This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form; any comments regarding this page should be directed toWikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.
TheSyrian Army announces a total withdrawal from Aleppo, formally acknowledging the fall of the city to rebel forces, and saying that its troops will regroup and launch acounter-offensive to retake the city.(Reuters)
ARussianairstrike hits a busy roundabout in Aleppo, killing at least 16 people and injuring 20 others, the first time that Russian warplanes have targeted the city since 2016.(SOHR)
Local forces inTalbiseh, northernHoms Governorate, attackSyrian Army convoys withdrawing towardsHoms, seizing control of the town's checkpoint and burning it following pro-government forces withdrawal.(SOHR)
At least nine people are killed and four others are injured after an attack in a commercial zone inApaseo el Grande,Guanajuato,Mexico. Local authorities say the attack relates to the drug sales in the region.(La Silla Rota)
A student attacks his classmates with a hammer and injures two before being subdued by other students at a high school inGuadalajara,Jalisco,México. The attack was streamed onX, where the perpetrator publishedNazi views and other violent content.(El Debate)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Pioneer of Modern Dance in the US, later psychotherapist, - the article was mostly there, missing details about husband and two children though. First indication that she died came on 30 November. --Gerda Arendt (talk)10:34, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article updated The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Oppose on quality missing aftermath section. Given Botafogo is showing that scrapping the long-established existing system of ownership prevalent throughout South America with the introduction of private investment is bearing results, this looks (for now at least) like a turning point; the article should mention this. Also the fact that Atlético Mineiro were clear favourites and did much better throughout the tournament until the disastrous final isn’t made clear either.Abcmaxx (talk)12:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Abcmaxx hard to say Atlético were favorites - Brazilian media were not considering it as such, since despite Atlético's better campaign at the Libertadores, Botafogo leads the Brazilian Championship and may become its champion next Wednesday. There is a section on their road to the final as well. Also, both teams became privately owned, Botafogo is not the only one showing its results.Solon26.12522:01, 1 December 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.
Nominator's comments: Re-nominating as more comprehensive article has been created and previous nomination withdrawn. Protests have severely escalated, widespread police brutality akin to the2020 Belarusian protests. The president has called the government illegitimate, which is very unusual. Abcmaxx (talk)23:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support on notability. This seems like a reverseJanuary 6 to me, an American, with the president and a large number of protestors (and what seem to be a larger proportion of the civilian population) rejecting their recent election's results.Oppose on quality - everything's cited but it could definitely stand to be better organized.Departure– (talk)04:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality only. There's definitely violence associated with this, and the EU membership withdrawl itself is also newsworthy. But as noted, the article has many unsourced paragraphs, and I would urge those that want to see this posted to try to avoid day-by-day blows and try to write how the protests happened more narratively. --Masem (t)04:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on significance. Leanoppose on quality for now, though the target article and blurb are better than the previous nomination. This reminds me of Euromaidan and the colour revolutions.98.170.164.88 (talk)04:58, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The protests haven't yet succeeded to make any significant changes in country's politics, and the violence hasn't resulted in deaths and destruction of cultural monuments. The right to protest is one of the fundamental human rights, so a protest isn't notable for inclusionper se. As for the "suspended application for EU membership", this is aPOV-pushing incorrect statement as it appears that the accession talks were only postponed. Moreover, even if the accession talks were suspended, they would have absolutely zero impact on the EU (frankly speaking, it's not a withdrawal from the EU like Brexit).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)08:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are burning effigies of Ivanishvili and firing fireworks at the parliament building, and Georgian Dream offices are being demolished. Police are beating men, women and minors alike to a pulp in the street in plain view. Protests don't have to be successful to be posted, the2020 Belarusian protests were posted, and they weren't successful at all.Abcmaxx (talk)10:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The significance of those protests was that they happened in a dictatorship where authorities supress any form of democratic movement and there were no protests of that scale since country's independence. Georgia is more democratic than Belarus and has a history of similar protests in the past, so these protests aren't really that special for now. Burning effigies, firing fireworks and demolishing offices are regular activities conducted during violent protests everywhere around the globe. Unless there are confirmed deaths, severely damaged cultural and historical landmarks, or real changes in country's politics, I don't think these protests are ready for posting (article's quality aside).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)11:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Giving the last elections were equally quite blatantly falsified, the president has called the Georgian Dream, a party which wants to outlaw all opposition parties, a "rogue government", and what we are currently seeing is the authorities supressing any form of democratic movement, there is little difference between the two. The only difference is that Belarus has been a dictatorship since 1995 and not 2024.Abcmaxx (talk)11:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there's clearly a democratic backsliding in Georgia mostly because of the 'foreign agent' law, but I'm unsure to what extent the election results were falsified (if falsified at all). I spent almost two weeks travelling around Georgia last year and got a different picture than the one presented by the Western media. The majority of people acknowledged that they had to maintain normal relations with Russia due to the economic dependence and fear from potential Russian invasion. My conclusion was that many Georgians support Georgian Dream simply because they don't want a Ukrainian scenario or an economic collapse in case they introduce sanctions as requested by the EU (Note that Russia is one of Georgia's largest trade partners, many Russians visit Georgia and spend a lot of money there, and Russia is home to the largest Georgian diaspora in the world.). In other words, Georgia's geopolitics without a land border with the EU is such that they have to maintain good relations with Russia. That being said, I don't trust Western media about the situation in Georgia at all, especially the labels that not being pro-EU automatically means pro-Russian, and I believe that the election results were not falsified to the extent to change the winner (Moreover, there are only accusations from the opposition parties that the results were falsified with no proof, and international observers refrained from declaring that the election was free and fair or that there was an electoral fraud.). This is my opinion built upon my personal experience from visiting Georgia. Others may have other opinions.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)08:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Georgia is a close-knit society, with a small population. The country is full of KGB agents and people with pro-Russian interests. Unless you are Georgian or at least speak the language then the locals will not tell you the whole story in order to safeguard themselves. Many still remember the 2008 invasion, or the upheaval in the 90s. A third of the country is still occupied by Russia. The Georgian Dream has around 30-35% electoral support, which is significant, but no way do they have majority popular support, and the generational divide is very wide, as the younger population are staunchly pro-European. The pro-Russian element is to do with oligarch money, which they are using to buy power.Abcmaxx (talk)09:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on principle butOppose on quality, none if the current protests are actually documented, only the govt level responses.Masem (t)15:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted Some opposes refer to referencing problems, but when I look at the article, this all looks fine and there are no citation needed tags. The article must have been improved since those comments were posted. I therefore find that there's consensus to post this.Schwede6619:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: It looks like a 3-way tie and it will be a while before any coalition talks and a government is formed. Article needs results section to verify expanded and an aftermath section. Abcmaxx (talk)10:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Obviosuly ITNR, but I don't think the blurb is particularly good. I would wait until we have a more definitive idea of how many seats each party will win, and then look at how reliable sources are describing the outcome. In particular, I think it might be preferable for the blurb to mention which party is the largest.Gust Justice (talk)00:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Owing to the incredibly complex electoral system used in Ireland, this is about the only blurb we can post for a very long time.Abcmaxx (talk)01:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe this is a stupid question, but how then do we know the results are going to be close without substantial results, besides the fact that polling SEEMS to show this is the likely result, seemingly similar to last election?DarkSide830 (talk)04:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say it's a stupid questionDarkSide830. We just don't know without substantial results truthfully. The vote transfers are going to differ from voter to voter, and first preference winner does not necessarily equate to whoever gets the most seats. Sinn Fein topped the polls last election, but didn't nominate enough candidates from what I recall, so their excess preferences flowed to smaller left leaning parties. The final coalition wound up excluding SF altogether. I feel like saying it is a hung parliament is reading the tea leaves abit early. Per my previous comments,The Guardian's article that was used as the news source for this nomination doesn't even mention a "hung parliament" from what I could see.Ornithoptera (talk)10:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a comment on the last time we ran the Irish election here, and he said that every election as long as he was alive resulted in a hung parliament; I dunno if that's true, but that's plausible. So this blurb indeed is not particularly good, so I'd suggest to wait until we have an idea on how hung it is, I guess.Howard the Duck (talk)01:13, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait While first preference votes have been counted, Ireland's STV system means that the final seat count for the various parties (which can determine who would be prime for forming the next government) is not. We have arough guess using the initial preferences, but I would advise that we wait until we have more than the initial preferences to go off of. Another issue is that the article cited for the blurb does not even mention a hung parliament, it only speaks to the exit poll (which wound up showing Sinn Fein on top, despite Fianna Fail placing first) everything's speculative at this point.Ornithoptera (talk)06:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait per others and proposealternative blurb. We shouldn't use "hung parliament" in a non-Westminster context. It makes no sense, as the electoral system is not geared to generate a clear winner. We wouldn't say that the German general election resulted in a hung parliament either.Khuft (talk)14:00, 1 December 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.
Oppose, sadly. Flooding in SE Asia countries is very routine with thousands killed each year, the problem is that there is usually no single major flood event that gets significant attention in the news to make any single flood event newsworthy. --Masem (t)13:10, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am speaking to how reliable sources cover these, which give far less attention to other mass casualty events. If these floods where given the same weight of coverage as hurricanes, that would be different, but the fact that we really only see these floods get covered a few times each year despite thd death toll and impact on people there is a sign that these events are more routine. — Masem (t)16:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: ITN/R, national parliamentary election. Another incumbent lost, however, there are still coalition talks as to the exact composition of the government. Scuba15:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Appears to be in mostly good shape - there's just one paragraph lacking citation in the Electoral System section. As well, some response to the results in the article would be appreciated.Departure– (talk)15:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Nominating to draw attention to it, this will likely be ongoing for a very long time given EU accession is enshrined in the country's constitution and that the falsified elections weren't overturned. Previous protests werent posted only because the article wasn't made in time and it failed on quality, although since has been expanded, hoping for help of others on this to avoid the sane fate. Abcmaxx (talk)23:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would reword the blurb as "... formally announces the country will suspend its application for EU membership". According tothis article, the PM said that the negotiations were on hold until the end of 2028, but that the government would still aim for EU membership by 2030; maybe one could cynically claim that this amounts to the same thing in practice, but let's stick to what the government "formally announced".
I agree that the stub as it currently stands is obviously not sufficient to post. I would be open to supporting based on significance, but it's still a bit early to judge how important these protests will end up being. Does anyone know how many protesters there are/were, for one basic metric? The sources I've found just say "thousands".98.170.164.88 (talk)01:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless some escalation in protests will happen. So far nothing serious is happened yet. Btw Georgia's EU accession process was suspended in July[1]. Currently government just formally accept reality that in near future accession is unlikely. But main goal to join EU in 2030 is still not abandoned.46.188.18.196 (talk)02:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 107 arrests, widespread brutality, 2nd night of unrest with no signs of abating, so I strongly disagree this isn’t serious, there's hundreds of videos circulating of police bearing defenceless children and women in the street. Will try and expand later, help is welcome.Abcmaxx (talk)09:45, 30 November 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.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: The fire artricle is in good shape, and we could also link the cathedral itself (I only see a couple tagged things). That said, while the official opening to the public is next week on the 7th, Macron gave a large, widely-covered tour today to unveil the new interior prior to that opening. I can see holding off until next week to post, but I think we're getting the bigger coverage now (and given the dates, we're past the CRYSTAL point and the opening has little likelihood of not happening). It would be nice to get new interior pictures but I believe those will be subject to copyright, and I don't see any immediately new image of the cathedral in the last couple months, post-reconstruction. Masem (t)17:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, there's a lot media coverage today with Macron's tour of it. We could wait but it will be unclear which point will have the most coverage. — Masem (t)18:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To any non-involved party: Consensus appears to be to close until Notre-Dame actually re-opens, with overall consensus trending towards support, but an early close here appears likely. I've seen no arguments for posting this now so a non-involved party closing this would be appreciated, barring any dissidence towards this early closure. I'd do it myself, but we're still a few steps short of asnowstorm.Departure– (talk)22:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Big historical landmark. Officially open to all guests. People are wrongly claiming it’s not open yet. Also, can somebody suggest the Irish election for tomorrow?68.160.249.84 (talk)01:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is going by the December date when the public will be allowed to visit, and we have reliable sources stating that. Also, we don't prematurely nominate elections - especially ones with specific winners and parties that hold onto, gain, or lose power in government.Departure– (talk)01:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: The fire was big time news, but the re-opening is nowhere near as important for the front page. We have WAY more important events going on right now that deserve coverage instead.Harizotoh9 (talk)20:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support once it actually opens to the public. The reopening is definitely a notable event in itself, and the subject is nicely encyclopedic.Yakikaki (talk)19:30, 3 December 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.
Nominator's comments: New supranational government, in office until 2029, of political significance equal to a change of national government. Will take office on 1 December 2024. Sandstein 10:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC) Sandstein10:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The right news to post was her re-election in the same way we posted her election in 2019. This is just a routine change within the European Commission. Across individual countries, we generally post parliamentary election results, not when the government is officially formed and the cabinet is complete.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)10:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ITN often disagrees on when to post a change in head of government (which this is too, technically, as Von der Leyen will also commence her new term of office). We oscillate between posting the election or the assumption of the office. But that's not a reason not to post on either occasion, as long as we agree that the story is important. Sandstein15:35, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite a good article. Given we bizarrely failed to post Von der Leyen's re-election we should definitely post this. The European Commission is one of the most powerful bodies in the world, and uniquely powerful for a supranational union.AusLondonder (talk)13:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The United States is politically and economically more powerful, influential and independent than the European Union. Moreover, we don't have a rule that supranational unions should be assigned more significance. That being said, a supranational union isn't a valid argument to support this.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)16:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the same logic. At least they were demonstrating some; your argument ("Go USA",fauxcomparatives etc) possesses a certain paucity in that department.SerialNumber54129
I don’t admire the US politics very much, but I can’t deny the facts (I didn’t tell the IMF and World Bank that US should have 50% higher GDP than the EU). You’re welcome to elaborate what is EU’s real power that makes it significant (maybe Germany going into recession after imposing sanctions against Russia?). People here should divorce from their emotions that the EU is the greatest and most influential thing that ever happened in the world. Yes, it was initially a peaceful project between the European nations with the goal of uniting Europe, but it eventually ended up in a union propagating the non-sense that the largest country in Europe is actually not European. For what it’s worth, I’m European.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)17:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The United States is certainly a union -- it's right there in the name. Its states were separate colonies and still have their own governments and laws.Andrew🐉(talk)09:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This is a purely procedural matter. Kiril is right that her election was the thing to post; we could have posted her re-election too, but the fact that we didn't isn't by itself justification for posting this lesser event.GenevieveDEon (talk)14:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kiril and Genevieve; the window for posting was when the election occurred, not at the time when the term actually started. It would be a slippery slope to allow "oh, we missed it, lets post here instead"-type logic for ITNR items (which I am pretty sure the election would have been treated as). --Masem (t)14:35, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, this article isn't in good shape- it has way too many tables compared to text content, and is orange tagged for section needing update. And it's based on an election event that is stale.Joseph2302 (talk)22:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per TDKR Chicago 101. It was a failure not to post von der Leyen's election, so we can repair it with the election of the commission, its quasi von der Leyen's inauguration.Grimes2 (talk)15:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per all above. Is not the formation of a government, it is the election of a government by a parliament. Just as the election of a PM by a parliament would be posted, so is the election of the European Commission._-_Alsor (talk)11:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe we should have posted earlier about this topic, but it is better to post this one rather than nothing at all. Important topic, so better late than never.Tradediatalk15:48, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kinda big deal, actually. This is the one that counts, following the European elections in June. I found the article to be in a surprisingly good shape, too.Yakikaki (talk)19:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support big deal, she's going to be in charge of the commission for until 2029. Article is of sufficient quality. Sure it would've been better to post when she won the election for the commission, but this is also fine since we didn't.Scuba18:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Oppose blurb No clear indication of being a major/great figure in the article (such as a legacy or impact section). For example, while the lede touches on being a major figure of the Golden Age of Mexican film, this is nowhere expanded upon in the body. If such a section could be created to support the recognizition, that would make it more appropriate for a blurb, but right now, based on the current state of the article, it would be hand-waving without sufficient sources to back the claim. --Masem (t)05:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: First major offensive since the 2020 ceasefire, over 25 villages and towns taken, the rebels are also at the door of Aleppo again. We might want to also add this to ongoing. Scuba15:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those clashes saw fighting for a single village, this offensive has seen the rebels capture 40+ villages, 2 cities, a military base, and are again in Aleppo, one of the major cities of Syria. They aren't really comparable.Scuba15:05, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. While this is indeed a re-escalation of the fighting, the amount of territory retaken is fairly small so far. If the opposition forces recapture Aleppo, I think that would be significant enough to post; a few towns on the approaches to the city are not. Let's see how this plays out before posting anything.Modest Geniustalk12:01, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, they took the citadel today, the main SAA-Hezbollah-IRGC HQ in the center of the city. Only real resistance is coming from the kurds in the Sheikh Maqsoud neighbourhood. All government buildings, including the police HQ have been taken.Scuba23:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait and recenter nomination on Aleppo in case it falls. I feel this is only making major headlines now that the opposition is in the outskirts of Aleppo. Would be worth waiting if the city falls - that would certainly be major news.Khuft (talk)19:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Comment I would at least wait a few days, letting the ceasefire news stabilize for a bit, as well as to actually make sure the ceasefire holds. Also, as this is only a 60-day ceasefire, we may need to be prepared to readd it in late Jan/early Feb. if hostilies immediately flare back up. --Masem (t)14:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Israel is still prohibiting the return of Lebanese civilians, and has threatened to pick up hostilities again. We should wait and see if they're serious about the ceasefire.Scuba15:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Was thinking of nominating myself. It's a complete contradiction to say in the top headline there's a ceasefire, while also saying it's "ongoing". Makes us look silly. If hostilities break out again it's easy enough to re-add it. — Amakuru (talk)17:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: there was an airstrike today. Israel interprets the "ceasefire" agreement that allows it to continue attacking Lebanon. Israeli troops are still inside Lebanon and preventing Lebanese from returning home[2].VR(Pleaseping on reply)20:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 60 days is not a lot of time for a ceasefire. Anything can happen within those 60 days and tensions are still high. If it becomes more permanent, then I support removal.INeedSupport:303:17, 29 November 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.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose on quality per above. Article needs to be updated.Otherwise Isupport on notability. We've effectively established by precedent that ICC arrest warrants for world leaders are ITN-worthy, and Aung Hlaing is thede facto head of state of Myanmar.FlipandFlopped ツ16:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Thesource listed above says plainly that "the chief prosecutor of the international criminal court (ICC) is seeking an arrest warrant ... A panel of three ICC judges must now rule on the prosecutor’s request." So, an arrest warrant has not yet been issued. This is the secondrecent example of failure to get the basic facts right. Tsk.Andrew🐉(talk)17:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Andrew. This was the same case with the warrants for the Israeli leaders - they submitted a request mid-year, and it was only granted in the last month. --Masem (t)17:52, 27 November 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.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose both on quality and importance. The article has almost no prose, just tables and lists. This is a new competition (only the third time held) with highly questionable significance. Theprevious edition was held five years ago and was merely a qualifying process forbaseball at the Olympics. This year's rosters are full of minor league and free agent players; players in the world's top leagues did not take part. There seems to have been little interest from broadcasters or mainstream media. I don't see a case for posting this, let alone adding it to ITNR (as proposed on the talk page).Modest Geniustalk13:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Broadcasting wise, the tournament had deals for TV (including Free to Air) in Asia and Central America, for outside those regions had a global deal withDAZN.
