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. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.
German vehicle manufacturerDaimler Truck announces it will cut around 5,000 jobs in the country by 2030 in an effort to save€1 billion following a drop in sales.(DW)
Two people are killed, including the perpetrator, and six others are injured, including threepolice officers and three seriously, in ashootout at a house inCalldetenes,Catalonia,Spain.(Ara)
Nominator's comments: ICC notably issues an arrest warrant for ade facto sitting head of state. Article updated. Similar blurbsfor Israel andfor Russia previously posted. Articles appear to be updated (and if not, please offer to help out). Nice4What (talk ·contribs) –(Thanks♥)19:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose perBelling the Cat. The warrants for Netanyahu and Putin have not been effective and the ICC judges seem more at risk than such leaders. Better to focus on actual arrests or convictions.Andrew🐉(talk)20:06, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Over half of people indicted by ICC remain free, including Putin and Netanyahu. What makes these guys different?EF520:22, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't ICC also issue warrents for the Hamas leadership at the same time as Netanyahu? Agree this is more performative since past warrents have generally been ignored (like when he when to Hungary, an ICC signatory) and they did do anything to arrest himMasem (t)22:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that the ICC isn't real, it's that it's performative and doesn't do much when we're talking high-level global leaders. It basically says "we're out for you but not really". — EF502:23, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support another world leader with an arrest warrant out on them. People going "oh well uh Netinyahu hasn't been arrested yet therefore the ICC isn't real" are delusional.Scuba02:18, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm generally against posting arrests and criminal charges out of deference to the presumption of innocence. That said, I supported posting Putin based on his status as the head of one of the most important countries in the world, even though it was obvious that barring a coup there was not the slightest chance of his ever being arrested. But that was an exceptional case. Most of these warrants are little more than symbolic gestures with zero practical effect. If/when any of these warrants are actually executed, that might be worth posting. Until then, this strikes me as virtue signaling with a bitWP:RGW thrown in for flavor. -Ad Orientem (talk)03:01, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Notable subjects with referenced articles appearing prominently in the news. Personal opinions about the ICC and its effectiveness, as well as any predictions about how effective these particular warrants will be, can be deposited in the waste bin.Thebiguglyalien (talk)🛸04:52, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The coverage does not seem to have been prominent. I'm not seeing it anywhere on the front page of the NYT, for example – they have it buried in their Asia/Pacific section. Other stories such as Macron's state visit to the UK, seem much more prominent.Andrew🐉(talk)06:19, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The recognition of potential criminal acts by an international court for a country's head already has much weight to post.WP:CRYSTAL opinions regarding its enforcement are well just that, and even then do not affect the notability of the ICC looking into systematic violations of women's rights by the Taliban. Arguments that this isWP:RGW or mere activism are completely ridiculous.Gotitbro (talk)06:32, 9 July 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.
Not Quite Ready Very prominent UK Pol from the Thatcher era. The article is well developed and in generally decent shape, although there are handful of gaps in referencing. -Ad Orientem (talk)16:35, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD I added two CNs. However, both are pretty minor. On balance the article is in better shape than most that are nominated. -Ad Orientem (talk)21:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Picture A famous face in his day and we have a high-quality official portrait which we can use and is still quite recognisable, despite his age then (89). The article is huge and so there will always be room for improvement but the issues are not show-stoppers.Andrew🐉(talk)18:40, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unconvinced that Tebbit would be recognisable to all but a very small subset of editors that are mostly probably (a) from the UK (b) aged over 50, and (c) were interested in politics 40-odd years ago.Black Kite (talk)18:45, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If a job's worth doing, it's worth doing well. Tebbit was a major figure in his day and we have a high quality picture. If you think that no-one remembers him now then why nominate his name for RD? RD is usually full of people that I've never heard of and I can't see the point of just listing names that most people don't recognise. See theNYT's article for an example of how to do this properly.Andrew🐉(talk)20:27, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We are not doing picture RDs for national party leaders and we don't even do them generally (reaching obsoletion) as most see these [rightly] as blurb alts. I personally see RD as a major impetus to improve article quality rather than a mere death ticker.Gotitbro (talk)06:36, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of whether is he "notable" or not, we don't do picture RDs. (Though I agree with the others - why do a picture RD for a relatively unknown person? If we have picture RDs, it should be for someone with global recognition.)Natg 19 (talk)20:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two people are injured and two other people are missing after theMagic Seas, aLiberian flagged ship, is attacked in theRed Sea nearHodeida,Yemen, by multiple boats anddrones for the second consecutive day.(NOS)
The death toll from theflooding inCentralTexas,United States, increases to 104, including 28 children, with 41 other people still missing.Flash flood warnings are issued for expected additional rainfall.(AP)
Four people are killed and at least 22 others are injured in a fire at theRamses Exchange building inCairo,Egypt. National connectivity data is brought down to 62% of ordinary levels, including banking and phone calls. Trading on theCairo Stock Exchange is halted the following day.(NOS)(CNN)
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.
