted on TV. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support blurb per Harizotoh's comment above. A highly notable figure's death is made no less notable just because he died of disease as opposed to some freak car accident... are we seriously going to make that the standard? We routinely post people who died in "non-notable ways" all the time. Moreover, this death is garnering way more coverage than any of the other items currently listed on ITN - it would be silly, disconnected from reality, and overtly bureaucratic not to post, IMHO. FlipandFlopped ツ 15:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb not anyone with an impact or legacy, and we are seeing simply based on fame and or notarity being used to elevate that, which should not be a blurb reason. Oppose RD on quality. There are a few cn around, the filmography needs sourcing, and I would see if that popular culture can be trimmed or merged around. For example, it doesn't need to list works that are documentaries of his trial, which should be actually on the trial page and part of its media coverage. - - Masem (t) 15:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin comment This should be listed under April 10 (date he died) I'd move it but on a phone, I cant trust a clean move. Masem (t) 15:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb (when ready). Probably for the wrong reasons, but this is someone who's fame transcends the original confines of what he was famous for, such that he's now a household name the world over. His death is front page news across the globe, so this is a fairly clear blurb for me, particularly given that some other fairly routine figures not in the "Thatcher/Mandela" sphere have been blurbed of late.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose blurb I don’t see any sane argument for a blurb. As an NFL player, he’s never won the Super Bowl and won only one MVP award (there are many players with much greater achievements); as an actor, there’s absolutely no indication of any significance whatsoever that would put him on top of the field. Finally, the delicts he committed don’t make him a high-profile criminal for sure. Considering that famous scientists and artists with landmark contributions to their fields were dismissed for a blurb, a nomination of a criminal whose delicts garnered media attention probably because he had been already known for his past NFL career is sheer derision of Wikipedia and its reputation as an encyclopaedia.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The "sane" argument is that his death is in the news. All over the news in every country. And our purpose is to provide easy access to articles pertaining to that that news in the form of links from the main page. Your opinions of his achievements are irrelevant.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is not ITN's purpose, that would be the basis for a news ticker.
    ITN specifically ignores fame, popularity, and aspects like being a household name or have mass coverage of their death. — Masem (t) 16:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's literally point 1 of ITNPURPOSE. And fame and popularity are factors that go into reaching consensus for a death blurb whether you personally approve of that or not. Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At this point I'm honestly starting to doubt whether Wikipedia having a pseudo-"news ticker" is in fact a good thing. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, we purpusely ignore fame and popularity - that what leads to bad blurbs like Betty White and Carrie Fisher. It makes ITNC an attempt for a popularity vote (look how many editors are here that regularly do not participate in ITN for this entry). We have to fight against the urge to post a topic just because of these types of factors when the person otherwise lacks the type of top-of-field recognition. And ignoring his legal factors, he was nowhere close to a top tier actor, and while he may be in the Hall of Fame, there are also nearly 380 ppl in there, with roughly 20 ppl per year added, there is no way every signel one of them has the level of top tier as like Jim Brown or Tom Brady. He made no lasting impact or legacy to the world, outside of the mass coverage his trial got. So he fails all importance criteria we use. — Masem (t) 00:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He was a high profile criminal, being a high profile star. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb his death is most certainly ITN, and article quality is high. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - Wow this is a massive death. Actually quite shocked at this, bloody hell PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, the death isn't news. Just a notable person died. Article still looks like it has some cleaning to do? microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 16:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Probably the only American football player I'd support because of his fame. FWIW BDP is not about legal issues. There's a reason the foundation mandates BLP but not BDP. However, the most recent RfC concerning BDP's close states that BDP should apply by default so I'd oppose any wording mentioning the trial. Sincerely, Dilettante 16:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - Very notable individual because of his notoriety and the global news coverage. --TheDutchViewer (talk) 16:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb because his career was not especially exceptional in any of the fields he worked in (no, not even crime); Oppose RD because of unresolved quality issues in the article, as discussed above. Comment - However, manner of death is not a criterion for any of this, and arguing for or against his inclusion on that basis doesn't really carry much weight. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. A very famous and well-known figure. While his football career – which itself was pretty notable – would ordinarily not be enough, the extensive coverage and notoriety he received for the murder trial adds up to being significant enough. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    O.J. trial was probably one of the most significant judicial events in the last 70 years, it was named the "Trial of the Century" for a reason PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, labelled as such by the media to sell newspapers. - SchroCat (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Citation needed. It's pretty ridiculous to assert that his fame only came from a few media outlets wanting "to sell newspapers." BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Person is very notable, but the news is not talking about his career or even the murder trial, and quality is to be improved. Editor 5426387 (talk) 16:49, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Neither his death is for a notorious cause nor his career is comparable to that of Higgs, Maradona, Pelé or Thatcher or other people whose death has been blurbed. It does not make sense. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose RD and oppose blurb - quality is not up to standards and lasting impact of Simpson is questionable, so blurb is excessive ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Oppose Blurb and Neutral on RD -- Subject was best well known for his criminal murder trial, civil wrongful death conviction, and conviction for O._J._Simpson_robbery_case . Overall not newsworthly, but the blurb "NFL Player...Dies" betrays the subject's notoriety. This would diminish WP:WPs stature in the same way that Washington Post calling Abu_Bakr_al-Baghdadi "Austere Religious Scholar" [15] did . Tonymetz 💬 17:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Infamous murder suspect, convicted criminal and NFL celebrity dies of cancer" Tonymetz 💬 17:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stephen can we polish it a bit? Tonymetz 💬 18:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    re: revert can we be more constructive with the comment? Tonymetz 💬 18:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Overall not newsworthy – even when it is a front-page feature on some of the most prominent newspapers in the world and in numerous countries? Even that Newsweek story you mention about al-Baghdadi features a big red line at the top: "BREAKING: O. J. Simpson Dead". BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I aim for a higher standard for WPs frontpage than newsweek. Other editors may argue for a lower bar and hopefully consensus meets in the middle. Tonymetz 💬 17:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course Newsweek shouldn't be the only consideration. Numerous other major international papers, such as the NYT, BBC, Guardian, France 24, Al Jazeera, etc. – as well as many newspapers of record for individual nations I checked – should be, though. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mooonswimmer I move to change blurb to "Infamous murder suspect, convicted criminal and NFL celebrity dies of cancer" Tonymetz 💬 17:51, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Infamous" isn't specifically included on WP:WTW, but it probably should be. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    what does it mean to you? To me "infamous" means "famous, but for nefarious reasons" Tonymetz 💬 17:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It means WP:PUFFERY. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    it's good prose and WP:DUE in this case. The subject's life was overwhelmingly nefarious Tonymetz 💬 18:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is bad prose, as MOS:WTW discusses. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    OJ Simpson dead: Infamous murder suspect and American Football star dies aged 76