Yes, some players that played in Climax Series and Japan Series were in2024 WBSC Premier12 rosters , not just Ryoya Kurihara, but alsoChusei Mannami andShugo Maki (a BayStars capitan that played in 2023 WBC) was there. Althoout Premier12 is mostly used to test new players for the next WBC.
Ohtani is by far is the most popular Japanese player right now so anything with him on it will surpass something that has not,2023 Word Baseball Classic Final was more popular than2023 World Series there, this year all World Series games were shown in FTA TV only beacuse Ohtani was on it, most of years those games are thrown intoNHK BS only and often cut out by BS programing.
it is a new tournament but is already stabilized, Baseball went various reforms during last decade,World Baseball Classic replacing the oldBaseball World Cup and becoming main major international championship alongside the creation of Premier12 as the replacement of the oldIntercontinental Cup.
There's no "claim it's a new thing". It'd be ultra-restrictive to effectively say that if something wasn't nominated and successfully posted its very first year of existence that it's henceforth banned from posting. Window closed. The end. Or what if it wasn't hypothetically notable until now? Judge it on today's merits. —Bagumba (talk)15:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment With sports events what is not on ITNR I believe we should strongly avoid unless shown otherwise (I don't think it has been here). Though I would like to point out the usage ofChinese Taipei, I am not sure if the term has ever been posted to ITN but such a political term shouldn't go without a qualifier; at a glance it would appear to a reader to do something with the PRC when it pertains to the ROC, as such a parantheses with Taiwan should exist for such cases.Gotitbro (talk)02:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was used only for elections, not for sports as far i remember
That said i am in favor of the use of the Taiwan term to be used beacuse ofcommon name, i was in doubt if i should use or not since of the highest stantards ITN tends to have, so i went with team name just in caseMeganinja202 (talk)08:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support notability top global competition in a global sport. Just because it hasn't been posted before doesn't mean we can't do so, and basing notability on TV viewing figures is pointless as they are often incorrect, viewership us difficult to measure, and popularity doesn't stem from TV anymore.Abcmaxx (talk)09:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability - genuinely global event, organised by a recognised authority in the sport in question, which is one with a global following even though two countries tend to dominate the headlines. Butoppose on quality, as the article lacks sufficient prose narrative, and in places has tense problems implying that the tournament is yet to occur or still going on.GenevieveDEon (talk)19:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The top international baseball competition is the World Baseball Classic. The Premier12 does not include MLB players so it really ISN'T a top level competition in the sport, IMO.DarkSide830 (talk)05:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both are on the same senior international level, while WBC is the World Cup equivalent, P12 is the Confederations/Intercontinental Cup equivalent, so is on top level of importancy, also both are sanctioned by WBSC.
I mean, Japan winning is irrelevant. My point is the Premier12 is effectively just the WBC without MLB players (aka most of the best players in the world, acknowledging a few NPB and one or two KBO players likely make this cut). It's not nearly the headline-grabber that the WBC is and much less hyped. I love baseball and did some Premier12-related editing on some pages. I don't think you can make the soccer comp though seeing as it's such a massive outlier as far as global sport popularity goes. Very few sports we have at ITN/R have several different international competitions like this in play.DarkSide830 (talk)04:22, 1 December 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.
Four people are found dead and five others are rescued from a tourist boat that sank yesterday off the coast ofMarsa Alam,Red Sea Governorate,Egypt. Seven others are still missing.(The Guardian)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Support A major development. If the ceasefire agreement is actually implemented in the manner claimed by Netanyahu and Biden, it would mean the reclamation of control by the Lebanese army and effectively the end of Hezbollah military dominance in most of southern Lebanon. I am fine to wait until tomorrow if necessary to see if the ceasefire agreement is ultimately accepted by all parties - but assuming it is successfully entered into, then this should be posted.FlipandFlopped ツ20:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality only. The background has far too much focus on the conflict where this should use summaries more and point to relevant pages via main/seealso templates. There should be more on the past efforts to organize a ceasefire, including nations involved (here, this being US and France).Masem (t)21:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - suggest Alt Blurb Shouldn't it technically be a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah (not lebanon) this is how most RS are noting it.Schwinnspeed (talk)03:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb, not alt blurb. CNN reports "Israel and Lebanon have accepted a US-backed proposal"[5]. Lebanon is a party to this agreement (as noted in the article itself), and the Lebanese army taking control south of the Litani is a major part of this agreement.L'Orient Today, a major Lebanese newspaper, also presented the full text of the "cease-fire agreement between Israel and Lebanon"[6], and several points of the agreement relate specifically to the Lebanese government.VR(Pleaseping on reply)05:20, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly,headlines are not reliable. Secondly, plenty of sources characterize this as "Israel and Lebanon" ceasefire:Atlantic Council,UN news,Politico,Axios,LA Times etc. Thirdly, looking deeper into the sources makes it clear that the Israeli government, Lebanese government and Hezbollah leadership are all parties to this agreement. One could argue that "Lebanon" is accurate, since all Hezbollah members are Lebanese citizens. Some potential compromises would be to say "Israel and Lebanon, including Hezbollah, agree to..." or "The Israeli and Lebanese governments, and Hezbollah agree to..."VR(Pleaseping on reply)08:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - if there was an armistice, but given the history of ceasefires in past conflicts, this may not be that significant. Especially with reports that Israel warning Lebanese civilians not to return to the south. In the meantime, this is covered by ongoing.Nfitz (talk)05:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb in principle. Widely reported news which should bring the fighting to at least a temporary halt on one front. The altblurb is more accurate than the original. However I have twoconcerns with the article: a) The 'background' section has sparse references; because this is a controversial topic that should be improved, especially when discussing motivations. I'm not a fan of mirroring a section from another article, but if that's the approach taken it will require fixing on the mirrored article. b) The lead indicates that this is a permanent ceasefire, but the body (and nominated blurb) both say it's only for 60 days. Those should be made consistent.Modest Geniustalk14:23, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: part of the Zucker, Abrahams, Zucker trio that produced comedy films like Airplane! Article needs more sources Masem (t)19:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now as nom said, the article is in need of more sources and is currently orange tagged. If these issues are fixed, please ping me and I will change my vote accordingly.Aydoh8[contribs]00:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: The article could be easily expanded, doesn't convey nearly enough that he was one of Poland’s best ever players. Abcmaxx (talk)17:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Soft support sure the article could use some expansion, but the content that is there is of a high enough quality to post.Scuba15:52, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now with 340 words of prose. Time for a re-review? Is there a source for the second table in the Career statistics section? --PFHLai (talk)17:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Support I'm not seeing any cn tags, just twowhom tags, but considering the length of the article I think that's fine for inclusion in RD.Scuba15:51, 27 November 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.
Nominator's comments: Very rare to see an airliner crashing in Europe. No immediate quality issuesapart from a UGS tag which could easily be fixed.Edit: it appears to have been fixed. Aydoh8[contribs]00:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support this as a testament to the development of airliner crash safety; ten were involved in a crash of a cargo airliner and only one lost their life.Oppose for now because only one person died. Maybe if this becomes a wider incident like the737 plague it'd be notable but as it is we're to a point where (at least in my opinion) large airplane crashes are not blurb-worthy.Departure– (talk)01:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose low number of fatalities/injuries as this was a cargo plane and does not seem like a systemic issue that would cause scrutiny of the aircraft line.Natg 19 (talk)01:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support it was a cargo plane, the only people on board where the pilots, casualties shouldn't be what keeps this from being posted. Article is of high quality, and this is getting global coverage in the news.
No, it doesn't warrant inclusion just because it's a 737, especially if one cannot tell the difference between a737-400SF of the second generation 737 Classic series and one of the fourth generation737 MAX series. --KTC (talk)21:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - seems relatively minor in the great scheme of things. No prejudice on relisting if it turns out to be a Russian terror attack or something.Nfitz (talk)05:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We wouldn't post a road crash that caused one death. I don't see any reason to treat this differently just because it involved an aeroplane. Procedurally, the nominated blurb doesn't even link to the article!Modest Geniustalk14:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning Oppose.(edit conflict) Low amount of casualties but other than that, this was mostly a minor incident and sabotage doesn't seem to be the cause for now. It's a relief that there weren't any ground casualties/injuries. It seems that cargo aircraft accidents are rarely posted if the accident was significant enough. For example,Turkish Airlines Flight 6491 was posted due to the high death toll on the ground.Flight 810's nomination was against posting as no one died. Moreover, no one seem to have nominated the crash ofAtlas Air Flight 3591 (3 casualties). 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 (☁＝☁＝✈)14:32, 27 November 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.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Under normal circumstances I would not make or support this nomination. However, most of the indictments were posted on ITN against the very strong objection of some editors both on BLP grounds and the fact that it was contrary to our customary practice of only posting convictions. Under the circumstances, I think we need to take note of what is probably their final disposition. It is receiving front page coverage both in the US and abroad. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:41, 25 November 2024 (UTC) -Ad Orientem (talk)23:41, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
True, but this is probably as close as we can get. The indictments should never have been posted and it is my sincere hope that we never do anything like that again. -Ad Orientem (talk)23:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - consequence of a story we already posted, Trump winning the presidential election. The idea that a truly unprecedented event, a former president being indicted on criminal charges, should not have been posted is both a personal opinion and not relevant to whether or not this story should be posted.nableezy -23:54, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you are going to post that someone is charged with a crime, and we certainly would have (and in one case correctly did) post any convictions, why would we not post the dismissal of the charges? (Unless the decisions involved were heavily motivated by a strong animus or a desire toright great wrongs.) -Ad Orientem (talk)00:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Besides the utter lack of AGF in that parentheses, the reason is that one thing was unprecedented and treated as such across the globe, and the other is a predictable consequence of what we already posted. I wont return the favor of failing to AGF in making unsubstantiated claims about the motives of this nomination. And also, despite the claim that there is a probable final disposition of this story here, the charges were dismissed without prejudice, allowing them to be re-filed when Trumps presidency comes to an end.nableezy -00:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So basically we can announce criminal indictments on the main page of one of the most trafficked websites in the world, and quietly ignore it when they go away? The fact that he was an ex-president is neither here nor there. He was entitled to the basic protections of BLP and we set aside our very longstanding practice of only posting convictions. And FTR my opinion of Donald Trump is unprintable. But I do believe in basic fairness, even for people I detest. I'm not going to relitigate what happened beyond that it was an egregious error that should not be compounded. -Ad Orientem (talk)00:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is here and there, that was an unprecedented event in US history. And sources treated it as such. The basic protections of BLP are to not say anything untrue about a public figure, and hewas indicted. There was zero BLP issue in saying that. I dgaf what our very longstanding practice is, there is nothing in BLP that says we should not include what is verifiably true. And there is nothing in any guideline that says one of the biggest news stories of the year should not be on our front page section ofIn the News. BLP does not mean, and has never meant, we cannot include anything negative about a living person, it means we write conservatively and accurately. It was indisputably true that Donald Trump was indicted in several criminal cases and that he was the first former US president in history to have been indicted. There is 0 BLP issue in saying that, not in an article and not on the front page.nableezy -00:44, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose was foregone conclusion as soon as Trump was named the winner. Also a subtlety is that they are being dropped without prejudice, meaning they could be brought up once he is out of office, so it's not the true end of the story.Masem (t)00:21, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No it wasn't, we had no way to predict how the grand jury, and Smith's subsequent actions, would go, because they didn't discuss them in public until court filings. Trump said numerous times that he would make the cases go away as president, and the DOJ has a standing policy that they cannot go after a sitting president, so that this happened like this was of zero surprise.. Only that Smith volunteered to end it before Trump took office might not have been part of it but the net result was.Masem (t)00:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose current blurb If Trump's charges were dismissed on the merits or he was explicitly found not guilty, that would be one thing. Here, however, the blurb is actively misleading: the current phrasing, by omission, makes it sound like the case against Trump was dismissed on the merits. In fact, the opposite is true: the government initiated the motion to dismiss on a without prejudice basis while maintaining the strength of its case. The sole and only reason for this is the constitutional prohibition on prosecuting a sitting president. Per the Government's motion to dismiss: the dismissal "does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the government's proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the government stands fully behind".FlipandFlopped ツ00:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And a fair response,Ad Orientem. I have added an alt blurb.Isoft support alt blurb. On the one hand, I think that this a foregone conclusion: if he won, this was always going to happen. On the other hand, I am generally an inclusionist when it comes to things making global headlines going on ITN. Given that we posted the indictment, I am inclined to support for reasons of balance.FlipandFlopped ツ00:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Upon further review of the target article, Ioppose on quality grounds per Andrew Davidson. The target article doesn't contain sufficient explanation & updated information corresponding to the info communicated in the blurb.FlipandFlopped ツ15:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MASEM. The process leading to the dismissal of charges was perhaps unexpected, but the fact of the matter is, the ultimate result of these cases with Trump as the sitting president likely wouldn't have had much actual impact, and I'd say the lack of a verdict is of even less impact in the end.DarkSide830 (talk)01:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the same reasons the 1 July 2024 SCOTUS decision on presidential immunity. Trump winning the presidential election is noteworthy, while this doesn't have the notability for ITN.JohnAdams1800 (talk)15:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The nominated article has not been updated. And that article covers multiple proceedings and some are still open or are now proceeding to sentencing. We shouldn't run a headline saying that all charges have been dismissed when it's more complex than that.Andrew🐉(talk)08:43, 26 November 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 Sambhal Violence, Uttar Pradesh, India
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose Without expansion, this seems like a small flare up in a country where such protests and conflicts are commonplace. --Masem (t)13:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sad to say but such violence and riots are common in India; additionally, it is a small flare-up with only 4 deaths, thus not not worthy of ITNThe AP (talk)13:29, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Undecided on the nom but do we really need three comments belittling the world's largest democracy and trivialising the deaths as "only 4" in a "country like India"?AusLondonder (talk)14:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
we are stating facts and not because it is “the world's largest democracy” we are not going to give it a special notoriety if they are recurrent events in that country. It is the same parameter we use to judge shootings in the United States or earthquakes in the Philippines. Since this is not a news-ticket portal, we should value it more for notoriety than for newsworthiness._-_Alsor (talk)14:58, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP is not a newspaper and not every event, even those involving deaths, necessary need coverage, much less inclusion on the main page. How likely is this going to have enduring coverage and not just a burst of news? — Masem (t)15:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am an Indian myself, and I don't find any interpretation of any comment that is "belittling" the "world's largest democracy." Even though the incident is tragic, it has a low number of fatalities; as such, I didn't find it worthy for ITN. Also to note - such incidents are common and recurring in India sadly so we can't possibly include each of them to ITNThe AP (talk)15:33, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Soft oppose I'm not seeing this being reported outside of Indian news sources. It's terrible that people have died, but I just don't think this is a major enough event to warrant ITN posting.Scuba16:38, 25 November 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.
The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: I believe this is ITN/R as both a change in the president (according to AP News) and as the results of a general election. Please let me know if I'm missing something; thanks! Staraction (talk |contribs)03:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Soft oppose the article only has a one sentence aftermath section and is mostly tables. It is ITN/R, so once that is cleaned up I'll change my vote.Scuba16:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Support. No citation needed tags when I looked just a few minutes ago. Putting this onto the main page might lead to some much-needed improvement... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥21:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I've cleaned up the major mess I made, leaving the secondary sources I'd added before suddenly gettingterribly confused while reading about translingualism and abandoning a language to write in another... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥00:22, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first round of thepresidential elections inRomania takes place, to determine which two candidates will compete against each other in the second round on December 8.(Euronews)
Inbaseball,Chinese Taipei defeatedJapan 4-0 in the finals of the WBSC Premier 12, winning the first title of the top three international baseball tournaments in its history.(Taipei Times)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
German composer and educator, who taught at the (now) Leipzig Music University from 1962 to 2004, from 1990 to 1997 as its rector. Article was mostly there, just needed refs. More about his music would be nice, but his key influence was teaching. Sadly the only notice of his death so far is paywalled, but the rest is covered by solid encyclopedias. --Gerda Arendt (talk)17:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Comment: Pretty close, however only has 1 sentence about what he accomplished in each of his political roles ("Thompson became the chair of the economic development and tourism committee" and "Thompson's office reported finding $105 million of unremitted state money which should have been turned over to the state treasury in August 2023".) Not sure if there's anything that can be added for additional depth?SpencerT•C03:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Soft support: Adaptations uncited, two cn tags, and a bit of a prose problem, but otherwise the article looks fine.Scuba16:35, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No need to be so soft with it. Two CN tags, and a completely unsourced Selected works section mean that this article needs work before it can be posted. Cheers,atque supra!Fakescientist800019:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Neither the conference nor our article seem impressive but we should consider the topic while we are planning to promote multiple motor racing events (1,2,3). It's certainly in the news and significant. Andrew🐉(talk)09:24, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They all use fossil fuels. The conference agreed a statement about transitioning away from fossil fuels despite opposition from countries like Saudi Arabia.Andrew🐉(talk)09:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, this is irrelevant to whether this conference should get posted or not. We should be considering each event individually on their own merits. I am personallyneutral on this nomination, as I do not know much about COP.Natg 19 (talk)10:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which at least was a commitment to direct action to reduce factors impacting climate change. Funding aspects like this year's is not a direct action.Masem (t)16:29, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Article looks good and well cited.Moraljaya67 (talk)
Oppose on quality, at least. Article may be well sourced but is a mess in terms of tenses (a lot of future tense). In terms of significance, I'm not sure if this result is really as impactful as something like the Paris agreement to merit posting. --Masem (t)13:30, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality per above. I'mneutral, leaning support on notability. The title really should be COP29 though, Climate Change has always and will always be brought here only to not be posted.Departure– (talk)14:06, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: as much as the final result of this conference feels extremely disappointing, the COPs are still one of the most important tools national delegations and associations have to negotiate on plans aimed to help our planet and its ecosystems survive. So, yeah, I think they should be addressed even when progress is not so significant. By the way, I'll try to go through the article myself to correct the grammar, as suggested byMasem.Oltrepier (talk)15:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I've tried to get the article in better shape, and I think I should have solved all of the most glaring issues with tenses and grammar, although I must confess there are a lot of useful bits of information that are still missing from the page...Oltrepier (talk)21:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on notability these summits happen regularly and there's always lots of talk but nothing of note ever happens other than vague meaningless declarations as a result, leaving everyone, particularly those still believing something might change, predictably dissapointed. Having a handful of people fly in on private planes from around the world to an oil-rich dictatorship to pretend to do something about climate change is textbookgreenwashing.Abcmaxx (talk)21:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support These conferences happen annually, but they are the largest regular international conferences on Climate Change. This year's summit notably saw an agreement on a specific numerical goal for climate finance.Jackattack1597 (talk)04:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When we have posted the COP conclusion before at ITN, it is usually tied to a commitment to do some actual actions to reduce climate change (even if they can't be held accountable, etc.) Simply saying they will plan to help poorer countries with financing towards climate change is sorta a nothing-burger in the larger picture regarding CC, given that those pooer countries are typically the least likely contributors towards it. — Masem (t)13:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Some may call it an idle man's show and I personally don't see any notable step they took, but the event might still notable enough. Wikipedia has a good article on it, and it is on the news, to present it is what ITN does.ExclusiveEditorNotify Me!14:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Comment: Not sure if this is technically eligible for RD if the article is about his death? Not sure how this has been handled in the past.WP:ITNRDBLURB suggests that something like this should be blurbed when the death is the main topic.SpencerT•C17:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
These are completely unrelated sports, so shouldn't be combined. Yes they both use cars, but we wouldn't combine rugby with football just because they both use balls, or tennis with squash because they both use racquets.Modest Geniustalk15:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment many parts of the text are ungrammatical and unidiomatic, as if they've been through automated translation. I've tried to tidy up the season summary, but parts are still contradictory or difficult to follow. This could do with some attention by someone who followed the season - I don't have time to dig into all the references.Modest Geniustalk15:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose an independent blurb, as I am in favour of a conjoined blurb with the F1 ITNR blurb. Two motorsport blurbs clogs up the main page, and they can logically be grouped together.FlipandFlopped ツ07:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support only as a separate blurb. This isWP:ITNR and meets article quality standards and so should be posted as a separate blurb- this is no different to having multiple election articles listed at the same time on ITN. This discussion isn't an appropriate place to try and re-write how ITN and ITNR nominations work, these 2 events are not related just because they both use cars.Joseph2302 (talk)11:29, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voicing quality concerns about how to better optimize the phrasing of blurb(s) is inappropriate to bring up in the discussion and voting section of those very same blurbs? ITNR means the event itself is notable enough to make it on the main page. How the article is blurbed and presented remains subject to community consensus, which entails room for disagreement without accusations of inappropriate behaviour.FlipandFlopped ツ16:54, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support nomination but strong oppose combined blurb we would not combinefutsal withassociation football even though both are similar and organised by the same governing body; that would be the sporting equivalent of combining Uruguayan and Somaliland election blurbs because they are both elections. WRC and F1 are completely different sports, we wouldn't combine Moto GP with F1, this is a much bigger distinction; bigger than you would have between F1 and Formula-E for example, despite those two also being very different cars (would not support combining them either).Abcmaxx (talk)07:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The F1 blurb has long been posted while this one lingers because some editors want a combined blurb. That seems rather unfair...Fram (talk)09:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, if we are not combining the blurbs, then I am not opposed to posting the article. Its quality is more than sufficient to meet ITNCrit.FlipandFlopped ツ16:23, 27 November 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.
