Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
In the news toolbox |
---|
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary[edit]
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps[edit]
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
Headers[edit]
Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]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. Please do...[edit]
Please do not...[edit]
Suggesting updates[edit]There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
[edit]Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives
Sections
[edit]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.
December 7
[edit]
December 7, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Politics and Elections
|
(Ongoing) Northwestern Syria offensive
[edit]Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Kianlolcat99 (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: I think it's appropriate at this point to nominate the Northwestern Syria offensive article for the ongoing events for ITN. There's been significant developments, the article is being updated pretty regularly, and RS are consistently covering it. The capture of Aleppo is also still displayed on ITN. Previous discussion (from December 1st) rejected putting Syrian Civil War back on ongoing and said to nominate the article for Northwestern Syria offensive instead. Can I has Cheezburger? (talk) 02:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support when the current blurb rolls off. This conflict is probably the most important one in the world right now, and it will determine the future of the Assad government. The article is seeing continuous updates; this qualifies for ITN. Gelasin (talk) 03:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
December 6
[edit]
December 6, 2024
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
Reopening of Notre Dame
[edit]Blurb: The Notre-Dame cathedral (pictured in 2024) in Paris reopens following reconstruction in the wake of the 2019 fire. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Notre-Dame cathedral (pictured in 2024) in Paris reopens following reconstruction in the wake of the 2019 fire.
Alternative blurb II: The Notre-Dame cathedral in Paris (pictured in 2024) reopens following reconstruction in the wake of the 2019 fire.
News source(s): AP, CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Cantab12 (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Trying again, as the cathedral is now opening tomorrow. The previous nom was closed due to the cathedral not being open yet. Natg 19 (talk) 18:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - target article should be Reopening of Notre-Dame de Paris 2024 (which I'd support on quality), and the cathedral hasn't reopened yet (it's still 6 December in France). Departure– (talk) 18:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt fixed the target article. Scuba 18:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Unsure about the target article being the reopening ceremony. That article is rather stubby at the moment. Natg 19 (talk) 18:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support alternate blurb. A unique event that's for sure. We are close enough to the opening. Nfitz (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb per above. Quality is solid. The Kip (contribs) 20:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support either blurb, but can we change them slightly? 'The Notre-Dame cathedral' is not idiomatic in British English. 'Notre-Dame de Paris', 'Notre-Dame Cathedral', or 'The Cathedral of Notre-Dame (de Paris)' would be better. GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Idiomatically it's just Notre-Dame, no cathedral or Paris. I would go with "Notre-Dame reopens following reconstruction in the wake of the 2019 fire." GreatCaesarsGhost 01:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It's not ITNR and there's no indication of significance for just another building opening up in the 21st century. If we ITN the opening of every well-known building we might as well be a construction newsletter –Jiaminglimjm (talk) 23:40, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think this is a bit of a slippery slope fallacy. There is a feasible way to demarcate between major, widely covered closures of worldwide landmarks vs mundane construction updates to every named skyscraper with a wikipedia article... the degree of news coverage. Support. FlipandFlopped ツ 23:54, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Important church for France, 50 world leaders are expected, worldwide coverage. This makes it a unique event. Grimes2 (talk) 00:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt2. It's the reopening of one of the greatest monuments of Western civilization. I've added an altblurb that I think flows better. Gelasin (talk) 03:21, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
2024 Romanian presidential election 1st round annulled
[edit]Blurb: The first round of the Romanian presidential election has been annulled by the Romanian Constitutional Court due to Russian electoral interference. (Post)
News source(s): Euronews, Reuters, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: This is unprecedented. Have not marked it as ITN/R but does concern an election. Article needs updating Abcmaxx (talk) 14:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support (pending blurb update) – clearly significant (an EU country has just annulled an election result!) and long enough – but you seem to have linked to the parliamentary election rather than the presidential! DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 14:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oops apologies! Fixed now though. Abcmaxx (talk) 17:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance given the political crisis and especially the issue of election interference. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Article does not include the information the blurb is claiming (re: Russian interference). There should be continuity here before this is posted. --Masem (t) 14:47, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, addressed. SerialNumber54129 15:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as there was no clear winner after the first round. It'd have been more significant had this decision annulled the final results from the presidential election in a similar way as the Supreme Court of Ukraine did during the 2004 Ukrainian presidential election.