This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages ofPortal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcludedPortal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
Altblurbs, labelledalt1,alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
Atarget article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
Articles in theOngoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
TheRecent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass ourstandards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets ourminimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about.We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the dateof the event (not the date nominated).Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the{{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should bereliable,support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb insimple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add{{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (seeWP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins shouldalways separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, checkWP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or becauseconsensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page,before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
Tell about problems in articles if you see them.Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.
Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful.A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such asethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handleconflicts of interest.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
Oppose arecurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss themhere.
Use ITN as aforum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.
This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. Eight days of current nominations are maintained – older days are archived.
To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.
Nominator's comments: Climate change is a significant factor in many of the disasters that we report and so this annual tussle should be part of our coverage too. Andrew🐉(talk)10:53, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This conference received a lot of news coverage, and the agreement has generally be seen as a small step forward following the past couple years of conferences being captured by big oil. I'd be concerned about calling the agreement "weak" in wikivoice, but this wording seems to be backed up enough by expert consensus that I'd be happy to leave it in (although perhaps an ALT would be wise to include). --Grnrchst (talk)12:27, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unless the conclusion is something of the scale of the Paris Agreement, we typically do not post these types of international meetings. That we have to call the agreement here "weak" is not helpful to demonstrate why this is important. If anything the most significant news is the purposeful lack from the US to be involved and even that itself is not reason to post.Masem (t)13:02, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is ITN where other candidate topics include the sale of a comic book, a beauty contest, a bus accident, a motorcycle race and lots of football games. Just about any environmental issue is more important than these. The US angle is significant as it has affected the pace of progress while the independent initiative of California is interesting too.Andrew🐉(talk)15:19, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose Every year politicians from all over the globe fly in on private jets to either a fossil-fuelled dictatorship, flood-prone region, concrete metropolis, or in this case, a deforested area, make bold statements and promises, only to go back to sponsoring fossil fuels, wars, logging industries, mass-produced low quality plastics in coal-powered factories and energy-guzzling data-centres. Then repeat the whole charade each year while the climate continues to deteriorate. If they really cared about the environment they would have backed it up with actions, even small ones such as holding this meeting on Zoom, because the only thing this meeting has so far done is raised the carbon footprint.Abcmaxx (talk)13:03, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose even the article mentioned that the outcome of this conference was "weak" at best since it's the usual carrot on stick promise that was being made instead of observable progess.NotKringe (talk)14:22, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb Many of the oppose rationale seem to have an implicit premise that ITN should functionally become "Current events Wikipedians think are most important". That is, in fact, not what this section is for: ITN means "in the news". Meaningless sham elections and performative global conferences can, and regularly do, garner substantive worldwide news coverage, even while that coverage is critical or skeptical. "I acknowledge this event is getting worldwide coverage across all of the reliable sources, but I personally think that this event was meaningless or weak" is not a valid !vote rationale.FlipandFlopped㋡17:18, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As been shown multiple times on the talk page, ITN is not about repeating what's in the news, but featuring quality articles about topics that are in the news. If you want to know what is in the news, you don't use an encyclopedia, you use a newspaper or news website.Masem (t)20:21, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose they had their annual event, committed to even less than usual and went home again. Doesn't meetWP:ITNSIGNIF as it's one of the least significant COP events in the last few years (last year for example they at least committed to lots of things). Just because some news articles were posted about it (which aren't even at the top of most news sites), this does not mean we should post it.Joseph2302 (talk)17:45, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And they're not even the most widely covered international tasks in the last few days anyway: USA and the possible Russia/Ukraine peace deal is getting way more coverage than COP30 (and yet this probably isn't atWP:ITNSIGNIF just yet).Joseph2302 (talk)17:53, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: the president is thinking of evacuating the entire city of 8 million and building a new capital on the southeast coast, but that is a process that will certainly take years. Yalestonian (talk)06:01, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if they do evacuate the city then nominate it then as it would likely meetWP:ITNSIGNIF then. But it doesn't reach that threshold right now and we don't post or assume significance based on maybes or speculation.Joseph2302 (talk)17:54, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The situation in Nigeria is terrible right now. There have been at least four major kidnappings this week. How about we merge the kidnappings into one blurb instead of individually nominating them and potentially overwhelming the ITN box?Bremps...05:04, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lean Oppose i personally do not believe that NWLS has the sports level of significance for ITN especially given how prevalent soccer is internationally. I would argue domestic leagues for soccer should be only limited to Liga and Premier (including their female variants) only because they have a much larger international following than say MLS or NWLS from what I understandIon.want.uu (talk)05:56, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We can't post every sports championship and the coverage for this one has been tepid, even in the US. If we are going to post this, then we are going to have to start posting national soccer championship matches everywhere, for both women and men. I think at some point we have to start drawing a line. This one just doesn't strike me as having a level of soccer/football significance that would justify our attention on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk)18:14, 23 November 2025 (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.