    Anna Baio / Independent.co.uk via yahoo Tonymetz 💬 19:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia isn't written like a headline, and we refrain from using the kind of loaded words that are common in news headlines. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I’m the RD nominator but I’m opposed to a blurb. Mooonswimmer 22:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Can we at least get the article to sufficient quality before arguing about blurbs? The filmography is orange tagged and there's three cn tags. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 17:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, support RD iff referencing issues are addressed. Mjroots (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD pbp 17:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support RD. Not relevant enough for a blurb (oppose blurb), like Higgs a couple of days ago. Bedivere (talk) 17:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb when ready I don't think any one of the things he is known for justifies a blurb in isolation, but together, and in particular the fact he was the subject of one of the most notable trials of the last few decades, and which has hugely influenced popular culture, I think there's a good case to run one. 2A02:C7E:30F9:A600:4DAF:47D:BA7E:157F (talk) 18:05, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb per the IP above me. Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Plenty of name recognition in this case and so RD will suffice. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Plenty of name recognition ... so RD will suffice – So you're saying blurb is only for people who don't have major notability? Huh? That doesn't make any sense. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      The article has lots of interesting details: that his father was a drag queen; that he had rickets as a child and so was bow-legged; that he didn't know his own name until the third grade; and that he joined a gang called the Persian Warriors. But the proposed blurb doesn't tell us any of this or any of his other claims to fame or explain the details of his death. It just says that he was a football player like the many others that are listed in the RD ticker. The proposed blurb therefore provides no added value and is not needed. Running his picture would be ok though, as we have a good one. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      If you don't think the present blurb is good enough then propose another; although I'll say that opposing on the basis that his blurb doesn't mention his father was a drag queen is patently absurd. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      There's some discussion of better blurbs above but there doesn't seem to be a consensus. My position remains that we can do without a blurb. There will be plenty of readers regardless. (2.4 million) Andrew🐉(talk) 21:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Which is over 10 TIMES more than Peter Higgs, who's currently posted. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      And this further demonstrates that a blurb is unnecessary. The readership curve follows the usual pattern for such celebrity deaths -- a big spike on the announcement and then a steady decline -- halving each day. The posting of the RD/blurb at ITN makes little difference to this. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Simpson's trial was a major global event that made him world famous, whether we think it should have been or not. It has been covered in multiple in-depth documentaries and dramatisations over the last 30 years. Consider that the British public would usually have no interest in the personal life of an NFL player, but he is the leading story on the BBC. There is extensive coverage of his death on the BBC, and a search through the archives shows extensive coverage of his release in 2017, which again, would not usually mean a row of beans in the UK. It's also top bracket news on Spain's El País and France's Le Monde, two countries where American football of the 1970s would not mean anything to the general public. Unknown Temptation (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support blurb, Oppose on quality I'm a little hesitant to back a blurb, but the OJ case was a "trial of the century" moment that (unfortunately) made him a worldwide household name to this day. Like stated above, the global coverage of his death is significant. The Kip 18:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was able to add about 30 cites – there's now only three sentences and five filmography entries missing citations. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb O.J. Simpson and the media circus around his trial definitely supports the idea that he should be in the recent deaths, not to mention the trial's significance on pop culture and media coverage in general. User:JRHistorical (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb The impact the trial has had on history, criminology, and the judiciary is significant enough to warrant the blurb for O.J., given his status as the defendant of a trial that we've continued discussing regularly in the public sphere for three decades. DrewieStewie (talk) 19:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb (upon ready) A more significant household name the world over than someone who played football and did some film work. Brought the world of criminal justice, proceedings to a larger audience. CoatCheck (talk) 19:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb His trial was historic. He wasn't. And frankly, do we want someone who in 90% of the world is only really known for being a serial criminal on the Main Page for weeks? I'll pass on that, thanks. Black Kite (talk) 19:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Even counting the double murder as a crime, a single armed robbery over a decade later hardly makes a Heisman Trophy winner a "serial" criminal when he dies at 76. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Filmography and some sections in the media portrayal section need some ref work.Support RD Article looks good enough for posting. Neutral on blurb since he had an impact on pop culture, however I could see how an RD tag could suffice.Support blurb As Ryan Reeder pointed out, death is making significant news coverage across the world, showing he was at least notable outside of the U.S. and his article is in good shape. As mentioned earlier (don't know from who), he has also made an impact on pop culture and he was the subject to, what has been regarded to, the trial of the century. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Is anyone forgetting that, as despicable as you may find him (and no arguments to the contrary here), he is a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and widely regarded as one of the greatest running backs of all time? Sizerth (talk) 20:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality (Still some unsupported statements) oppose blurb. Not a transformative figure in any aspect of his life and a natural death at an old age. Doesn’t tick many of the usual boxes for a blurb. - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's two cn tags left and the filmography is sourced. Thoughts? @Estreyeria, Chaotic Enby, Ad Orientem, The Herald, PrinceofPunjab, GenevieveDEon, Mike gigs, MonarchOfTerror, The Kip, and TDKR Chicago 101: BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's good enough for RD. The two CNs are not highly controversial claims although they should be sourced. Still opposed to a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:35, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Should be good for RD. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yep, looks good enough for RD. Still oppose blurb per AO. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Just a reminder to Americans that playing American football does not make one important outside that country. I say this as an Australian who would never dare to seek a blurb for a player of Australian football, using that as one of the supporting factors. This makes him a famous alleged criminal. That's not enough. HiLo48 (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    playing American football does not make one important outside that country.
    Nobody’s claiming that. What people are pointing out is that his death is on the front page of the BBC (where it’s actually currently the top story), Le Monde, La Repubblica, and El Pais, among other non-American papers, which establishes that yes, he was at least somewhat notable to people outside the U.S. The Kip 23:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also on the front pages of both of Australia's newspapers of record. Clearly notable outside the U.S. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps not the case here - but keep in mind that what your computer shows you on the front page of many sites - especially BBC News, is a function of both your location, and your browser history. Nfitz (talk) 23:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps for BBC and the English-language versions of papers of note, but I checked the native-language sites of the above papers - it’s one of the top stories on all three. The Kip 00:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because he played American football? HiLo48 (talk) 08:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He was famous all over the world, and 90s qas the time when what happened in US became known in every part of the world. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support blurb per DrewieStewie, and also noting that he was "one of the first African-Americans to play a leading role in advertising and in movies", per Alan Dershowitz: The Hill Staraction (talk | contribs) 23:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That'd be a bit more impressive if another "one of the first" hadn't done it 60 years earlier. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A lot happened in those 60 years to make it notable that OJ was the first in the post-civil rights movement era. DrewieStewie (talk) 02:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sidney Poitier had won his Oscar and Bill Cosby in advertising was well on its way to becoming an encyclopedia entry while this Simpson fellow was in high school. As a black athlete, maybe he was a bit ahead of his time in endorsement deals (discounting Alice Coachman for Coke, 1952). Only a brief spell, though, till Air Jordan changed the game for dozens of sportspeople or golfers to far outsell this sellout. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted as RD, blurb discussion can continue. Stephen 23:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. He was a record-breaking football player over 40 years ago; his records have not stood. He wasn't actually groundbreaking as a criminal. The murder trial was sensational due to his celebrity, but was not otherwise unusual. His robbery conviction was just the culmination of selfish stupidity. BD2412 T 23:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • "not otherwise unusual" – I mean, he's on the front page on a substantial number of major newspapers worldwide. What else could there be? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • That was basically a blip. A novelty. There was nothing sustained about it. The murders themselves were typical of thousands of other double murders not committed by a one-time football star. BD2412 T 18:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • The murders themselves were typical of thousands of other double murders not committed by a one-time football star. – The manner of the murder is irrelevant. What matters is if Simpson is In The News – something that being on the front page on a substantial number of the major newspapers in the world, whether its being a headline in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Australia or Africa – which Simpson is all of – proves. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Given his pseudo-criminal status, it is highly unlikely that NFL or any other professional sports will mourn his death. Didgogns (talk) 23:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    pseudo-criminal? He was convicted on multiple charges, including kidnapping and armed robbery - and was sentenced to 33 years in jail. That's hardly "pseudo"? Nfitz (talk) 23:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh... then he's just a criminal Didgogns (talk) 23:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He's a famous criminal still honoured by the sports hall for other reasons. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe I'm wrong - front page of The Beaverton now - perhaps there is something to this. Nfitz (talk) 03:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb - he's not blurbable as a B-list (or maybe C-list) actor. And even his sports career was very local - and we don't blurb many gridiron player deaths. The only reason we are having this discussion is that he killed his wife - and got away with it in the civil trial; and perhaps the twist of the later decision that he had killed his wife in the civil case. And the extra twist of his turning to criminal activity and burglaries. I don't think we typically have blurbs for someone whose primary claim to fame is killing someone. Nfitz (talk) 23:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 1 of the alt blurbs I think the combo of being a HOF football player & being the defendant in a hugely major murder trial makes O.J.'s death blurbable. His death is making worldwide headlines. I think the football portion of his blurb should mirror the blurb used for Jim Brown. I'd lean towards mentioning that he was a murder suspect in the blurb, but I think it isn't a major problem if that's omitted. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 00:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Old Man Dies Since I'm already here and blurb discussion apparently continues, I may as well make it official. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb The article has only a one sentence update about his death, and the death is not notable in and of itself. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb It looks like the votes will be close on this one, so I'll throw in my two cents. His death might not reach the Thatcher/Mandela threshold of notability (very few do, and honestly, he's close), but he's definitely above the Higgs/Toriyama threshold (no disrespect intended), who were both recently blurbed Ryan Reeder (talk) 00:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb: Ryan Reeder makes a good point. OJ definitely has more notability/notoriety as some other people who were blurbed. Also major news networks across the world clearly think this is a big deal because it's front page all over the world.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 00:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The kid is certainly hot tonight, as the guy from Loverboy once said, but where will he be tomorrow? Or in two weeks, seriously; why will readers need to remember the Juice or Boson Guy died? These delays happen. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - like it or not, he was super infamous and a household name. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb as per InedibleHulk. Regardless of how infamous he was in life, there isn't anything particularly notable about his death. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It os not the only rationale for a blurb. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per above, and general principle against RDB This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb outsized coverage across the press, per above. Trial was a large cultural feature that has been discussed for quite some time. Ornithoptera (talk) 03:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb His death is all over social Media, newspapers, TV and radio, therefore he should be blurbed. LiamKorda 03:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • VOTE TALLY Since there has been a large influx of votes which has created a rather daunting wall of text, I have done the courtesy of tallying the votes. With regards purely to notability, there are currently by my count 28 votes in favour of a blurb and 27 votes opposed to a blurb. It is safe to say it is an even split. FlipandFlopped ツ 05:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - Sorry if I'm a little late to the party for this one. I believe he's notable enough to be blurbed, as news outlets from all across the world are talking about it, and he certainly exceeds some of the people we've recently blurbed in terms of general popularity, even if his cultural impact might not be as prominent. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 07:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: if we run a blurb here based on getting attention across the world, then the blurb should reflect why he gets attention around the globe, which isn't for being a good American football player or a Naked Gun supporting actor, but because of the bizarre arrest and murder trial of a B- or C-list celebrity. The first few suggested blurbs here are not representative of this. Fram (talk) 14:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He wasn't a B or C-list celebrity. He was top football player and was also in other films, lke Capricorn One. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Firstly as noted by Fram the blurbs fail to reflect why his death attracted significant coverage in many countries. While his death has attracted coverage in many English-speaking countries, it's certainly not overwhelming. For example, in India coverage has been sparse. It's ultimately an editorial decision and as an encyclopaedia I think we should blurb people like Peter Higgs and shouldn't blurb people like Simpson. AusLondonder (talk) 14:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb: I think that the sheer discussion surrounding this blurb speaks for itself. For instance, even though I was formally facinated with Higgs I still did not hear about his death until the blurb, it was simply not "In the news". I heard about OJ's death 4 hours after it hit the front page of every newspaper (yes in america, but still). I understand that it might be less international than famous scientists or geopolitics, but it is still all over the news. Normalman101 (talk) 14:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb: O. J. Simpson's death that has been widely publicized and in the news. Also per Ryan Reeder --Pithon314 (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurb. Not a transformative figure, even if notable in pop culture. Highly covered, but so are many American celebrity deaths. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb - Some of the oppose rationales are somewhat silly, like he wasn't a transformational person or that he only won one MVP award. On the other hand, he was very famous in several fields. There was football, where I would argue that becoming the first 2000 yard rusher was transformational. Not to mention his HOF, Heisman, MVP, and still holds the record for rushing yards per game 50 years later. As an actor he was not transformational, but I am sure that most people my age still remember his Hertz commercials if nothing else (and some probably remember other acting roles). And of course there was the Bronco chase and the trial of the century, which certainly impacted race relations, TV coverage of trials, and probably some aspects of subsequent US jurisprudence itself. All in all, he was far more famous, for multiple reasons, than most notable Hall of Fame football players, actors or defendants. He - and his death - has received substantial new coverage. His death ought to have a blurb. Rlendog (talk) 18:47, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As a late discussion reminder, ITN specifically does not consider fame or popularity or household name status as a reason to post a blurb. It's why the oppose !votes are asking if he was a major figure in his various fields. Masem (t) 18:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb: Rlendog summed it up pretty well but I think it's important to include "murder suspect" (or something similar) in the blurb. Only mentioning a positive fact ('Hall of Fame running back') would no doubt be controversial. Johndavies837 (talk) 18:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb, the murder case is widely known in many countries, even if people (such as myself) know very little about American football. Sahaib (talk) 22:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting, Oppose Blurb because there is no chance of a neutral blurb being written. 142.117.133.114 (talk) 22:24, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt3 blurb. Household name, not exactly "old man dies" at only 76. Anarchyte (talk) 06:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC1
    It's not "oldest man in the world" old. But even working under the premise that men are supposed to live to 111, he was in his last trimester. That's not young or middle-aged, whatever you want to call it. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb Outside of 1 CN tag, article detailed with depth to show importance not just in field of American football but also in American popular media. SpencerT•C 22:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt II (otherwise III) blurb per "major figure" criteria of WP:ITNRDBLURB:

    The death of major figures may merit a blurb. These cases are rare, and are usually posted on a sui generis basis...

    His notability is a unique blend of being an accomplished athlete, prominent pitchman, and acting roles, combined with his later life ties to his ex-wife's murder, which spawned court TV and reality TV. A lot of erroneous votes that WP:ITNRD requires the actual manner of death to be notable. It does not. There's also poor arguments that if we remove the parts he's notable for that he's no longer notable, which would disqualify anyone, including politicians and academics. While he was not at the very top of any field, his death is in the headlines globally with prominent coverage nonetheless, even if it's not in your particular country. Follow the sources, and the underlying interest in race relations.—Bagumba (talk) 03:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Came across some articles worth noting: "How the O.J. Simpson Car Chase and Trial Changed Media Forever" (Rolling Stone); "O.J. Simpson Changed Everything" (Time); "O.J. Simpson helped create the America we live in today" (CNN); "O.J. Simpson Changed America Forever" (The Arizona Republic). This should be a clear blurb in my opinion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This really ought either be posted as a blurb or closed, as this was nominated over 4 days ago. Kcmastrpc (talk) 11:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed. I think there's a slight consensus towards a blurb, but it's up to an admin to decide to promote or close. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose blurb. His link was on the RD line for more than 2 days already. I might be more supportive if that was on MainPage for a brief time. I prefer seeing other wikibios featured in MainPage rather than getting this again. --PFHLai (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Though, Peter Higgs has been on there for a week. Surely he should be pulled now if a mere two days is too much for O. J.? BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Agreed. OJ didn't get bumped off RD because more than two days passed. He got bumped off because of RD noms got promoted. Plus, (my opinion), this discussion has been going long enough and a decision should've been made. Plus he's been dead for five days, that's not a long time for this to go stale either. There are blurbed noms that get posted days after the events occurred too. Also possible recommendation, should this get blurbed, I would also suggest closing the nom to avoid further prolonging this discussion as there's been way more than enough time to discuss/reach a consensus. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, I wish we have more new blurbs coming in to displace Higgs and other old blurbs and keep ITN more fresh. (Maybe we should have only 3 bullet-points on ITN, leaving more space for SA/OTD on the right side of MainPage, but I digress...) --PFHLai (talk) 23:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted as blurb Thanks for everyone's input. I've put the above into a spreadsheet (and that shows me that the preliminary vote tally was 28 for and 30 against, not 28/27). Numerically only, this now sits at 37 for and 34 against. That's too close to call it consensus; I thus also looked whether the vote was supported by a coherent rationale (I discounted a couple of votes that were clearly irrational; there were a lot of votes that I wouldn't agree with but at least they seemed rationale). Using the latter approach, we have 36 supports for a blurb and 27 opposes. That's good enough to call it a consensus to post. Noteworthy is the comment by an IP editor who remarked that there is no chance of a neutral blurb being written. Chances are the discussion will not stop or transfer itself to Errors. Alt blurb III has most explicit support. Schwede66 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Did you account for the support !votes that only discussed fame or household name factors, which are specifically not acceptable reasons for posting a blurb? I count at least ten of those. That would pull the numbers a lot closer and possibly towards favor of not posting.
    Given how late this is after his death, and that this was far closer to a no consensus, this was an inappropriate action. Masem (t) 02:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Did you account for the support !votes that only discussed fame or household name factors, which are specifically not acceptable reasons for posting a blurb? Can you quote where it says it's "not acceptable".—Bagumba (talk) 02:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Masem, you do seem to have specific thoughts on ITN that I'm not entirely sure are shared among ITN regulars, let alone the wider community. And indeed, I'm not seeing "fame or household name" at WP:ITNATA. I also personally don't have much sympathy for the timing argument because if we hadn't posted this there would be an even older item on the page. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:18, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Household name" is specifically mentioned in WP:ITNRDBLURB - I also agree that this falls short of the "major figures" standard for a blurb set there. I remember when there was a heated discussion whether the death of Nelson Mandela should be posted as a blurb - the slope was always slippery, but the way we slid down it is shocking. 164.10.46.61 (talk) 08:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Household name" was only mentioned as a caution against potential puffery in obituaries. It's not forbidden as a reason for support.—Bagumba (talk) 11:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At one point I could have sworn we cautioned on blurbs related to fame or popularity, but I can't see if that had been there and/or recently removed. That said, since ITN is fighting systematic bias of Western culture, fame and popularity absolutely should not be used as reasons to post a blurb, since that will weigh far too heavily on Western celebrities and athletes. — Masem (t) 16:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're free to have that opinion. It's just not specified at WP:ITN as a generally accepted practice that might carry added weight in determining consensus. —Bagumba (talk) 16:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Bagumba and Masem: As the one who added that line into WP:ITNRDBLURB, I can indeed tell you that it was never intended to be an exclusionary criterion, but more as a guideline/warning. It was a WP:BOLD addition and you are also free to BOLDly revert it. However, I do believe it reflects the current consensus at ITN as far as what drives the tenor of blurb discussions, as opposed to outright controlling what deserves posting. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This was a very bad posting based on a clear misunderstanding of the purpose of Wikipedia as a free encyclopaedia. Such a committal decision cannot be elaborated by using a simple vote count. Considering the context that we’ve omitted famous scientists and artists with landmark contributions to their fields, posting a death blurb for a former NFL running back and a convicted criminal is a blow to the reputation of Wikipedia. This is certainly not the message that we want to send to our readers.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed. I would have pulled it had I not already epxressed an opinion. Black Kite (talk) 21:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe what we need to do is make sure that reasons to post blurbs based solely on the idea someone being famous (or infamous) or well known, or that their death has massive coverage due to being famous, should be dismissed, explicitly adding this under the current Great Figure criterion. It's caused so many problems before (eg Betty White and Carrie Fisher) and as Black Kite points out, how actual great contributors to mankind get shunned absent article quality issues. But that's something to expire on the talk page. Masem (t) 22:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove "murder suspect" from the blurb - Even though he most likely did commit the murders, Wikipedia has standards and shouldn't put allegations that haven't been proven in court on the main page. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 11:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's verifiable that he was a suspect, far beyond breaking news, and a core part of his notability.—Bagumba (talk) 12:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Have to agree. It's the main reason he's actually getting a blurb. AusLondonder (talk) 12:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    True, but even if it's verifiable the allegations have been made, I don't think we should put allegations on the main page to begin with. To be fair, that was kinda my issue with having him blurbed to begin with—we can't really blurb him without mentioning that, so I understand why it's being kept now that there's consensus for a blurb. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 12:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Had he not killed his ex-wife, he wouldn't have been notable enough for this. So how do you not mention it. Besides - the court did find him civilly liable for the killings. A poor justice system not getting a conviction in the first trial, with the unusual restriction of not being able to appeal, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be mentioned. Especially when there aren't any BLP issues. Nfitz (talk) 13:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's why a blurb is completely wrong in this case for so many reasons. AusLondonder (talk) 15:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll add that the blurb as written is basically saying "good riddance" in WP voice, which is absolutely inappropriate. We need to adopt the same standard that DYK has about blurbs being unduly focused on overly negative (or positive) factors relating to a BLP. Masem (t) 16:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DYK hooks are mostly trivia with no respect towards WP:DUE , so it's understandable there. On the other hand, ITN blurbs need to be neutral (WP:NPOV), which might require negative points. —Bagumba (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    When I wrote the alt blurbs, I was trying to be as neutral as possible. For the football portion of the blurb, I based it on the blurb used for Jim Brown. I included “murder suspect” & “convicted criminal” b/c people seemed to want to have those aspects as potential options for a blurb.
    A few days after I wrote the alt blurbs, I thought about potentially having the murder suspect part be a piped link to Murder trial of O.J. Simpson, but I was concentrating on other things & I wasn’t sure what people thought about that idea. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting support It's the Juice. Of course we have to post it. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb OJ was a tabloid celebrity. Wikipedia, in theory, doesn't care about sensationalized news coverage. If you strip away the sensationalism, OJ was not significant enough a figure for a main page blurb. Nosferattus (talk) 15:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turing Award[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Avi Wigderson (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Avi Wigderson wins the Turing Award for the study of randomness in computation and decades of intellectual leadership in theoretical computer science. (Post)
News source(s): Association for Computing Machinery, Quanta Magazine, Institute for Advanced Study
Credits:

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

2A02:14F:1F2:FF04:D271:E46A:12E9:68D1 (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support assuming Wigderson's article is the target, it looks fully sourced ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article looks good and notability is assumed. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 18:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reluctant procedural support since I think ITN/R needs a purge, but as long as the current rules persist, up it goes This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Academic articles should usually have a section discussing their research, and here, specifically the research they did towards the award. This has almost nothing of his academic career outside of what awards he got. --Masem (t) 03:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there is no section dedicated to his research and its academic review. The article is a bit small for a biography to be blurbed. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality per above. The Kip 18:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Trina Robbins[edit]

Article: Trina Robbins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

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

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 06:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait Although the article is generally well-sourced, the Career section needs some improvement.--MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MtPenguinMonster: I think this has been addressed. Could you take another look? gobonobo + c 20:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article looks good now, and should be ready to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:48, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thoroughly sourced now. gobonobo + c 20:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 9[edit]

April 9, 2024 (2024-04-09) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Alasdair Macintosh Geddes[edit]

Article: Alasdair Macintosh Geddes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://announcements.telegraph.co.uk/marketplace/advert/geddes-notices_56701
Credits:

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

British medical doctor who diagnosed the world's most recent and hopefully final fatality due to smallpox. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 23:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Dieter Rexroth[edit]

Article: Dieter Rexroth (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DSO
Credits:

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

German cultural manager for many orchestras, festivals, awards, notably Deutsches Symphonie-Orchester Berlin for which he won Kent Nagano. The article was basically there, without sources though as usually when translated from German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is ready for RD. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Patti Astor[edit]

Article: Patti Astor (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ARTnews
Credits:

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

American actress and co-founder of New York's Fun Gallery. 240F:7A:6253:1:7DE7:343:E10:135D (talk) 10:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 240F:7A:6253:1:FCE8:2031:6457:A266 (talk) [reply]

Oppose the article needs a lot of work. There are several cn tags and filmography section is not sourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: R. M. Veerappan[edit]

Article: R. M. Veerappan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of India
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Politician and Film Maker needs references Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there are four orange tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 03:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too many issues with article (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 10:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Climate change ruling in Switzerland[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz v. Switzerland (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The European Court of Human Rights rules that climate change prevention is a human right. (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
  • Oppose - Article is one sentence long ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on article length, but generally support this as significant. Masem (t) 17:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • To add this affects all eu member states and not just limited to Switzerland. — Masem (t) 18:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Council of Europe states, not just EU. But agree on significance; shame that the premature nomination means that any half-decent article that may emerge 12 or 24 hrs down the line will have a starting handicap of half a dozen opposes to overcome. Moscow Mule (talk) 20:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have some rudimentary knowledge in this area that I am going to try to hit tonight to provide background and thus fill in the case basics but can't promise anything. — Masem (t) 20:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose article is 1 sentence long, will need to be expanded. Editor 5426387 (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose on quality As mentioned previously, article is a very short stub. WOuld need to be greatly expanded on before being considered.
Support, thank you for expanding! ~~mAyLiNgOeEd (Talk to me!) (My contributions to Wikipedia📜) 20:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The German article is about the plaintiffs, not the lawsuit. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is titled as if the scope were to be the plaintiffs, but it has more on the case and reactions to it than the organisation. Schwede66 23:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on significance, oppose on quality. Article needs very substantial work. AusLondonder (talk) 22:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • EXPANDED I have spent the last hour to expand it out, though I'm not diving into reaction kudzu. --Masem (t) 01:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment. Did the reacts for You based on de.wiki. Myself I abstain from !voting but will take this opportunity to congratulate You, @User:Masem on your fine work on this and any other issues on ITNC. Kudoz! --Ouro (blah blah) 05:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability but the article still needs improvement before it can be posted, particularly in the reactions section. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A very significant event and even though the article is bit short but it is good enough. PrinceofPunjabTALK 03:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The latest climate news is that March was the hottest in recent times and that sea temperatures set a new record. Switzerland is not a significant scapegoat in this and the ECHR has no enforcement powers even if it was. To see who's actually responsible, see the Carbon Majors report which has just been published. China's coal industry heads the list with 25% of global emissions (2016-2022). Andrew🐉(talk) 07:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • ECHR has required the Swiss gov't efforts to rectrify the emissions target failure with oversight by govt representatives to the ECHR from other countries. Yes, its not like they put a fine (outside of legal costs) on Switzerland, but they are forcing the country to establish new laws and likely new sources of funding within a reasonable time to meet overall climate change goals. (This isn't about climate change per se but the human rights that are lost if climate change is not adequetly met, that's the story here). — Masem (t) 12:11, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I think the blurb is imprecise and would need revision. This was a very specific ruling finding Switzerland in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights (Article 8 and 6 § 1). It essentially found that Switzerland had positive obligations to act and has not effectively done so, thus Switzerland has committed a human rights violation. The court found that Switzerland has failed to reduce its GHG emissions fast enough to meet its own targets (set by law). It found that Swiss domestic courts should provide an adequate venue to abide by the Convention. The court also found that 4 individuals represented as plantiffs did not actually fulfil the victim-status criteria under Article 34 of the Convention and declared their complaints inadmissible. It is worth noting at the same time they decided on Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz, they threw out (made inadmissible) two other climate-change cases at the same time (Carême v. France and Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and 32 Others). Find the court documents here.
Of course this ruling can have large implications, especially for member states of the Council of Europe/convention signatories. The ECHR has never directly ruled on a "climate-change" before (although they have had environmental protection cases). This does pave the way for future cases (see Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway) not only in the ECHR, but other venues as well. It is clearly important ruling, but I would ask other editors to assess if the court actually found that climate-change prevention is a human right. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I put in the article, part of the reason Switzerland failed is they were putting much of their effrt by riding on the EU's emissions trading program, which throughout the EU failed to realize CO2 reduction goals anywhere close to what Kyoto/Paris asked for. Many other states also took their emissions committment in this direction and have been burnt by the failure of the program; eight other states joined Switzerland to fight off this case. This means that many states within the Council will still likely fail to meet 2020 or 2030 goals, and that if they don't take strong mitigating actions beyond the cap-and-trade system, they will likely be found in violation. — Masem (t) 12:08, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. On the human rights violation bit, just added ref, from the Washington Post. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • support incredibly important, per et al. Kasperquickly (talk) 11:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support thanks to @Masem for expanding it, it's very important and is long enough (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 11:45, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on importance, weak oppose on quality: the quality of the prose is very poor, and much reads like a machine translation ("her reaction was not material", "aligned with the relevant political spectrum", "instead they should seek political actions"). Sandstein 12:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Likely due to the reactions section being based off machine translation from the Swiss version ( the bulk of the rest I wrote fresh from English sources) likely needs wordsmithinh — Masem (t) 13:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Machine translation does not seem acceptable for material presented as a quotation. For example, I just spot-checked ""alienating, possibly even counterproductive". The actual quotation was "befremdlich und möglicherweise gar kontraproduktiv". "Befremdlich" would be better translated as "disturbing" or "disconcerting". But if you're going to quote someone then you should give their original text per MOS:PMC, "the wording of the quoted text must be faithfully reproduced". Andrew🐉(talk) 07:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the perspective a cynic like me (call it valid or invalid if you like), I'd love to see this article discuss more actual ramifications than it already does. Switzerland has apparently been told to "reassess and address its climate change goals". What exactly does this entail and what would be the punishment for not doing so? All the comments here claim this ruling is so terribly important, yet honestly I don't see that well substantiated in the article. DarkSide830 (talk) 13:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, in that this doesn't have immediate or extremely visible material impact in the near term. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 20:08, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article doesn't indicate what impacts this will have, and what sort of penalties there will be for failing to abide by the ruling. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:20, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) New Irish Taoiseach[edit]

Proposed image
Articles: Simon Harris (talk · history · tag) and Taoiseach (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Simon Harris becomes the new (and youngest) Taoiseach of Ireland after Leo Varadkar's sudden resignation. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Simon Harris becomes the youngest Taoiseach of Ireland after Leo Varadkar's resignation.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Simon Harris becomes Ireland's youngest taoiseach following the resignation of Leo Varadkar after running unopposed in the election.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Simon Harris becomes the new Taoiseach of Ireland after Leo Varadkar's resignation.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: There were two nominations at ITN already (one for Varadkar's resignation, one for Harris' nomination) and both had the consensus to wait until today. ITN/R as new executive head of state. Abcmaxx (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality Simon Harris has some citation needed tags and I've added a failed verification check based on a cursory glance of the article. Taoiseach is correctly orange tagged for more sources. If Harris' article is fixed, then that could be posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality per Joseph. And I would remove the mention that he is the youngest Taoiseach. It is trivial and irrelevant information for practical purposes. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no real reason not to include it since we have to post the change anyways. I'd phrase it like "Simon Harris becomes the youngest Taoiseach of Ireland" though, excising the "new (and". BSMRD (talk) 16:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I still think it is unnecessary information. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think this might make it seem to unfamiliar readers that there were multiple taoisigh, of whom Varadkar was the youngest, and that his resignation makes Harris the new youngest. It's worth noting his youth as an separate feature to his newness. Perhaps "…becomes the new Taoiseach of Ireland, and the youngest ever, after Leo…" although I accept it's a bit wordy. Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 07:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle once article issues are closed This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once issues are resolved. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 18:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support once maintenance tags are resolved. microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 18:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - once everything is ready quality-wise, per above. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 07:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance. All these "support if fixed" votes are meaningless, because it's WP:ITNR, and so only consideration is article quality. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT3 - Him being the youngest is fairly trivial, it's the succession we're focused on. The Kip 18:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT3, Oppose on quality As per The Kip, there isn't a need to specify he is the youngest. The article currently is not ready, due to many cn's and failed verification's. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT3, Oppose on quality. Article is missing some sources, needless to say. I don't think it's too far off though. I think some of the tags could be removed because Harris's article seems to have been citation bombed. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking good to go now. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've been through this and some of the citation needed tags were so easy to replace (a strike being called off is a basic news story, for example), and removing extra details that weren't in sources that were tagged as "failed verification". There's now one tag left for "better source needed" (legislation cited with primary source) and one more of "failed verification" (about a "scandal" I know nothing about). I've seen worse pages posted, and this story is getting old now. Unknown Temptation (talk) 18:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I replaced the refs at the better source and failed verification tags mentioned by Uknown Temptation above, the article would seem to me to be ready now Josey Wales Parley 21:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 22:36, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) XZ Utils backdoor[edit]

(NON-ADMIN CLOSURE)
Stale. The Kip 21:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: XZ Utils backdoor (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A maliciously introduced backdoor in the Linux utility xz within the liblzma library is found. The issue has been assigned a CVSS score of 10.0, the highest possible score. (Post)
Credits:
now we have a good enough article on the event itself. I am not much experienced with ITN, so kindly feel free to update/change the blurb as necessary. —usernamekiran (talk) 16:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stale - The correct date for this nomination would had been the 29 March unfortunately so it's stale as far as ITN is concerned. -- KTC (talk) 17:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per KTC, article is stale ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — Not significant. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stale as this happened on 29 March, which is older than last of the current front page blurbs (1 April). Joseph2302 (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2024 (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.