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- There two clear winners in any 1st round given only two get to advance to the second round. Abcmaxx (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- There may be a clear winner if a candidate wins 50%+1 of the registered voters in the first round. In this case, two candidates advanced to a run-off in the second round because no-one achieved victory in the first round. There cannot be two winners when one president is elected.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- There two clear winners in any 1st round given only two get to advance to the second round. Abcmaxx (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance and probably article quality. Its ITN notability stems from the annulling of the election, not the specific result it overturned. SerialNumber54129 15:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability It would admittedly be a little unusual to blurb the first round of a multi-round election, but an annulment of an EU member state's election over Russian interference is even more unusual. I think both this and the ultimate result (whenever it comes) can reasonably be posted. FlipandFlopped ツ 16:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait, Good faith nom, but I think it's a bit early to nominate given how it only been a few hours since it was announced. The article section needs more time to improve first. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 16:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support hasn't happened before, big news. Scuba 16:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support An act without any precedent that I can think of in modern European politics. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- That depends on how narrowly you define it. See e.g. 2016 Austrian presidential election. Daß Wölf 17:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose current blurb. Heads I win, tails you lose. I don't believe the Constitutional Court's claim that it annulled the election due to alleged "Russian interference," and as such, I cannot support any blurb which presents this as fact. However, I do believe this is notable and I would support a blurb that simply states something like "The first round of the Romanian presidential election is annulled by the Romanian Constitutional Court." Gelasin (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above - ready? The AP (talk) 19:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Kelly Powers
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced. Death published on this date. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. Grimes2 (talk) 14:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ready, IMHO. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:00, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Miho Nakayama
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:7956:811C:CEEE:B7FD (talk · give credit)
- Updated by AlphaBetaGamma (talk · give credit) and VenezuelanSpongeBobFan2004 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Japanese actress and singer. 240F:7A:6253:1:7956:811C:CEEE:B7FD (talk) 10:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. The article's body looks good generally (although I am unsure about the reliability of some sources), but the filmography/TV series list is completed uncited. ForsythiaJo (talk) 21:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The ginormous tables at the end of the article need to be cited somehow. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:07, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Stanisław Tym
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WP (in Polish)
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Orange tagged but could be easily expanded and brought to a good standard. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Soft support pending article expansion of course. I'm thoroughly heartbroken. One of the greats of Polish satire and comedy of the last fifty years. I have lots of work over the weekend but I'd love to find the time get the article up to standard. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Maggie Tabberer
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1], [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Canley (talk · give credit) and JackofOz (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Happily888 (talk) 06:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems good to me, well-cited. FlipandFlopped ツ 23:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
December 5
[edit]
December 5, 2024
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Peter B. Teeley
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Press secretary to Vice President George H. W. Bush and United States Ambassador to Canada. Coined Voodoo economics. Obit published 5 December. Thriley (talk) 06:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Soft support stub, but properly cited. Scuba 17:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Paolo Pillitteri
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Notizie
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Italian politician, film critic, and journalist. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:07, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good to me. I see no issues TheHiddenCity (talk) 21:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Soft oppose His list of essays is strangely formatted (usually these are a bulled point list at the end of the article), and also not completely cited. There is one footnote from a website called "Spirali" addended to one of the entries that is a source for a handful, but not all of the works listed. FlipandFlopped ツ 23:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
December 4
[edit]
December 4, 2024
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Princess Birgitta of Sweden
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SVT (in Swedish)
Credits:
- Nominated by 31.44.227.152 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Elder sister of King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden. Died on December 4th. Article could probably need some work with sourcing. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 10:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Article needs sourcing. Scuba 17:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson
[edit]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.