Oppose very under-cited and horribly structured. Prose is written almost like a bullet point list, needs a major re-write too.Abcmaxx (talk)20:42, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The death toll from the collapse of a multistory building on Friday inKarachi,Sindh, Pakistan, rises to 27 as rescuers pull 11 more bodies from the rubble as the three-day rescue operation ends. 10 others were injured in the collapse, of which one died in hospital from their injuries.(CTV News)
A truck and a commercial vehicle carrying passengers collide along the Zaria-Kano expressway inKano State,Nigeria, killing 21 and injuring three.(AP)
FiveTurkish soldiers are killed bymethane gas exposure in a cave in northernIraq during an operation to search for a fellow soldier's remains.(AP)
InGlendora, Mississippi, 13 cars of a Canadian National freight train derail, including one car spilling benzene, forcing an evacuation of the area.(Press-Register)
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.@Ainty Painty,Joseph2302, andQuicoleJR: This whole thing was very confusing, but to summarize: the nominatedDin Muhammad (age 88) didnot die, despiteDawn mixing the two wrestlers up. Instead it wasDin Mohammad who died, at age 104, who was the first gold medalist (they both competed in wrestling at the 1960 Olympics, which explains part of the mix-up). I have removed the mistaken details from Din Muhammad and created a new article on Din Mohammad, who is notable, and the person who did die. Thus, I have modified the nomination. Thoughts?BeanieFan11 (talk)22:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose with an asterisk - Not particularly significant (we had deadlier floods in February that weren't posted) and not up to quality. Iwould support if the death toll rises above 35, which is what I generally consider the minimum death toll needed for weather events to be considered "significant". Note that a search for 23 missing children at a summer camp is underway, with no indication of their whereabouts, so there is unfortunately a non-zero chance it passes that margin. If the toll does reach over 35 please ping me so I can change my !vote; I'll be improving the article tomorrow so quality isn't a big issue.EF501:29, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changing my vote tosupport - two of the 23-25 children missing have been found (both have been killed), and are beginning to be called "victims" by news outlets. Article quality looks good; ORES shows "GA". 100-year flood with devastating impacts. — EF513:24, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, butnot ready in article quality. Needs a bit more meat on the bones. Will check back later today to see where things are. -Ad Orientem (talk)04:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Side note to my above; I'm not wowed by the proposed image. I can't really see anything w/o enlarging it, and even then, it's not much. -Ad Orientem (talk)05:02, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Masem, the floods were caused (technically) by the "remnants" of Barry, so the storm itself only had a marginal role. Could have also been caused by another storm that formed nearby. See the talk page. — EF512:18, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless the death toll rises, per EF5. I do think that this is some of the worst localized regional devastation seen in the US since the Kentucky floods a few years back and may warrant posting in the future if and when they rise to that level.Departure– (talk)05:10, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maintaining my oppose and upgrading tostrong oppose on quality until we get more concrete and consistent figures for the death toll. Blurb says 35 and the article says 30+.Departure– (talk)20:21, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Departure–: Fixed; death toll is currently 30 (with 37 more missing). Do you have any quality-related concerns on the article itself?That's what the "at least" is for in the blurb anyways...EF520:32, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changing tosupport - quality is fine, and the death toll per the article is 43 (should be specified in the blurb, though). That's very significant for this part of the world, and it's fair to say its effects are enough for international concern.Departure– (talk)23:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but oppose image. Article needs improvement for sure, but this is a very big flood event with 100-year flooding events occurring across central and west Texas. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |me |talk to me!06:55, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For full clarity, I have no problem with quality now and thus support the posting, but I still wouldn't support changing the image to be for this hook as I have yet to see any good visual that is appropriate. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |me |talk to me!09:56, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait There is no need to rush to post and I think we can wait to post/nominate again until it starts to subside and we have a more final impact of the flooding.83.187.162.155 (talk)10:10, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Unfortunately I don't think a flood like this is significant enough to post due to the death toll. From what I've seen in ITN, floods usually need to have around 100 or more deaths to be posted and unless the death toll rises quite a bit this flood should be no different. Quality is good and if this does get posted we need a better image.harrztalk20:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Harrz: 100 deaths? Who the heck said that? I've seen weather events with 25 deaths get posted; this is by far the deadliest flood ever in this region.EF520:19, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There’s now 43 confirmed fatalities, one less than the August 2022 floods. Is that enough? NoteWP:MINIMUMDEATHS, which is what your argument seems to be based on.EF523:11, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The death toll is up to 47 and is deadlier than the 2022 Kentucky floods, and also the article isn't a stub anymore.Hoguert (talk)23:44, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Unless a random tornado outbreak happened under my nose this is now the deadliest meteorological event in the U.S. in 2925, surpassing the March 13-16 tornado outbreak.EF523:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I hate mobile editing. Really though, this is the deadliest US meteorological event in 2025, surpassing the death toll of both theMay 16 andMarch 14-15 tornado outbreaks, both of which I’m sure you’re familiar with.EF514:27, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we were to post the top meteorological event for each country - especially in this time of increased extreme events - we'd have always one or two on the ticker. While a 100-year event at any location is rare; there's always 100-year events in a year in some part of North America - especially with the tendency to very localized very extreme events in this temperate region.