Oppose Certainly notable and a significant milestone in Brazil’s backslide from democracy under Lula and Moraes, this arrest itself isn’t worth a blurb.Dr Fell (talk)04:17, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SeeWP:GUILLOTINE.Wikipedia's dispute resolution system includes some noticeboards that are relatively unmoderated. Discussions there can become free-for-alls that do more harm than good, with toxic piling-on that escalates instead of solving the dispute. ...Andrew🐉(talk)12:05, 23 November 2025 (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 religious sister and immigration activist. Died on November 14, but appears death was announced on November 17. ForsythiaJo (talk)00:15, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: We had posted the previous Action Comics sale, and unlike the recent nomination on an art auction where there were questions as what defined the class of art, this is the record for all comics. Unfortunately we don't have a separate article on that issue itself, but the series article linked is in good shape from a sourcing perspective. Masem (t)15:59, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ThePortrait of Elisabeth Lederer sale resulted in the creation of a substantial article whereas this is just a small update and the lead of the target article says nothing about the news. The other nomination had a good PD image; this doesn't have an image. The other sale was over $200M whereas this is under $10M. No contest.Andrew🐉(talk)19:23, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Andrew. Moreover, the first issue of the comic had a print run of 200,000 copies, and this is just one of them that sells for a record price, so the buyer doesn't have exclusive ownership of the printed original as there are other copies around the world (probably not 199,999 as some have been lost or destroyed). This would have been way more significant had it been the last surviving copy. In contrast, paintings that sell at auctions are originals, which gives the buyer exclusive ownership, thus making it incomparably less notable than thePortrait of Elisabeth Lederer sale a few days ago.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)21:14, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is the only known copy in condition 9.0, hence the price. There are other copies, but most have been damaged or destroyed. Even slight damage reduces the grade. (An 8.0 sold for 5.3 million a while back.) The pedigree of this particular comic will make it forever special even if another 9.0 turns up.Superman #1 has a special place in comics history as it was the first comic to feature a single character. Previous comics likeAction were anthologies.Hawkeye7(discuss)21:38, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The difference between a pedigree of grades 9.0 and 8.0 is barely visible, and it certainly doesn't prevent the reader to digest the content in any way. The significance of this particular comic is undeniable, but so are many car models whose surviving units sell at auctions for much higher prices and we never post.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)22:00, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That should absolutely not be a reason to dismiss ITN. We're trying to broaden the type of stories that ITN covers.Masem (t)23:28, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Seems like trivia. I also don't see much evidence of enduring global coverage beyond the initial wave of english-language pieces reporting "hey, this happened". I see no reason not to hold this to the same standard that other events are held to at ITN.FlipandFlopped㋡17:25, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Largely per Andrew. I'm not seeing any real significance here that would justify a blurb. This is further indicated by the lack of a stand alone article. Records of this sort come and go. -Ad Orientem (talk)18:06, 23 November 2025 (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.