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson killed in an apparent assassination in New York (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/unitedhealthcare-brian-thompson-death-12-04-24/index.html
Credits:
- Nominated by BD2412 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jinyceditor (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Coretheapple (talk · give credit), JohnR1Roberts (talk · give credit), Fuzheado (talk · give credit), GreenC (talk · give credit) and Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- This should be merged with the RD below. I'd do it by on a mobile keyboard it would be messy. Masem (t) 19:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- I know of no sources yet describing this as an "assassination"; the motive is not known yet, as I understand it. 331dot (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @331dot: NBC News is calling it a "targeted" attack. BD2412 T 20:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that's not the word "assassination", which requires knowing the motivation of the attacker. That it's a targeted attack is apparent from video evidence, but that can't read the attacker's mind. 331dot (talk) 20:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'd be fine with "in a targeted attack". Also fine with this being merged into the RD below, so long as the proposal to blurb makes it into the merge. I don't know if there are particular mechanics for doing that. BD2412 T 20:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that's not the word "assassination", which requires knowing the motivation of the attacker. That it's a targeted attack is apparent from video evidence, but that can't read the attacker's mind. 331dot (talk) 20:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @331dot: NBC News is calling it a "targeted" attack. BD2412 T 20:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb but support RD yes this is getting news coverage in the US, but this isn't a global news story, also Thompson led a very quiet life before this, he didn't even have a page until he was killed. Almost all the articles cited in his page are either primary sources, or where made after he was killed. Scuba 20:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- If he led a quiet life such that we have nothing prior to this event to build an article, then that's a BLP1E issue and we shouldnt have an article on him. Really this event should be in the United Healthcare article. — Masem (t) 20:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- agree _-_Alsor (talk) 22:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is that now, retroactively, some news sources, such as the AP, are publishing articles about his life before he was killed. The article has already been made and approved, it's quality is only going to increase from this point. It would be silly to delete it. Scuba 03:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- If he led a quiet life such that we have nothing prior to this event to build an article, then that's a BLP1E issue and we shouldnt have an article on him. Really this event should be in the United Healthcare article. — Masem (t) 20:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb but support RD. Unless there's some indication that this was a political act, terrorism, or an international death squad then I don't see that it's ITN. It barely even meets GNG for an independent article which makes even an RD questionable - but I think this is a break-all-the-rules occasion and we should post an RD, even if an article for him doesn't meet the requirement of an article through WP:SINGLEEVENT. Nfitz (talk) 02:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, support RD as per above. This isn't particularly global news, but it is notable enough for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
(Ready) Michel Barnier loses no-confidence vote
[edit]Blurb: The French prime minister, Michel Barnier, loses a motion of no confidence. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckgxw9wj241t
Credits:
- Nominated by Tim O'Doherty (talk · give credit)
Tim O'Doherty (talk) 19:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose but it might be worth posting if/when he resigns.I think I misunderstood this.. don't mind me. Estreyeria (talk) 19:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support changes to the French PM are ITN/R
Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administers the executive of their respective state/government
. Scuba 19:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)- That's Macron, isn't it? Masem (t) 19:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
The prime minister of France (French: Premier ministre français), officially the prime minister of the French Republic (Premier ministre de la République française), is the head of government of the French Republic
Scuba 19:45, 4 December 2024 (UTC)- List of current heads of state and government puts the Presidency in that position, not the PM. — Masem (t) 19:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just to add, I am not making any objection on this yet as a normal ITNC, as even if not ITNR it's still worthwhile to include. It just doesn't seem to have the automatic ITNR aspect. — Masem (t) 20:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- No problem, also, looking at that list it says Barnier is head of government, and Macron is head of state, with Barnier shaded blue due to
offices lack de jure constitutional power
. Scuba 20:28, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- No problem, also, looking at that list it says Barnier is head of government, and Macron is head of state, with Barnier shaded blue due to
- That would be a mistake, the French President has power over diplomacy and national security while the PM is the one actually heading the day-to-day government. I guess since it's a semi-presidential system it sorta blurs the line. Scuba 20:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Part of it is the problem that Wikipedia's own terminology really just assumes that every government just follows the Westminster System, (where all de-facto power on the top level derives from a single elected legislative body that picks its own leader) and thus assumes everything in every other government can be directly translated to an equivalent role. (e.g, treating the United states President as the same as the UK's Prime Minister, just elected separately) As we can see here, there's places where the site's attempts at direct, 1-for-1 parallels on a per-member basis tend to fall apart once you leave the Commonwealth. Realistically I don't think there's any hard-and-fast rule that can just be applied to all governments, but instead it'd need to be evaluated nearly on a per-country basis, and that in many countries like France... The role of "head of government" can't be cleanly placed onto a single head like it can in the United Kingdom. Nottheking (talk) 08:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just to add, I am not making any objection on this yet as a normal ITNC, as even if not ITNR it's still worthwhile to include. It just doesn't seem to have the automatic ITNR aspect. — Masem (t) 20:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- List of current heads of state and government puts the Presidency in that position, not the PM. — Masem (t) 19:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- The wording seems to include the prime minister. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's Macron, isn't it? Masem (t) 19:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Irrespective of whether this is ITNR or not (in the French system, both the President and the Prime Minister kinda head the government), this is worth blurbing. First time since 1962 that a French government is toppled by a vote of no confidence. Khuft (talk) 19:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Regarding the ITN/R status, France has the technicality that the President has more power over the executive outside of cohabitation, and the Prime Minister during cohabitation. And, well, the Macron/Barnier situation was variously described as a messy kind-of cohabitation, although Macron is still considered to have retained more power. So, it's not clear-cut, but not necessarily ITN/R. Still, this is a major political crisis we're getting into, as no group can realistically build a majority coalition and the 2025 budget has to be voted soon, so it's very much significant enough in my opinion. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Chaotic Enby. It's sort of a pseudo-ITNR situation given the cross party appointment and the state of the legislature. However, regardless it is getting extensive worldwide news coverage and should qualify as a normal ITN candidate anyway. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 20:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, article appears in good shape (itnr or not) Masem (t) 20:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question - is it the government that lost a non-confidence vote, or the Prime Minister? I'm not sure the exact phrasing of this particular motion, but in most countries it's the government that falls, not the PM; which could lead to the appointment or selection of a new PM to lead a new government, or even the reappointment of the same PM if there's behind the scenes negotiation to obtain support. Nfitz (talk) 03:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- From what I can piece together, it's sorta like the British sytem. The government is gone, Macron has to appoint a new PM and whoever (if anyone) gets approved by the assembly has to make their own cabinet. Scuba 04:12, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support major political event. Not head of state, I suppose, but well, good enough. Juxlos (talk) 03:50, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom. IDB.S (talk) 05:36, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Shortest-tenured French government in quite some time; serious development in one of the world's largest economies. Daniel Case (talk) 06:04, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is in good shape; very solid-quality piece. As far as the notability of his position, we have to remember that not every country just has a carbon copy of the United Kingdom's Westminster System, so there often is more than a single "Head of Government." And given that the UK gets two official leaders (Head of State & Head of Government) to merit ITN attention, it's fair to consider most other countries get two such positions, with the Prime Minister of France (who does wield many powers analogous to a Westminster-style PM even if the President is still the official Head of Government) fits the bill here. Nottheking (talk) 08:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This is just a consequence of the summer election (which we posted) as its failure to establish a clear majority continues to play out. Barnier will continue as a caretaker PM as no successor is in sight and so the French govt is still a work-in-progress. It's like the continual crisis of the speaker elections and stopgap budgets in the US in 2023 and ITN didn't post every twist in that saga. The broader encyclopaedic topic is the general economic instability and unrest following the COVID-19 recession which is making it hard for incumbents everywhere – Germany, South Korea, &c... Andrew🐉(talk) 13:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- The broader encyclopedic topic by itself isn't really suitable for ITN due to poor story-article correlation. Items like this are suitable because they speak towards the broader topic. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:39, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support as ITNR In my view, this is clearly ITNR. The ITNR rule allows for elections for "head of state and government". France has a different head of state (Macron) than head of government (Marnier). It does not say "head of state OR government" - the choice of "and" in the ITNR rule therefore implies that both should be posted. If we would like to change the ITNR rule to only designate a single ITNR election per country, that is also fine, but this is not the place to do so. We must enforce the current ITNR rule as it is drafted. FlipandFlopped ツ 14:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are some govts where the head of govt is purely ceremonial as all the power lies in the head of state, and in those cases, changes in the head of govt are not significant. As long as we, as shown here, can discuss and reach the same conclusion for a head of govt solely from an ITNC approach without invoking ITNR, it's probably best to leave the ITNR alone. — Masem (t) 14:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support as ITNR as the French President and Premier share jurisdictional responsibility. SerialNumber54129 14:44, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now due to lack of article - first of all, this is clearly not ITN/R, there's nothing in the provisions for this scenario - thus far Barnier hasn't yet left office and he isn't the most senior poltician in France anyway, that would be Macron. That said, I do in principle think we should post this... *but* the story needs an article. We have March 2023 French votes of no confidence for the less newsworthy ones that didn't succeed, so it is not a correct situation for this story to lack one. Linking to the BLP on Barnier isn't the answer to that, the story isn't just about him anyway it's about his whole government and the much wider situation concerning French politics. Effectively this is an oppose on "quality", since an article not existing is rather a severe quality concern — Amakuru (talk) 14:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not every event needs a sepearate article, and this impulse editors have to rush to create one is a larger problem with NOTNEWS and article creation in general. ITN just requires a significant update to some article. — Masem (t) 14:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Consider 2024 French political crisis. That's been ongoing since June and Macron is more central to it than Barnier. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that would be an alright contender for the bold link. But the notion that this event doesn't need an article is bunkum. With a few exceptions, if a story isn't notable enough to be covered anywhere except in a BLP article then it almost certainly isn't worthy of inclusion in ITN. This no-confidence motion clearly should have one (or at the very least a prominent section in the article Andrew mentions) and we shouldn't list it under the Barnier BLP just because nobody has created the necessary proper prose for it. — Amakuru (talk) 15:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- The issue that we have NOTNEWS problems is the idea event must be distilled into a new article, but that has never been a requirement for ITN posting. Is this event worthy of its own article? Ignoring ISE logic, right now it feels it is part of of larger picture related to the Barnier govt, since the the no confidence vote was a result in that. It makes far more sense to this to be the coda of the existing Barnier government article (which is nowhere close to being too long to include) rather than a separate article that would require adding more context that already exists in the Barnier govt article. I agree the BLP article is probably not the best target, but a new article is also not required when there is a clear suitable article right there already. Masem (t) 19:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that would be an alright contender for the bold link. But the notion that this event doesn't need an article is bunkum. With a few exceptions, if a story isn't notable enough to be covered anywhere except in a BLP article then it almost certainly isn't worthy of inclusion in ITN. This no-confidence motion clearly should have one (or at the very least a prominent section in the article Andrew mentions) and we shouldn't list it under the Barnier BLP just because nobody has created the necessary proper prose for it. — Amakuru (talk) 15:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now due to lack of article This probably already counts for ITN/R (as many have already noted), and even without that this is already significant for being the first time since 1962 that a French government lost a no-confidence motion. All the more reason then that there should be a separate article for this, because that same 1962 motion has been at least covered under the 1962 French presidential election referendum, and more recently the ITN blurb for Imran Khan's deposition in April 2022 also bolded the No-confidence motion against Imran Khan article. Yo.dazo (talk) 16:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose because this is notable in France and I put it in 2024, but this hasn't led to a new head of government being appointed. Barnier is still the caretaker PM. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 18:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- As many have said above this, this only means that this doesn't count as WP:ITN/R. To me at least, being the first time a French government was dissolved by a no-confidence vote since 1962 is enough for WP:ITNSIGNIF. Yo.dazo (talk) 20:04, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose because this is notable in France and I put it in 2024, but this hasn't led to a new head of government being appointed. Barnier is still the caretaker PM. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 18:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Barnier has resigned as PM of France. TheCorriynial (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can we have an update here? Either post it or don't, but it's not really "news" anymore... Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- ITN is not a news ticker, we are not required to post things in a hasty manner. That part of france's govt still remains collapsed, so this is still very relevant. — Masem (t) 20:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- The nomination is about the VONC, not the continuing travails of the French government. If it is posted soon then it will have been twenty-six hours since: either modify the blurb or close the discussion. We shouldn't be "hasty", but we equally shouldn't be letting news discussions run into a third day. There's no point. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- We have a seven day period for noms to be added and posted for ITN for a reason, it's for us to feature quality articles that have been in the news, not to keep readers abreast of the news. Masem (t) 21:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- The nomination is about the VONC, not the continuing travails of the French government. If it is posted soon then it will have been twenty-six hours since: either modify the blurb or close the discussion. We shouldn't be "hasty", but we equally shouldn't be letting news discussions run into a third day. There's no point. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- ITN is not a news ticker, we are not required to post things in a hasty manner. That part of france's govt still remains collapsed, so this is still very relevant. — Masem (t) 20:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with Masem - no need for hastiness. Also: Macron just announced a couple of hours ago that he will nominate a new PM "in the coming days". We might as well wait for the nomination of the new PM, and then fold the vote of no confidence into the blurb. Khuft (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now because there is no article yet. The political situation in France is very fluid and so we might be getting a lot of events and we don't want to be a news ticker. Maybe as these events unfold, we would have had the time to write a comprehensive article about them. Tradediatalk 08:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support due to the creation of Collapse of the Barnier government. CitrusHemlock 16:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Marked as Ready after counting 12–4 in favor of posting. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 22:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Jared Isaacman nominated as NASA administrator
[edit]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.