That said - this should have been posted. But the other two events? This is why we should be more discerning about bias towards posting news from privileged nations - even those as still as privileged as the USA.Nfitz (talk)22:54, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They should not have been. While it's an undisputed tragedy for those involved, events of that scale are tragically commonplace world wide and unlike the Texas floods they don't seem remarkable. The two tornadoes were not at the top of ITN at the time of posting which might have meant they went under the radar a bit. — Amakuru (talk)23:22, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless, I was using them as an example or what we have posted in relation to this, which is as of right now over twice as deadly.Now if we’d stop arguing about events over two months old and focus on what is currently one of the deadliest USWx events of the 2020s…EF523:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Many events similar to the other US storms get a lot less news coverage in their own countries press. When I lived in South East Asia, during the rainy season the regular occurrence of one or two kids being washed away in the gutter at the side of the street didn't even get local coverage, especially if they were kids from a kampung. That's not the case in privileged nations. Though I expect that will change in the USA with their decisions to significantly cut funding for FEMA and NOAA, and all sorts of things that help to ameliorate such tragedy.Nfitz (talk)06:20, 7 July 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.
Comment - The article prose is decently written and sourced throughout, and is ready, in my view. The problem is the big number of citations missing in the lists of his prolific works.Jusdafax (talk)07:50, 7 July 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.
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: According to the BBC: "The Oasis Live '25 tour was the biggest concert launch ever seen in the UK and Ireland.[2] And now, for at least one date it seems, the reunion of this notoriously volatile group is very much on. Morgajon (talk)20:42, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How does "biggest concert launch ever seen in the UK and Ireland" even remotely fit the description "average music tour"? And why would a one off event be considered a "recurring event"? That makes no sense.Morgajon (talk)21:06, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, we dont post anything like this and havent for years, and what i mean by average, is that bands go on tour EVERY YEAR. so thats what average means in this scenario.Shaneapickle (talk)21:13, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure you've understood the significance of *this* tour then. What makes it different from the everyday. If your point is that no tours should be posted ever, just say that. It's not a very good argument, but it would at least be clear what you were trying to say.Morgajon (talk)21:42, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no connection to the band or this tour whatsoever. And I don't appreciate being accused of such a thing on such a thin pretext. It's well known that Wikipedia does not tolerate such things.Morgajon (talk)22:20, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I suppose there aren't many tours whose opening night gets liveblogged by multiple broadcasters including the BBC[3], but I don't think it really rises to the level we need for ITN.Black Kite (talk)21:04, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What would be the level then? Or are you saying a concert tour can never be significant enough for Wikipedia's current events listing?Morgajon (talk)21:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Morgajon It seems since you are a new user here (somehow you managed to atleast figure out the ITN) Current events does not post tours, they post political, health, and other current events.Shaneapickle (talk)21:15, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Current events does not post tours". If you're referring to a rule, I can't find it. If you're making an argument from precedent, that makes no sense, given the lack of any similar tours since Wikipedia has been online.Morgajon (talk)21:51, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't a rule as such but entertainment news (beyond ITNR awards etc.) is generally avoided at ITN unless the event is highly significant. I don't think Oasis going on renewal tour counts towards that (The Eras Tour, much bigger commercially, wasn't featured either).Gotitbro (talk)21:52, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously I came here to make the case this tour is highly significant. It's worth noting that it has already been the cause of controversy over demand pricing, seized on gleefully by politicians.Morgajon (talk)22:25, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would have to wonder then if thenLive Aid would have made it onto ITN if the Wiki had existed in 1985. I would think it would barely get on, but the argument would be less about the shows most likely, but more about the "expected viewing public" and maybe the feat that is was with the satellites of the time.TheCorriynial (talk)21:57, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm seeing nothing here that even gurantees Live Aid would be given a fair hearing, if it happened today. Even though in hindsight (and it would have been abundantly obvious at the time), that was a highly significant event just in terms of significance as a concert. Namely the sheer number of bands and the massive interest solely in the musical aspects of the "event" (set list, air time, direction). I suspect music is just off the table here as a rule. They'd probably view even something like the Knebworth Oasis concerts as run of the mill, happily ignoring clear proof of significance -When Oasis played there in 1996, more than 2% of the UK population applied for tickets, which sold out in under 24 hours. For this tour, that figure rose to 5% and sold out in minutes. I don't think anyone here has the first clue why reputable news sources like the BBC would focus on such things.Morgajon (talk)23:16, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Moderately big music news, but it's not all that huge a deal. We didn't post the Eras Tour; I don't foresee us posting this.GenevieveDEon (talk)21:48, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Other than sales, how is Eras even remotely comparable in terms of musical/cultural significance? That's a solo artist from the 2000s performing with relative continuity. This a 90s band