@Fortuna imperatrix mundi: You know, some people might argue that opposing a blurb partly on the basis of refusing to add legitimacy to an event or practice that is regressive, antiquated, and ontologically demeaning towards womanhood is antithetical to the spirit of oursecond pillar—and I don't care.Oppose with extreme prejudice against anything pageantry-related besmirching the Main Page.Kurtis(talk)13:28, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't really comparable. This is one of four annual beauty pageants as opposed the the MotoGP World Championship which is the top event in the world.Chorchapu (talk |edits)00:04, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The second part of the altblurb does not add any additional context or elaborate something readers needs to know in order to understand the main "story" of the blurb/nomination. I feel non-essential information like this is better left omitted from the blurbs.Question Additionally, isn't the norm that the targeted article is one bolded?~2025-35388-89 (talk)00:38, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose General consensus on WP is that beauty paegents are still exploitive events of women, and while we cover them because they are in the news, we really don't want to glorify these events.Masem (t)03:30, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly missed notice of that consensus. And while criticism of these exist (among the community and otherwise) I wouldn't say there is any aversion to these at the level of saychild beauty pageants. Considering the history of (lengthy and healthy) discusssions at ITN.Gotitbro (talk)04:15, 22 November 2025 (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.
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.
Oppose - the article is obviously not ready. There are no electoral results. 10 (of 26? 30?) members getting re-elected isn't a meaningful blurb, and I can't find that fact in the article. Will the Prime Minister change?~2025-35132-06 (talk)18:38, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - The party affiliations of the winning candidates are yet to be released. If it does turn out that all winners are independents (which seems likely), then the usual course is to post which individual is elected prime minister (which parliament will vote on). This is how thelast election in Tuvalu and the2022 Nauruan parliamentary election were posted (although in Nauru's case it was the president). The Tongan parliament may not hold a vote for PM for a little while (it did not occur for almost a month after the previous election). If that does eventuate, then this nomination would need to be withdrawn and then could be renominated after the PM is elected —N Panama84534 🏝️🥥20:29, 20 November 2025 (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.
One person is killed in an Israeli airstrike attack against a vehicle inBint Jbeil,Lebanon. Several students are also wounded on a bus passing in the area.(Al Jazeera)
One person is killed and another injured in a large-scale fire inŌita,Japan. At least 170 homes are damaged and another 260 households remainwithout electricity.(NPR)
Lawrence Reed, alleged to have poured flammable liquid over a 26-year-old woman on aChicagoCTA Blue Line train and later set her on fire Monday evening, faces a federal terrorism charge.(NBC News)(Department of Justice)
Oppose for now. This is a huge domestic news story here, so I can definitely imagine a feature based on it. However, the article has only been updated with a single sentence, and I have a hard time gauging what "suspended control" even really means. What has changed? Much more prose is necessary here. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat)11:23, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A single-sentence news update doesn't really warrant featuring on the Wikipedia frontpage. We want that, when readers click on the article, they learn more about the subject. The entire incident is just a single paragraph. It gives some good context, but it doesn't feel like the level we should look for for frontpage features. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat)12:38, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Needs work to explain what's going on. This used to be part of the big Dutch conglomerate, Philips. It makes chips and is an essential supplier of them to the auto industry. It has now become part of the US/China trade war and Chinese pushback is disrupting the auto industry. To coin a phrase, "Everything's Computer!".Andrew🐉(talk)13:09, 21 November 2025 (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.
Rather than being the seventh oppose vote, I'm going toWP:SNOW close. Removal of leaders below President/Prime Minister isn't ITN-worthy.(non-admin closure)CREditzWiki (yap)
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 – This article feels like the platonic ideal of an ITN feature. I can see a lot of work has been put into it in the past week. I would like to see the [failed verification] in the lede cleaned up first, but otherwise it looks good. I expect a lot of !votes related to whether this is already covered by our existing Ongoing articles, but it looks like Midas is not mentioned in either article currently, so it's not covered. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat)12:03, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's in the news but my concern is whether we should be highlighting this in particular when there's so much corruption elsewhere. :For example:
These are all fairly fresh stories that one finds when searching for "corruption" but I'm not sufficiently familiar with the details to evaluate their comparative merits.