Strong oppose until this evolves into widespread protests, or a political crisis, orsomething beyond non-specific claims of "outrage". At least something with article to point towards, feigning the possibility of Duterte's death following these comments.Departure– (talk)05:03, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please note that it started on conflict of Marcos-Duterte on Investigation of War on Drugs in the Philippines of Former PresidentRodrigo Duterte. And inMary Grace Piattos issue that possibly go on impeachment too (While I'm replying this, it's in the investigation of Quad committee of the Philippines). I can't remember other issues of Duterte-Marcos it's so many issues lol.RoyiswariiiTalk!05:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: This isWP:NOTNEWS and also, I think, that every criticisms/controversies of a certain politician is habitual news.Moraljaya67 (talk)
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.
Twenty-four people are killed and 46 others are rescued after two boats carrying 70 passengerscapsize when the boats' engines failed in theIndian Ocean off the north coast ofMadagascar.(BBC News)
World leaders at the COP29 climate summit inBaku,Azerbaijan, sign a deal to send at least $300 billion annually todeveloping nations in the fight against climate change.(CBS News)
At least one security officer is killed and two others are injured in a gunfight betweenJubaland police and security guards inKismayo,Somalia, after rival candidates announced a parallel election amid a disagreement on the electoral procedure for the presidential election on Monday.(Hiiraan Online)(NTV Kenya)(NATION)
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Strong oppose combined blurb That would be like combining the Super Bowl and Rugby World Cup finals because they both use an oval ball.Abcmaxx (talk)16:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Must we run a photo of a Dutch and Belgian athlete in front of the British flag? How about we use something like instead?Bremps...20:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The bodies of six people were found at the height of the Alazán Plan ejido with signs of torture on the highway that connects the municipalities ofSan Fernando withReynosa.(Excelsior)
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Major escalation of Russian invasion of Ukraine. 219.74.216.56 (talk •contribs)
What exactly was launched is unclear, as we can't take Russia's own claims to their word, and more reliable sources says it wasn't ICBMs[16]. This is an escalation, but at this point, reasonably covered by the ongoing. --Masem (t)17:03, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose - this was NOT a nuclear warhead, and we have an article for the projectile -Oreshnik (missile). Let's not puff it up any more than it was. We didn't post Ukraine using West-supplied long-range missiles and Putin's nuclear threats that he always makes, so let's not post the use of Russia's shiny new toy. Also, you may want to use a template for future ITN submissions.Departure– (talk)17:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you point me towards the RS that states this was an ICBM, or anything other than the blurb states, then? Also, this wasn't even the only hypersonic ballistic missile launchthat day. MultipleKh-47M2 Kinzhal strikes were reported in the same Reuters article.Departure– (talk)20:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, source state that it was new intermediate-range ballistic missile.
But also that it was a nuclear-capable weapon[17].
It was a major escalation and major event in war, Putin addressed the nation, which he only did after the start of the war, mobilisation, and Prigozhin mutiny.BilboBeggins (talk)21:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Kinzhal also has nuclear capabilities. Prigozhin's mutiny was quite a while ago so it tracks he'd make another address to remind the West there's a war going on, even when it's just a new weapon. I'd prefer not to take Putin on his word that this was something special.Departure– (talk)21:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose good faith nom. Just another day in a country that's been ruthlessly invaded and subjected to near daily indiscriminate bombing attacks. -Ad Orientem (talk)22:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not actually an intercontinental ballistic missile nor nuclear. If one of those is launched, would be more likely to fulfill notability requirement.FlipandFlopped ツ22:13, 22 November 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.
Oppose on quality Seems too short, and what reactions there are are the usual "fluff" in the sense that there's condolances and not actual any actions. Likely needs a background section too. --Masem (t)05:58, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Local leaders complaining of a lack of security, officials saying the death toll will rise, and the PM and President both commenting on the incident are not "fluff". The entire section is only 5 sentences long.Harizotoh9 (talk)06:09, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would expect a good reaction section not to be flooded with non-action statements of sympathy and anger, but actual steps towards action to investigate and make sure such events happen again, what they are doing for familes of the victims, etc. (eg: its far too easy for quote anyone with "thoughts and prayers" after a tragic event, that doesn't make for good encyclopedic content) — Masem (t)13:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality, support on notability the ongoing land dispute & sectarian conflict which is at the source of the attack needs to be fleshed out in the background section. As of now, all the article says is "Sunni and Shia Muslims are in conflict in the region over a dispute over land". That is nowhere near a sufficient explanation. We can't put an incomplete article on the main page.FlipandFlopped ツ22:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality Seems short, I'd like to have it with more detail.Support on notability A significantShia-Sunni relations attackTheHiddenCity (talk) 22:27, 22 November (UTC)
It is reported thatPakistan internet authorities have banned the use ofBluesky in the country amidst a surge in popularity in the app. The ban is confirmed by internet watchdogNetBlocks in a post onX (formerly known asTwitter).(TechRadar)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
I moved her to 21 November. Sorry, I was on vacation, so updating came late. Le Monde and Diapason, the most serious obits, both came 21 November. --Gerda Arendt (talk)00:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose at least on quality - the trial article, which should be linked, is a stub. Unsure on notability, as we don't often post trials of individuals aside from major world leaders.TheKip(contribs)07:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We seem to have a rash of indictments and warrants lately. PerWP:SUSPECT, "A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations, arrests and charges do not amount to a conviction."Andrew🐉(talk)09:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There are lots of reasons why this isn't suitable for ITN. The case article - which should be the bold link - is a stub. This is a domestic case involving a private individual, very different from the ICC seeking a national leader. The case itself does not seem particularly significant, there are fraud and corruption trials all the time. The blurb is misleading, because it incorrectly implies Indian prosecutors, and isn't NPOV.Modest Geniustalk12:04, 22 November 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.
Article updated The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Note After clarifying the issue on the talk page, I just want to point out that he is not technically the PM at the moment. He will officially become PM once his cabinet is finalized, probably in December. I don't think it's a big deal as a lot of changes in political office don't take effect immediately, and this is the stage in the process at which his predecessor was posted to ITN anyway. If we do want to delay it until he is officially the PM, I'm fine with that. If not, perhaps changing the word "new" to "next" in the blurb would better suit his status, although even theLithuanian public broadcaster doesn't do that or make much of a distinction.98.170.164.88 (talk)09:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt blurb: Incorporates both election and his article as it seems PM is not directly elected by people in Lithuania, also he is still not the PM (blurb says he's just elected) and cabinet comes from elected officials.ExclusiveEditorNotify Me!13:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
(Non-admin closure) Consensus is towait as Jair Bolsonaro has not been indicted, but only has been charged so far, and the decision to indict lies currently with the prosecutors.Abcmaxx (talk)11:56, 28 November 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.
Strong support The fact that Bolsonaro is linked with an attempt to assassinate Lula is notable enough. The indictment is very ITN worthy. The article looks good too aside from two cn tags in the Timeline section (not sure if that section itself needs and expansion). --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)22:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support on notability - Brazil's equivalent of Trump's indictment(s). No reason this should be treated any different... except maybe on quality, which I've no comment.Departure– (talk)01:31, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed.Please do not modify it.
Oppose seeing as how Lula got out of prison based on the political whims of a judge and then ran for president again this doesn't really mean anything.Scuba01:51, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lula was sentenced by thesame judge who would serve in theCabinet of Jair Bolsonaro, if political bias has to be talked about at all. None of this is relevant to whether Bolsonaro's indictment is notable or not; it is and we posted the Lula developments back then as well. Personal judgments of political assesments by editors aside.Gotitbro (talk)07:56, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Highly noteworthy development in the attempted overthrow of democracy. Will be interesting to see if the matter is actually prosecuted properly and justice served unlike what happened in the US with Trump free to run again despite his attempt to overthrow democracy.AusLondonder (talk)04:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The blurb and the article falsely tell us that the police have indicted Bolsonaro. In fact, the decision to indict lies with prosecutors, who have not yet made that decision. As per theNYT article cited in the Wikipedia article: "Brazil’s federal police urged prosecutors to charge Mr. Bolsonaro and three dozen others (...) Federal prosecutors have still not decided whether to pursue charges in any of these cases". Sandstein10:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose/Wait per Sandstein on account of the blurb not being factually accurate. These indictments are likely still forthcoming. I think blurb posting on this topic should wait until that time.DarkSide830 (talk)16:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb Prosecutors have clarified that although they will indict, it will take time to proceed to that next stage for logistical reasons:see here. However, I think this is ITN now, and so posting now (when coverage is high) is appropriate. It would be different if the prosecutor hadn't yet decided on an indictment: he WILL certainly be indicted, just after the Holidays. As such, I have proposed an altblurb which uses modified language.FlipandFlopped ツ22:30, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree in principle re: BLPCRIME, but I think for heads of state the indictment itself is notable (for Trump as well as the Netanyahu/Gallant arrest warrants currently posted to the Main Page).DecafPotato (talk)22:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest Possible Oppose We've been down this road with Donald Trump and that was an egregious error. The Federal charges in his case have now disappeared and as of this post the consensus seems to be to ignore it. This is why we post convictions, not accusations. -Ad Orientem (talk)03:21, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We posted when Trump was impeached (knowing full well there would be no removal by the Senate), and as mentioned above, the grand jury findings still exist and new indictments could be raised in the future (just not likely in the next four years). We have also posted the arrest warrants from the ICC for Putin and for Israel/Hamas leaders. Clearly when former leaders of countries are at least charged, in a formal manner consistent with the nation's laws, for major crimes, that seems to be the point to post, even if no actual conviction comes down the road.Masem (t)04:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by§ Public figures—editors must seriously considernot including material —in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured for that crime.
However, Bolsonara is a public figure. Consensus might determine this doesn't belong on ITN, but it's not dictated by this policy.—Bagumba (talk)04:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba: That's a very unfortunate section. All living persons with Wikipedia articles are public figures in some way. Otherwise, they would not be covered in reliable sources that justify the existence of their articles. Could you please explain what makes politicians more prominent public figures than artists, scientists or sportspeople?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)12:59, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP tends to use the legal definition ofPublic figure to determine who is public. It is certainly not the case that any notable person we consider to be a public figure, but generally use that for those that are nearly always going to be covered by media, like politicians, actors, athletes, and top-level businessmen.Masem (t)13:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unsure whether the legal definition is the same everywhere (for instance,public figure lists only the case in the United States, which may not be true for Brazil or anywhere else). Furthermore,WP:PUBLICFIGURE isn'tlex specialis that can overrideWP:BLPCRIME, and the examples given under WP:PUBLICFIGURE don't even list a case involving indictments (WP:BLPCRIME should normally be more restrictive than WP:PUBLICFIGURE due to thepresumption of innocence. Otherwise, we risk to make afalse positive.).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)13:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, BLPCRIME is more geared towards protecting the privacy of those that are clearly not public figures (those whom have never been written about until such an event) rather than the allowance that we should cover crimes related to public figures. No matter how you slice it, Bolosanaro is a public figure, and thus the protection that we look for under BLPCRIME simply is not applicable.
Beyond the scope of BLPCRIME, all other aspects of BLP in general apply: we do have to write with presumption of innocence, we should be accurate to what actually happened here from a legal perspective and not jump to conclusions (that is: I know the original articles on this all said, directly, "indictment", but that was clearly not the best wording). But there's no reason we can expect any attempt to protect Bolosanaro's privacy here via BLPCRIME.Masem (t)13:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Indictment" comment I was evaluating whether to post this, but sawSandstein's comment above:The blurb and the article falsely tell us that the police have indicted Bolsonaro. In fact, the decision to indict lies with prosecutors. Reuters says:Brazil's prosecutor general is expected to weigh those two cases along with the police report on the alleged coup plot before bringing any charges against Bolsonaro early next year.[21] So it seems there's a conflict on whether he's indicted yet or not. For balance, CNN a few days ago had"Brazil’s Bolsonaro and allies indicted in 2022 coup plot probe". The previous Trump post that's been mentionedwas for an indictment, but this discussion is not necessarily binded by that (WP:ITNSIGNIF). If there hasn't been an indictment,2022 Brazilian coup plot needs to be updated to say that he's been accused by the police (or similar), and not useidict. —Bagumba (talk)04:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bagumba,Sandstein This is caused by a translation issue and cultural barrier. The literal definition of "indict" is "to formally accuse of or charge with a serious crime". The police have formally accused Bolsonaro, under Brazil's criminal procedure for the referral of cases. The prosecutor then has a supplementary decision as to how or whether to lay charges in Court. In Portuguese, the same verb - "indiciar" - is used for both of these two "types" of accusations:see here. So, when English sources like CNN are translating from Portuguese coverage, they say he was "indicted": technically true, because of the literal definition of the word and how it is used in Brazil. However, it is misleading to the American reader, who usually interpret "indictment" purely legalistically - that is to say, charges have been laid in court by a prosecutor.
Using the altblurb language of "formally accused by police" is more precise and avoids that misleading impact. IMHO there is a consensus that the story itself is notable enough, so I would recommend going with the alt as a compromise measure.FlipandFlopped ツ16:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. I have raised the issue on the talk page and will make modifications to the article ASAP after giving folks time to raise disagreements to my interpretation. Hopefully then you or another admin can consider whether or not to post on the merits re: the notability of the event itself.FlipandFlopped ツ17:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Translation error, I see, in that case I rescind my vote. It is already on tenous grounds that we post formal charges; police complaints should nowhere be near the Main Page.Gotitbro (talk)07:53, 27 November 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) ICC arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu, Yoav Gallant, and Mohammed Deif
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.
Support Since the arrest warrants of Putin and others' were posted, I think this should be posted too as it is about a incumbent Prime Minister.LiamKorda14:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support on notability, arrest warrants against world leaders have been posted before.Weak oppose on quality, the article isn't updated to where I think it should be to be posted. Besides that, otherwise it's well sourced.Departure– (talk)14:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - Support on significance and precedent. I think the quality could be better but not quite to the point where it should stop this from being posted. ✈mike_gigstalkcontribs14:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Important development, rare event, and per ITN precedent. The article is detailed and well-referenced; I find its organisation quite confusing and the update isn't great, but it provides the facts of the case and is in good enough shape to post.Modest Geniustalk15:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability as there is precedent that an international arrest warrant for an incumbent leader is notable, and on quality per Modest Genius above. Vanilla Wizard💙15:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely no need for a separate article for the issuing of arrest warrants. It would have been far better to have an expansion of the ICC case. — Masem (t)19:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. I used the main article, since it wasn't really discussed if the sub-article should be used instead, and there's an obvious titling/scope issue with it. I used an image of Netanyahu and an additional use of "Israeli" per the choices used for the Russian ones in 2023.[22] These can all be changed if necessary. --Patar knight -chat/contributions18:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our article explains that it's because neither Hamas nor independent sources have confirmed his death, so the ICC cannot determine if he is dead and decided to issue in case he is alive. --Patar knight -chat/contributions20:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Israel claims to have killed him in July, Hamas claims he's still alive. The ICC has been unable to determine either way, so issued the warrant. Regardless of whether you think either claim is tenable, or if any of these people will be arrested, the blurb is factually correct in stating that the court has issued a warrant.Modest Geniustalk20:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Patar knight: would you be amenable to adding the phrase "allegedly killed" or something similar next to Deif's name for clarity (so it'd read "allegedly killed Hamas leader Mohammed Deif")?DantheAnimator07:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gotitbro, makes sense but I think the claims could still add important context (e.g. the fact that there are legitimate questions regarding his death suggests he is missing/hiding and thus the warrant won't have any immediate effects on him, unlike Bibi & Gallant who have generally been going about their lives). I'm open to other phrasing but I still think it's an important thing to add for context/clarity. Usually also the blurb is supposed to based on the article and the article in this case talks more about the warrant's effects on Israeli officials so I think it's helpful to readers to reflect this dynamic/disequilibrium in impact in the blurb. Open to other ideas though and thanks for the reply,DantheAnimator16:37, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is too much detail to get into for a blurb. A warrant was issued and the relevant part of the article explains the ICC's reasoning for issuing the warrant for Deif. If you have reliable sources that discuss the practical effects of the warrants, I would suggest adding to the article. --Patar knight -chat/contributions17:44, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I still think adding two words to some effect would be rather helpful but I don't feel too strongly about it so it's alright. Many thanks for the replies! :)DantheAnimator04:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think like joint Nobel Prize announcements, the idea is that each day a different person will have their image. Now I think it's due time for Deif to get his picture, Gallant was on the front page all of yesterdayQueensanditsCrazy (talk)13:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see he doesn't have an image in his page. Not many photos of him exist apparently, but the article has links that have some pictures. Are these pictures copyrighted or some other thing that means it can't be used in his infobox and thus on the main page?QueensanditsCrazy (talk)13:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Typically the admins try to rotate the photos between different topics or people every several days, but that is up to admin discretion, as the ITN box is protected and editable only by administrators.Natg 19 (talk)17:35, 26 November 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.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose Terrible event, yes, but there's not a high number of fatalities, and the fact that they are tourists does not make it more notorious or more special.