April 8[edit]

April 8, 2024 (2024-04-08) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports

(Posted) RD: José Antonio Ardanza[edit]

Article: José Antonio Ardanza (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El Mundo
Credits:

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

Longest serving lehendakari (president of the Basque Country, in Spain). Remembered for his commitment against ETA terrorism and the fight for dialogue to pacify and normalize the territory. I think the article is ready to be posted. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:36, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Aderounmu Adejumoke[edit]

Article: Aderounmu Adejumoke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.bbc.com/pidgin/articles/c0d3m2zxz49o https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/04/nollywood-actress-adejumoke-aderounmu-is-dead/
Credits:

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

Nigerian actress. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 23:05, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Selected filmography section is not sourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Melitha Sidabutar[edit]

Article: Melitha Sidabutar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.todayonline.com/8days/indonesian-singer-melitha-sidabutar-dies-23-4-years-after-her-twin-sister-died-similar-heart-problems-2400761
Credits:

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

Indonesian singer. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 22:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support the article meets the bare minimum requirement. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Not much substance to the article, but she had a rather short life and what's there is appropriately referenced. Schwede66 00:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ralph Puckett[edit]

Article: Ralph Puckett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Medal of Honor Winner.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there are two cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:38, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now three cn tags. Schwede66 23:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Bill Gunter[edit]

Article: Bill Gunter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tallahassee Democrat
Credits:

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

Florida politician from back in the day. Needs work. Curbon7 (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there is an orange tag and the article has only two sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there are 2 sources (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 11:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apart from his running for a seat in the US Senate in 1980 and his recent death, everything else in this wikibio is unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 23:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted as blurb) RD/Blurb: Peter Higgs[edit]

Posted and will remain so. Stephen 09:57, 10 April 2024 (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.

Proposed image
Article: Peter Higgs (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Nobel prize winning theoretical physicist Peter Higgs (pictured in 2013) dies at the age of 94. (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nobel winning physist whose namesake is part of the Higgs boson particle. Article looks in high quality shape. I am hesitant to call for a blurb for this though. Masem (t) 16:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - great looking article ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - good quality, would support a blurb. Polyamorph (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - One of the key figures in this field. I’ve added a blurb as think he meets notability for one. yorkshiresky (talk) 17:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - The Higgs boson is a very important discovery of the 21st century in terms of science. Lukt64 (talk) 17:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Higgs boson particle is worldwide known. If we are ever going to blurb a scientist, this should be just the case to do it. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Article is fine. Black Kite (talk) 17:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - article is okay, significant physicist. PhilKnight (talk) 18:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - A monumental figure in the field of theoretical physics. --TheDutchViewer (talk) 18:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb This is a clear-cut case, and the article looks fine.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Top of his field, article in good shape and his discoveries are popular/noted worldwide. Good case for a blurb (regardless of age). --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull Death has no immediate consequences and is not notable in manner. We are already far too liberal with death blurbs. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support - why even bother, orbitalbuzzsaw? There's no way this will be pulled at this point. --RockstoneSend me a message! 23:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull Name any Physics conference, professional sports match or equivalent thing in other areas which mourns the death of Higgs, then I'll support. Didgogns (talk) 01:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb I do agree that most death blurbs are a mistake and this is why we have RD. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb I'm fine with getting rid of death blurbs, but while they exist in their current iteration this qualifies as someone who is at the absolute top of their field. Curbon7 (talk) 01:28, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support blurb. It's very easy to see how Higgs meets the currently generally-accepted threshold of "at the top of their respective field." And for the record, I agree with this generally-accepted criteria. But the only reason why I felt the need to !vote at all was the sudden pull !votes from editors that want a different criteria. As I've said before, it bothers me how every RD-as-a-blurb discussion becomes a forum where editors debate what they think the criteria should be. No one individual blurb nomination will ever be the place where that issue gets settled once and for all. Right now, there exists an informal understanding that "the top of one's respective field" is the criteria we tend to go by these days. A very vocal minority wishing for a stricter criteria or a permanent end to posting deaths as blurbs expresses dissatisfaction with this every time one of these gets posted, but always to no avail as they're still the minority at this time. If we ever want to get a formal criteria to put the issue to bed once and for all, the only place where that's going to happen is the talk page, not here. So as Rockstone said, why even bother?  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 01:53, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support although I usually do not support death blurb but he is one of the most influential people in his field therefore his death is pretty significant. PrinceofPunjabTALK 03:59, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m sure cheese makers mourn the death of a prominent cheese maker, but just because someone is prominent in their field shouldn’t qualify them for a deathblurb. The manner or direct impact of the death are not notable (e.g. a serving head of state/government’s death is notable as change of head of state for some other reason would be notable, and the assassination of a famous person is notable because it receives world headlines), and thus, it does not qualify to be on ITN in its own right This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 08:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support for blurb The man literally has a subatomic particle named after him. If there's anyone notable for a RD blurb in physics, it's him. Melmann 08:55, 10 April 2024 (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) Eclipse[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Solar eclipse of April 8, 2024 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A total solar eclipse is visible across North America. (Post)
Credits:

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

Last total sun eclipse till late 2026. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now Appropriately orange tagged. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Have we ever posted an eclipse before? HiLo48 (talk) 00:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's listed on ITNR under celestial events NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 00:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, see here as an example of an eclipse that was previously posted to ITN (there are a couple more examples mentioned there, too). 92.18.110.33 (talk) 02:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    yayy 59.99.6.230 (talk) 10:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm surprised it would be on ITRN - but it's only total solar eclipses that are ITNR. On average, only about 1/3 of eclipses are ever total. On average, there's a solar eclipse every 5 months or so, but it's only total every 16 months or so. So I guess we only have to debate quality. Nfitz (talk) 02:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality (orange tag to fix). Support, issues have been fixed! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 02:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's happening soon and is all over the media, and live streams have already started. The orange banner tag, which was there for six years, was quite ridiculous as it's trivial to find reliable coverage of the track and we even have a nice animation (above) thanks to NASA. Everyone who complained about this without doing something about it should please read WP:JUSTDOIT. Anyway, the most important point is that it's better to report this before it happens rather than afterwards, so that readers get a reminder to take a look for themselves and so don't miss it. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:30, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah. We always seem to post astronomical events well after they're over, with the snarky undertone of "and, ha ha ha, you missed it". —Cryptic 09:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      That is true. If we don't post it today then I think the item will be too stale and not useful enough to put up. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Yeah, would be great to post it before it happens! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article is fine, it's WP:ITNR and thus have marked as ready. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's happening soon and is all over the media as @Andrew Davidson said (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 11:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the article is in a good shape and it is getting extensive media coverage. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:17, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support timely ITN we should post this now. Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The article looks decent. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks fine. Just post it now. Shanes (talk) 16:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 16:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am prepping File:Solar eclipse of April 2024 from Indianapolis.jpg for image protection as an image of the eclipse taken at totality, now that it's happened.

(Posted with timeline) Ongoing: War in Sudan (2023–present)[edit]

Article: War in Sudan (2023–present) (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC (13 April), Washington Post (12 April), Al Jazeera (11 April), Crisis Group (11 April)...
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Add timeline as well. Continuation of last weeks discussion that had consensus but with admin opposition. Lukt64 (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support the proposal to link both the article and the timeline, e.g. "War in Sudan (timeline), that seemed to have consensus in the Mar. 31 discussion; I don't know why it wasn't posted. Consensus is not a vote, of course, but 14 in favor and 3 against seems pretty cut and dry. DecafPotato (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Again, ongoing is for a constant stream of blurb-worthy events that would clog ITN if they were all added. If we were to add this, we might as well add every armed conflict. This is not getting a sufficient amount of media attention, and a relatively updated article isn't enough. ITN is not a war ticker. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 21:17, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ITN is NOT a war ticker, but war is the #1 thing being covered in the news right now. Lukt64 (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find a single front page headline on Sudan in any media outlet. The significance isn't there PrecariousWorlds (talk) 07:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also mention that we'll have 6 wars currently in ongoing if we post Sudan. That to me seems like an undue weight. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inasmuch as we did it with Ukraine, plus earlier consensus on 31 March This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not seeing the consistent substantial updates to the timeline article that Ongoing demands. The updates are daily, but they are very short (ie RSF does x, SAF claims y, etc). DarkSide830 (talk) 22:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with the timeline - Previous proposal had consensus, admin opposition is not a supervote. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it wasn't admin opposition. The article is not being updated sufficiently for ongoing. The timeline is a ticker of trivial events. Stephen 23:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot bite my tongue on this one. I acknowledge you probably did not intend it badly, but the most recent updates to the timeline talk about various massacres/battles which have killed hundreds of innocent people. Just because the victims come from a war-torn country like Sudan and there is less detail about the exact circumstances of their deaths, does not render these peoples brutal deaths a "ticker of trivial events"... I think we should be sensitive about our choice of words here, especially when talking about these sorts of global issues. FlipandFlopped ツ 01:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that this is an absolutely horrifying conflict, with an immense human toll. However, without sounding like a heartless monster, there is no such policy as 'WP:MINIMUMDEATHS', and there being casualties and massacres in a war zone, as awful as it is, I don't think indicates an excessive amount of notability. There are many armed conflicts in the world; people are being tortured and kidnapped by Mexican cartels as we speak, ISIS is still committing atrocities in Syria. There are detailed and updated timeline articles for these wars. But at the end of the day, this is In The News, and I think our standards for notability go beyond just posting tragedies of a certain scale. He could have phrased it better, but I agree that there doesn't seem to be anything exceptional about Sudan compared to many other conflicts that make it fit for ongoing. Just my opinion, I don't mean to trivialise these events. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An admin thinking the timeline is a ticker of trivial events (a subjective opinion, and not one that appears to be consensus) is very much "admin opposition". Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 01:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the time it was autoarchived, a consensus of 14:2 believed the updates to the relevant target articles were sufficient to post (a couple editors implied they opposed but never !voted, even accounting for them it was near unanimous). It was 14:1 when I marked it as ready; you disagreed and unmarked it as such and allowed it to be archived. I don't think you were being malicious at all, I just think you may want to be more cautious about overriding consensus in the future. Despite you technically not !voting, it was clear throughout the discussion how you would have !voted, so it's fair to say you were an involved editor when unilaterally deciding it wasn't ready after all. Just to be clear, I'm absolutely not trying to attack your character or your judgment or dogpile on you or make you feel bad, I just think this was a misstep and I hope you'll understand why some editors feel that way.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 17:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with the timeline per Chaotic Enby. This should have already been posted, as I believe there was already a prior consensus to post. FlipandFlopped ツ 01:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I notice that after you promoted this to (ready), @Stephen: removed the label as he did last time. Unfortunately, he does not appear to have looked at the entry (or the news) lately, as it has been massively updated since his last comment, with some of the many stories appearing about the Sudan War in recent days. It will be interesting to see if he succeeds in keeping this off the front page despite consensus again. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 03:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is disappointing. Counting the nom, the support:oppose ratio is 11:4, almost 3:1. I was optimistic that Stephen would understand why myself and several other editors thought it wasn't appropriate to un-mark it as ready the last time, but it feels much more inappropriate for them to do the same thing they were criticized for a second time. No one person decides if an ongoing entry is or is not sufficient to post. We discuss things as a group for a reason. Citing one's own !vote rationale as the reason why it's not ready despite a consensus saying otherwise is a supervote. Of course, he doesn't have to be the one to post it, Wikipedia is voluntary after all, but it would have been better to just do nothing.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 05:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanilla Wizard @SashiRolls @Lukt64 I agree and am respectfully disappointed that @Stephen would remove the (Ready) categorization despite clearly voiced concerns that he is supervoting down a nomination which he is involved with because he casted a minority oppose !vote.
    In fact, across both ongoing nominations, 18 total editors have voted support and 5 have voiced opposition. Two of those five are admins (@Stephen and @Spencer) and one was an anonymous IP address.
    At this point and with all due respect to both the above administrators, we will never agree on whether the article has substantive updates or is just "trivial". This is just going to be nominated again and the same argument will repeat itself. A completely uninvolved administrator needs to come in and review the article + both nominations and assess whether it has consensus for ITN. Is there anyone we could ping or does this need to go to AN/I? FlipandFlopped ツ 18:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Flipandflopped Thanks for this very well-written summary with which I agree. I wonder if we could go to Wikipedia:Closure requests for an uninvolved administrator to look at it? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    FWIW, too, close to 7K in substantive updates have been added since these two admins expressed their minority opinion that the main article was insufficiently updated. This is largely due to the many in-depth stories that have been published on the subject in RS in the last few days. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Even though I'm opposed to putting up this item, I do think that the admins should respect the consensus we've made here. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 19:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support with timeline as there are frequent and significant updates Fileyfood500 (talk) 02:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with timeline - per above. The conflict is still one of the most significant wars going on right now, and the timeline article is being updated on the regular. To be brutally honest, I don't quite understand why it was even removed in the first place. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 07:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with timeline - As Chaotic Enby already said, there was already clear consensus to post last time but it was supervoted down. No disrespect intended towards the admin in question, I don't think they had any malicious intentions, but this is an accurate description of what happened the way I see it. And it remains true that Timeline of the War in Sudan (2023–present) is getting frequent and significant updates. And yes, these are updates that would be individually blurbworthy had it not been for the fact that they're part of a long and protracted war: people being killed in the triple digits daily, significant offensives being started, etc.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 17:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support with timeline per @Bucket of sulfuric acid's above arguments (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 18:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. (again) Strange that this was not promoted based on the previous clear consensus. I just fixed the two big red errors among the 448 references. (§) I'm not sure that including text via an extract template is ideal, as one has to really dig to find referencing problems in the daughter article, whereas ideally there would be a summary in the section included in the parent article... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 18:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment another battle of Wad Madani has begun. Battle of Wad Madani (2024) Lukt64 (talk) 21:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
High support with timeline and overall status. I'm the person who has been announcing a lot of the things happening in this conflict in the last few days. It's been growing especially around Khartoum and a large battle in Wad Madani started today. Along with the dengue crisis within the capital and many other things. I don't even know why this war was taken out of current events. NYMan6 (talk) 22:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Timeline article is mostly single sentence updates without paragraphs or additional depth about specific events; of insufficient quality and depth to be featured at ITN/R. Only 3 of the lines since March 1 were of more than one sentence. Conversely, the War in Sudan (2023–present) does have a little more depth, however insufficient updates about recent events, with only 3 sentences in the body appearing to refer to events in April 2024 (the past 9 days). Based on the comments above, there are events going on, but just not in sufficient depth or quality for these articles to be featured in the Ongoing section. SpencerT•C 04:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It has a lot more depth, indeed. I've added a couple more sentences from an April 10 Reuters report and three more from a March 29 Al Jazeera report on the impending famine. I've also added a section to the talk page explaining that the in-depth article is being criticized for not having enough updates in the last 9 days, while the timeline article is being criticized for having too many short updates. My hope is that by providing actual feedback to the authors, this will lead to a better entry and a better ITN decision than was made last time (i.e. not posting when there was clear consensus to post). 10.7 million people were estimated to be displaced by January 2024, 5 million are facing famine. 18 million "acute food insecurity". -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Spencer and Stephen: I should also add that it's very likely there will be quite a number of media organizations publishing articles on the 1-year anniversary of the conflict in the next 5 days. Not sure why en.wp would not do the same given the strong majority in both the last nomination and this one for promotion. That said, I'm not a fan of the one-line updates to the timeline entry. (I didn't !vote for *its* inclusion last time either.) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:40, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- It is possible that Stephen and Spencer are unaware of the nearly complete internet blackout in Sudan in February and March, making it difficult for the press to report on conditions inside the country. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 03:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted with timeline I see clear consensus to add the main article to ongoing including the timeline. I suggest we all move on and go with what the consensus is. Schwede66 02:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 7[edit]