Oppose We should wait until there us a court case and decision on guilt, rather than intermediate actions, in the cases of govt corruption. BLPCRIME concerns and all that in addition to typical ITN caution to wait for such verdicts.Masem (t)15:21, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support now There is no need to wait, the story is that they have been dismissed from their ministerial postions, and the reasons given are due that this is due to Midas, so where is the BLP violation? Whether fairly or not is another matter but there's no inferrence of crime here, just pure statement of fact. We rarely have a corruption story with a definite "blurbworthy" moment which can be nailed on to a specific time and place, and if we wait, then what usually happens in corruption cases, there will be appeals, counter-suits, political maneuvering, blame-shifting and all sorts of judicial wrangling before it all fizzles out with either one or two scapegoats or with blame completely dissipated over time.Abcmaxx (talk)17:39, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A developing political scandal is very much not appropriate for ITN, unless it was the arrest of the sitting national leader.Masem (t)19:38, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An anti-corruption investigation revealing corruption in one of the most corrupt countries in the world isn't really major news, and the removal from office of the two ministers involved isn't a significant change in the country's politics. Unless this story further results in mass convictions of high-profile political figures or Zelenskyy is held accountable and removed from office because he appointed the two corrupt ministers, this seems like a staged scandal to please the EU politicians that Ukraine is fighting corruption.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk)19:44, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Howard the Duck. Ministers losing their post due to corruption allegations is a common occurrence. If it reaches PM or President level, then it might be worth posting.Khuft (talk)20:05, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While significant in Ukrainian politics, this is not worthy of an ITN feature, as political scandals such as this one are not terribly uncommon, even less so in Ukraine!TheInevitables (talk)20:37, 20 November 2025 (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 given that the blurb has to specify that it is the most expensivemodern art to make it sounds significant (and to exclude several paintings more expensive than it), I don't think this will be really worth blurbing.NotKringe (talk)03:00, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Most expensive" istriply quadruply misleading. Besides "modern art", it's limited to actual sales - the Mona Lisa was appraised at what would now be over a billion inflation-adjusted dollars - and further limited to auctions -Interchange (de Kooning) which, unlikeSalvator Mundi, is modern art, sold privately for 300 million. And it only makes second place among auctions when measured by unadjusted dollars. Altblurb is a little better. A link toList of most expensive paintings, where this appears all the way down in tenth place, might help, but I'm not convinced it would be sufficient by itself. —Cryptic03:15, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above and suggest close, given it is snowing. I appreciate the good faith nom, though, and agree with others it is a good candidate for DYK.FlipandFlopped㋡04:29, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's in the news and we have a reasonable encyclopedia article about it which has been updated. This is the fundamental purpose of ITN. Arguing about the work's significance and value is not –de gustibus non est disputandum. Note also that we have a good PD picture and that's worth a thousand words.Andrew🐉(talk)10:41, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral – Based on above discussion, the superlative blurb simply isn't correct. I wouldn't be opposed to simply blurbing this still, as I don't think second-most expensive is inherently less encyclopedically interesting than the most-expensive, but it doesn't quite feel like a good match for ITN for the following reason: the news story is presented in three sentences on the article, which is meagre for an ITN feature. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat)12:24, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This record is subjective because it depends what counts as modern art - doesInterchange (de Kooning) not qualify? That sold for $300m in 2015. It also ignores inflation. It's currently tenth on ourList of most expensive paintings, which itself states that the list is likely missing several more expensive sales that weren't publicly disclosed. It's not Klimt's best-known work, or his most expensive if adjusted for inflation (that'sWasserschlangen II). So while this is mildly interesting, I don't think it's significant enough for an ITN blurb. Like others have suggested, it would work better at DYK, if it qualifies there.Modest Geniustalk14:10, 19 November 2025 (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.
Denmark holds local elections, with the rulingSocial Democrats suffering large losses, including the mayoralty ofCopenhagen, which they had held since 1903.(Politico EU)
A majoroutage ofCloudflare causes global disruptions to numerous apps and websites. Cloudflare says the outage occurred after aconfiguration file designed to handle threat traffic malfunctioned and triggered a crash in its software handling traffic for its wider services.(BBC News)
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 given this is a BLP landmine area, we are still ways away from any person being affected by these even if they ever get released in their unredacted form. Definitely not appropriate for ITN to feature this.Masem (t)20:04, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wait for when they actually release and something comes of it, though the only ITN-worthy thing that I can imagine is a major shakeup/fall of the Trump admin.Gotitbro (talk)20:30, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this bill does not "compel" anyone to release anything, and per others, there is nothing significant coming out of this yet.Natg 19 (talk)20:32, 19 November 2025 (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.