coming back from an acrimonious split to perform again after 16 years. Taylor Swift has a long way to go before she has audiences evenly split between a generation of fans who saw her perform live at her peak, and the kids who came to her through their parent's musical tastes. Or in a sign of Oasis' significance, through a general awareness of the cultural fabric of the nation. Of which "Britpop" is a huge part (hence the unprecedented demand now).Morgajon (talk)22:09, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Based on what? If you're referring to "The consensus among those discussing the event is all that is necessary to decide if an event is significant enough for posting." then quite obviously there is agreement. But if you were referring to the rest, I don't know how anyone else isn't seeing significance. This reunion tour has been reported on by the highest possible news sources, in great detail, across hundreds of individual pieces, right across the globe. I personally think all that's happened here is that for whatever reason, people think "current events" shouldn't include anything related to concert tours, and that's that. So they're not going to listen to any attempt to show them this tour has reached breakout to become a legitimate national news story and all round cultural moment, much less why. The fact people seem to think it is comparable to Eras shows how little they've actually thought about it.Morgajon (talk)23:02, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose ITN doesn't cover tours in the same way others might. This appears promotional and big-in-context more than it does big on a worldwide scale. I've never even heard of Oasis up until this point, and arguments about their comeback being a "big deal" seem to be mostly within the scope of their genre and the UK and not suitable for a worldwide news story.Departure– (talk)22:18, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
One more note; it appears that Morgajon's only edits have been to this ITNC entry and to the Oasis tour page itself, and they've received a notice for a potential conflict of interest which honestly wouldn't surprise me. The level of constant replies on their points is also bordering onWP:BLUDGEON territory.Departure– (talk)22:20, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The guidance makes it pretty clear that you cannot oppose something for only having ties to one country. Not that it is remotely true that Oasis aren't globally recognised. This is most definitely a big deal in the UK, far beyond mere music news. It's culturally significant, certainly the equal of Eras to the US, if not more so given the generation/reunion aspect. I have no conflicts of interest, and it is only logical that I should be the one to defend my own nomination. I certainly find it bizarre someone who had never heard of Oasis before, would want to comment on what is and is not a big deal in music.Morgajon (talk)22:37, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
COMMENT I am taking this toWP:ANI as @Morgajon wants us (actual reviewers of these candidates) to make an exception when the consensus is opposing the addition of this to the main page. I am also proposing a sockpuppet investigation because, this guy probably used Wikipedia before, got banned and decided to sockpuppet, because how can a new user, already know anything and everything about the works of Wikipedia.Shaneapickle (talk)23:11, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see no need for this. Sure, Morgajon is arguing strongly for this to be posted, but there is nothing that needs a warning or block by an administrator.Natg 19 (talk)23:24, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stop talking absolute rubbish. I am not asking for an exception, I am asking for a precedent to be set, for the exact reasons this process allows - significance. I appear to know more than you about Wikipedia for the simple reason that I actually read the guidance I am shown. It's ludicrous that you think a "conflict of interest" arises from just editing 2 pages about the same thing. It certainly isn't my fault that for some resson everyone here seems to have agreed amongst themselves that concerts will apparently never rise above the level of significance required. That's the sort of thing you would expect to be covered in the guidance. It is not. Without such guidance, it's perfectly reasonable to view this tour as a current event that's in the news, the general news, and bring it here, because in the real world that's exactly what it is.Morgajon (talk)23:24, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Natg 19 and @Morgajon I brought this to ANI so an admin can resolve this situation, I am not advocating for a warning or a ban, because this situation is really being heated up and is turning into a snowball of different opinions, like a pee stain on a snowball.Shaneapickle (talk)23:45, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Significance is one of the criteria for posting at ITN, however, there are no guidelines as to what "significance" means, thus we are left to "precedent" or people's opinions.Natg 19 (talk)23:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That non-guideline suggests "proof that an event is being covered, in an in-depth manner, by news sources is required", which has been provided. Precedent and subjective dislikes are specificallynot considered when determining consensus perWP:CCC andWP:DISCARD. The use of "we didn't post this other thing" as a rationale at ITN is part of an ongoingcompetence issue that develops by editors here not being terribly experienced in other parts of the project.Thebiguglyalien (talk)🛸23:36, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "imaginary" significance criteria, it is part of the criteria that we used to judge based on consensus for posting ITN items. We also generally try to avoid business (which includes the music business) news because of the promotional aspects that typically come with that, barring the most significant mergers or acquisitions.Masem (t)23:30, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (with the disclaimer that broughtBe Here Now to FA: itis a big deal within the industry (hype + exploitative ticket prices = money) and for fans (nostalgia), but hardly main page worthy as its really just the British Isles. IOWS, opposing as the coverage is, with no new songs, slow day media driven hype. A comparison would be to the c 2007 Pixies reunion, which was notable as the stry there was they had almost gone mainstream in between. Here, nothing has changed.Ceoil (talk)23:42, 4 July 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.