Note also, that there are victims in Australia, New Zealand, the US, Denmark, UK, and Laos, with the news being reported by organisations around the world.GMH Melbourne (talk)13:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on notability. This seems to be an incident of food poisoning the likes of which we've seen numerous times and are likely to see again. Not nearly as widespread or otherwise impactful as a contamination event should be to get posted; this seems to be restricted to a single hotel in Vang Vieng.Weak oppose on quality at the moment. Also, this nomination may bestale as the fatalities happened on 13 November, and this is likely to roll off the news cycle and ITN as a whole before notability gets demonstrated and quality improves. The oldest blurb isJustin Welby's resignation from 12 November.Departure– (talk)14:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Tragic event, but accidents that cause four fatalities are sadly quite common. Even methanol poisoning isn't that unusual, seelist of methanol poisoning incidents - and those are just the incidents that received media coverage and editor attention. The nationality of the victims has attracted media attention, but shouldn't affect our judgement of significance. I see no reason to treat this any differently than a traffic collision that caused four deaths, which would never be an ITN blurb.Modest Geniustalk15:21, 21 November 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.
The embassies ofKazakhstan andKyrgyzstan urge their citizens to leave areas near Ukrainian combat zones or to leave Ukraine altogether amid an escalating risk of Russian retaliatory attacks.(The Times of Central Asia)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Comment Its difficult to find sources for the statements of Haverbeck, because Holocaust denial is illegal in several countries. Impossible to post in RD.Grimes2 (talk)15:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Slow day, huh?Weak oppose - updated for the death but has a few CN tags - there's another in the article's body on a negative claim about Prescott that really should be sourced or removed.Departure– (talk)15:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. The article is extensive and has a lot of citations, but it's very dry prose and hardly a riveting read. There are classicWP:PROSELINE problems, a lack of images, and it often (particularly in the 'life after parliament section) feels like a random collection of factoids rather than a coherent biography. Still, those are stylistic issues that don't actually violate our criteria. Could do better, but good enough to post.Modest Geniustalk19:34, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've added a few more CN TAGS because there are numerous unsourced lines. The article is not perfect, but it should be close. It is not ready to be posted._-_Alsor (talk)13:04, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forty-fivepro-democracy activists inHong Kong are sentenced to prison terms of between four and 10 years over an unofficial primary held in 2020.(Reuters)
TheTunisian coast guard announces that on the night of November 8, a patrol boat rammed and sank a boat carrying migrants on its coasts, killing 53 people.(Fanpage)
Nor is Taiwan, but both are de facto independent and functioning democracies. I'm undecided whether that is sufficient to post, but it certainly isn't a clear-cut case.Modest Geniustalk12:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The argument for posting about elections in the Republic of China is entirely different than posting about elections in breakaway separatist republics.Scuba16:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ITN has posted election resultsfrom the SADR (Seems I misremembered? Regardless, the distinction for which nation we deem fine and not is quite arbitrary. Somaliland functions as a state with its own independent elections, it is not a micronation or an autonomous region in its current de facto state) and even subnational entities so I would say this is fine. I'm glad someone was able to nominate this, I intended to originally regardless. A change in government too, which is notable. The article looks fine to me.Ornithoptera (talk)17:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: For the record, the2021 Somaliland parliamentary election was not only nominated but also made it to the very top of the front pagehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:In_the_news/Posted/June_2021 check June 6. Yes Somaliland is Unrecognized, but it is a fully functioning democracy same as Taiwan. In the past its articles have been featured and now should be no different. Somaliland is a free standing de facto state and articles from less independent states have been featured before, such as North Cyprus. Main point being there is precedent from their election in 2021 that they can be featured so I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be.Subayerboombastic (talk)18:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. We look at unrecognized states on a case by case basis. They are not automatically bound. Here it looks like it has geopolitical considerations as well as being a change of a longtime governing party. --Patar knight -chat/contributions04:34, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Somaliland is a de facto long-standing independent state just like any other, the only exception is that other countries have no interest in recognising them (in some cases it would be against their own interest to do so). Unlike some other examples, it's not a puppet state nor just some rogue separatists controlling a territory. The closest example would be Taiwan, although the geo-political situation and involvement of world powers is very different. I would even propose to make it ITN/R.Abcmaxx (talk)15:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comment: I threw this article on the 1959 incident together a few minutes ago after news of the Danish intervention broke; I believe it's in good shape but apologies for any errors or omissions due to hasteChetsford (talk)00:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose for now - the target should be2024 Baltic Sea submarine cable disruptions or ideallyYi Peng 3, the ship detained. If something is conclusively proven and charged in a court of law or any escalations or developments to any of the numerous wars going on worldwide come of this, maybe I'll support, but for now it's equivalent to a marginally important arrest of a private individual and therefore not ITN-worthy.Departure– (talk)01:08, 21 November 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.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Support: Article looks good. No obvious gaps in references; If anyone observes any gaps, please point them out and we can get them addressed.KConWiki (talk)14:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If people with concerns about missing citations can put up CN tags or give which specific areas are of concern, I will be happy to attempt to resolve them. ThanksKConWiki (talk)00:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Commment: I now have gone through the entire published works section, removed a couple of duplicates, provided ISBNs for all listed works, and provided either Internet Archive or else Google Books links for almost all listed works. Anyone who would care to review and comment, please feel free. Are there any other areas of concern? Thanks to all -KConWiki (talk)21:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Plenty of coverage and it's a nationwide protest with over 30,000 in attendance in Wellington alone after all. The lede could be expanded, though.Departure– (talk)20:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Red-tailed hawk: Hello. The marches stated nine days ago relatively small. They garnered very little attention then, naturally, because of their size. This is the climax. ITN shows the Oscars, not the date the invites go out.SerialNumber5412922:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
occurs across New Zealand is a bit too broad, the hikoi started in Auckland and made its way down to Wellington. This all happened in the North Island, maybe occurs in major cities in the North Island of New ZealandRynoip (talk)23:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppsee Relatively peaceful compared to other protests, nor yet to shown as impactful (eg like the past India's farmer strike that actually impacted commerce in the country). --Masem (t)01:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are protests nearly happening every day around the world. We have no room to cover them all, so we need to look at scale and impact. This specific protest lack either (particularly after it appear no laws will be changed)Masem (t)20:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the hīkoi is seven times the size of the notable 1975 Land March led by Dame Whina Cooper. Videos of MP Hana-Rwhiti Maipi-Clarke's haka in Parliament on the 14th, relevant to the hīkoi and the Treaty Priniciples Bill are already viral and in global news cycles.Ladygeekiness (talk)01:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I disagree it's minor, it has made all major news outlets around the world even in non-anglophone countries, which usually pay very little attention to New Zealand and even less so to Maori issues. The lack of violence should not be a factor on notability.Abcmaxx (talk)09:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The barrier for inclusion in major news outlets is extremely low. That should not be used as a judgement of significance, because news reports events big and small.Masem (t)13:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That applies to domestic news though, if this protest was not notable nor impactful it would not have gathered so much global attention. Plenty of genuinely important news does not get reported either it's a double-edged sword anyway.Abcmaxx (talk)14:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It appears that the bill is unlikely to become law anyway and so there’s little impact. Such demonstrations and protests are common — for example, there was a big farmers’ protest in London on this day. This one doesn’t seem sufficiently significant.Andrew🐉(talk)11:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Absolutely notable, and rare significant news from that corner of the globe. Comparisons to other countries of course run afoul ofWP:ITNATA.Duly signed,⛵WaltClipper
Comment - I'm utterly befuddled by the rationales used to oppose this item so far. One rationale implies that because there wasn't any violence or killing, it isn't notable; another says that because the journey across country took nine days, that it's technically outside the news cycle; and another isspeculating that the bill won't become law anyway so there's no point in protesting. Much of this doesn't have any bearing on the actual significance of the item.Duly signed,⛵WaltClipper-(talk)13:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support We posted the2023 Australian Indigenous Voice referendum, this is perhaps even more significant in that it signals a rollback of already agreed upon law and rights. CRYSTALBALLing aside, about whether this may or may not pass, the protests have to be seen in the context of New Zealand politics where these are important (largest ever?) and a significant point in the country's and Maori history.Gotitbro (talk)14:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is the referendum was just that, a referendum with 15,739,686 votes. These are protests 82,000 strong (and that's being generous) in a country of 5.22 Million.Scuba16:55, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that's nonsense, the farmer's protest in the UK shouldn't be posted either and if someone nominates it I will vote oppose there too.Scuba17:44, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose protests aren't large enough to warrant posting. Any argument to the contrary is just a pro-Western bias. Comparing these protests to the2024 Armenian protests for example, which had 20,000 protesters in a country of 3,000,000, several hundred arrests, and called for a regime change, the verdict of ITN was that it wasn't notable enough to post. These protests are 82,000 in a country of 5,200,000 and are seeking to preserve the special status of one ethnic group over others.
These protests...are seeking to preserve the special status of one ethnic group over others is a ridiculous and cynical misrepresentation of what the protests are about.AusLondonder (talk)19:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you don't believe thatThe New Zealand Government has the right to govern all New Zealanders nor thatAll New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and duties? Bold of you I guess.Scuba21:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Scu ba, things are a bit more nuanced than what you make out. Maybe it's best to not argue the finer details that are hard to understand when you don't live here.Schwede6607:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, I forgot that you have to live in the country that the ITN/C event is taking place in in order to vote on its inclusion.Scuba16:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Calling the protests, which are against a minor political party's efforts to re-interpret or rather rollback thePrinciples of the Treaty of Waitangi (already seen as inadequate forindigenous rights in New Zealand), preservation of special treatment is rather disingenous. The view that the bill seeks to enable resource exploitation in indigenous lands without having to specifically consult those people has more currency than any purported equal treatment of the citizens of New Zealand.Gotitbro (talk)08:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What? Do you not support equal rights for all kiwis?indigenous lands without having to specifically consult those people is a bit fake considering the bill is to make all kiwis equal without special rights or privileges.Rynoip (talk)20:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support largest protest that New Zealand has ever seen and has been covered extensively in major news sources across the world - the event is absolutely notable enough to post. The article itself is extensive and well-sourced, and easily of the quality we would want for a front page feature.Turnagra (talk)17:29, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per other editors. Largest protest in New Zealand's history sounds like something we should post, and it has even made it into German news. Both blurbs are very long however, and a bit arcane. Simpler and shorter blurb proposed.Khuft (talk)19:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's in the news and has attracted worldwide attention. ITN shouldn't ignore genuine news from smaller countries. Second blurb sounds better but would be open to other suggestions.AusLondonder (talk)19:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't think we can call it the "largest protest" in the country's history becauseThe Spinoff source in the article merely estimated it as being the largest, and described the difficulty in knowing for sure. TheBBC described it as "one of the biggest" rather than "the biggest", so I think the blurb should reflect this. ―Panamitsu(talk)22:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the 150,000 protesters are the sum of the 200 protests in relation to the 1981 Springbok tour. None of them individually were anywhere near as big as the 42,000 people who were protesting in Wellington on Tuesday, as estimated by the Police.Schwede6607:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we are going to say that the protest against the treaty is the largest in NZ history, as alt blurbs 2 and 3 do, this needs to be backed up by a claim in the article with a verifiable citation from a reliable source. The articleHīkoi mō te Tiriti currently cites a writer forThe Spinoff who "estimated it was the largest protest Wellington had ever seen, potentially the largest in New Zealand's history." The last part is hedged.
With this in mind, I would say that:
The original blurb, omitting any comparisons, is fine.
Alt blurb 1 may be okay but it depends on how you parse it. If you parse it as "largest (protest in the country's history at New Zealand's Parliament)" then it's fine, asThe Spinoff makes this exact claim very confidently. If you parse it "(largest protest in the country's history) at New Zealand's Parliament", which I think is the intended and more natural parsing, then it's problematic.
Alt blurbs 2 and 3 are not adequately supported by existing sources or the article text, and even though they may be true, verifiability is the most important criterion to judge them by.
Alt blurb 4, which uses the wording "one of the largest protests" (mirroring the BBC), is fine.
I might also propose something like "New Zealand witnesses thelargest protest in its capital's [or: its parliament's] history...". That would be less ambiguously parsed than alt blurb 1.