Oppose per above. Beyond the article only containing a few sentences about this, it simply hasn't garnered sufficient coverage in global news sources.FlipandFlopped㋡17:27, 23 November 2025 (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.
@Bagumba: I went through and sourced several statements from the article. It still uses the media guides a good bit for overall season stats, but I think it may be reduced enough for RD. If it's still rough, I can probably replace with PFR citations. Thoughts? ----TheRobot Parade15:40, 22 November 2025 (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.
Oppose the blurb for the South African football team qualifying for the World Cup has already been shot down for being a mere trivia, so I don't think a qualification for a continent-scale tournament warrant a blurb.— Precedingunsigned comment added byNotKringe (talk •contribs)02:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Moral support, as a fellow Singaporean, but I doubt this will be approved as: 1. the ITN venue is focused more on the final winners rather than qualifiers when comes to competitions, regardless of the new highs that individual teams/persons have progressed to. 2. As the competition is ongoing, it isuncertain as to how much higher can the Singaporean team progress in the competition, even if the likelihood is low that they will go on to the next stage.– robertsky (talk)03:03, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose About as easy an oppose as possible. Qualification to the world cup for American Samoa might be notable enough. No other qualification alone is remotely close.Basetornado (talk)05:09, 19 November 2025 (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.
TheArab–Israeli conflict isdesignated as acontentious topic with special editing restrictions. Editing and discussing this topic isrestricted toextended confirmed users.You are not logged in, so youare not extended confirmed.Your accountis extended confirmedis not extended confirmed, but youare an administrator, so your account is extended confirmed by default.
Oppose TheNYT analysis says that "And Hamas has made clear it will not make things easy. The group rejected the U.N. resolution, saying on Tuesday that involving the International Stabilization Force in disarming it would turn the force into “a party to the conflict on behalf of” Israel." If Hamas doesn't agree with the resolution then it seems dead before it has started. Turning this round will mean more action on the ground and further negotiation and that's what we have Ongoing for. Note that the target article's lead doesn't explain that Hamas is dissenting from this Resolution and so gives a misleading impression that everything is on track.Andrew🐉(talk)17:36, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Comment Withholding judgement until the article is more complete, but haven't these incidents involving pilgrims become relatively routine? I feel like I see at least one a year.–DMartin03:49, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Clearly a taffic collision during a holy pilgrimage whih kills about a 50 people cannot be chalked out as a non-notable news event. Though I agree the article is barely a stub.Gotitbro (talk)10:06, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it's now just barely passable, and as for notability I've thought about it and nowOppose as this looks to be an unfortunately common event. Also, it doesn't make it onto any of the BBC, Guardian, or AP front pages.Chorchapu (talk |edits)16:10, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose accidents like this seem to happen with each of these pilgrimages, so while tragic, it's routine as well. Also there is only one paragraph on the event, the rest BG and reactions, so there seems to be very little pact from this.Masem (t)22:02, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose I am usually keen to post mass-casualty accidents so long as it is clear that there is a wide breadth of coverage and the accident is sufficiently shocking or unusual to have merited a significant government response or investigation. In this case though, the breadth of coverage seems more limited (there are some articles from outside the region, but not as many as for some other bus accident noms we've seen), and I accept Masem's point that pilgrimage crashes are effectively annual.FlipandFlopped㋡04:32, 19 November 2025 (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: American game developer and LGBT activist. Article needs more sources, especially for games she worked on, but improvements are ongoing. MidnightMayhem (talk)00:56, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Was going to nominate this earlier but at the time, the video game credits were unsourced. Now that I look at it now, that has been fixed, and as we are dealing with an individual that is well established to have had a gender change, I believe the article is compliant with core BLP issues like DEADNAME.Masem (t)05:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support aside from the career section being sparsely sourced, I did not spot any glaring issues that would prevent this from being posted. I think the quality is sufficient for posting as a RD.~2025-34635-24 (talk)14:23, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support: Article seems toreally rely on the Women in Gaming book for most of its prose alongside primary sources, but I don't think either issue prevents it from RD. ----TheRobot Parade16:39, 18 November 2025 (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.