April 7, 2024 (2024-04-07) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

(Attention needed) Lori and George Schappell[edit]

Article: Lori and George Schappell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP News
Credits:

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

May need some citations for media appearances. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 03:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Antonette Mendes[edit]

Article: Antonette Mendes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.heraldgoa.in/News-Today/Antonette-Mendes%E2%80%99s-demise-A-huge-loss-to-Goa%E2%80%99s-Konkani-stage/219939 https://www.gomantaktimes.com/ampstories/web-stories/heartfelt-goodbye-to-goas-melody-queen
Credits:

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

Indian singer, actress, playwright, and theatre director. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 22:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ready. Article is cited throughout. I found no concerns. Marked as ready. Flibirigit (talk) 00:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Allen Fraser[edit]

Article: John Allen Fraser (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/john-fraser-former-speaker-dies-1.7168762
Credits:

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

Speaker of the House of Commons of Canada, 1986~1994. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 23:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The article has one citation needed tag to resolve. Flibirigit (talk) 00:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've revised that sentence and inserted a footnote at the end. --PFHLai (talk) 18:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Short and DoB has no citation but seems very barely sufficient. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 19:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is now a footnote in the main prose next to the date and place of birth. --PFHLai (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 22:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joe Viera[edit]

Article: Joe Viera (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.br-klassik.de/aktuell/news-kritik/joe-viera-nachruf-jazzwoche-burghausen-gruender-gestroben-100.html
Credits:

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

German jazz saxophonist and educator. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 23:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The article has two citation needed tags to resolve. Flibirigit (talk) 00:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the article has two cn tags and have so many redlinks. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: thank you for the nomination. I made a mistake thinking he died 9 April as two others (see above). Redlinks should be filled, not complained about. I have no time today, but it can't be too difficult to get recordings source. He ran a festival for more than 50 years and deserves attention. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I had 10 minutes and added four references. Please check, User:PrinceofPunjab and all. Several of the obits have more detail. I, however, am out for the rest of the day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted - it looks like the issues identified above have all been resolved.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:06, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Michael Boder[edit]

Article: Michael Boder (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Violin Channel
Credits:

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

German conductor focused on world premiere at the great opera houses of the world. I began the article long ago, and sadly updated. Some refs were lost but replaced. There would be much more to say ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Chryssie Lytton Cobbold, Baroness Cobbold[edit]

Article: Chryssie Lytton Cobbold, Baroness Cobbold (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2024/04/09/lady-cobbold-chatelaine-knebworth-concerts-died-obituary/
Credits:

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

British aristocrat and writer. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 04:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose - added one CN tag, otherwise brief but well-written. The Kip 18:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've just replaced that {cn} tag with two footnotes. --PFHLai (talk) 02:49, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The paragraph listing their children is not cited. Flibirigit (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I found a source for the kids, so this has enough details & references now. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the new source, but it doesn't support the kids' middle names and dates of birth as shown in the bullet-points there. --PFHLai (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PFHLai: Since the middle names & dates of birth don’t seem all that important, I removed them. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I tried but couldn't find any useful RS available online. --PFHLai (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ready. Article is fully sourced. I found no concerns. Marked as ready. Flibirigit (talk) 12:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 22:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Karen Yarbrough[edit]

Article: Karen Yarbrough (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WBBM, CBS News
Credits:

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

American politician who served for Cook County, Illinois. The article needs work, especially with several unsourced paragraphs and a couple short sections which should either be expanded or merged. ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 01:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to go now! Any reviewers who can take a look at it now are appreciated. :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support All is properly cited. No tags. Prose works well. GTG. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ready. The article is fully sourced. I found no concerns. Marked as ready. Flibirigit (talk) 14:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 15:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Mozambique boat disaster[edit]

Article: 2024 Mozambique boat disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A ferry carrying approximately 130 people sinks off the coast of Mozambique, leaving at least 100 dead. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A ferry carrying approximately 130 people sinks off the coast of Nampula Province, Mozambique, leaving at least 100 dead.
News source(s): Reuters, France24
Credits:

Article updated

Shipwrecks that kill 100+ people aren't exactly run of the mill events, so I'm a little surprised this wasn't nominated. Article needs a lot of work, though. The Kip 23:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on notability. I considered nominating this, but the article is a bit stubby. Natg 19 (talk) 23:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article on the boat tragedy is unfortunately a bit short, but the who-what-where-when-why is there. Bremps... 01:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality article is 1,200 characters long, which is still basically a stub. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability due to the large scale of the shipwreck, but oppose on quality due to the article just barely passing the threshold of a stub. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, as much as we shouldn't be a disaster ticker, more than 100 people dying is not exactly common either. Quality seems fine, at 1900 characters right now, solidly Start-class but nothing we can't post. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability Tragic event with massive number of fatalities. Sincerely, Dilettante 16:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The writing that's there isn't terrible and the room for more only rightly suggests this is a developing situation under investigation, with details to potentially follow. The sort of story that was meant to be posted for a week or two, by my guess at what went through whoever started this practice's minds at the time. I could be wrong. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note Article currently states at least 100, rather than 130. Would recommend stating "at least 100" until/unless we get an official death toll. Bremps... 03:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jerry Grote[edit]

Article: Jerry Grote (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [16]
Credits:

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

There are dead refs to fix. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They're all from the same magazine, Baseball Digest, I think simply removing the links and making them offline sources suffices. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Muboshgu: Doesn't that go against WP:KDL? Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:04, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I've put them back. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ready. I removed one unsourced sentence, and found no other concerns. Marked as ready. Flibirigit (talk) 14:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 15:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted combined blurb) 2024 NCAA Division I women's/men's basketball championship games[edit]

Proposed image
Articles: 2024 NCAA Division I women's basketball championship game (talk · history · tag) and 2024 NCAA Division I men's basketball championship game (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In NCAA Division I basketball, the South Carolina Gamecocks win the women's championship (MOP Kamilla Cardoso pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In NCAA Division I basketball, the South Carolina Gamecocks win the women's championship (MOP Kamilla Cardoso pictured) and the UConn Huskies win the men's championship.
News source(s): CBS Sports (women's) / Associated Press (men's)
Credits:

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

Men's championship (tomorrow night) is also ITN/R. Blurb will be updated with men's winner after that game but no reason not to go ahead and post the women. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Article looks in great shape. Obviously some "Aftermath" content is forthcoming, but what has been written looks to be well-written and sourced. Nice to see a sports article in good shape this soon after it's conclusion. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait post combined blurb when the men's tournament is completed. Natg 19 (talk) 22:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article is detailed and sourced, with detailed box scores Fileyfood500 (talk) 22:32, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Post now, update with the men's result tomorrow. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is in great shape, although it might need some small fixes, it's good enough for ITN.
  • Support, article is well-written and well-cited. Can post this one now and combine with the men's blurb tomorrow. The Kip 03:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted—Bagumba (talk) 04:04, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Nomination updated for men's final - altblurb added. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The men's final article still has two unsourced paragraphs. Black Kite (talk) 03:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Black Kite Just added sources to both of those. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 04:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joe Kinnear[edit]

Article: Joe Kinnear (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport, National World
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Football Manager. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 6[edit]

April 6, 2024 (2024-04-06) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

(Posted) RD: Phil Nimmons[edit]

Article: Phil Nimmons (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC, Billboard
Credits:

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

Article is a bit short, but the career sections are cited. Will work on expansion. Needs a citation for his discography. Flibirigit (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up and expanded the article's prose. Could anyone help cite the discography? Flibirigit (talk) 00:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unsourced discography hidden by comments. Any help in sourcing is appreciated. Ready for review. Flibirigit (talk) 12:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This article has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Slovak presidential election[edit]

Proposed image
Article: 2024 Slovak presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Peter Pellegrini is elected President of Slovakia. (Post)
News source(s): AP News, Reuters
Credits:

Not as important as the Prime Minister of Slovakia, but notable enough. Classicwiki (talk) 01:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support in principle Not ITNR, but this election is quite significant both regionally and internationally due to the NATO-Russia conflict; Pellegrini's election gives Fico more legitimacy and cements Slovakia as a firmly pro-Russian country within NATO. The campaign section is orange-tagged for expansion. Curbon7 (talk) 02:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support not ITN/R as above but a national election nonetheless This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Curbon; we also have precedent from posting the Czech presidential election last year, where the opposite, but comparably significant geopolitical outcome occurred. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 04:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support got quite a lot attention in media Braganza (talk) 05:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support due to the fact that the elections are nationwide and he is elected directly by the people. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We publish more than enough ITN/R politicians and so don't need secondary ones like this too. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality campaign section is correctly orange tagged as needing expansion. Aftermath section should also be expanded, since almost all of the English-language coverage about this election is related to his pro-Russian policies, which have one sentence on them (which isn't enough of a representation). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the lack of content in the campaign section and the underdeveloped state of the article seems somewhat contradictory to the above claims that this election was particularly notable even in spite of it not being ITNR. FlipandFlopped ツ 01:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There aren’t enough details in the article to make this seem notable enough for ITN. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:53, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Some of the effects of the election are described in the aftermath section, though it only says that it is a "gain" for the government of the Prime Minister, which doesn't seem to be significant enough on its own for a blurb. The campaign section does discuss some of Pellegrini's more Russia sympathetic views, though I am not sure how significant this is considering the Prime Minister already holds similar views. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joseph E. Brennan[edit]

Article: Joseph E. Brennan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [17]
Credits:

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

Working on expanding it – Muboshgu (talk) 18:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support - needs more details on death. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 00:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Personal life section needs expansion and more sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 08:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find any, you're welcome to present those sources and details. I've looked. All I see in Google searching and Newspapers.com is he lived on Munjoy Hill, had a wife named Connie, and two children. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
adding source for spouse's name and number of children would be sufficient. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I added some additional details to the personal life section about his children. The article is of sufficient quality. I also note the exact cause of death is not available online, likely for privacy reasons. Given he died at 89, I do not think having the exact cause of death in the article is a prerequisite for being posted to RD. FlipandFlopped ツ 01:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Ecuador-Mexico diplomatic crisis[edit]

Article: 2024 raid on the Mexican embassy in Ecuador (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Mexico breaks its diplomatic relationship with Ecuador after the latter storms its embassy in Quito. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Mexico breaks its diplomatic relationship with Ecuador in response to Ecuadorian police forcibly entering the Mexican embassy in Quito.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Mexico breaks its diplomatic relationship with Ecuador in response to Ecuadorian police forcibly entering the Mexican embassy in Quito.
News source(s): Washington Post, El Pais
Credits:

Article updated

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ixtal (talk • contribs) 11:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Mexico seems to have completely broken off any relations with Ecuador. That's pretty major. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for events to escalate. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 14:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They broke diplomatic relations. Isn't that enough escalation? They won't (let's hope) go to an actual war over this. Cambalachero (talk) 17:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support given that it's already a full breaking of diplomatic relationships, we can't really predict whether there will be further escalation but that enough is already notable. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support A pretty big event and Mexico have broken its relations. We posted 2023 Canada–India diplomatic crisis [18] even though there was no official breaking of relations between those two countries. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's no dedicated article and not much of an update. Coverage doesn't seem significant. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose' solely due to lack of a dedicated article. The incident is quite serious and almost without modern precedent. It warrants an article, and a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is zero requirement for a standalone article, only that either we have a new article of reasonable length or that there has been a significant update to an existing article. I am on the edge of supporting this on significance, but in terms of quality there would likely need to be at least a few more paragraphs in the target article (in addition to overall article quality) to support. — Masem (t) 16:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support big international incident. The article is properly updated. Cambalachero (talk) 17:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, major international incident - like the Syria airstrike, one nation violating the diplomatic territory of another is significant. The Kip 18:49, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as this a relatively important event given that Mexico is a regional power. Would prefer some updates to article and would like to see if this escalates but not opposed to posting it. Ion.want.uu (talk) 20:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Collapsing derailment by an IP editor blocked for appalling racism  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:18, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose agree that no dedicated article is required but the section in the relations article is insufficient providing no background on Glas and almost no specifics about the raid (timing, causalities, notifications, etc). Should be an easy support if the target is improved slightly. Also LOL Mexico caring about national sovereignty after facilitating a full scale invasion of the United States for decades. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 19:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A full scale invasion? Last time they fought was nearly two centuries ago, and the US started it by annexing Texas... Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have a feeling they're referring to something quite contemporary. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Exactly, Mexico refused to recognize Texan independence, nor their request for annexation by the United States, invaded a foreign country and lost half their territory for their trouble. Of course, if Polk had done his job 180 years ago we'd be in sovereign control of the entire continent and not dealing with the infestation we're dealing with today. Oh well. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I doubt you're describing an infestation of bugs. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Wait, weren't you the IP blocked for one month for repeatedly saying racist things about Latin Americans already? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 01:45, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I intended to keep these suspicions private, but with the above remarks I’ll say it: the IP in question’s behavior quite reminds me of the CBANned user LaserLegs and I’ll be taking both the above remarks and said suspicions to ANI shortly. The Kip 02:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've created a discussion about him on ANI, looking back on his contributions he has a history of appallingly racist comments, including this one against a fellow editor. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    LL or not (the typing style certainly is familiar), those sorts of unhinged racist remarks make me wonder if it'd be a good idea to require autoconfirmed status to comment at ITN/C.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that's a little bit of an extreme measure, many contributions from unconfirmed editors are useful, only a minority are like this guy. Already too much gatekeeping on Wikipedia atm PrecariousWorlds (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's fair. I won't dwell on that suggestion since it's not related to the blurb nomination anyways. I'll also collapse this whole thing just to make it easier to read the real conversation.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:18, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well there certainly is an infestation that some people have been dealing with for the last 200 years... AryKun (talk) 18:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    None of this is relevant to the topic at hand, enough soapboxing PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    New target is better but still mostly filler. Remember the five sentences rule? Too bad it's not a rule anymore. Wall of reactions flag salad looks terrible and is mostly unncessary. 24.125.98.89 (talk) 01:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Here you go again with your unnecessary and political remark. You made similar remarks under the 2024 Mmamatlakala bus crash discussion here and here. Even though you later deleted your comment, it appears that you like making irrelevant comments and like to use ITN/C as a political fourm like you just did here. PrinceofPunjabTALK 08:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quality issues resolved to my liking. Switching to support. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support a big international incident. LiamKorda 07:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also maybe add nicaragua also broke relations. It is more than just a reaction.37.252.92.174 (talk) 16:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Posted There's consensus for altblurb II. Schwede66 05:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 5[edit]

April 5, 2024 (2024-04-05) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

RD: Mahammed Dionne[edit]

Article: Mahammed Dionne (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.barrons.com/news/former-senegal-prime-minister-and-presidential-candidate-dies-6454d4a9
Credits:

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

Prime Minister of Senegal, 2014-2019. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 04:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is a bit short but still it has resources and just enough information to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Awards and honours section is unsourced. There's 1 {cn} tag in the main prose, too. Please add more REFs. This stubby wikibio has only 284 words of prose. Any more to write about him? What did he do as PM? --PFHLai (talk) 11:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PFHLai: I expanded the article & fixed the cn tag, but I couldn’t find references for the awards. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, @Blaylockjam10, for the expansion and new REFs. I almost promoted this to MainPage, but decided against it. There seems to be too much materials in the intro not mentioned and ref'd in the main prose. --PFHLai (talk) 12:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: C. J. Snare[edit]

Article: C. J. Snare (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [19], [20], [21], [22], [23]
Credits:

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

American rock singer best known as the lead singer of the band FireHouse.

  • Oppose the entire discography section is unsourced and there is one orange tag. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This stubby wikibio currently has only 149 words of prose. Please expand it. --PFHLai (talk) 10:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2024 New Jersey earthquake[edit]

(NON-ADMIN CLOSURE)
Rather than be a sixth straight oppose vote, I'll go ahead and SNOW this. The Kip 22:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 2024 New Jersey earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A magnitude 4.8 earthquake hits New Jersey, making it the strongest eartkquake to affect the state since 1783. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.fox29.com/news/earthquake-did-you-feel-it-philadelphia-area-shaking
Credits:
Toadette (Let's talk together!) 20:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Little to no damage. No casualties. Seemingly the most consequential thing to happen were the temporary closings of some important pieces of infrastructure but none of these said pieces were damaged at all. An interesting oddity, but not really ITN worthy Kosazhra (talk) 20:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Would make a good DYK, but absolutely a flash in the pan in news terms. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unlike the Thailand quake, this was far weaker and there's no significant damage. May be unusual to NYC residents but not to the rest of the world. --Masem (t) 20:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with your argument, but the other quake was in Taiwan, not Thailand, lol. DecafPotato (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above Kcmastrpc (talk) 20:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose no damage, no victims. Alarmed New Yorkers is not ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:08, 5 April 2024 (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.

April 4[edit]

April 4, 2024 (2024-04-04) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Decision needed) 2024 Chabahar and Rask clashes[edit]

Article: 2024 Chabahar and Rask clashes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A terrorist attack in Chabahar and Rask, Iran resulted in the death of 27 individuals, including 11 Iranian security force members and 16 militants. (Post)
News source(s): https://indianexpress.com/article/world/twenty-seven-die-militant-attack-iran-security-forces-9251245/
Credits:

3000MAX (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose Seems notable enough, but the article feels far too short for the front page. The Kip 22:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll add a little more details soon, but since the journalism in Iran works under direct harsh governmental surveillance, it's hard to find detailed information on the web to improve the article.
    Also i would be appreciate some help I'm not sure what inbox fits the best. Is there a list of inboxes so i can find the right one? 3000MAX (talk) 23:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably Template:Infobox military conflict or Template:Infobox military operation. The Kip 23:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Or Template:Infobox civilian attack? Stephen 23:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Considering the target of this attack was Iranian security forces and individuals on either side were killed in the ensuing combat, I think military conflict might be the best. The Warrenpoint ambush seems somewhat comparable from an article standpoint. The Kip 23:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on Significance, Oppose on quality the article is not in good shape. It lacks inline citations and is a bit short. But the death toll is significant therefore it should be on the main page. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrinceofPunjab, @The Kip New details have been added to the article, but I couldn’t delve further due to the scarcity of new and detailed informations. Unfortunately, there hasn’t been much news since the incident occurred, primarily because of the lack of active journalism in the country. 3000MAX (talk) 16:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose part of a bigger conflict and the victims do not appear to be civilians. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:38, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It may be a part of a bigger conflict, but that conflict is not covered by ongoing and we have a blurb about Israeli airstrike in Damascus in which only 2 out of 16 dead were civilians. I didn't know we can only post when deaths are mostly civilians. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per PrinceofPunjab. LiamKorda 07:25, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is important enough for a blurb & its quality is good enough. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Pat Zachry[edit]

Article: Pat Zachry (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): local12.com, Cincinnati Inquirer
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 17:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose I've added a few CN tags, though the article isn't far off. The Kip 22:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Kip, I've resolved those. I'll check again to see if there's anything else that slipped past me earlier today. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Gotcha, changing vote to Support. The Kip 22:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The birth date and location are not cited. Flibirigit (talk) 11:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Flibirigit, cited now. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article seems ready now. LiamKorda 07:25, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Thomas Gumbleton[edit]

Article: Thomas Gumbleton (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

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

Catholic Bishop.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Most of the "Early life" section is unsourced. The Kip 22:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is ready now. LiamKorda 07:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Lynne Reid Banks[edit]

Article: Lynne Reid Banks (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

Author.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose I've orange-tagged the Works section as most of it has no book ID numbers/references. There's one uncited sentence as well. The Kip 22:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the books section is not ready. LiamKorda 07:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Abu Maria al-Qahtani[edit]

Article: Abu Maria al-Qahtani (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

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

One cn tag. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article seems good enough. LiamKorda 07:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 3[edit]

April 3, 2024 (2024-04-03) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Kalevi Kiviniemi[edit]

Article: Kalevi Kiviniemi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): YLE (in Finnish)
Credits:

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

Finnish concert organist, playing concerts at Notre-Dame, St. John the Divine, the bamboo organ in the Philippines and our local church, especially gifted to match music and instruments. I expanded his article back in 2010. Since, it was expanded by other enthusiasts, sadly resulting in a load of unsourced copyvio, and without links. Some works and universities where he gave master classes are commented out until we find a ref, - help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the article is largely fine but I do not like the Organ Era recordings. It has way too many redlinks and has only 3 sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has the fuga source and the French overview for all (or let's say: most) on top. The diligent match of organs and the repertoire for them that made this player unique shows there best, imho, also his way of not only playing the "grand" instruments but those of historic interest. If it helps I can list them more specifically. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PrinceofPunjab, now each volume has individual sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is ready now. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(ATTENTION NEEDED) RD: Gaetano Pesce[edit]

Article: Gaetano Pesce (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Noted Designer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost ready article is in good shape except the literatures section is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It seems the "Literature" section mentioned above by PrinceofPunjab was changed to "Further reading" However, if those are his works, it should be in a "Publications" section with sourcing e.g. ISBN.—Bagumba (talk) 07:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have just thrown in some ISBNs and OCLCs. Hope this helps. --PFHLai (talk) 21:28, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Barth[edit]

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

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

American postmodern writer. Several cn tags. Sincerely, Dilettante 10:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The article is of high quality and well sourced, and the death is documented and sourced. Fileyfood500 (talk) 23:11, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the awards section and Bibliography needs sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose still has CN tagsTame Rhino (talk) 02:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, sources have been added to both Awards and Bibliography sections, and most {{citation needed}} tags in the article in general have been addressed. Only one remains; though that shouldn't stop this article from being posted. Looks good to go! (Update: MonarchOfTerror, PrinceofPunjab, Tame Rhino) :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've now fixed the last citation needed tag so should be good to go. Vladimir.copic (talk) 03:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all the issues have been fixed and article is ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 04:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Taiwan earthquake[edit]

Article: 2024 Taiwan earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A 7.4-magnitude earthquake strikes near Hualien City, Taiwan. (Post)
News source(s): [24]
Credits:

– Muboshgu (talk) 01:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait for effects to become more clear/article to be expanded further, then support. The Kip 01:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The tsunami warning has passed, and while there are some collapsed buildings, it looks like there's no significant fatalities or injuries based on most recent reports. Helps that the epicenter was several miles out from land. --Masem (t) 02:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just adding that the count has been upped to 1 death and 50+ injuries but that's rather tame for a quake of this scale, to the point I still don't think we need to post this. Masem (t) 04:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with this line of thinking. Any large earthquake above 6.5 or 7.0 magnitude with its own article is "in the news" and should be worthy for posting. Natg 19 (talk) 04:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This earthquake was significant in the region and did damage buildings. Any earthquake over 7.0 where there are people nearby should qualify as a major news story. S-1-5-7 (talk) 05:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because an earthquake exceeds a threshold should not be reasons to post, since that factor alone doesn't give any weight to notability or long term impacts. It's along the lines of "if a tree fell in the woods...", that simply happening may not generate the sourcing or coverage we could expect if it was a major disaster. — Masem (t) 14:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Article is reasonable now. This is not a "best article" category; it is what is in the news. More details will presumably be added. S-1-5-7 (talk) 05:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: No issues with article and seems ready to be posted. More details can be added to the article as further information is released. Tofusaurus (talk) 06:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: The earthquake is already receiving extensive international coverage. Reported casualties are also increasing as time goes on. It is the most powerful earthquake in Taiwan in 25 years. This is definitely noteworthy of an ITN post. Focus should be on article quality at this point. Tofusaurus (talk) 12:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per reasons listed above. —Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 06:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose since there's no significant casualties, it happened in the desolate part of the island.3000MAX (talk) 06:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC is reporting seven fatalities, and that the epicentre was within 12 miles of Hualien City, which has a population of nearly 100,000. GenevieveDEon (talk) 06:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
right, the area is not isolated. 3000MAX (talk) 09:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no minimum death toll needed to count something as a disaster. If this was an earthquake was equally sized as this one but in a remote area where there wasn’t much potential to cause any real damage, this would be a more valid point. But this happened in a somewhat populated area where the potential for damage was high. QuarioQuario54321 (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait This seems borderline as List of earthquakes in 2024 indicates that there's a mag 7+ earthquake every month on average and so we should focus on the ones with significant impact. The details of this one still seem to be emerging. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support – It has caused considerable damage and rescue efforts are ongoing. Several dozen people remain trapped in buildings. Sounds notable for inclusion.Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 07:38, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Although a magnitude 7+ earthquake happens every month or so on average, this is the second most powerful earthquake of the year, and it did hit a densely populated area rather than the middle of the ocean, and had secondary effects such as a landslide and a small tsunami. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelloThereQuestionablePerson (talk • contribs) 11:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support significant event, many missing and injured, the casualties are only going to rise over the next several days. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the impacts of the earthquake become more clear. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for the situation to become clear. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 13:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until we have more reports of the impact. Magnitude 7+ earthquakes are common, but this happened in the middle of a fairly large town and there are already several casualties reported with the possibility for many more. Estreyeria (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support since around ten people died, making it a significant event. LiamKorda 14:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the death toll cureently stands at 9 and it could increase. We blurbed 2024 Noto earthquake when the death toll was still in the mid single digits. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The death toll and injury statistics are actively changing and disruptions to city centers and highways would impact trade/tourism/etc. Toroko (the sit of at least 4 deaths) is possibly the most visited national park in Taiwan. Ycleike (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support That over one hundred people are trapped in highway tunnels, with no outside contact established, is grim and disturbing. Rescue attempts guarantee this earthquake is ITN. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 14:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on account of the damage to infrastructure; and, suspension of semiconductor manufacture from some larger plants which could end up affecting the global electronics economy. - AquilaFasciata (talk | contribs) 17:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Consensus to post has been established. Schwede66 18:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Support. There are 'only' 10 confirmed dead so far, but that number seems bound to rise given there are currently over 100 missing and over 1000 injuries reported. Property damage appears to be extensive. I think this crosses the line into major impacts worth posting. The article is in good shape - quite impressive given the rapidly evolving situation. Modest Genius talk 18:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrew Davidson: Free promotion for Kato. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I cropped it for max impact as a thumbnail. Schwede66 16:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2[edit]