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.
Speedy Close the article quality is far below the minimal level of acceptability, and is basically an ad for this protest which has been in the news far less than the "No Kings" protests, which weren't even posted.72.203.224.67 (talk)14:39, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and Speedy close. I'm having a hard time seeing whyUser:VitoxxMass posted this very local item. And why these silly nominations about things that don't even make the news in neighbouring countries keep pertaining to the same nation. No prejudice in relisting if the protestors start killing people, occupying the White House, or the government starts shooting them. And then with only a single source, calledNewsNation that I haven't heard of, but is listed inWP:RSP asThere is a consensus that NewsNation is generally reliable for matters not related to UFOs or UAPs. going on to discuss NewsNation's involvement in UFO conspiracies. WTAF?Nfitz (talk)15:42, 4 July 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.
Seconded. It's right on the borderline of appearing prominently enough in the news, but we need those last few sources that prove the article is viable.Thebiguglyalien (talk)🛸04:56, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Needs work They've been excavating this for eight years so it's not exactly a discovery. The Times headline is "Peruvian city lost for 3000 years opens to the public" which indicates that the excavations are completed and they are launching this as an attraction. I reckon that we need more than newspaper stories to support this as they are probably just based on a press-release.Andrew🐉(talk)07:09, 7 July 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.
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.
Nominator's comments: Two MLB Franchises are marking a long time player's death today. Along side later being a Head coach, He was the last living member of theSt. Louis Browns (which no longer exist, now the Orioles), and as the source above states, when they moved, also the last of the inaugural Orioles team lineup in 1954. Article is close, but could use a look over. TheCorriynial (talk)00:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article:3I/ATLAS (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Astronomers announce the discovery of3I/ATLAS, an interstellar object passing through the solar system. (Post) News source(s):NYTimes,Guardian, Credits:
Nominator's comments: Third-ever confirmed interstellar object (indicated by the "3I") and almost 6 years since the last one. (2I/Borisov) Not confirmed as a comment, but many sources do report this. Also of encyclopediac interest is the extremely high velocity (excess velocity of ~58 km/sec) which makes it more energetic than any other object ever measured in or near the solar system. Nottheking (talk)21:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Significant event across a whole continent; countless records broken, including highest June temperature in Portugal and Spain; numerous wildfires and deaths; significant disruption in multiple countries. According toMoMo, there have been 553 heat-related deaths in Spain since the start of summer, whilst the LSHTM predicted there would be 570 in the UK between 19 and 22 June. harrztalk19:57, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Was thinking the same. Seems like this story is already slightly stale. The lede of the article saysthe most severe heatwave so far came in mid-June.Natg 19 (talk)20:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have amended the lead to be more accurate; I wrote that before the current spate of extreme temperatures began.harrztalk21:05, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually many of them are ongoing, with more extreme temperatures forecasted for weeks to come. Also, it does meetWP:ITNSIGNIF, as countless sources from across the world have been tirelessly reporting on it. Just because the heatwaves have ended in English-speaking areas doesn't mean they have ended everywhere.Greece is currently battling wildfires with over 1,500 evacuated and20 cities in Italy are on red alert for heat. Please do not say they are "finished" until you have done some research. Also, every item in ITN is over a week old now, so something a bit more recent is definitely due.harrztalk20:57, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is extremely hard to justify the annual occurrences of heat waves or wildfires, without something that makes that specific event far more significant than those of previous years. Just because there's a large amount of mainstream news covering it does not make for a good encyclopedic content.Masem (t)22:10, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is why I said "most" countries it has finished. Of the 21 countries listed on that article, only a few are still affected- and the amount of content on those listed in that article is no more than a couple of sentences anyway.Joseph2302 (talk)23:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As for staleness, it would be very nice if this was the last hot week of the summer, but judging from the past articles and current mid-term forecasts, that's not about to happen. I don't see a problem whether it gets posted now or 15 days from today, considering it will still be an ongoing deadly event with recurring hot days.DaßWölf01:49, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Article looks good and detailed, and this is certainly significant. I don't mind a yearly-recurring disaster being in ITN. Lots of yearly-recurring items are. You can't tell the thousands dead that the subject is insignificant, and I don't think it's really stale either. The season is still ongoing, for one, but also the heatwave was perhaps the most significant this very week. I'm seeing a lot of 20–30 June. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat)11:47, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thousands die every year from seasonal flooding in SE Asia, we don't post those, because it happens every year. And particularly, given this is over a long stretch of time, and not from one single event, its hard to consider it as a significant topic.Masem (t)13:07, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in my opinion, we probably should... I'll never understand why mundane things like sports events are seen as more important than the deaths of thousands; we often post tornado outbreaks which kill around 20 in the US, even though they are annual occurrences. These heatwaves will likely continue until at least August, so if it is the prolongued nature of them which makes you weary to post it then might I propose adding it to the Ongoing section? It does seem to fit the criteria after all.harrztalk16:05, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The key I think is understanding that a singular event can carry more significance than a long drawn out sequence of events. the idea of "frog in a boiling pot" comes to mind, that one major single event is going to get far more widespread cover than a series of connected events which are not much different from the usual.Masem (t)20:05, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Masem: That sounds like a bias we should fight, not encourage by posting comparatively small events such asTropical Storm Barry (2025) orJuly 2025 Central Texas floods at the time when there were only several dozen casualties. One could argue that deadly flooding in Texas is also "not much different than usual" these days. Hence, I'm interested in what made you encourage that item over this one?DaßWölf15:36, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I only suggested using Barry to highlight that the storm had multiple disasters, not just the flooding. As for these heatwaves there's nothing here that attributes any if the short term heat events to causing a larger number of deaths across a few days, the only death counter is summarizing all estimated deaths from the heat over a couple months. So unless there was a specific event that could be focused on, we're still talking about a drawn out event rather than something with immediately clear impact.Masem (t)16:12, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And on writing this, I realize that we have a major quality issue on the article, because it is focused on trying to discuss maximum temperatures seen in each country and what alerts were sent out, but actually doesn't spend time to duscuss the death toll. There are a few isolated mentions if deaths, but nowhere outside the infobox explaining the death toll. That's a major miss, in addition to the over documentation of temperatures and alerting.Masem (t)16:16, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A few days ago I posted astudy suggesting a pace of about a thousand deaths a day for the beginning of this month. There are many precedents for such studies. Deaths in heatwaves are harder to count than in e.g. tornadoes, but climatology and meteorology regularly deal with such data aggregation.
I also noted in my !vote above that even though this in general is a long event, the fairly uneventful weeks will still be severe in comparison, particularly in relation to other severe weather events typically considered for posting, and even some of the ongoing wars. I really think an event in this severity needs to be featured on ITN, and if immediacy is this important to the blurb section, I wouldn't oppose placement in the ongoing section.DaßWölf16:29, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see no mention of a potential nor what immediate action against heatwaves exists today that would've prevented the 60,000 deaths in 2022.DaßWölf16:54, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above due to its negative effects. I also remember heatwaves from the last few years being posted, although I'm not sure about that. --SpectralIon18:58, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Masem's point about the double standard. As an additional example, when gay marriage was increasingly being legalized by country after country, we posted it the first few times, but then ITN had to draw the line when it became apparent that legalizations were now the norm in certain regions as opposed to an aberration. This same principle applies, unfortunately, to climate-related articles: if we do not draw the line somewhere, we will blurb wildfires every single year going forward. This is the new normal, and that is notWP:CRYSTAL: the science on climate change tells us every year will have record-breaking floods, storms, fires, and heat waves. So, to me,WP:ITNSIGNIF requires a higher standard of impact and enduring significance - "yet another record-breaking year" is not that without more evidence of mass evacuations or concentrated devastation (like with the LA Wildfires or a particular hurricane, e.g.).FlipandFlopped㋡19:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on the basis of quality. This is an almanach-like collection of random temperature readings since April. The infobox says the heatwave started on 28 May 2025 (did it? says who? in what countries?); the first entry Albania starts with a statement that Tirana expierenced 28°C in April and 37°C on 9 June... what? Was a heatwave ongoing in Tirana/Albania between April and June? Was Tirana affected by the actual heatwave at the end of June? What was the effect on Tirana/Albania during those heatwave days? Similar remarks could be made for most entries. Sorry, but this article has no coherence whatsoever.Khuft (talk)20:35, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is true for quite a few countries, and I am working on finding new information for them but it is quite difficult as I need to look for sources in other languages since English sources are mostly focused on France, Greece, Italy and Spain. The sections for those countries are much more developed and hopefully the rest will be similar soon.harrztalk21:15, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
May I ask what the issue with the article is so I can improve it? Everything is sourced and without just removing the coverage of certain countries I don't see how the issue can be fixed. When covering an incident that has affected a whole continent, having sections for each country is the best way to do it without overloading readers with heaps of information about different places.harrztalk00:00, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose as I feel the blurb is misleading. While I don't have any statistics on how many people die due to heat every summer every year, I feel the blurb reads like it's a major disaster like a draught leading to famine. I also disagree with the very vague "widespread disruption".83.187.162.155 (talk)00:21, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You will find statistics, droughts and sense of major disaster if you read the article and this discussion. For instance, there has been anongoing drought in Europe for the last few months, and it isn't abated by extreme heat.