Note that the issue isn't even just about comparing head counts of a single protest vs. multiple protests aggregated. The article inThe Spinoff mentions a possible 2010 protest with 80,000 people in Auckland, and although the author states that the 80K figure is "hard to prove", and even claims that the current protest is "probably" the biggest single-location NZ protest, that uncertainty may be enough of a reason to avoid outright making the claim that alt blurbs 2-3 (and 1 if you parse it the obvious way) do.98.170.164.88 (talk)11:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The protests you mentioned were againstapartheid in South Africa, which is the single largest political matter in its modern history and which involved widespread international pressure, not just from New Zealand. If that's your comparison point, then I think this protest is doing well for significance.Duly signed,⛵WaltClipper-(talk)13:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sorry, this is a rather long post. UnlikeMasem, I suggest that this is a rather impactful protest. The situation reminds me of the2004 foreshore and seabed situation; when that unfolded, I thought it was a super-big mistake byHelen Clark's Labour government. They did survive the 2005 general election, but the resentment was deep-seated enough that they didn't get through in 2008. This feels much the same; this time forChristopher Luxon's National government. In August, former PMJohn Key gave the current PM what I felt wasa public telling off in his typical style (one of Key's nicknames is the "smiling assassin", i.e. he smiles while he's telling you off). AndNewshub's chief political journalist explained yesterday that it's going to be a problem for Luxon for months to come: "This will still be going on at the start of the [next] year and the political calendar is traditionally kicked off with a number of Māori events. That is a problem for Christopher Luxon not to have it voted down by then, not to have it neutered." By the time this is over, it will have inflicted a lot of damage on the government, possibly enough that they don't survive the next election.Schwede6608:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As this is a perennial issue which is going to keep rumbling on, why don't we wait until we get a clear impact such as the passing/withdrawal of the bill or an election result?Andrew🐉(talk)10:30, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Andrew🐉: it is probably wiser to post to ITN once the bill is voted on, as that is when there will be a clearer impact. However, when that happens, the protests are still important context to include in the ITN blurb. --MtPenguinMonster (talk)12:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Quite a significant protest with international news attention and also in relation to size. The protest is the story here, since the coalition partners have pledged to vote the bill down after the committee stage at furher reaadings, so it will almost certainly die out.--Patar knight -chat/contributions13:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is a big deal in New Zealand, but lacks long-term or wider significance. No legal change has occurred and a majority of parties have indicated that they will oppose the bill. In the end this is just a bit of domestic politics, letting a minor coalition party introduce something controversial purely so it can be demonstrated how unpopular it is. If the Treaty of Waitanga was repealed then that might be suitable for ITN, some peaceful protests against a bill that has no chance of becoming law is not. Once the bill is defeated the protests will quickly be forgotten.Modest Geniustalk17:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - we posted the protests in Israel against the judicial reform for example, and that never got implemented either. One of the, if not the, largest peaceful protest in the history of a country, one that is widely covered across the globe, merits posting.nableezy -17:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per nableezy, who puts it quite well. Due to their national scale and international coverage, as well as the lasting effects on the Indigenous rights discourse within New Zealand, I would say it's blurb worthy.Ornithoptera (talk)18:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support it is already one of the most significant events in New Zealand political history, just by the sheer scale of the public participation.David Palmer//cloventt(talk)20:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is getting widespread international coverage, which makes it rise above "mere domestic politics" as implied above. And even if it was not widespread and international in nature, being "domestic" does not make it ITN worthy, so this argument is redundant. Widespread international coverage + major domestic coverage and recordbreaking levels of domestic political participation + lasting impact on Crown-Indigenous relations in New Zealand = suitable for ITN.FlipandFlopped ツ22:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are 20 votes in favour and 9 votes opposed – a 2:1 ratio in favour. Both perspectives have hashed out their arguments with reasons. The general ratio is in favour and this will likely not dramatically shift, nor will new arguments emerge. As such, I have marked this nom as ready for an admin decision.FlipandFlopped ツ22:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thriley, that is because people who hear about it in the news are not likely to correctly remember or spell the name of the protest movement (it being "Hīkoi mō te Tiriti"). The general wikipedia page forMāori people went from in the vicinity of 3,000 views per day to over 300,000 total views from November 10 (first day of protests) to present. The article for theTreaty Principles Bill also rose to 100,000 views during that same period, from essentially almost zero prior to the protest beginning. These additional page view stats paint a clearer picture that there has been a surge in interest and coverage. So, just looking at that one stat in isolation is very misleading.FlipandFlopped ツ21:14, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support posting Article quality and significance both seem sufficient, and it would be nice to post this before it's too late. As I wrote above in a reply, I prefer alt blurb 4 because the article and its sources don't adequately back up the claim of it being the very largest protest in the NZ history, though that claim is plausible. The original blurb avoids that issue but creates another: pinning down an estimated number of protestors. The 60,000 figure doesn't seem to be consistent with the numbers the article infobox uses anyway, i.e. >82,000 across the country and 42,000 specifically in Wellington/at parliament.98.170.164.88 (talk)04:10, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No long term significance as it is protesting a bill that is already known to never become law. Just a flash in the pan really like the other nearly daily protests that happen at parliament. Only difference was more people.Kiwichris (talk)06:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus has hardly changed since this was nominated and I think it was ready to go on the 20th. It would truly be a shame to see this not posted because the admins that would have posted were either involved, too busy, or considered this stale by now, which it isn't (not for the next day or so).Departure– (talk)15:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1. IMHO, there has been a clear consensus to post for at least 5 days. I am not sure what is causing the issue here, given that we have posted a litany of other articles during this same time period.FlipandFlopped ツ16:33, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Tables are not fully filled. Aftermath section is not added yet. Besides, many activists are jailed every year, although this is significant in terms of the number of activists jailed, I don't think we should be giving special consideration to this incident.TNM101 (chat)14:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose though this court case is notable, we are now in the sentencing phase, which is not as notable. The time to post this would have been in 2021 when the activists were arrested and charged.Natg 19 (talk)16:56, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, if we did not post this before, it would be fine to post this now. However, the article still needs improvement.Natg 19 (talk)19:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose on quality - The article hardly seems updated following sentencing. While it is in the article, it's not nearly enough prose to (in my eyes) justify an ITN blurb.Support on notability.Departure– (talk)20:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Looks alright. Also, when it comes to the current blurbs, the last one about the election is Mauritius is so old, even the winner has long forgot about it... Maybe add something more fresh, like this?51.154.145.205 (talk)13:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The democracy movement effectively stopped in Hong Kong in 2020 when the protests were supressed. And while important in the context of those protests, I am not sure if this is an inflection point in the history of the protests or the movement itself.Gotitbro (talk)15:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Weak oppose on article quality, i'd say add detail on what's listed on bro's greatest work, "Two Billion Light Years of Solitude (1952)". Also, if this article doesn't get approved soon, it may risk becoming stale as bro passed on november 13.BlondArkhangel (talk)13:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Russian forces launch a missile attack on the city ofOdesa,Ukraine, for the second consecutive day, killing at least ten civilians, injuring dozens of others and damaging civilian infrastructure, including residential buildings.(Ukrainska Pravda)
APakistani Taliban ambush on a military convoy inKhyber district, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, kills eight soldiers and wounds three others. Several gunmen are also killed. Separately, seven police officers are kidnapped inBannu.(Voice of America)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Failing to read detailed instructions is normal behaviour – seebanner blindness andWP:CREEP. If you don't want people casting such !votes then the format of the process should be changed so that it's a checklist rather than a call for !votes.Andrew🐉(talk)08:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The orange banner tag was placed in 2010 which is 14 years ago! Since that time, the article has been expanded greatly and the number of citations increased from 2 to 27. As there's no current indication or discussion of specific problems with the article and the article seems quite adequate, I just removed the obsolete tag. If people think there's a problem, they need to be specific.Andrew🐉(talk)08:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Article needs serious work, and needs to be updated, but when that is done this is ITN/R. More of a call to action for people to edit the article at the moment rather than a true submission to the board. Scuba04:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose on quality as the article is very short, although it seems well sourced.Per AP, other major parties have conceded defeat to PASTEF and their victory seems all but guaranteed. I'd just like to confirm however, Sonko is the leader of PASTEF but he isn't mentioned in the AP article - I don't know enough about Senegalese politics to draw a major conclusion on this though.Departure– (talk)17:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At least 72 people are killed, a third of whom are children, in an Israeli strike against a residential building inBeit Lahia, in northern Gaza.(Al Jazeera)(AsiaOne)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
I'm not saying it's a requirement, I'm just wondering why aren't there any, especially given they’re very useful on sports season articles.Abcmaxx (talk)08:55, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support the season summary could be expanded, but is just about good enough for the article to passWP:ITNQUALITY. The existence of an infobox is not a requirement for ITN, and so any votes based on that should be disregarded.Joseph2302 (talk)09:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The season summary is detailed and well referenced. The rest of the article is mostly bullet points and tables, which isn't great, but it's in a good enough state to meet our requirements for posting.Modest Geniustalk15:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
I should note that theGrey Cup isITNR so discussion should focus on quality instead of notability.Strong oppose on quality, much of the article is written in future tense and no details about the game itself are present.Departure– (talk)04:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: The teams' summary, scoring summary, and stats tables have now been added. The game summary has been re-written with references. Pictures from the game have also been uploaded and added. I'm also suggesting a change to the key image, since this is from the MVP award presentation. I'm seeking reconsideration from@Departure–:,@Abcmaxx:,@Joseph2302:,@Scu ba: and support from@WikiOriginal-9: and@GreenRunner0:Cmm3 (talk)04:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article not too bad, needs a few more citations in places though. Needs a section on their death given that he was taking painkillers for an injury and fell from fifth floor of a building in St. Petersburg. Abcmaxx (talk)10:09, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: The former Somaliland president died on November 15, coverage of his death started on November 16. The overall article seems well-cited with reliable and primary citations needed for some awards. QalasQalas (talk)11:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The purchase of conspiracy theory websiteInfoWars to thesatirical news content makerThe Onion is put on hold by aTexas judge after lawyers representingInfoWars founderAlex Jones claimed to find irregularities in the auctioning process.The Onion say they plan to complete their purchase.(The Guardian)
Protestors storm theParliament of Abkhazia in the capitalSukhumi in opposition to a proposed measure that would allowRussians to buy property inAbkhazia. Opposition leader Eshsou Kakalia claims that protestors now control the building.(Al Jazeera)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Celeste dos Cravos, the woman who, giving her carnations to the soldiers, gave the name to the 1974Carnation Revolution in Portugal. Been working on the article and I think it is already in a good state to be posted. _-_Alsor (talk)11:16, 16 November 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.
Nominator's comments: Significant in not only boxing, but sports in general. Appealed to a diverse audience of traditional boxing icons and celebrity-driven boxing with over 100 million people tuned in to watch the event. Also the firstNetflix live sports stream, which was met with widespread criticism. Additionally, significant in women's boxing was the undercard of this event which was Taylor vs. Serrano. BlondArkhangel (talk)06:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Firstly, thanks for this contributionBlondArkhangel. We continue to look for newer contributors such as yourself. Regarding this nomination, I was thinking that it would have been aWP:SNOW close given the reasonably high bar on posting that this project has. However, I saw that we had postedFloyd Mayweather vs. Conor McGregor in 2017. So, I am not sure how this will go. Btw, I, a novice to this sport, saw the women's fight and it was quite something. Congrats to the winners irrespective of the posting decision.Ktin (talk)06:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I also am not really into boxing but found this event to be extremely exciting. As far as I can tell, this event had two important fights in the world of boxing, and I actually think the Taylor-Serrano fight was actually a more anticipated fight for the boxing community, whereas the main event fight was more of a meh but still fun idea that gained lots of popularity. The fight itself was so huge that Netflix crashed and buffered multiple times, likely from the millions of people trying to watch it at the same time. Did you experience buffering while you were watching it?BlondArkhangel (talk)06:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose don't think we have posted any recent boxing results. And this one (Paul vs Tyson) is not significant enough, as it was not even a title bout, but just a publicity stunt.Natg 19 (talk)06:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how the frequency of posting boxing results should be a criteria for ITN. Mike Tyson,is a pop culture figure and among one of the most dominant and famous boxers in his era. This event was talked about by many in and outside of the sports world and narrated as a 58 year old man is coming out of retirement to beat an influencer in Jake Paul. In the sports world this event, even if it was a publicity stunt, has a lot of significant aspects to it that have attracted the likes of people who don't even box. However, I would argue it wasn't just a publicity stunt, Taylor and Serrano's rematch was extremely hyped in the boxing community and a well fought one at that.BlondArkhangel (talk)07:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose, I'm more inclined to see this as entertainment news(which we try to avoid), rather than sport news.WP:ITNSPORTS doesn't say anything about boxing, but my understanding is that his was a relatively routine fight that is not worthy of ITN.–DMartin07:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this is notable, but not for the same reasons the blurb currently implies - hear me out. Never before has a fight been live-streamed simultaneously to so many: according toRolling Stone, 120 million households tuned in. To put that in context, when we posted Floyd-Mayweather back in 2017, that was called "record-breaking" because it simulcasted to 50 million (source).The fact that Netflix streamed this, as opposed to PPV or a cable provider, is a huge story for the future of sport and television. Soon, the NFL and NHL will begin transitioning to broadcasting sports via streaming providers. This (and the majortech issues which surrounded such a large simulcast) will be looked back upon as a major transitional moment. Merits ITN, as the wider notability extends beyond the "publicity stunt" nature of the feature fight itself.FlipandFlopped ツ07:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support. Do you have any propositions on what the blurb could be altered to without being excessive? A lot of events happened in this singular event (Paul v. Tyson, Netflix crashing, Netflix streaming live sports, Taylor v. Serrano)BlondArkhangel (talk)07:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
120 million people tuned in to this boxing match, how is that not significant? The Taylor-Serrano fight also took place under this fight, I wouldn't say that was a "joke" fight or outcome and it was probably the most entertaining of the matches.BlondArkhangel (talk)07:31, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb2 Significant event. The 31-year gap makes this even more interesting. Even if it was a publicity stunt, it did its job, that is getting publicity in the form of the 120 million people who watched it live. This fight would be debated over for a long time to come. I also think that the blurb should cover the women's match too, as it was said to be a better fight than the Paul Tyson one. So I have added another altblurbTNM101 (chat)08:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we do post this, I oppose blurbs which mention the women's fight. The significance of this event is the main fight which was Paul vs Tyson. There were 6 other fights on the fight card, so it is cherry picking to mention Serrano vs Taylor.Natg 19 (talk)08:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ITN is not limited to title fights if their media attention is exceptional. Floyd Mayweather Jr. vs. Conor McGregor was a boxing match that was featured in in the news and not a title fight, but had widespread publicity. Paul v. Tyson is statistically a more watched event than that and arguably just as popular.BlondArkhangel (talk)16:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment' correct me if I’m wrong be abuse I’m not into boxing but McGregor v Mayweather was more significant because they are both significant fighters with many titles, not an influencer v an old man27.96.223.193 (talk)22:37, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support the news isn't so much the fight, but the attention and spectacle surrounding it. It's very much ITN, but I'd oppose the current blurbs. I also don't have any suggestions on what it should be, hence weak support.Kcmastrpc (talk)14:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As said by other above, we don't put boxing results in general, but also this was more of an entertainment piece, also this was not official title match, so could be very well rigged for entertainment, it would just serve as unnecessary advertisement for Netflix.ExclusiveEditorNotify Me!14:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of ITN is to reflect events that capture widespread public attention. This event has definitely garnered that title. If anything this would hurt Netflix, the amount of technical difficulties in the streaming of the event could show significance even beyond the fight and in other sports streamed by Netflix.BlondArkhangel (talk)16:32, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on significance - not a world-changing sporting event, nor is it ITNR. Maybe if it wasn't the era of the internet, I'd consider supporting for that 100 million figure, but as far as I can tell that isn't much of a record.Strong oppose on quality as the article has next to no details about the fight itself.Departure– (talk)16:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose we shouldn’t be giving the Paul brothers any more platforms than they’ve already bought. Also the article is in poor shape.Scuba19:11, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are a hypocrite for injecting your own opinion about these figures while criticizing my recent oppose vote for another nomination. Focus on the article quality, like you told me.Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk)02:06, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It may have significant coverage worldwide, but it doesn't have any lasting impact. It is a publicity stunt for both Jake Paul and Mike Tyson, which isn't usually posted on ITN.INeedSupport:323:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support While I think the event is a farce, in a sport" that shouldn't exist, there is absolutely no doubt that it's in the news. It's on the front page of Australia's ABC News.HiLo48 (talk)23:24, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ioppose blurbing Paul vs. Tyson since that fight doesn’t seem like a significant fight. Itheoretically support blurbing Serrano vs. Taylor since that was a widely watched title fight, butI currently oppose such a blurb due to quality issues. At the moment, there isn’t an article that has sufficient details about that fight.Blaylockjam10 (talk)09:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as it was just a show fight with no competitive significance. It'd have been a different story had Paul become a world champion as a result of his victory.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)11:05, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It did receive 60 m simultaneous viewers, which beat out a record set by the 2023 Cricket World Cup (io terms of streaming services, not broadcast channels) -- however, correctly, simple viewership numbers are not a reason to post. — Masem (t)14:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but viewership figures are hard to measure in the first place and furthermore, Netflix gets an increasingly high viewership of anything. I'm sure something like a Taylor Swift concert live-streamed would absolutely break a record but at least that would have some cultural merit as a music event, having a retired boxer turned undefined celebrity and a youtuber with no specific field just feels like aWP:PROMOTION, and I don't think this event will age well or be particularly remembered in a few years time.Abcmaxx (talk)14:35, 17 November 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.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American "First Lady of Children's Folk Song"; died November 9, media coverage appears to start on November 11. Core article seems well-cited, with citations needed for some awards. ForsythiaJo (talk)02:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Some work is needed, but Yuriko, Princess Mikasa was one of the last royals of Japan born and from the Taisho era, married one of Emperor Showa's brothers, and was the oldest living royal in Japan following her husband's death. TheCorriynial (talk)23:55, 14 November 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.Natg 19 (talk)02:20, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added this to the rule summary at the top of the page. It looks like these are good faith votes from people who are unaware of the above, and it comes up very often in comments, so added it for awareness.Abcmaxx (talk)09:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please brush up onWP:ITNRD before adding your vote. Anyindividual human, animal or other biological organism that has recently died is eligable to be included in RD, as long as their artcles areNot currently nominated for deletion or speedy deletion, Updated, and ofsufficient quality.Scuba05:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RDs are "eligible" for opposition, but oppose votes should be based on article quality. "Halting importance globally" is not a reason to oppose, as Scu ba has stated.Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Natg 19 (talk)18:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Soft oppose: the "children" section is largely uncited, but that seems like it would be an easy fix, and the information in it should be public record.Scuba05:17, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've fixed the children section, thanks to NHK last year when she turned 100 listing every child via photo. I've tried to improve tone issues and fixed a ref needed, turned out it was in the same source I used for her children.TheCorriynial (talk)10:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked it down to one ref needed, that im not sure how to find a reference for, being a order award that is usually given to women in the royal family and rarely to other foreign female royals.TheCorriynial (talk)12:52, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking through wikimedia commons, it appears she received the award in 1941. Obviously commons shouldn't be cited, but its a start. I've tried the best I've can, maybe a Japanese wikipedia user could help?TheCorriynial (talk)16:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
APakistani Taliban commander accidentally detonates a car bomb at his house inMir Ali,Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, killing himself and six other people. Fourteen others are also wounded.(AP)
A study published in themedical journalThe Lancet reports that the number of adults who havediabetes globally has increased from 200 million people in 1990 to around 800 million people in 2022. The study also reported that around 40% of adults with diabetes are notreceiving treatment for the disease.(DW)(The Guardian)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Support per the talk page consensus. The Israeli invasion article is more current, and should therefore be the one we use on the main page.Kurtis(talk)09:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
AU.S. jury awardsUS$42 million to three former detainees of theAbu Ghraib prison inIraq, thereby holdingVirginia-based military contractorCACI liable for their role in the torture and mistreatment of the detainees.(AP)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
The couple of sentences startingWest was a supporter of the Talyllyn Railway are tagged as needing a citation but at a glance everything else looks good.Thryduulf (talk)20:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Oppose Article needs substantial expansion with only one source in the header and an entirely unsourced filmography. No information whatsoever regarding death other than month.Sampaioe (talk)15:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Weakest oppose The article is just barely sufficient, but given this is an English writer, there has to be interviews with her discussing the work. (eg like[34]) There is definitely room for expansion that would be nice to see before posting. --Masem (t)03:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having separate year articles for the booker prize seems really weird, because there's no major ceremony or anything. Sure, details of the shortlist and the like are important but I don't see why this can't be done on a list page, with any further details (such as "first X to win") being on the book/publication page. I do know in the past we have usually highlighted the book as the target. — Masem (t)13:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Targetting the book article (Orbital) is fine, provided it has been updated with a referenced paragraph about the prize. The award is given to that specific piece of work, it's not part of a broader corpus or lifetime achievement. There's only one winner and not much more could be added to2024 Booker Prize. What would *not* be OK is usingBooker Prize orSamantha Harvey as the bold link.Modest Geniustalk14:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. The article is very light, but does just about meet our minimum requirements. I'd like to see some secondary sources for the plot summary perWP:PLOTCITE, but it's not a disaster without them.Modest Geniustalk14:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted Early comments focussed on the poor article and this has since been significantly expanded, thus reaching a consensus to post.Schwede6620:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly is not an advertisement. Your ignorance of the Booker Prize does not mean that no-one else knows what it is; and you can find out from our general articleBooker Prize. 14:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
One of ITN's purposes is to show "to point readers to subjects they might not have been looking for but nonetheless may interest them". I think that even if you do not know what the book Orbital is or even what the Booker Prize is, it can provoke you to research what it is to see what the buzz is about. Frankly, I had no idea at all what the Booker Prize or the author who wrote Orbital or Orbital itself was, but it led me down a rabbit hole to learn through clicking each hyperlink and reading what Orbital was about and just how impressive the achievement of the Booker Prize is.BlondArkhangel (talk)19:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Further, this also helps to reduce the systematic bias by featuring a top tier award in the field of literature. We should aim to include such top awards for other creative fields as long as we know the award is documented routinely by the media and considered a top award in said field.Masem (t)19:50, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
wait? I don't know the terms that may be being used, but I think we could wait until Welby's successor is named to post it. Being the most important ecclesiastical figure (after British monarch) of an important worldwide branch of Christianism, I do consider this change ITN-worthy._-_Alsor (talk)14:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Oppose with only 26 million baptized, and of that only 5.5 million practicing members as of 2010, the Anglican church isn't a major world player in global religions. When theUnited Methodist Church with it's 5.9 million practicing members repealed bans on LGBTQ clergy and same-sex marriage we didn't include that in ITN, so why would we include the Anglican leadership change?Scuba16:03, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly disagree. I think your numbers are for the Church of England specifically. The worldwideAnglican Communion has about 85 million practitioners, making it the third largest Christian denomination (communion) after the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodoxy. The bishop of Canterbury is the closest thing to its pope or (even closer analogy) ecumenical patriarch. Also, this is a pretty rare change, he's been in the position for over a decade. We posted hisappointment in 2012.98.170.164.88 (talk)16:23, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was unaware of his appointment in 2012, I wasn't editing at the time, but rules and norms change, especially in the decade + since then. Again, there are only 26 millionbaptized Anglicans, but sure, lets consider the Episcopalians whose entire church is a rejection of the CoE and the Archbishop and the Crown, and other groups like them, as Anglican for some reason to boost that up to 86 million.
There are ~1.3billion Catholics of ~2.4billion Christians. That means only 3.58% of Christians (and again that's with bloating their numbers considerably) are Anglican. That simply isn't a large enough congregation. We don't post leadership changes for Methodists, Baptists, or other protestant denominations. Why should we with Anglicans?
We in factdid post the leadership change for the largest branch of Mormonism in 2018, which "only" has 17 million adherents. For comparison, the median population of UN member states is around 9 million.