Blurb I'd not come across them before but they were quite famous in some countries in their day. Anyway, what's remarkable is that, though they seemed in reasonably good health for their age, they were very close and chose to die together by assisted suicide. A blurb seems needed to explain this unusual double-death.Andrew🐉(talk)21:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb article appears good to post. Blurb absolutely not necessary, no indication of how they were a major figure, and while it's an unusual case of choosing to use assisted suicide to die at the same time, that is completely legal in Germany and not uncommon itself. That factoid is better for DYK than as a blurbMasem (t)22:08, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's all wrong.
This is mainly a case of "death-is-the-story", not "major figure", though they do seem quite famous too.
Such duo-suicide is quite rare -- seeBBC report on another case, for example, which explicitly says "it’s rare".
Assisted suicide is fairly new to Germany, dating from a court ruling in 2020, and the overall numbers are still fairly low there. And most countries don't have it at all, of course.
As usual, the article doesn't qualify for DYK as the article was created in 2006 which shows how notable they were.
Support RD, oppose blurb - This is obviously not a suitable nomination for a blurb, and Andrew has made so many such nominations recently that it's getting to be disruptiveeven apart from everything else about how he uses ITNC.GenevieveDEon (talk)22:16, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question This is a very unusual nomination, as articles about duos where neither of the two are independently notable enough to have their own page are already very few in number, and then it is even more rare for both members of such a duo to die in conjunction with each other and on the same date. With this said, I am wondering whether it would be more respectful or in keeping with the obituary-esque nature of the RD section to include them asAlice Kessler andEllen Kessler as opposed to "Kessler twins". They were individual human beings who lived their own lives, after all.FlipandFlopped㋡03:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To some extent I agree, but I think there's a reason they decided to go out together. They were clearly a duo in almost every aspect of life. I wouldn't consider it disrespectful when it seems like that may be exactly how they want to be remembered. ----TheRobot Parade05:23, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb and snow close, there is clear consensus forming to not post a blurb and as others have pointed out, there is nothing particularly significant about their deaths to warrant a blurb.~2025-34764-67 (talk)20:08, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - At the time of writing this comment, the blurb ends "rules that former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is." She does presumably exist, but could we not put nominations up until we know what the story is, please?GenevieveDEon (talk)08:34, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment TheInternational Crimes Tribunal is a terribly misleading name given it's a Bangladeshi court; let's shorten it to ICT maybe or add the description "Bangladesh's" before it?Abcmaxx (talk)09:10, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on quality and notability with altblurb There will probably much more to come given the gravity of the verdict but as it stands the article is comprehensive, easy to read and sourced.Abcmaxx (talk)09:47, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support/altblurb/comment Added another alt, don't believe the court name is neccessary (not really a known body internationally). The other blurbs fail to say that it was in absentia, which is a big deal. Happy to change them if needed, but thought it best the users who wrote them add it if needed.Basetornado (talk)09:54, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The tribunal is a domestic one not an international body and was set up for the civil war which resulted in the creation of Bangladesh but it's now being used for a political show trial of an opposition leader. The death penalty is not happening because she is in exile in India, who is not going to be giving her up, right?Andrew🐉(talk)10:49, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Her authoritarian rule caused thousands of deaths and tens of thousands injuries, including in one of the bloodiest crackdowns in recent history, not to mention the decades-long systematic persecution of political rivals with extrajudicial killings and abductions. Whatever Bangladesh's governance and judicial deficiencies, or stance on capital punishment, calling it a show trial effectively calling it a kangaroo court is a massively biased and partisan stance.Abcmaxx (talk)11:16, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is just the way politics is done now in South Asia. Over in West Pakistan, the military regime is repressing the opposition but we're not posting about crimes against humanity there; instead the blurb is of a grand constitutional amendment to give them legal immunity from such considerations. Obviously these legal systems are quite partisan, serving the interests of whoever happens to be in power.Andrew🐉(talk)11:49, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two things can be true at once though, just because the Bangladeshi judicial process isn't great that doesn't automatically