Pinging@Harrz: Here are a few more ideas to draw references about the droughts:[5][6][7][8][9][10]. If the ITN crowd decides this is stale, I would suggest renominating it when the next hot day is forecast or perhaps reframing it as the drought (consider the additional human impact in unrealized food exports outside Europe), and certainly reorganising the article by date or month rather than country. And thank you very much for the work you've put into it!DaßWölf15:53, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 2 governments' propaganda is not ITN worthy content- ITN isn't a Russo-Taliban propaganda forum. Also literally no sensible target article for this nomination either, as the recognition article is junk list of reactions. Suggest speedy close as perWP:SNOW.Joseph2302 (talk)20:27, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article:Kenneth Colley (talk·history·tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s):[11] 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 - Adequate article with good sourcing. Filmography completely sourced but has a few missing television cites, but not enough to keep me from supporting.Jusdafax (talk)14:47, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article:David Lipsey (talk·history·tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s):[12] 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, sadly. The filmography section should be spun out anyway, but the article is underdeveloped overall, eg the lead is basically a list.Ceoil (talk)22:38, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support pending improvements. Very well-known character actor. I wish I had the time to dredge out some more material for the career.DaßWölf16:47, 7 July 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.
Campaign for the preservation of videogames that has started several government petitions, being covered by various media personalities and news outlets.NeoGaze (talk)16:40, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is currently on the main page inDYK and that seems ample exposure for now. It's another form of protest like the other recent nominations and, perWP:ADVOCACY, we should have a high bar for reporting such lobbying.Andrew🐉(talk)16:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on significance, all this means is that it will be debated. I would be willing to consider blurbing any new laws that result from this, but I don't think the petition itself is important enough.QuicoleJR (talk)16:57, 3 July 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: Brother of Diogo Jota, had a football career of his own, article newly created and sufficient. Kingsif (talk)09:58, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are what's needed to passWP:GNG- and sources about him rather than just being the brother of Jota (which is how mst obitiaries are doing). I will look for sources later today and if I don't believe GNG is met, I will start an AFD. Either aay, nowhere near meetingWP:ITNQUALITY.Joseph2302 (talk)12:44, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You’re experienced enough to know that (otherwise suitable) sources which contain significant info on how someone is notable in their own right are always acceptable, even if they all mention the person’s more-famous relative. Notability being inherited is if someone has no claim in their own right and a bio would be all personal information found in sources by association. That clearly isn’t the case - the sources with info on André’s career support his own notability, regardless of mentioning Jota.Kingsif (talk)13:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is really a debate for the article talkpage or an AFD, but if these sources exist, then add them so it can meetWP:ITNQUALITY. Like I said, I haven't thoroughly checked for sources yet, but the sources on the article currently don't meetWP:SIGCOV about him.Joseph2302 (talk)14:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is moot thanks to expansion, but worth saying to underline ITN’s attitude to new short bios: I know you know that SIGCOV includes sources focused on others if there’s enough info and, at the time you wrote this comment, there was a “who was André Silva” source all about him already used. It was fine, is now better, and notability shouldn’t be brought up for RD unless it is at AfD.Kingsif (talk)19:07, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you're referring tothis source that was there at time I questioned notability, it's borderline but I don't see it as SIGCOV (as it's mostly basic career facts, a section about his name and confusion with someone else and the accident- which seems somewhat routine to me).Joseph2302 (talk)23:13, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Regardless of the notability argument, the article is well below the minimum size of 1500 bytes of readable prose. We don't post stubs at RD.QuicoleJR (talk)14:05, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Barring any sourcing prior to his death to show significant coverage (Simply playing for a major team no longer is considered sufficient under NSPORT), this is a clearWP:BLP1E failure, particularly as the deaths were from an accident, and unlikely to warrant anything like a "Death of..." article that we'd have for major leaders or extremely visible celebrities.Masem (t)14:21, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't doubt notability, as someone who has made pages for players and managers in the Portuguese second division. Notability is a red herring anyway, a topic forWP:AFD. However the page is a stub and should exceed 1,500 characters - preferably more on career.Unknown Temptation (talk)15:13, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had a butcher's and found a source from his lifetime[13] and an obituary,[14] both in Portuguese. This was enough to flesh out with vital statistics and a bit more about the career. All English coverage is inevitably framed around his brother, which isn't helping this page beat theWP:NOTINHERITED allegations.Unknown Temptation (talk)18:31, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article seems better now, but also acomment: This is a very unusal situation. The circumstances of this article's creation imply that we really only found him relevant because he died in an accident with his brother (who happens to be the famous Diogo Jota.) A close reading ofWP:ITNRDBLURB would suggest