The British monarch is the head of the CoE, not (the rest of) the Anglican Communion. And the Episcopal Church in the US is definitely not a "rejection" of the CoE and the Archbishop of Canterbury — it's in full communion with the CoE and looks at the Archbishop of Canterbury as a figurehead, like the rest of the Anglican Communion does. Episcopalians do reject the Crown as an authority, but once again that only undermines your argument about the King being at the top of the hierarchy.98.170.164.88 (talk)16:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whether Mormons are considered Christian or not is actually kinda irrelevant to the argument as far as ITN is concerned; they are a broadly comparable religious body and we posted their change in leadership. And as I said, Episcopalians reject the crown, but they have always been inspired by and in communion with the CoE. The Episcopal Church websitetalks about Justin Welbyextensively.98.170.164.88 (talk)16:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I agree, the Mormon president changing shouldn't be included in ITN.
Wrapping all vaguely Anglican churches together as being under the direct administration of the CoE is a backhanded way to bloat CoE numbers.Scuba17:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The news item is about the Archbishop of Canterbury ultimately. He is relevant to the Anglican Church as well as CoE. So including Anglican membership is relevant. The actual numbers of CoE specifically do not matter.La Ovo (talk)18:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anglicans are united under a single Church body, akin to Catholics with the Catholic Church. Baptists, and other Protestant denominations are scattered among a lot of different smaller churches and lack the central cohesion of Anglicans and Catholics. The Anglican Church is after all the nationalChurch of England, for an entire country.Harizotoh9 (talk)01:45, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article looks good. The archbishop of Canterbury is the principal head of the Church of England and the leader of the worldwide Anglican church community. Notable religious figure and the circumstances of his resignation is newsworthy as well. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)16:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article seems good enough; there are two{{cn}}s but not about any important claims. I agree with others who say that this meets the significance threshold. He was the ceremonial head of the worldwide Anglican Communion. While the Anglican Communion is not as tightly knit in terms of dogma or organization as, say, the Catholic Church, Anglicanism is one of the main traditional branches of Protestantism and the Communion's 85 million adherents are nothing to scoff at. Welby played an important role in trying to keep the Communion from falling apart due to disagreements over LGBT matters and other issues.98.170.164.88 (talk)17:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The resignation of a politically connected head of a major Christian denomination (and the unofficial head of the third-largest Christian tradition) is a big deal, especially considering that it demonstrates a continued role sexual abuse plays in disrupting upper hierarchies across Christian denominations. ~Pbritti (talk)18:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can't say I know this story inside-out, (or even at all) but covering up sexual abuse is a crime in the UK, so would be something we can't say definitely happened without a confession or conviction. Is this exactly what reliable sources are saying, that he was "covering up an abuse scandal"?Unknown Temptation (talk)18:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support His resignation is significant for the reasons outlined above, and is being covered in various media as a major news item. In response to the comment above, "covering up" might not be the best phrase. Maybe something like: TheArchbishop of CanterburyJustin Welby (pictured) resigns following criticism of his handling of an abuse scandal in theChurch of England.Baldwin de Toeni (talk)18:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt Significant resignation of a major religious figure in a major religious denomination following a scandal would justify ITN inclusion. Alt blurb is moderately better worded than the original blurb. Article itself looks fine, though the few CN tags should be fixed ASAP.Sampaioe (talk)19:45, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. I've phrased the blurb similar to the currentBBC headline, "Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby resigns over Church abuse scandal", replacing "over" with "as a result of" because "over" might be misunderstood by non-native speakers as describing a physical position. Sandstein20:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remove (post-posting objection). I do not believe this should have been posted yet, ascoverage from the BBC suggests that Welby has announced his resignation but is still in post: 'It was not immediately clear when the archbishop would leave his post but the process of finding a replacement is likely to take at least six months.'— Precedingunsigned comment added byA.D.Hope (talk •contribs)09:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pull - While Welby remains in office for now, he willnot be remaining in office until a successor is appointed. It is customary for there to be a reasonably longvacancy in see in such circumstances. Welby has indicated that he will step down once he has fulfilled a number of outstanding duties, but the announcement itself is the story. (The appointment of his successor will probably hit the headlines, but it's a largely separate process.)GenevieveDEon (talk)09:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The blurb should be amended to something like '...has announced his intent to resign', in that case. The blurb as currently written implies he is no longer in office, when as far as I can tell he is still archbishop.A.D.Hope (talk)09:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pull Resignations which are 'effective immediately' are the exception and not the rule. Most high-profile resignations allow for some sort of grace period in order to ensure an orderly transition. If the argument is purely semantic as opposed to notability-related, then go and gather support atWP:Errors for changing "resigns" to "announces his resignation".FlipandFlopped ツ15:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Besides the article being far too short to be of quality, this appears to be due to a domestic issue rather than something terrorism-related (the driver was allegedly upset at a divorse ruling that went against him). This is the type of event that is likely not to have long-term enduring coverage and fails NOTNEWS. --Masem (t)12:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean support Article needs work, but once it reaches start class I'm in favor of a blurb. This is all over the news, much more so than the relatively unknown regional terrorist attack that is currently at the top of the fold. Domestic mass murders are still notable, especially in a country where fatalities are unlikely to reach more than a dozen.Kcmastrpc (talk)14:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait and support when article is good enough Arguably a more exceptional event than an attack by a longstanding terror group, which we posted (and should have, to be clear).Bremps...14:22, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd argue that this is more significant than an attack by an existing group - those are almost to be expected at this point, and 35 people is an enormous amount for a vehicle attack.Minerman30 (talk)15:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on significance if article is not a stub. An unusual event attracting international coverage. Very high number of casualties for an incident of this type.AusLondonder (talk)16:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless motive is revealed to be terrorism or similar. Tragic, but ultimately unlikely to have any far-reaching consequences.–DMartin03:46, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Motive does not matter when it comes to mass casualty events. Even then, the motive could fall similar to it. 35 people died from one person ramming them over, that's a pretty large consequence from one person.BlondArkhangel (talk)04:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Motive is very important, as there's a significant difference between a terrorism-related attack and something that is related to domestic violence. The latter is not likely going to have the long-tail of enduring coverage since there's little else to be said about it, whereas a terrorism-related attack will have a significant followup of seeking out the agency that carried it out and any possible enforcement actions. This is why we have NOTNEWS, not every story, even carried by many internaional papers, is necessarily a good encyclopedic topic. — Masem (t)05:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So if someone blew up a building killing thousands because his wife left him, you'd count that as domestic violence and not a major event? It's the single biggest mass casualty event in China since 2014.Harizotoh9 (talk)05:29, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To add onto this, a reason why the article may not get significant enough coverage is because of the vast censorship by Chinese authorities. I think this article could spark enduring coverage about China's security and mental health of their people as well as the definite censorship that can be observed by people outside of China.BlondArkhangel (talk)05:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Motivation is important it will likely determine whether enduring coverage of the event will be there or not, which is the notability standard for news event articles. A terrorism event will draw far more govt response to prevent it, which establishes that tail of coverage, whereas something done by an upset person on a whim is unlikely going to move many needles. That may change in the future in this case but right now the question of the event's notability is in question since it's still working only off primary news source coverage — Masem (t)20:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support and want to note for the record, in case it is relevant for further nominations, that if a mentally ill person killed 35 people with their car in downtown New York City, we absolutely would not be seeing an opposition faction form because the issue is "too domestic". "Too domestic" strikes me as another way of saying "this is Chinese news, so it's not important enough for ITN". There is no basis in logic or ITN policy for that proposition. This needs to make the main page.FlipandFlopped ツ15:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I think general consensus is that this article ought to be postedASAP. Those who didn't support the article originally were mostly because of the of substance in the article. However, there is significantly more information and the general opinion seems to be posting it.
The expansion is in fluff, like media mentions and non-action reaction statements. This is a major problem of how news event articles are written today. It's great for Wikinews but not Wikipedia. — Masem (t)20:23, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you have suggestions on how to improve the article then go to the talk page and make said suggestions. I myself try to trim "Reaction" sections, and merge them into other sections such as "Aftermath" or in the event itself.Harizotoh9 (talk)21:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My suggestion would be to move it to Wikinews and only move it back if it is an event that shows enduring coverage. (this is also true for a good percentage of new news events articles, as editors are failing to follow NOTNEWS and NEVENT)Masem (t)21:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of ITN is:
To help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news.
To showcase quality Wikipedia content on current events.
To point readers to subjects they might not have been looking for but nonetheless may interest them.
To emphasize Wikipedia as a dynamic resource.
This is likely being searched by people who have heard of the event as it has been broadcasted on multiple news outlets. Your suggestion on improvement is due to the lack of time passed that proves it has enduring coverage so I'd say the article itself is of decent quality. Some people could also be unaware of the incident and may find that 35 people being killed from apparent road rage would be a cruel, but interesting article to read about.BlondArkhangel (talk)23:03, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But WP is not a newspaper. Just because an event happens doesn't mean WP should cover it, as events that only get a burst of news coverage are not considered notable per WP:N and WP:NEVENT. Readers coming to WP to try to catch up on news from an encyclopedia are absolutely at the wrong place.Masem (t)05:26, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think ITN is about exposing our readers to high quality information on international topics, a bit like you might hear in the headlines on BBC World Service.Secretlondon (talk)15:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Most of the English language sources are going to be limited as they're obituaries that give summaries of his life, rather than details on his career. I expanded a bit with the CNN and Korea Times articles.Harizotoh9 (talk)00:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One of the friars who was assaulted in a monastery inGilet,Province of Valencia, Spain two days prior, dies after failing to recover from serious injuries.(RTVE)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
An Israeli airstrike on a house inGaza City kills Wael al-Khour, a minister in theHamas-run government, along with his wife and their three children.(NBC News)
Qatar withdraws from ceasefire talks betweenHamas andIsrael as mediator due to "a refusal to negotiate a deal in good faith" from Hamas and Israel.(CNN)(AP)(The Guardian)
More than 300 pro-Palestinian protesters are forcibly removed and 50 others are detained byDutch police for participating in a rally inAmsterdam,Netherlands, in violation of a ban on demonstrations that was implemented following the attacks onMaccabi Tel Aviv fans on Friday.(Reuters)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (seethis RFC andfurther discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meetsWP:ITNRD.
Internationally influential Protestant theologian who worked with her husband on critical editions of the Greek New Testament. There were no sources for the short bio when she died, but are there now. Still limited sourcing for the publications, but that should not be hard. I need to travel for a while. --Gerda Arendt (talk)10:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality of the article. Also, I don't think we should post a acting prime minister, if it was an official prime minister elected I think we should post.MAL MALDIVE (talk)15:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
soft oppose this is the 4thacting prime minister since Haiti collapsed. Maybe we should start omitting them, but there is an argument to make per ITN/R since this is a head of government.Scuba17:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed onWP: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 meetWP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Article needs to be updated, the results have yet to be added, but this is ITN/R when it's ready Scuba15:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mauritian General Elections always receive international attention in both French and English language media who always remind that it is Africa's only stable democracyVaroon2542 (talk)16:46, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Inconsequential ITN nomination, this doesn't appear to be a major headline on BBC, AP, CNN, etc. Additionally, it's unclear on how this will have any significant impact with the security theatre in this region of Pakistan. It's my understanding is that this group has been terrorizing this region for quite some time.Kcmastrpc (talk)17:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are short term impacts. Ideally we're looking for long-term impacts, and this doesn't seem to have moved the needle on the state of terrorism in the region.Masem (t)18:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Article is of high quality, and gives a reasonable good reason why he was considered a great figure in their field.Masem (t)15:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb being transformational is not sufficient to rise to a death blurb. it's unclear what his impact or legacy will be nor is his death being covered all that much internationally.Kcmastrpc (talk)18:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Article is generally well-cited, with the notable exception of the filmography section at the end. All of it is pretty easily verifiable from google searching. However, in many cases even the target articles do not have a proper citation or even a mention re: Rachins appearance.FlipandFlopped ツ19:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and suggest close STALE. Death was reported on 11/2 (over a week ago). Latest nominations right now are dated for 11/4. Suggesting close since this is stale. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)14:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support She was playingPeggy Woolley onThe Archers before I was born and before the late Queen came to the throne. And she was still playing the part at the age of 103. Just posting her name is quite inadequate to convey the nature of her legendary feat. Just why is it so hard to post a few words or a picture to explain this to our readers?Andrew🐉(talk)18:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure many outside the UK will know who The Archers were, and even then it only applies to those who listen to Radio 4 or grew up with it. I think you could make a case of reforming RD altogether, but this would merit a much wider discussion.Abcmaxx (talk)18:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support notability butstrong oppose blurb and altblurb1 firstly this is Europe, so why use the term soccer, secondly we are an encyclopedia we should be specific, and thirdly, these aren't random Israelis being attacked they are Maccabi fans who are politically right-wing and one the most supported clubs in Israel, which brings a whole new dimension. Also Ajax's fanbase whom they played against also is somewhat known to have pro-Israeli sympathies, so Iadded altblurb2 which omits Ajax from the blurb as there is no indication their fans were involved.Abcmaxx (talk)12:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, barring any significant deaths, this is part of what's in the ongoing topics related to the Israeli conflicts. --Masem (t)12:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait @Masem I tend to agree with Abc here,WP:MINIMUMDEATHS seems like a relevant essay. However, I'm leaning towards oppose at the moment because it's still unclear if this is going to have any long-term ramifications. For example, if Israel decides to incur on Dutch sovereign soil with her military forces as a result, this would certainly seem blurb worthy.Kcmastrpc (talk)13:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the scale and level of violence and reaction is much larger than usual though, especially given this was a relatively high-profile football match tooAbcmaxx (talk)18:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree here, it has had official responses from various politicians, so it has caused a diplomatic incident. Such events are rarely one-sided given an organised and politicised group of football fans were involved. Also the pogrom redirect looks to be heavilyWP:LOADED andWP:POV I think this should be deleted. I have addedaltblurb3in order to give a neutral balance.Abcmaxx (talk)14:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Everything gets political responses nowadays, the way we write event articles, which is a problem. Reactions really should be focused on actual involvement and steps, and not just stern words or statements of thoughts and prayers, but event articles tend to attract and grow those like kudzu. There's a lot of weight in claiming these reactions are significant that is in the CRYSTAL territory as well. — Masem (t)14:58, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but this is making global headlines; I'm not sure what other involvement you can reasonably expect other than mass arrests and government intervention to bring their citizens home, which is what happened here.Abcmaxx (talk)18:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tons of events get global headlines, but WP is not a newspaper and ITN is not a newsticker. And if that's the extent the actions that result from this event, that's also pushing it towards being a footnote within the larger context of the Israeli conflicts. — Masem (t)19:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right but you can't set such a high threshold that only elections and tragic events with x amount deaths get posted, we are already getting to a point where it's becoming near impossible to post anything else.Abcmaxx (talk)11:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose given the earlier disruptions by Israeli fans attacking people in Amsterdam aren’t mentioned idk how anybody could think this is a NPOV. Also oppose on notability.nableezy -15:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, oppose alt blurbs 1-3 on NPOV concerns The level of coverage this is receiving puts this on a similar notability footing to the US College Protests, but Europe's version. I supported posting the protests and support this too. However, I am sympathetic to the NPOV concerns. Looking objectively at the reporting, there is evidence that at least some Maccabi fans were targeting or vandalizing houses and businesses with the Palestinian flag and that Arabs in the area (including a taxi driver) were assaulted prior to the game starting. Omitting this from alt blurbs 1-2 is a NPOV concern. On the other hand, there is obvious video footage that later in the night (after the game had ended), coordinated violence on a much larger scale was directed at the Maccabi fans leaving the stadium; alt blurb 3 leaves the reader with the oversimplified impression that the Maccabi fans "clashed" (i.e. caused violence) with locals. The net result of this is that Isupport alt blurb 4 (which I have added).FlipandFlopped ツ19:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose clashes between opposing football fans in Europe is very commonplace. This is just given more attention due to the current Middle East situation. No deaths, or major number of injuries. If posted, alt3 is the most neutral blurb to use. To me, "clashes" implies violence / fighting on both sides with no indication of who started in.Natg 19 (talk)19:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurbs 3 and 4; oppose the others. What makes this particular Hooliganism noteworthy is that it's explicitly ethnic violence: Israeli fans engaging in anti-Arab demonstrations in the Netherlands of all places, and residents responding with violence. Also, a lot more than 10 were injured, as of current reporting.Ivanvector (Talk/Edits)20:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - football hooliganism +WP:POV; all of these blurbs portray the israelites as victims here without showing what they did for this to happen. The background section in the artile is literally bigger than the section on the attackAbo Yemen✉05:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Describing an incident of football hooliganism as the "beginning of a pogrom there" in the Netherlands is completely false and ridiculous. Football hooliganism is not uncommon in Europe. The article itself states that "Maccabi Tel Aviv fans had been filmed beforehand burning a Palestinian flag, chanting anti-Arab slurs and not observing the moment of silence for victims of 2024 Spanish floods." The incident was not an "attack" - the article has serious NPOV issues.AusLondonder (talk)14:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is very clearly NOT just football hooliganism, and none of the major media are presenting it as thus. Even the pro-Palestian Guardian is calling it "attacks on Israeli football fans"(The Guardian). The blatant POV of some of the commentators here, and their both-sides-ism, is despicable and should be discarded.Khuft (talk)17:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only in the headline. The source you are citing to argue against "despicable both-sides-ism" goes on to repeatedly describe "incidents on both sides" and "fights on both sides" with both anti-Arab racism and antisemitism being causes of the fighting. Vanilla Wizard💙19:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you even read the article? No-one is denying there were incidents started by the Maccabi fans, but the incidents thereafter targeting Maccabi fans were way more significant and shocking. The article quotes the mayor of Amsterdam, for instance, as follows:“Men on scooters crisscrossed the city looking for Israeli football fans. It was a hit and run. I can easily understand that this brings back memories of pogroms,” Halsema said. “Our city has been deeply damaged. Jewish culture has been deeply threatened. This is an outburst of antisemitism that I hope to never see again.” It's not me saying this - it's the actual mayor of the city where this happened.Khuft (talk)20:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did see that the politician placed the blame squarely on one side without acknowledging the other. The police, the source you posted, and reliable sources more generally, acknowledged that incidents and fights occurred on both sides. This discussion about how the story should be framed is better suited for the talk page (where such a discussion is already happening), it's not going to be blurbed. Vanilla Wizard💙23:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on notability as this doesn't even make the list of the most significant events that could be described as spillovers of the Israel-Palestine conflict,strong oppose every proposed blurb except alt4 as terribly misleading. Alt3 is at least not POV, but it's not a very informative description of the event. Seems like we're past the point ofWP:SNOW anyways. Vanilla Wizard💙19:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't say that I like how his books are referenced, but that would not stop me from posting this. The two citation needed tags that I've placed are of bigger concern.Schwede6602:09, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose on quality Some cn tags and Books section needs some sources.Oppose blurb not significant enough to warrant blurb. I mean, Colin Powell didn't get blurbed for Pete's sake. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)07:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb, no indication of any impact or legacy beyond simply being connected to the Falklands war.Support RD, I tagged one bit of trivia in the death section (re surviving members of the Thatcher cabinet) but that's not a showstopper. --Masem (t)12:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, Oppose Blurb article looks good, but being minister of defense during a war 40 years ago doesn't make you notable enough for a blurb.Scuba21:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb - The article is of sufficient quality to meet RD requirements, but given his role as a former Defence Secretary rather than a head of state or high-impact contemporary figure, a blurb feels unwarranted. His contributions do not reach the level of widespread historical impact typically needed for a standalone blurb.Anopisthograph (talk)22:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb Not a figure of sufficient notability or impact to warrant a blurb. Keep in mind that the nominator here opposed the recent blurbing of a national constitutional referendum on European Union membership.AusLondonder (talk)14:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:ITN candidate German soprano who excelled in operetta, musical, film and entertaining music, especially one beloved operetta film. The article just survived a deletion suggestion, so became well sourced. Her death is reported only on her personal website, but what else can we expect about a woman who - if we believe the German Wikipedia - suffered a stroke 5 years ago and since lived in Italy with her son, where she died (on 30 October, but the first trace appeared here on 7 November) and was buried. --Gerda Arendt (talk)14:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:ITN candidateFighter in the French Resistance during World War II, writing poems at school and in prison where tortured and to be executed by the Nazis, after World War II encouraged to write by Eluard and portrayed by Picasso, then as war correspondent in Algeria and Vietnam, in a relationship withNguyễn Đình Thi, distant for most of the long time. - Several of the article's references were no longer there, but could be replaced. More detail is in the sources, such as an early short marriage and a child that died young. --Gerda Arendt (talk)21:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for the hurricane article andOppose for the blackout Hurricane article needs to be updated with information on deaths. Blackout article contains only one sentence related to the hurricane. Also, I feel that the blurb should mention impacts across other countries as well and not only about Cuba.TNM101 (chat)16:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait per TNM101. There are fatalities so that should be the focus, the Cuba grid going down again is less significant overall.Masem (t)17:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article looks good, hurricane made landfall, there have been fatalities. It's impossible to separate out the blackout so that should also be tagged.Scuba21:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article is comprehensive and well-updated. Given the significant fatalities and the large-scale power outages across multiple countries, this event meets ITN criteria for prominence.Anopisthograph (talk)01:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose way too much unsourced content, and also for a career of 18 years, there should be more text. Also date of death is not well sourced (it was announced on 6 November, but source doesn't say that is date of death).Joseph2302 (talk)11:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have made2024 German government crisis. Currently it is not ready to be a targetted article, and perhaps it should be merged intoScholz cabinet. Either way, I support in principle posting this. While we do not normally post government collapses, the present situation is very much unprecedented in Germany, and is receiving significant media coverage (if perhaps overshadowed by the US election).Gust Justice (talk)21:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This seems the right approach. Not every separate event needs it's own article since you have to reestablish a lot of context for such cases. It might grow large enough into one in the future but in the immediate it should be merged (but still nominatable) — Masem (t)22:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm about to update the article. I don't think it should be merged because the impact will probably extend beyond the coalition. Perhaps we can talk about a merge in the future.Killarnee (talk)05:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should be careful on such CRYSTAL claims, hence why it is better to keep these types of news events in context of a larger article. Should it truly be significant, establishing its own context, then a sepearate article can be made.Masem (t)17:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This will have a significant impact for the nation and globally. This event has a long history, with discontent since the last election and enormous resulting gains for radical parties. Waiting until the next (snap) election makes no sense, the vote of confidence must come first, and theoretically it could be that there is no snap election at all. But even if there were, the snap election would probably not be until March, which would be more than just a little wait and see what happens.Killarnee (talk)05:13, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt1 Seems notable enough for a blurb and agree that "Traffic Light Coalition" is meaningless for anyone who doesn't follow the German Reichstag closely.Kcmastrpc (talk)14:38, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Major political development in major democracy, in the news globally. Prefer altblurb as wording seems better. Also support the creation of the seperate article on the government crisis which could be linked if appropriate.AusLondonder (talk)14:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