mean she was held responsible for atrocious crimes without reason. Also you would be hard-pressed to findany non-contentious sentencing of a high-ranking official even functioning democracies: was Sarkozy's sentence too lenient? Was Bolsonaro's too harsh? What about Assad fleeing to Moscow and being tried in absentia? Netenyahu's and Putin's Hague arrest warrants? What about even a relatively low-rankingMarcin Romanowski being granted asylum by Orban to avoid bring tried for some pretty brazen theft of public funds in Poland claiming the Polish now government and former opposition is out to get him? These are things all happening even in well-established non-authoritarian democratic countries. Few would question Hasina's culpability, and even fewer leaders of such stature are held to account by any court.Abcmaxx (talk)12:37, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You claim that these things are rare but my impression is that they are common and you list a bunch of recent examples. What matters is who holds power and we already posted details of her being deposed and fleeing. This show trial is just a coda and formality.Andrew🐉(talk)13:07, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree, trials and judicial processes are important. We posted both ICC arrest warrants, Bolsonaro's conviction and a bit further backFrank Bainimarama's incarceration. Even with those precedents, none of these were convictions forcrimes against humanity, that is the most of serious of charges one can face, on top of that there's a capital punishment element.Abcmaxx (talk)14:54, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to draw attention to Andrew's use of 'West Pakistan' here, because that would appear to carry the anachronistic and arguably inflammatory implication that Bangladesh, which is what the rest of us are discussing, is still 'East Pakistan'.GenevieveDEon (talk)22:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT1 - Head of government fleeing the country and being sentenced to death is extraordinary. All passages are cited from a quick look. Also,Oppose original blurb as misleading.Hugoaway (talk)11:32, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Striked it. In the future, just put <s> and </s> between your blurb if you want to renounce your own blurb.Jalapeño(utg)12:33, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support either blurb, with a preference forAlt 2. This is big news, and as previously discussed, we seem to have a broad consensus that convictions are the thing to post. Psephguru, thank you for being willing to listen; Jalapeño, thank you for helping, and for striking out the unwanted blurb rather the messing up the numbers by deleting it.GenevieveDEon (talk)12:37, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the blurb goes back up, it needs to be contextualised that aBangladeshi court made the finding. Also the article itself needs correcting. At present in the first para a sentence reads "Hasina and Kamal were convicted on 17 November 2025 of crimes against humanity by the International Crimes Tribunal-I and sentenced to death, while Mamun was also found guilty but sentenced to five years in prison as he had turned into a state witness." Any reader could easily confuse The "International Crimes Tribunal-I" with being an actual international criminal tribunal, which it is not.TarnishedPathtalk23:39, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re-posted. Per broad consensus atWP:ERRORS, on top of the original consensus above, I've reverted my earlier pull and reinstated the hook. However, per a sensible observation by GreenLipstickLesbian, the simple addition that it was by a Bangladeshi court doesn't really harm the neutrality and may assuage some of the concerns raised by TarnishedPath. I've also made the nationality of the court clear in the article lead. My pull-and-then-repost action has effectively resulted in the status quo being restored, so if for any reason there's later a consensus that a further pull is required, that would be a fresh action and not subject toWP:WHEEL concerns. — Amakuru (talk)00:42, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ecuadorian presidentDaniel Noboa announces that Spanish police have capturedLos Lobos leader Wilmer Chavarría, who faked his own death and changed his identity, inMálaga,Andalusia.(BBC News)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (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.
Weak oppose: Agreed with the proseline sentiment, but more importantly the birthdate is unsourced. Once those issues are fixed, I'd support. ----TheRobot Parade16:16, 18 November 2025 (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.
Not ready. There's good prose on the background and road to the final, but none on the course of the final itself. The 'game summary' is just a bulleted list & table of statistics. Needs at least a full paragraph of referenced prose describing the game.Modest Geniustalk14:52, 17 November 2025 (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.
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.
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using theinline URL syntax[http://example.com] rather than using<ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when<ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents:
In the news toolbox.jpg)
_(54907903518).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Article improved.ArionStar (talk)14:12, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