April 2, 2024 (2024-04-02) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Business and economy

(Posted) RD: Gerhard Lohfink[edit]

Article: Gerhard Lohfink (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Die Tagespost
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: German Theologian who left a university position to live in a community. He wrote many books translated into many languages. The article was mostly there but without references. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support there are two or three Publications that need source but otherwise the article is okay. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for a diligent look. There were four articles, all published in Theology Digest, which means picked and translated by editors. You find those four articles listed as sources in other publications, but for his biography, they seem of minor interest, - commented out. I'll try to get a bit more from what the sources say about his books into the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Notker Wolf[edit]

Article: Notker Wolf (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
Credits:

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

German Benedictine monk and electric guitarist, the "rocking abbot". Jmanlucas (talk) 03:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This guy sounds really interesting, I think the article could do with a little more on his musical career. How often do you hear of a Benedictine monk in a rockband?? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I nominated the same person: German Abbott Primate of the Benedictines until 2016, known as the rock abbott. Article was there, only one ref lost. Just added a bit, such as rock to lead. Don't miss the little video in memory at the end - so full of life. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC) Will move it now to the correct date. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Almost ready article is in good shape except the Recordings section is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are referenced now. Three of the references are good for more, - I'm out for the day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is ready now. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we have footnotes and references in the main prose for the date and place of birth, please? And maybe some prose explaining what the photos are showing in the gallery section? (Or at least captions?) --PFHLai (talk) 11:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    yes, PFHLai --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Gerda. Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 17:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Christopher Durang[edit]

Article: Christopher Durang (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline Hollywood
Credits:

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

American playwright. 240F:7A:6253:1:7572:264F:E304:8869 (talk) 14:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the work section barely has 4 sources and have multiple tags and there are cn tags in the other parts of the article too. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Juan Vicente Pérez[edit]

Article: Juan Vicente Pérez (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:

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

Article updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The article is of sufficiently good quality. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is well cited. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gayrettepe nightclub fire[edit]

Article: Gayrettepe nightclub fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Turkey, at least 29 construction workers are killed in a fire while renovating an Istanbul nightclub. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article updated

Little surprised this hadn’t been nominated yet. The Kip 21:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, not every disaster with 20+ deaths has to be on ITN. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose barring something like this being arson or the like, thus type if low-level man made accidental disaster isn't good material fir stand alone articles as it likely will have no impact within a few years. Masem (t) 22:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- I'm sorry, if this occurred in an Anglosphere country, this would be posted instantly. There is no requirement for a minimum number of deaths, but this event is nonetheless notable enough for posting, the fact that it happened in Turkey instead of the US or UK is not reason not to post. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd also oppose it if it was in an Anglosphere country. Accidents of this level are, sadly, pretty routine news at the world's scale, and not the kind of impactful events that should be featured on Wikipedia's main page. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Tragic event but not notable enough. ITN is supposed to serve for the uttermost uncommon events, and this event itself will most likely have no impact long term per Masem. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nearly 30 people died in a fire. Unfortunate and not really common event. Too bad systemic bias sometimes seem very evident around here. Please remember this is a global project, not an anglophone-countries one. --Bedivere (talk) 00:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. An incident with 14 spanish dead got in ITN within hours. Lukt64 (talk) 00:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Lukt64. Does border on NEVENT but for the sake of consistency we probably should post this. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above; the article does not indicate this will have any long term impact. Gödel2200 (talk) 01:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Construction deaths are common everywhere and the article lacks detail. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:31, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per notability, the number of casualties is higher then a simple work accident. 3000MAX (talk) 10:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not Ready the article is not ready to be featured on ITN. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Something like this would absolutely be posted if it had occurred in Chicago or Los Angeles. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As a workplace accident or as a nightclub fire? Does your hypothetical US-based scenario automatically make this fire in Turkey notable? 24.125.98.89 (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Lukt64 and WaltClipper. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, but oppose on quality for now The # of deaths makes this notable enough for a blurb, but the article needs more details. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose quality Not enough info on the fire itself and there could be more reactions listed. Once the article has more detail it should be posted Hungry403 (talk) 02:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the article is not in a good shape. LiamKorda 10:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Judith Tuluka Appointed First African Woman PM[edit]

Seven in a row. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: Judith Tuluka (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The President of DR Congo names Judith Suminwa Tuluka as first African female Prime Minister (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:
Heatrave (talk) 20:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is an appointed position, so it's not an election result.
  • It's not the chief executive position; that's the president, who made the appointment.
  • The claim in the nomination is false. Aside from the various presidents Kip has linked to, there have been several female prime ministers in various African countries before now. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: John Sinclair[edit]

Article: John Sinclair (poet) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): metrotimes, mlive, Detroit Free Press, CBS, Washington Post, Rolling Stone Variety Clash
Credits:

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

Big in the White Panther Party. Important poet. Counter cultural icon. Founder of the Hash bash in Ann Arbor, Michigan John Lennon played to free him from persecution (and prison). 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support: His journalism career alone seems illustrious enough to me. Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 06:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RDs don't have a criteria of notability: only article quality matters for them. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait The discography section is entirely unsourced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait some paragraphs do not have sources at the end and some sections of discography are not unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Discography is fully sourced. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:34, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Almost ready the article is almost ready now except for some unsourced claims in the Foundation section and MC5 section. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. I submit this is ready to go. Everything is fully sourced. No templates.
Parenthetically, the Ann Arbor Hash Bash which will probably be heavy on memorializing him is set for April 6, 2024 tomorrow. Running this soon would be fitting.

His memorial service is set for the 8th of April.7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is ready now. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Chris Cross[edit]

Article: Chris Cross (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sky News
Credits:

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

Ultravox bassist; co-wrote "Vienna" amongst others. Died on 25 March; news released today. Article needs a lot of work. Note: NOT Christopher Cross, who was surprised to be informed he was dead on social media. Black Kite (talk) 19:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not Kris Kross either.—Bagumba (talk)
Oppose the article is almost entirely unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article needs work as mentioned, also not significantly more distinctive than other people with the same or similar names so that might lead to confusion. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 18:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is now ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Viertola school shooting[edit]

Consensus to post will not develop. Stephen 22:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: Viertola school shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A school shooting in Finland leaves one dead and two injured. (Post)
News source(s): PBS
Credits:

Very rare and tragic event in Finland. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 15:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now. Article is a stub and I'm leaning towards lacking notability as well. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it might be rare in Finland, but come on now. With one death, this isn't notable. It's not even a mass shooting by any definition. --RockstoneSend me a message! 16:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, it is not that it "might be rare" to occur in Finland, it is that “it is rare”. A certainty. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, not every shooting is notable, even in countries with a usually low crime rate. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A shooting is rare in Europe, let alone Finland. But with one fatality, this unfortunate act is not ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Although my heart goes out to the victims, this is just standard police blotter stuff. rawmustard (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above, and recommend SNOW close. The Kip 21:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Maryse Condé[edit]

Article: Maryse Condé (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Arguably the preeminent French writer. Perennial candidate for the Nobel. Brilliant writer, dead at 90. Bibliography needs sourcing. Sincerely, Dilettante 14:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Bibliography section is largely unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:49, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Selected Bibliography section is now mostly sourced. Time is running out.... --PFHLai (talk) 06:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I added one ref as requested. Substantial article on an important woman, - let's not miss this chance because of tidbits. - Hint: I have an article under this date also in need of reviewers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{cn}} I've given it some attention and if somebody could be so kind to resolve the citation needed tag that I've just placed, I'd be happy to post this. Schwede66 22:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 23:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Larry Lucchino[edit]

Article: Larry Lucchino (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Boston Globe
Credits:

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

Longtime baseball executive, article seems well-sourced. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 14:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 1[edit]

April 1, 2024 (2024-04-01) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Anne Innis Dagg[edit]

Article: Anne Innis Dagg (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC.ca
Credits:

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

Canadian Zoologist. Found this article at Recent Deaths. Seems to meet quality expectations for mainpage / RD. I did not have to make any edits. Ktin (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support there is one cn tag but otherwise the article is ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) World Central Kitchen drone strikes[edit]

WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES
No consensus to post—Bagumba (talk) 04:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: World Central Kitchen drone strikes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Gaza, Israeli Defense Forces kill 7 World Central Kitchen aid workers in a drone strike. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Reuters, O Globo
Credits:

Article updated
I know this is covered in ongoing, but I believe the significance and magnitude of this event is worthy enough of it to be covered as a full blurb as well.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 20:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Unlike the consulate strike below, this is covered by ongoing, and besides the non-Israeli/Palestinian nationalities of the deceased I don’t see what makes this especially different than any of the war’s unfortunately many attacks on civilians (including aid workers). The Kip 21:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's unfortunate that the media/world governments care more when it's Western nationalities, but that fact is the reason why it's getting so much more coverage than any of the other killings of civilians in this war. And again, just because something is covered by ongoing doesn't mean it cannot be blurbed.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 21:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not the first humanitarian aide deaths and likely won't be the last until Israel changes their approach to Gaza. Should be covered by ongoing. Masem (t) 21:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support this is heavily covered by major news organizations and its ramifications are far ranging; also I was just going to nominate this anyway. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Just because an event is considered "ongoing" doesn't mean that all events relating to it can't be blurb, contrary to the claims of some users. It simply means that there needs to be a higher threshold of coversge/significance for something to be blurbed. For example, the Bucha massacre and the Sinking of the Moskva were both blurbed even though the Russian invasion of Ukraine is ongoing. The widespread coverage of this attack, and with the overwhelming death toll being of foreign nationals, more than meets the extended criteria for posting. Mount Patagonia (talk • contributions) 00:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While I admittedly can’t come up with rationale for why Bucha was posted without potentially sounding biased, the Moskva sinking was posted as it was the largest warship to be sunk in combat in approximately 40 years (since the ARA General Belgrano during the Falklands War). That’s a special/lasting significance that goes beyond the ongoing item. The Kip 18:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose The event is covered by ongoing, but the fact that the World Central Kitchen is stopping its operations in Gaza due to the attack could be significant (though it is too early to tell what the impacts of it will be). Gödel2200 (talk) 01:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is what ongoing is for - We currently have two Israel/Gaza related blurbs nominated in the last day, posting them both is a stretch. This is exactly what the purpose of ongoing is, not just for ongoing events, but for when there is a constant flow of blurb-worthy stories like this. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose once again, this is covered by ongoing. _-_Alsor (talk) 08:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Israel has struck UNRWA facilities before, this is only making headlines due to the victims not being Palestinian. Unlikely to see any long term consequence of this when compared to other individual incidents of Israel attacking aid organisations. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Traumnovelle & covered by ongoing. Modest Genius talk 18:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support As Godel2200 noted, WCK halting its operations in Gaza is uniquely significant. This attack is also unique and attracting heightened levels of coverage/reaction relative to UNRWA strikes - for example, drawing out some of the fiercest condemnations of Israel yet from former allies in the west. Because this is very potentially a major turning point in the war and is attracting more news coverage than some of the other items we have at ITN currently, I support a blurb. FlipandFlopped ツ 23:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unlike the Iranian consulate airstrike, this is unlikely to have major impact on the conflict and it is covered by ongoing. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this event has caused new developments in the conflict, including WCK halting its operations per Flipandflopped, as well as Biden's warning to Netanyahu: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/04/biden-warns-netanyahu-situation-gaza-is-unacceptable/ Staraction (talk | contribs) 23:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: 4 days later and news about this attack and direct sequelae is still the top headline on the New York Times, BBC, and Reuters websites.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 00:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This attack has led to a change in the policy towards Israel by the US government and several other governments (the Australian government is furious and has considerably changed its messaging on the war in response to the attack), and has been major world news. The article is also in decent shape. Nick-D (talk) 02:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Joe Flaherty[edit]

Article: Joe Flaherty (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News
Credits:

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

Noted Actor.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not ready. Many paragraphs without citations. The filmography is mostly unsourced. A citation is needed for his birth date. Flibirigit (talk) 20:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Significant improvements have been made. Article is almost ready. Flibirigit (talk) 11:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Only a few films are missing a citation, and this wouldn't be the first article where a long list is at least temporarily separated from the biography. I trust. however, that the few refs will come. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lou Conter[edit]

Article: Lou Conter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, WaPo, Honolulu Star-Advertiser
Credits:

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

Last survivor of the USS Arizona sunk at Pearl Harbor. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In less of that I’d go for in the news rather than for recent deaths. It’s big news, at least in the US.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1011:b13f:5382:6420:adfe:2a66:f322 (talk) 01:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've no view on the article itself, but this IP comment appears to be calling for a blurb. I really think that's not appropriate; being present at an event, and then surviving for a long time afterwards, is not a particularly noteworthy achievement in itself. GenevieveDEon (talk) 07:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I don't think this is blurb worthy. When the last survivor of World War II goes, that would be worth considering. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb The article is of sufficiently good quality for RD, but the death itself isn't noteworthy enough to be blurbed. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD - article is sourced well-enough ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first paragraph in the Military career section need more sourcing. --PFHLai (talk) 08:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Wyliepedia @ 09:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the new footnote. It supported that the subject was a QM, as indicated at the end of the paragraph. But we still need sources for which class of QM, and for the rest of the paragraph. -- PFHLai (talk) 11:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind. Found another ref. --PFHLai (talk) 11:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Vontae Davis[edit]

Article: Vontae Davis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News
Credits:

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

The Kip 21:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted as blurb) RD/Blurb: Mohammad Reza Zahedi, 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus[edit]

WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES
Proposed image
Articles: Mohammad Reza Zahedi (talk · history · tag) and 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  In Syria, an Israeli airstrike kills 16 people at the Iranian consulate in Damascus, including brigadier general Mohammad Reza Zahedi (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Syria, a suspected Israeli airstrike kills 16 people at the Iranian consulate in Damascus, including brigadier general Mohammad Reza Zahedi (pictured).
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Israeli forces killed 8 people in an airstrike against the Iranian consulate. The death of Mohammad Reza Zahedi is the most senior death since Solemani. The first article needs work. — Knightoftheswords 19:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality Both articles are of insufficient quality at the present moment. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 19:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support RD Article looks fine now. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 06:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, an intentional strike on diplomatic staff is novel to my knowledge. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree this is a notable death, however, this is a military commander of a designated terrorist organization by multiple countries, not a diplomatic staff member, so I don't agree it's notable for that reason. It's notable due to the seniority of the individual, his leadership in a designated terrorist organization, and the manner of his death (an intentional strike). Fileyfood500 (talk) 05:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Zahedi was not the only victim of the strike, even if he may be the most notable. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:58, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed Zahedi is not the only victim. My clarification is that the intentional strike is on Zahedi, and that Zahedi's not serving in a diplomatic role. So it is not "an intentional strike on diplomatic staff", and not novel for that reason. However, it is an intentional strike on a senior official in a controversial organization, and that is notable. Fileyfood500 (talk) 02:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Israel has not acknowledged responsibility and there are lots of warring factions in Syria. For precedents, see the List of attacks on diplomatic missions. Cases involving Iran/Persia include the Iran hostage crisis, 1983 US embassy bombing in Beirut and more, going back to Alexander Griboyedov. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for RD senior IRGC general, def deserves an RD at the very least, weaker support for ITN just because these attacks also happen all the time with Hamas leadership and they aren’t reported on Ion.want.uu (talk) 01:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD once at quality, oppose blurb (either as news story or death blurb) Zahedi does pass notability (info about him well before today), but clearly is not a major figure that we'd give a normal out-of-respect death blurb to. The strike itself is part of the existing ongoing Red Sea crisis item, and would have just been an update to the appropriate article and considered under ongoing for this, so blurbing the event doesn't make sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masem (talk • contribs) 02:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Zahedi's article has enough details & references to post as a RD. Support altblurb on notability, oppose on quality This is important enough for a blurb, but the quality of the airstrike article isn't good enough. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb per Blaylock, but agree we should wait to post until the airstrike article is improved after additional updates/news coverage take place. I do think Zahedi's article is fine though, even if brief. FlipandFlopped ツ 03:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb - Per above. Article is of high quality, making a lot of headlines PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb per above. A very blurb worthy one. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb in principle, significant event which is not directly part of the Gaza war (so not covered by ongoing). The bold link should be the airstrike article, which is a good start but not ready. It has a few {{cn}} tags and currently has only one sentence about the actual airstrike - most of the content is background and 'reactions'. It needs to expand the description of what actually happened before posting. Modest Genius talk 12:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: reliable sources are now reporting this as a genuine Israeli airstrike, not just 'suspected', based on private comments by Israeli sources. Modest Genius talk 16:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb As per above, this is not covered by ongoing, and I think the killing of a high ranking IRGC general is notable enough. As per Modest Genius, the bold link in the blurb should only be the airstrike itself. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support on the blurb. Event is notable and has the possibility to dramatically escalate tensions in the region, but I'm just a little hesitant to not violate WP:CRYSTALBALL. Definitely Support RD though. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, happened in Syria against Iranian personnel, so neither covered by the Gaza war nor the Red Sea crisis. The uniqueness of the strike and the high rank of the person targeted make it notable enough. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support blurb, support RD per Mike_gigs. The Kip 20:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the overall event itself is blurb-worthy even if none of the deceased have an article for RD. That one of those killed has an article and this is a RD/blurb nomination just sort of complicated things. -- KTC (talk) 21:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:ITNRD states that a death blurb can be invoked if the manner of death is the main story. Additionally, this may was well be his RD, since we're not going to be scheduling a seperate RD nom just for him. — Knightoftheswords 03:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb – This to me feels like a very scary and direct expansion of the conflict. Article can use work but is of sufficient quality. Zahedi's article looks good. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support As per above, this event is not covered by ongoing, and I think this could lead serious escalation in the region. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The event is covered by Ongoing as it appears in the Israel Hamas article which covers such peripheral action too. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Marking as ready near unanimous support, with the only oppose being obsolete, all quality issues addressed. — Knightoftheswords 03:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not bothered about an RD for this but am still opposed to a blurb. It's the nominated blurbs which are obsolete as their numbers of deaths doesn't agree with the article. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted ALT0 as there's consensus for this blurb. Just waiting on media protection. Schwede66 22:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Strongly Oppose due to big mistake - the sentence writes that an Iranian consulate was struck, but this relaly doesn't makes any sense since countries have consulates in cities that are not the capital, France has an embassy in Cairo and has a consulate in Alexandria, it wouldn't have a consulate in Cairo. Also, the building also doesn't function as a consular building but sources place it within the diplomatic compound. Pictures from the place show the building is outside the fenced Iranian embassy compound. It is INCORRECT to write that it is was a strike against the Iranian embassy or against an Iranian consulate! Should be fixed to "building adjacent to the Iranian embassy building" I don't have a problem with the news piece but this is a big mistake and really should be fixed! Thanks! ElLuzDelSur (talk) 08:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per ElLuzDelSur's comment. Since this strike was not on the consulate, but on a building next to the consulate. It is clear the event is recent and the article requires work. The linked article is called "2024 Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus", although it's not a strike on an embassy from sources, but an adjacent building:
"Emergency and security personnel gather at the site of strikes that hit a building next to the Iranian consulate in Syria’s capital Damascus, on April 1, 2024" [1] Fileyfood500 (talk) 22:25, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Decision needed) Legalisation of recreational cannabis use in Germany[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Cannabis in Germany (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Germany, the Bundestag legalises recreational cannabis use. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Germany becomes the third country in Europe to legalise recreational cannabis.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

This follows a nomination back in February after the bill got passed, but now the law has actually come into effect. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Largest country that has legalized cannabis fully. Lukt64 (talk) 01:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's not that big of a deal. A lot of countries have either legalized it outright, or de facto decriminalized it. If they decriminalized recreational drug use more broadly, I'd probably support. But this is neither novel, nor an especially major development in global attitudes towards drug use. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are not much countrys who have legalized it for recreational use. Its subjectiv to think there are a lot of countries who have decriminalized it. See Legality of cannabis. LennBr (talk) 12:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Per AO. With almost one country every 6 months doing this, it ain't news anymore, especially the Western Hemisphere. Could be more notable on the other side of the globe. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:34, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Was practically legal before and per Ad Orientem's last sentence. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not that big of a deal, and as @Traumnovelle stated, cannabis was practically legal already. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 06:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Citation needed that it was practically legal in germany. And please don't link to an article about the state of berlin or whatever. It varied wildly from basically zero tolerance to unofficial decriminilization. But it certainly wasn't 'practically legal' on the federal level. Neither was it 'practically legal' in the majority of states. 80.228.131.106 (talk) 12:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't tell me that then, tell Traumnovelle. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 07:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was already legal for medicinal use, consumption wasn't illegal, and police had guidelines to not prosecute for personal amounts unless it was in the public interest - which corresponded to use in public or around minors, which is still illegal under the new law. This law change is more of policy and recommendation being codified in law than any serious and major change. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consumption of no drug is illegal in germany in itself. Just how the laws work. Not aimed at consumers, allowing them to seek help and whatnot without criminalizing themselves etc. Just a different philosphical aproach. Doesn't mean opiods(as a random example) aren't highly illegal. But someone ODing can seek help without fearing criminal consequences, just as an example. That police nationwide had guidelines to not prosecute is just simply not true. In some states, sure. In others... yeah, not at all. It is a major change in most states. And as a meaningless anecdote, i live in a state which had a more liberal stance towards defacto acceptance, i still could have gotten into major trouble for what i am now legally allowed to do. And it wouldn't have been a misdemeanor but a crime that would have prevented me from getting visas in some countries and the like. Broad real life consequences that now simply vanished. But you lot do whatever. I am just happy to not be a 'criminal' anymore. 85.16.39.169 (talk) 13:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work There are several {{citation needed}} and some parts are still written in a tentative future tense. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral on notability, oppose on quality The article has multiple short and unreferenced sections. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 09:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability The most populated country of europe legalizes cannabis possession for recreational use. Not many countries have done that. see Legality of cannabis. --LennBr (talk) 12:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability I've added an altblurb that would reflect this legalization a lot better. Support on notability as this is currently making headlines in European news, but the article needs some work before it's ready. TwistedAxe [contact] 13:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The most populous country that has legalised recreational cannabis use so far. While it was decriminalised before in certain parts and regions, this didn't really apply to the entire country. And it also being only the third outright legalisation in Europe, as well as it having plenty of news coverage, makes me think this is notable enough to be covered. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 13:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - per above 2A00:23C8:B00:AD01:106:C016:D59A:AA77 (talk) 14:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is not a new thing. That this "isn't common in Europe" (debatable) or that Germany has many people (and what of it?) shouldn't be relevant. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I support this solely based on the fact that Germany's the most powerful European nation. And we've posted gay marriage legalizations in small irrelevant central american countries, why not post about Cannabis legalization in the biggest european one? Kasperquickly (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Pretty sure that ITN items shouldn't be supported solely because of the country it's in. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 07:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Forgive me for being blunt. But it rings a bit hollow for you, who blindly followed the untrue rationale of someone else, to be lecturing people. If someone states a 'fact' as rationale, at least check for yourself if that is actually true. And i by no means want to call anyone a liar or assume bad faith otherwise. Misunderstandings happen and all of that. But please, if you vote 'per' at least check the claim yourself. 85.16.39.169 (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral leaning toward oppose This is pretty minor news, just one country of 195 legalizing cannabis. Asjhsz (talk) 02:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb on notability per the reasoning of Lukt64 & LennBr. Oppose on quality The quality of the article isn't good enough. The article's quality is fine now. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:02, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning support on notability not per the population of Germany (as this would implicitly suggest developments in smaller countries are less notable), but per the rarity of cannabis being legalized. It's not that common. I can understand ITN's increasing reluctance to post marriage equality blurbs these days, opting to only post them when there's something extraordinary about it, e.g. Taiwan being the first country in Asia to do it. The tides have already shifted on that one and it's become par for the course in the West. But I don't think the same can be said about the legal status of cannabis, at least not yet. Per Legality of cannabis, very few countries throughout the world have legalized recreational cannabis, so I don't think we're at the point where we can say this is so commonplace that it doesn't represent any significant shift in legislation. Rather, legislative changes like this are the major turning points that will eventually lead to it being commonplace. I sympathize with the counterargument that in Germany or in other parts of Europe there existed a de facto but not de jure legalization, but I feel this is also a little overstated.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 13:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • support blurb on notability, since it's a controversial subject. 3000MAX (talk) 17:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb per above. The Kip 21:10, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb and, noting improvements since the nom, suggest it’s ready to post. Jusdafax (talk) 08:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb per above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not that big of a deal as others have mentioned, and the coverage shows it. If you type "Germany news" into google, none of the top hits mention this development at all - articles instead reference football jersey designs and a dispute over elephants between Germany and Botswana. It is not being widely covered as even these stories precisely because cannabis legalization in Europe is nothing new. FlipandFlopped ツ 23:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if you post this, don't use the irrelevant photo of toxic plants it communicates nothing about the subject and doesn't help to hook readers. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 10:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Not the first in Europe and not the most surprising country to do it. Small amounts were defacto legal and consumption was the same so the most significant changes will be to the retailing of product. The article is decent in terms of it's completedness. Ycleike (talk) 12:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Hardly the first European country to legalize and it barely made any headlines, quickly being relegated to 3rd page at this point, being surpassed by Botswana and 20k elephants. Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is it made headlines when the Bundestag passed legislation a month ago, but consensus here was to wait until formally legalized on 4/1. Now we can’t post it because it’s not in the headlines anymore, apparently? The Kip 14:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin comment – At this point, there is relatively even support and opposition to posting this on notability, with some editors voicing article quality concerns. We'd need a surge of support before this can go anywhere. Schwede66 02:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-said-to-decide-on-direct-response-to-syria-strike-put-forces-on-full-alert/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/April_2024&oldid=1221442737"