is the announcement of asking for a confidence-vote in January 25 enough for ITN? the news besides this is, that our government doesnt have a majority anymore, because one of the three parties ruling left the federal government. User Kiril Simeonovski explained that pretty well (see a few comments below).LennBr (talk)03:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, leaning towardsalt blurb. Both are good, but I can't imagine that most people will understand what the traffic light coalition is. "The currently ruling coalition" is much better when it comes to general understanding. — BerryForPerpetuity(talk)17:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds more reasonable - though I'm not convinced that it's ITN. To many "traffic-light coalition" sounds more like a transportation issue, than politics.Nfitz (talk)18:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until the vote of no confidence takes place on 15 January 2025 (or earlier). Has anyone here read what really happened or you're guided by the delusive blurbs? From what I read in theGerman article, chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) announced that he had submitted the dismissal of finance minister Christian Lindner (FDP) to president Frank-Walter Steinmeier due to unbridgeable differences within the government coalition and that a vote of no confidence of his government will be held on 15 January 2025. In response to this, justice minister Marco Buschmann and education minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger from FDP announced their resignations, whereas transport minister Volker Wissing left FDP and stayed in the government. As a result, the cabinet was restructured so that state secretary Jörg Kukies (SDP) was appointed new finance minister, Volker Wissing additionally took over the Ministry of Justice and agriculture minister Cem Özdemir (The Greens) additionally took over the Ministry of Education and Research. The government coalition—now composed of SPD and The Greens—will serve as a minority government over the next two months. For now, this is just a restructuring of the cabinet, and its collapse is dependent on the vote of no confidence. It's highly likely that no confidence will be voted and the parliamentary election next year will be scheduled earlier, but the right time to post this is when that actually happens.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)19:49, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I would wait for the vote of no confidence to take place before blurbing. This is when the government would officially collapse. For now, it is officially just a change in the government members...Tradediatalk23:49, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support any of the blurbs look good. Government collapse is a major event, especially for the world's third largest economy.Scuba21:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Add altblurb3 and propose change nominated article I fixed grammar error and ensure conciseness, also could we re-target to the article "2024 German government crisis" as it seems got expanded enough.Haers6120 (talk)07:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
post-post oppose: Just post a new ITN entry after the snap election. Coalition collapse is a routine process and an inherent part of democracy. It may not have happened in while in Germany, but so what? All I'm reading here is: "A democratic government exercises a common and conventional internal procedure as part of politics in a democratic government." I struggle to see how this is ITN worthy.spintheer (talk)15:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Was coming to nominate this, but will add while his death was on Oct 28, like many Japanese ppl, the death was only announced today, giving time for privacy and mourning by family and friends. --Masem (t)04:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ongoing A blurb is likely to be posted sometime soon so we should start discussion so that we're ready. For example, is the article quality and structure satisfactory or are there specific issues requiring attention? As many readers will already be looking for the article (over half a million yesterday), a link in Ongoing would be helpful.
Note that the article is already huge with over 10,000 words of prose and over 500 citations. Our focus should be on the lead and infobox as the main summaries. They could use a timetable with key dates for the polling and results as it currently just says that the inauguration is next year. Someone above says that we get the results in 36 hours. Is that right?
Oppose, the blurbs are extremely vague and doesn't mean anything. Save the ITN nomination for when the results are in. Comment withdrawn due to update.31.44.224.222 (talk)10:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As of this comment, the article needs updating including tense modifications and there is an NPOV tag which I suspect is in reference to the lead. -Ad Orientem (talk)06:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support And with the fact twice-President Trump is now a foregone conclusion, I now support posting. As for the Senate thing, might it be prudent to wait to see if we can add the House to it as well?The C of E God Save the King! (talk)08:03, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Maybe we should mention Trump winning the popular vote, a feat the Republicans haven't achieved since 2004 and definitely a notable factor as it means a majority of Americans have voted for Trump rather than just members of the electoral college.PrecariousWorlds (talk)12:11, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wikipedia's editors lean very heavily into the far left, but this is getting ridiculous. Fox has already called the election, it's obvious what the outcome will be, stop stalling there's no point in it5.44.170.181 (talk)07:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh im sorry I was born in the wrong country. I've thought supposed leftists were supposed to be anti-racist, but i guess that doesnt extend towards the wrong ethnicities
Obviously Trump has won, but I've just looked at CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and BBC - and none have called it. Fox doesn't even seem to be airing election coverage.Nfitz (talk)07:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, I'm taking some liberties, but almost everyone has him at, what, 266, with Nebraska and Alaska among the outstanding. It's almost certain. We can wait, fair. But I doubt anything changes.DarkSide830 (talk)07:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously - but don't say that NBC and CNN have called it, when they haven't. I still can't see Fox - it's just commercials forever.Nfitz (talk)07:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Most conservative (not in the right-wing sense) projections have placed Trump 3-4 votes away from securing a re-election. Harris would need to win every uncalled state despite most of them projecting a Trump victory (and includes Alaska which hasn't voted for a Democrat in 60 years). I'd rather take our chances with a "Dewey Defeats Truman" moment at this point.PolarManne (talk)07:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support all reliable sources have called PA and GA. It's only a formality before they call Alaska - which would give Trump a win. I expect the call will go out before this ITN is posted.Juxlos (talk)07:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moral support – The2024 United States presidential election article hasn't been updated to project a Trump win due to theRfC discussion requiring unanimous projections from an assortment of sources, which other than AP are arguably arbitrarily limited to traditional television news networks. ITN is not going to say anything which the article does not say, so we would have to follow the RfC consensus. But I trustDecision Desk HQ, and they have called the race for Trump, so it's a matter of time before the sources we require for race calls call the race for Trump. Here's to another 4 years of chaos, I'm afraid.feminist🩸 (talk)08:37, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's the standard for the article. This is in the news. And the headline on BBC is that "Donald Trump declares victory". Maybe that should be our headline too.Nfitz (talk)Nfitz (talk)09:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for similar reasons outlined byfeminist🩸 above - the article has not been updated to show who the winner is. For everyone above who has voted support - have you actually read the article before voicing your support?Chrisclear (talk)08:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, I get it, but it's not like we've never posted an election without full results in the article, and with how things get "called", technically an official result isn't coming until after the calls.DarkSide830 (talk)09:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Needs work Revisiting this now we're allowed to discuss it again, I just read through the current lead of the nominated article. This mainly covers Biden and Trump but has very little about Harris and doesn't even mention third party candidates like Kennedy. It should have more about the campaign events like the debates and polling swings and more about the actual voting results. The general history of Biden and Trump and their flaws is less directly relevant and needs trimming to make space for better election coverage.
But now I see that this work isn't going to get done in a timely fashion because the article is fully protected and so editing will slow to a crawl. This seems to be a major quality issue. ITN is supposed to "emphasize Wikipedia as a dynamic resource" and this locking shows it to be otherwise.
I was wondering whetherDonald Trump might be the bold article in the blurb, to work around the locking. But that article needs work too. Its lead only seems to have one sentence about this election campaign and its result and so badly needs updating too.
Comment - alternative blurb that we can post now, and does appear to be the lead story on non-American news agencies. "Donald Trump Declared Victory in USA 2024 election".Nfitz (talk)09:03, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Usually, I would support posting election results right after the election, but I actually think it would be better towait until Inauguration Day to post something like this. I will guarantee you that this will be nominated on January 20, so I think from now on, it's better to wait until inauguration day right when the president is sworn in.Interstellarity (talk)10:27, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready It's close, but there's a few areas where citations are needed. I'm not sure how ITN will rate the guy who chaired a genocide commission, arguably the most important commission in recent Canadian history.NorthernFalcon (talk)17:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sinclair was a very notable individual for his work and life in an often under-reported and lesser known part of Canadian society: Indigenous issues, both contemporary and historical. For the very reason that his name is not familiar to many, but is lauded by many organizations in his passing with statements, is exactly why it’s fitting for his passing to be nominated for ITN. That being said, the article had some issues at the beginning but with some TLC by a few contributors it's getting better cited claims and structure. —f3ndot(TALK) (EMAIL)13:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article is in good shape, obviously not anywhere near Feature quality, but certainly close to a good article. Murray Sinclair is probably the most significant Canadian to die this year. —Abebenjoe (talk)19:10, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We're back to NOTNEWS territory problems again. Most road traffic accidents are not going to have any long tail of notability, and probably best to include on one of several lists we have that document such accidents. --Masem (t)13:38, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Without commenting on the ITN-worthiness of the item, I shall point out that the article is a stub, and we do not post stubs.Schwede6623:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point being made (not that I necessarily agree) is that it asserts, without evidence, that it was not a driver suicide, sabotage, etc.Bremps...00:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Accident implies that there was no precipitating human factor or fault resulting in the crash which is not for us to determine. Crash is simply the more accurate terminology and does not prematurely absolve anyone of fault.Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk)00:59, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Dreameditsbrooklyn's notion. I accept, however, that the use of "accident" is so common and engrained that it's hard to argue this point.Schwede6603:26, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Masem. Though I do remember including a few of these in ITN in the past (must have been during slower news cycles). At that time the rationale was the number of deaths is significant and thereby fits notability criteria for ITN. But I do thinkWP:NOTNEWS applies here more stronglySchwinnspeed (talk)13:05, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality Article needs some ref work done. Seeing how he's won nearly 30 Grammys, had a major impact on the music industry that propelled the careers of several influential singers/musicians, I could see an argument for a blurb. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)08:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We should never be relying on fame or household name for any aspect. That is feeding the systematic bias. We should assume readers on the front page do not know who these people are. — Masem (t)13:03, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose now on quality for any posting. Now, here's a person I'd think be worthy of a blurb, but at this pointOppose blurb because the article currently lacks the type of clear summary of why he's a legacy in the music business, though that likely can be fixed to improve it. We need to avoid hand-waving claims of importance and make sure the article has established that through sourcing. Its just not doing that right now, which is part of the quality issue as well. --Masem (t)13:01, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since ITN is fornews events, a death should only be blurbed if thedeath itself is a news event; a serving politician dying is notable in and of itself because it has repercussions for the gov't in question. Moreover, I don't know where you're from but I'd never heard of him. Nelson Mandela he wasnotThis post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk)08:51, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ITN is not for news events. It is to feature quality articles that are in the news. If you want news events, read Wikinews. — Masem (t)12:59, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Istrongly disagree on Quincy Jones being a household name, while I agree he's a major figure in the recording industry, he's far from a household name, such as how youraverage human anywhere in the world is far more likely to know who Musk or Zuckerberg is. I hadn't even heard of him before his death.31.44.224.222 (talk)09:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb as a highly relevant person in his field. However, the article does not seem to be ready. Hopefully it'll get fixed soon. RD is fine anyway.Bedivere (talk)03:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I "fixed" the remaining dead link, instead tagging it as unreliable for using TV.com (WP:RSP). Protection isn't the culprit, its the actions of certain unregistered users that compelled it.Registration has its benefits. —Bagumba (talk)04:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb on notability - Famous in the West in the 1960s, even played in communist Yugoslavia, in addition to facts pointed out above. I'd say a cut above OLDMANDIES or even SERVINGPOLDIES.DaßWölf18:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD - This debate on RD/blurb will prevent Jones from appearing entirely on ITN. Let's get the RD up there before it goes stale, which would be absurd. --Varavour (talk)09:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD butOppose on quality Article has multiple cn tags. Filmography section has a tag. That needs to be addressed before it is posted.TNM101 (chat)10:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Obviously a major story, and ITNR. As an aside, the BBC needs to get a less compromised Chisinau correspondent; they're still reporting Stoianoglo is ahead while other sources are saying Sandu has won; they did the equivalent with the referendum too.GenevieveDEon (talk)21:27, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They've flipped now. But still, if I had a nickel for every time this year the BBC wrongly called a Moldovan national poll for the pro-Russian choice, I'd have at least two nickels.GenevieveDEon (talk)21:42, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support thus concludes the story of these elections and referendum, that international media have presented as a choice between the West and Russia (hence the relevance of this result).SuperΨDro21:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ITN/R, and besides some results still needing to trickle in the article looks good. Amazing that Moldova was able to just power through Russian interference.Scuba22:22, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This isn't a new discovery; it's a confirmation of something already well-known. Our own articleOrders of magnitude (numbers) has the probability that a monkey will type the works of Shakespeare starting at any given input as the very smallest number it mentions, at approximatelyTemplate:10^. The reciprocal of that number is unimaginably greater than theage of the universe measured inPlanck time units. Theinfinite monkey theorem was formulated to illustrate a point aboutinfinity, so it shouldn't be a surprise that even very large finite quantities encountered in reality are insufficient. This is largely an exercise in the innumeracy of science journalists.GenevieveDEon (talk)11:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose per above. Anyone could have calculated this, myself included,given enough time (or not, given the results of this calculation). It isn't a new element of math which we'll reference for years to come, it's just putting to bed an old figure of speech. Sensationalism at its finest.Departure– (talk)13:10, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Fun story, but as others said I feel like this thought experiment has already been explored, there wouldn't be enough time before thermodynamic stasis in the universe for a monkey to randomly type out Shakespeare. Some interesting conclusions but this is more for DYK than ITN.PrecariousWorlds (talk)14:05, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this study basically remove the "infinite" aspect of the thought experiment? That to me seems to undermine its relevance to the topic.DarkSide830 (talk)16:00, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does. (There's also a degree of subtlety in the original theorem, around the termalmost certain, which is of interest.) This research is basically saying that it really does have to be infinite, or at least completely out of scale with the entire known universe, for the result to apply. But as I noted in my original !vote, we knew that, and already had it documented here on Wikipedia.GenevieveDEon (talk)16:06, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose This is a string of unrelated weather events, though reasonable to cover as a single article, but it is not like this is one long flood that is affecting more and more people daily. We posted the Spain floods, but there's no indication that system is continuing to create floods elshewer. --Masem (t)16:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per above. The European floods are only related insofar as they are all a result of climate change; they are not a singular ongoing event receiving frequent updates. --MtPenguinMonster (talk)04:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support New head of government. I'd argue this is ITN/R. Forgot Starmer was head of government now.Oppose for now, we didn't post Starmer coming to power before Labour's majority that made him PM (April 2020, didn't even get nominated), even when he was head of opposition, so I'd argue that when the same happens to the Conservative party it isn't any more notable.Departure– (talk)15:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting that it wasn't nominated at all. I reckon this is a large change nonetheless though, and notable enough to be ITN. It feels like ITN sometimes misses some pretty important nominations. Would've been great if it was nominated back then so we could've gotten opinions on headlines like this, but I'm nominating it to see what the people here at ITN think.TwistedAxe[contact]15:23, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For a more recent opinion,Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/January 2023#January 3 had the2022 US midterms concluding withHakeem Jeffries becoming House minority leader, again a change of leadership of the second largest party in one of the world's most important institutions. That itself was not nominated (only the election as a whole was), and despite Jeffries being the first African American US house party leader (comparable to Badenoch being the first Black woman leader of a major UK party), Jeffries is only mentioned in a single reply in that entire thread. A new minority leader in a democracy, failing being a very major first larger than what Jeffries and Badenoch are, isn't an item for ITN.Departure– (talk)15:31, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In this case though, I don't think the comparison is that equal. To be the minority leader of the House of Representatives isn't the equivalent of being the party leader or the candidate for president (or prime minister if you will). A more appropriate comparison would be if Kamala Harris was replaced with another candidate instead. Do you not think that would be appropriate for ITN in that case?TwistedAxe[contact]15:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was an ITN discussion when Kamala replaced Biden for the presidential nominee back in August and that went nowhere. Only Biden's withdrawl was posted, and that was notable because he had secured enough delegates to be the next nominee. The differences between the US and UK political systems make this a tough comparison.Departure– (talk)15:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like the withdrawal was posted because it was a notable event, yes, but also because it was kind of obvious and covered his replacement by Harris. It would be redundant to post 2 separate ITN noms that more or less cover the same subject.TwistedAxe[contact]16:05, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose How many party leaders have the conservative party had for the last several years? But seriously, if there would be a logic to this we would have to make an ITN for every opposition leader that is replaced anywhere in a remotely democratic system. It doesn't make sense to me.Yakikaki (talk)16:04, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why does it matter if the Conservative party has had alot of party leaders the past few years? And to answer the second statement, do you really not think the UK is a major democratic nation? I'd argue as a non-Brit myself that the UK exerts a massive amount of influence over other countries in the region and globally. Obviously the leadership of a country like that will also affect other countries?TwistedAxe[contact]16:07, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you misunderstand Yakikaki's comment. They are not saying that the UK is not democratic.Template:Tq means that they do not want to make a precedent to have an ITN entry for party leader changes for any country that has a "democratic" governmental system (this could in theory refer to any country that has elections, whether rigged or fair).Natg 19 (talk)18:28, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Leader change of a political party is not suffifciently significant and I imagine would not be nominated for any other country. – Muboshgu (talk)16:06, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support My general philosophy is, "if it's an interesting occurrence that is in the news and getting widespread coverage, then post it". This rings true here. To put it bluntly, Badenoch becoming leader is more newsworthy than Starmer becoming leader because she is the first Black person to lead a major British political party.FlipandFlopped ツ17:12, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This is an internal party matter. Sunak is not head of government any more, and Badenoch may well never be. We have alot of actual national elections currently nominated or coming up, and this just isn't in the same league.GenevieveDEon (talk)17:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Yakikaki, right now Badenoch's highest office is simply the leader of the opposition. We don't tend to remark much on party leadership changes in non-ruling parties.Ornithoptera (talk)17:21, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose good faith nom per above. While undoubtedly a significant event in UK politics, AFAIK we have never posted the election of an opposition leader. -Ad Orientem (talk)17:43, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This seems like a very one country specific story. I'm not aware of any precedent for posting non-government political party leadership changes. Quite afew people here even opposed posting a change in head of government of France.AusLondonder (talk)18:45, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Another one of those stories we would never nominate if it hadn't happened in an English-speaking country. We could find equal coverage in those countries when Spain, Germany, Italy etc. elect a new opposition leader, just it would be niche news in the Anglosphere. Curiously, I looked up whether Jeremy Corbyn was nominated in 2015 (a much bigger internal ideological shift) and it was just as opposed for the same reason.Unknown Temptation (talk)19:05, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is not a change of head of state or government, or involving an incumbent. This is just an internal party leadership change.