that his death is therefore the main story and wouldmaybe merit blurbing. Would like to hear other editors' thoughts on this because I'm not sure personally.Yo.dazo (talk)20:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see it as a typical case of users who otherwise prioritise article creation elsewhere (than Portuguese second division footballers) finding motivation from a tragic death to briefly move it up the list. “Deaditing” is a thing for a reason, though ITN has a weird relationship with the concept.Kingsif (talk)22:40, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm still opposing this posting on quality grounds. Whilst it is 2100 characters- and so more than a stub- the article says very little about his playing career, other than just listing the teams he played for. As such, the article feels incomplete, and does not yet meetWP:ITNQUALITY in my view.Joseph2302 (talk)08:06, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The section had, at the time of your comment, content about how regularly he was playing for the clubs, and how Penafiel led the league before falling off in his last season. It's certainly not just a list of clubs. I don't think it needs a diary of every game and goal. I admit the coverage of his youth clubs is a bit listy (with a splash of who his teammates were), but the Jota page just had a mention of his youth clubs (albeit only two) before I expanded that, with the page already posted. When it comes to youth clubs, we often have nothing to go on but a list, because the players were not of public interest then.Unknown Temptation (talk)21:31, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Although I agree that the page is on the shorter side, it is no longer a stub and as ofthis revision, standing at 2776 B and 465 words, the article is of sufficient quality for it to be postedAviationwikiflight (talk)16:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the old Football notability requirements, a player simply needed to play one match in a fully professional football league to merit a Wikipedia article. Liga Portugal 2 is fully professional. Andre Filipe da Silva played 59 matches in Liga Portugal 2. While those old Football notability requirements are no longer applicable, I find the argument that he did not deserve a Wikipedia article unconvincing.NorthernFalcon (talk)05:43, 7 July 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: Liverpool forward/left winger. One CN, no orange/yellow banners Jalapeño(utg)08:51, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see this was already posted. Marking as such. The article is well cited and there are no issues with speedy posting. --Tone09:25, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That was me who added it - apologies as I didn’t follow procedure by posting here but I figured it was an obvious RD to speedily add with a comprehensive and reliably-sourced article.Fish+Karate13:01, 3 July 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.
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.
Moving to neutral since I am genuinely unsure what the current consensus is for filmography sourcing. Other than that and one CN tag, the article seems fine.QuicoleJR (talk)20:30, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Filmography is largely unsourced. Even the prose need more sourcing. For instance, the third paragraph of the Career section mentions a number of his films, but the footnotes at the end of that paragraph link to sources about the last two films mentioned there only, not supporting all those films mentioned earlier in the paragraph. Please add more REFs. The missing REFs can be used in both the prose and the filmography tables. --PFHLai (talk)21:14, 6 July 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.
Article:Sean Combs (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Thetrial of Sean Combs (pictured in 2012) concludes with him being convicted of transportation to engage in prostitution. (Post) Alternative blurb: RapperSean Combs (pictured in 2012) is acquitted on racketeering and sex trafficking charges, and is convicted of transportation to engage in prostitution. News source(s):NBC,NYT,CNN Credits:
Nominator's comments: Very publicised legal case, notable, final verdict given especially surprising. Article is GA, has no orange/yellow banners or CNs. Jalapeño(utg)17:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Was not expecting to see Diddy at ITN today. Eh, I'm going toweak oppose as I can't remember the last time we posted any legal case involving one person, and I'm especially hesitant to post one about his crimes due to the nature (yes,WP:NOTCENSORED, I know).EF518:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would also oppose this nomination, as this is largely just celebrity news and no overarching significance. However, I see no BLP violation here as we are not spreading unsourced claims or anything like that.Natg 19 (talk)00:29, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would tend to agree that strictly, having an article covering the trial and verdict is fine, all that is public info. What I think the intent is is that this type of trial (similar to the Depp/Heard trial or theDust-set shooting) is leaning on celebrity gossip if we featured it as ITN. Just because something like this gets tons of coverage doesn't necessary make it appropriate content for us to feature on the main page.Masem (t)01:33, 3 July 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 We already posted the California wildfire when it happened, iirc. The place with big wildfires currently is Europe -- places like Scotland and Turkey.Andrew🐉(talk)06:57, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if there's a single ITN worthy US wildfire event currently happening, that should be nominated- but don't believe this is the case. And this article doesn't need posting to ITN.Joseph2302 (talk)10:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose - Largest in U.S. history? Deadliest? Where are you getting these metrics from? Plus, wildfire season hasn’t even started.EF512:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose wildfires happen every year in many nations. We should only post wildfires that actually have significant impacts like the LA one last year.Masem (t)13:39, 2 July 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.
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
.png)
.jpg)
.jpg)