Strong oppose the article does not demonstrate the subject's notability. Regardless of whether or not the ITN rule of "all RDs are notable" is in effect I'd still oppose on quality; demonstrating notability is a pretty big part of the 'quality' in posted RD articles that we do have a say in.This village pump discussion stated that social media followers aren't used to justify notability alone, and beyond that the squirrel's only claim to fame is being euthanized which is by no means unusual. If and when the article gets more significant coverage, let me know and I'll change my vote, but this article was created just now and the headlinesmight have some sensationalism in their motives.Departure– (talk)13:15, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article was created today (so we can question notability here), and ignoring the last few days of news burst coverage, I'm not finding much to demonstrate that there was notability to start with. A few articles here and there but not from very strong sources. --Masem (t)13:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Removing my Oppose since the article was kept and we have that ITNRD practice. But consider this a non support abstain, as I think this whole situation is the epidemic problem with editors failing to follow NOTNEWS and being able to distinguish what is appropriate for an encyclopedia and what is sensalist news content.Masem (t)15:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an argument for a deletion discussion on the target page. Note that the opening of such a discussionwould keep this away from RD.Departure– (talk)13:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an example of how a burst of news is not equivalent to notability perWP:N andWP:NEVENTS. Unless there was significant coverage before the death, then this is not a notable topic for WP.Masem (t)15:13, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, please reconsider, as the squirrel is getting international coverage now mainly because it has been an internet star for years. A notable topic, and worthy of notice in RD. Thanks.Randy Kryn (talk)22:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How much significant coverage is there of the pre-death facets? Yes, was famous on TikTok but the articles that I am seeing do not going much more beyond that. That's not notable for our purposes. — Masem (t)00:09, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Subject is not notable, story is not headline news, one of the main news references given is an admitted hoax, and the article is at AfD.GenevieveDEon (talk)22:54, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the deaths are not the crux of the story. The government signing a search warrant to raid the homes of people with a non rabid squirrel to kill it based off one random internet complaint is the story. How do all of you super editors not get that?64.229.210.77 (talk)14:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are we looking at the same AfD? It should be closed per Snow, as there is no chance of deletion with the sources which have been added. You opened it after saying above "Note that the opening of such a discussionwould keep this away from RD.", so the argument could easily be made that you opened the AfD mainly to keep the topic away from RD, which is why a snow close would at least bring the topic back here for a timely decision and not stop it via the AfD route. But, importantly, you also said that if you saw more significant coverage you would change your vote, and much coverage has been added since, so, who knows?Randy Kryn (talk)03:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did start the AfD to keep it from RD, I will admit that here. I wouldn't have started the AfD had I not, in good faith, believed the subject was not notable enough for a Wikipedia article, with reasons and policy to back it up. Many of the votes were allkeep but they all ignored that the main point was against sensationalism which a few others, includingTemplate:Noping, anadministrator, have supported. "Significant coverage" in my eyes means that the coverage clearly demonstrates why the subject is notable, which I have yet to see. What I do see is a lot of articles stating the same, non-notable facts again. Also, this reply appears to me to be moreso an attempt at catching me in afallacy than it is proving the point that the RD should be posted, and I'd advise against that.Comment on content, not contributors.Departure– (talk)03:25, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's no "catching" involved, just hoping the AfD closes soon so that this discussion has at least a chance at passing or failing without the roadblock (does that happen often here?, the AfD-defense). The only fallacy would be if you come to the point of seeing enough significant coverage and didn't change your vote.Randy Kryn (talk)03:35, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD any "person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post", the article, while nominated for deletion, will obviously be kept based on the existing consensus. Article is good quality and this is a relatively high-profiles scandal.Neutral on blurb at this point, but probably would've supported one had it been proposed closer to the event.–DMartin19:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A government agnecy went to a private citizens house, seized his pets and killed them because of a complaint to a government agency from a person who doesn't even live there and you're confused as to why people are upset about government overstepping?
Because american government oversight is why the story is notable. So yes, an editor not being american or living in america would struggle to understand why americans are so up in arms about this. It is not about the squirrel, it is about what the squirrel represents. How do you continue to not understand this?64.229.210.77 (talk)16:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The argument needs to be made in sufficiently objective terms that a non-American can understand it. We never restrict participation in these debates on the basis of the location or nationality of the participants, and we're not about to start for the sake of a squirrel. Other places have governments, people in other countries have pets, and other nations' and regions' government agencies have, and abuse, all kinds of powers including with regard to pets and livestock. I am fully capable of considering those situations in places other than my own. There's nothing magical about America; it just happens to be where this case occurred.GenevieveDEon (talk)16:59, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that was the case, why are there articles about animals like Harambe, only made famous by their death at the hands of the government?
You will never be able to justify deleting entries that users of Wikipedia want. You should learn what the word editor means because it doesn't mean gatekeeper.64.229.210.77 (talk)17:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not American; but I am British, and my instinct outside the US context is to use 'state' to mean 'nationally-run', which is the usual sense here in the UK. I was using 'local' as a contrast to 'national' or 'federal'. And none of that has any bearing on the fact that the political rhetoric here and elsewhere about this case is absurdly hyperbolic. Let's see people get this worked up about, say, maternal mortality in the US.GenevieveDEon (talk)14:27, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty sure family values are a main talking point in the US right now. Again, if you lived in the USA, you'd know this. I have a feeling the reason you want this deleted is much more political than you will admit.64.229.210.77 (talk)16:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please play the ball and not the man. Your feelings about my motives are irrelevant. The article itself doesn't say anything about the political overtones of the case. In fact, if a reliable source can be found which adds that detail to the article, I think it would go a lot further to demonstrating notability. If that were done, then this entire discussion would be moot, because it would meet the RD criteria automatically. But I'm also not sure what squirrels and raccoons have to do with family values. That seems to be somewhat out of left field.GenevieveDEon (talk)17:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree that Andrew's approach to ITN seems to be deliberately disruptive. Heopposed posting a blurb for a national referendum on EU membership in Moldova, but supports a blurb for the death of a previously non-notable squirrel? Could anyone show a better example of systemic Anglosphere bias?AusLondonder (talk)03:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've already explained that I don't wish any harm upon your beloved fur babies, so I'm sorry you feel that way. My intention was to invoke the humanizing aspect of this story.Kcmastrpc (talk)14:00, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD The culling by the authorities was correct. The squirrel bit a person, so the test for rabies was necessary. Should be mentioned in the article.Grimes2 (talk)14:31, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the person was not bit, they were wearing gloves that squirrels cannot bite through. This is why the article is needed, correcting the misinformation.64.229.210.77 (talk)16:58, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No blurb is proposed in the nomination (and comments about a blurb just show the depth of commitment that this death is worth an RD), and what does 'located anywhere else' pertain to? Thanks.Randy Kryn (talk)14:48, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support This is one of the largest news events for the past couple of days, and has significant implications regarding government overreach, misallocation of government resources, and animal rights. --Jay.Jarosz (talk)15:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This just isn't true. The Spanish floods (and the subsequent heckling of the King), the Novi Sad roof collapse, and the Tory party leadership result (correctly rejected above), are all much bigger stories. This is a flash in the pan. This is someone's fifteen minutes of fame, no more and no less, and we're not obliged to participate in that circus.GenevieveDEon (talk)15:42, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be claiming that bymy standards, the death of a squirrel in New York is more important than the death of over a dozen people in Serbia. I can assure you that's not what I meant. You seem to be new here - as do several other participants in this discussion - so I suggest you familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's standards before you make absurd assertions about relevance. (The Spanish story is near the top of the CNN homepage right now, so your claim about US news cycles is also plainly false.)GenevieveDEon (talk)17:07, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"An individual human, animal or other biological organism that has recently died may have an entry in the recent deaths (RD) section if it has a biographical Wikipedia article that is not currently nominated for deletion or speedy deletion." Peanut's article is currently nominated for deletion.GenevieveDEon (talk)16:55, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for informing someone who has been here 17 years and is a regular on this page what the rule says. I'm pointing out that I don't believe there shouldbe an article, though it appears that most of the people at the AfD appear to believe that a few news stories are equivalent to notability...Black Kite (talk)19:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article was created yesterday, so we are at a stage that we have to evaluate its notability. We've had this problem a few times before where a human being, not yet shown notable, only got coverage due to a accidental death (like getting into a drunk driving accident). --Masem (t)16:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD - No idea why people are starting deletion discussions in ITN. Also the story around this poor squirrel's death is causing significant media coverage, so this article absolutely deserves to stay.PrecariousWorlds (talk)16:54, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reminder to everyone this is an RD nomination, not a blurb nomination. Any arguments that you would normally make for or against postingas a blurb are irrelevant. SeeWP:ITNRD. And no, the subject does not need to be human. The only requirements are that the subject has a Wikipedia page, and that the Wikipedia page is not in a miserable state. Disappointed that one of the oppose !voters admittedly only nominated the article for deletion to obstruct this RD nomination on the technicality that it cannot be posted to RD if it is currently nominated for deletion. Vanilla Wizard💙17:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because the article was created the same day as the nomination, so its notability can be fully raised as an issue. It implies something along the lines ofWP:BLP1E, which is not a reason for creation of a article, in addition to failing to show enduring coverage as required by WP:N and NEVENT.Masem (t)21:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD We have posted other animals of similar significance and stature before, I think we posted an RD for a duck or something like that a while ago if I'm not mistaken. The story of how the squirrel was taken away is also pretty tragic. This should 100% be posted to RD, but shouldn't get a blurb.Hungry403 (talk)18:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, the death ofKnut (polar bear) was blurbed. Also the first hatching of wildwhite storks in the UK in 600 years was blurbed as a significant birth (as opposed to the usual deaths). It seems likely that there have been other animal blurbs as we have several horse races in ITN/R.Andrew🐉(talk)00:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support The entire thing seems quite ridiculous, but the relative inanity of a topic is not a condition of its newsworthiness. Our job is not to create an ideal news ecosystem, but to reflect the reality of the extant news ecosystem, as imperfect as that might be. The article seems adequately sourced.Chetsford (talk)00:03, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly demonstrating the great seriousness of the issues he's addressing in the final days of the campaign. I'm very keen to see some analysis as to why this case is such acause celebre for the American right in particular.GenevieveDEon (talk)08:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as the RD standard is clearly met. I have struck my earlier oppose vote. (I still oppose a blurb, but I think it's clear there's no consensus for that anyway.)GenevieveDEon (talk)15:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prior to Trump's actual statement on the subject, there was a report of another statement falsely attributed to him. This found its way into the article (twice) and at the time of my earlier comment was a substantial part of the article text. That was the hoax I was referring to. The article has now greatly improved.GenevieveDEon (talk)15:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support and marking as Ready for RD Article quality being the only criteria, it is ready to go. I note that pretty much all of the opposes are either based on the now closed AfD orWP:IDONTLIKEIT. I thought about posting it myself, but as I commented at the AfD, I will let someone else do it. FTR IOppose Blurb. Subject does not pass the Mandela Thatcher Kissinger test and the incident itself, while garnering a great deal of coverage, is of minimal long term significance. -Ad Orientem (talk)16:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite rare for a squirrel to get rabies and there's never been a case of human transmission in the US. Seestats. The racoon was a more plausible risk.Andrew🐉(talk)10:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not orange tagged. The brief tag was only about the form of execution that was used, which has no outcome on whether Peanut is dead or not.Nfitz (talk)17:36, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks better now. There is still room for expansion but there is enough important information for ITN. Another note: some opposition parties have called for resignation of officials and Milorad Dodik (Bosnia and Herzegovina) also expressed condolences to the families and for some reason also to Vučić, so this could be added if I don't do it tomorrow.Vacant0(talk •contribs)18:58, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose on quality at the moment; everything's sourced but it isn't the length of an ideal ITN entry.Support on notability, as this is about as notable as archaeological discoveries get, in terms of things to be posted to ITN, as far as I'm concerned.Departure– (talk)17:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support on quality,support on notability. Article is a much better length and well sourced, and the discovery itself is notable.Altblurb 2 proposed - Yucatan, Maya and Campeche all imply Mexico, so the country probably doesn't need to be specified, and also the name Valeriana is an invented term not used by the Mayans themselves.Departure– (talk)14:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment only to note this is backed by a peer-review journal article, which is typically a requirement for posting anything from the sciences. --Masem (t)18:06, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, this is one of these cool science stories that should be featured. Perhaps modify the blurb to reflect the fact that Valeriana is a contemporary name and not the original name of the city (since some more known places actually have original names known). --Tone19:44, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality I'm not against posting this on its merits, but that's not really a quality article. For one, the peer-reviewed work is published as CC-BY-4.0, meaning we could be adding figures from the paper and more. Further, the news stories on this go into more detail about how this was more "by accident" and by a doctorial student rather than a seasoned professor. The article doesn't get into those parts of the coverage. --Masem (t)20:59, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability,Oppose on quality. Definitely an ITN-worthy event, considering the significance of this discovery and news coverage. However, the article is quite short and needs to be expanded.ArkHyena (it/its)22:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've put in some work to try to improve the quality of the article to at least cover the main points. It is quite fresh news and no actual field work has been done there yet, so one may struggle to expand it very much further at this point without going into very detailed points taken from the original research report.Yakikaki (talk)13:13, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note for the reviewing admin: The city was not known asValeriana while it was inhabited: from the articleValeriana (Maya city):Valeriana is the name given to the ruins of an ancient Maya city in the Mexican state of Campeche... / ...the site was named after an adjacent freshwater lagoon of the same name. Cheers!Departure– (talk)14:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its the current working name until the site can be more thoroughly investigated. Until the more proper name is learned and published, it is completley appropriate to use Valeriana as the name. — Masem (t)14:55, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just feel it's an important distinction to make. The site is Valeriana, and it contains a large city of an unknown name, that has informally become known as Valeriana. I'd just prefer if the blurb didn't imply that it was always called that (specifically the original blurb).Departure– (talk)15:00, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article might still need a few minor adjustments, but I agree this is a huge turning point in the history of the country.Oltrepier (talk)12:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support good length and nicely referenced, the only possible grumble is would be nice to see longer and more detailed aftermath section.Abcmaxx (talk)12:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready. The results table is blank, the only prose describing the outcome is in the lead (and overly sensational, violating NPOV), there's only a single sentence on the aftermath etc. The material that's already in the article body seems well done, but it needs extending to the results and outcome.Modest Geniustalk14:06, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per above, clearly significant. Both ALT0 and ALT1 are fine. The table is filled in now, which addresses the primary concerns of others.Ornithoptera (talk)06:49, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why is Duma Boko the bolded article rather than the general election article? Is the notion that the government change is the first in the country's history not necessary to be mentioned in the blurb?Ornithoptera (talk)20:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Many unreferenced sentences(although one haseight completely unrelated refs). Article also seems to be unbalanced in terms of viewpoints. Needs to be more concise.TNM101 (chat)15:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
_(cropped).jpg)
_(cropped_3).jpg)
.png)
-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥00:22, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply].jpg)
_(3).jpg)
.jpg)
instead?Bremps...20:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
Self-trout'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk •contribs)07:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added Every section is sourced.SupportGrimes2 (talk)17:22, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
.jpg)
.png){kind=link}