Blurb: Jared Isaacman (pictured) is nominated by Donald Trump as the next administrator of NASA. (Post)
News source(s): (Bloomberg) (Reuters)
Credits:
- Nominated by WhatIsMars (talk · give credit)
- Oppose good faith nom, but we're not going to post the cabinet appointments of any president, or minister appointments of any PM. Certainly the nominations of Gaetz, Hegseth, and RFK Jr are more newsworthy than this nomination. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I didn't know that. How can I withdraw the nomination? WhatisMars (talk) 16:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose We don't need to be posting non-head of state-level job assignments for any country. Estreyeria (talk) 16:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, in addition to the fact there is no confirmation by the senate yet for this. None of these appointments are set in stone yet. Masem (t) 16:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Brian Thompson
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/12/04/nyregion/brian-thompson-uhc-ceo-shot
Credits:
- Nominated by QueensanditsCrazy (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: CEO of United Healthcare, insurance company QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as the article about him was just created today and looking through older news, I don't see any type of coverage that would have made him notable before this shooting, this failing BLP1E. And while we could consider the event as possibly notable, there's very little known as to motive to make a good article on it.Masem (t) 15:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- That reason @Masem, is not mentioned as an RD requirement in WP:ITN/DC. This RD 100% meets the requirements laid out at RD:ITN/DC, so this "vote" should not be considered. Also, that it's brand new is now a stale argument on December 6th for this December 4th event. Nfitz (talk) 23:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Notability is a necessary element of quality assessment. And while it may be possible that notability of a person prior to their death could come in the form of post-death obits and other pieces, that simply hasn't happen here. Details about his life that are presently in the article are superfilious and do not show significant coverage from secondary sources. — Masem (t) 00:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- superfilious? That's not a word, nor does supercilious make any sense. Nevertheless, a notability debate is not on-topic here. Please discuss this in an appropriate forum. Nfitz (talk) 00:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- probably meant "superfluous" Bremps... 03:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, that's probably it. Ironically it's the discussion of notability here that's superfluous! Nfitz (talk) 08:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- probably meant "superfluous" Bremps... 03:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- superfilious? That's not a word, nor does supercilious make any sense. Nevertheless, a notability debate is not on-topic here. Please discuss this in an appropriate forum. Nfitz (talk) 00:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Notability is a necessary element of quality assessment. And while it may be possible that notability of a person prior to their death could come in the form of post-death obits and other pieces, that simply hasn't happen here. Details about his life that are presently in the article are superfilious and do not show significant coverage from secondary sources. — Masem (t) 00:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- That reason @Masem, is not mentioned as an RD requirement in WP:ITN/DC. This RD 100% meets the requirements laid out at RD:ITN/DC, so this "vote" should not be considered. Also, that it's brand new is now a stale argument on December 6th for this December 4th event. Nfitz (talk) 23:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Given that he technically does have an article now, I think he passes notability if there's enough info to expand the article. Until then, it's not ready. Estreyeria (talk) 15:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. It's currently a half step above a stub and there are legitimate 1E concerns. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:23, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support there is an AP article out now that talks about his life before he was assassinated, but I understand the concerns that he didn't really get much media coverage before he was killed. Scuba 20:31, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Lean Oppose I'm not too sure if Thompson is really notable other than his death. He isn't that widely known as the CEO of UnitedHealth and thus the article may violate WP:BLP1E. INeedSupport :3 04:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Nfitz, 331dot, Alsoriano97, BD2412, and MtPenguinMonster: the other RD/blurb for Brian Thompson was closed, so you all should (re)comment here. Natg 19 (talk) 06:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks significantly improved and very well referenced; it's good to go. And I'm seeing a lot more media reports about this death, than many that are listed at RD. Some of the opposition above seems to not have any weight, as if an article for a person exists, then it's the quality of the article that's the issue; not a debate their notability! Nfitz (talk) Nfitz (talk) 07:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article seems to be well-cited, and cover a decent breadth of the subject's life & career; a very solid Start-class article, (and potentially well on its way to a C-class in the coming days at this rate) thus passing the threshold for RD. Also, while the article didn't exist until this person's death, that does not really speak of WP:SINGLEEVENT, and more just to how many people who do meet the notability threshold for WP slip through the cracks just because they don't happen to be prominent in the fields presently-active Wikipedians care about. Being specifically named in a pretty sizable insider trading prosecution definitely adds another dimension, and he was in a position that arguably gave him more power than a single member of perhaps any country's legislature. So I'm disinclined to put much worry in any 1E concerns; it almost feels as if those citing them as their "oppose" are neglecting to notice the rest of this person's history as a result of this article only cropping up in the past 24 hours. Nottheking (talk) 08:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- No, take out the events from yesterday, and what you are left with is an article that fails WP:N and WP:NBIO. The coverage of his life that has come out after his death is very superficial, and most of it is stuff that is more in conjunction with his function as CEO of UHC, which is not an aspect of notability related to the person themselves but of UHC. I looked myself for sources on him as a person published before the events of yesterday, and there was only weak primary sources (noting him becoming CEO) This is exactly the type of scenario that WP:BLP1E is meant to avoid, where after death there may be some coverage but no indication that the person was notable before death. As I noted in the other nomination, if anything, this is something that should be covered in the UHC article, not a separate article for a weakly notable event and non-notable individual. — Masem (t) 13:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Be that as it may, @Masem, your point is not relevant to the discussion here. The requirement for RDs at WP:ITN/DC are 100% met, so this isn't a discussion for this forum. Nfitz (talk) 00:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- When an article is created on the person's death, we have in the past questioned if the person was really notable to start with. Otherwise, people could game this to create an article about numerous non notable people that due as part of a news event, and then push them to RD. — Masem (t) 00:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's fair to examine the question on if they were notable. However, it is not correct to simply assume that they were not notable just because an article did not exist until their death. After all, that assumption also logically extends to the assumption that anyone who doesn't already have a WP article on them must not be notable, which clearly lands into the realm of logical fallacy.
- The failure of Wikipedia's editors to keep up with an unending requirement for exhaustive coverage does not speak anything towards the merit of the subject matter, merely the biases of Wikipedia's editors. Like the numerous biases known present in Wikipedia (which get discussed here all the time, such as how non-English-language locales tend to get ignored) the solution is to attempt to address these bias-related gaps... Not to attempt justification of those gaps. Nottheking (talk) 19:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- When an article is created on the person's death, we have in the past questioned if the person was really notable to start with. Otherwise, people could game this to create an article about numerous non notable people that due as part of a news event, and then push them to RD. — Masem (t) 00:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Be that as it may, @Masem, your point is not relevant to the discussion here. The requirement for RDs at WP:ITN/DC are 100% met, so this isn't a discussion for this forum. Nfitz (talk) 00:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- No, take out the events from yesterday, and what you are left with is an article that fails WP:N and WP:NBIO. The coverage of his life that has come out after his death is very superficial, and most of it is stuff that is more in conjunction with his function as CEO of UHC, which is not an aspect of notability related to the person themselves but of UHC. I looked myself for sources on him as a person published before the events of yesterday, and there was only weak primary sources (noting him becoming CEO) This is exactly the type of scenario that WP:BLP1E is meant to avoid, where after death there may be some coverage but no indication that the person was notable before death. As I noted in the other nomination, if anything, this is something that should be covered in the UHC article, not a separate article for a weakly notable event and non-notable individual. — Masem (t) 13:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - It seems incredible that a person of this significance and a story of this magnitude would fail BLP1E, but here we are. This is where Wikipedia's rules have the right of it. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's not a rule, @WaltCip. The (not a ) rule here is that RD's are based on quality - not the person - as long as the article exists. There's no AFD going on, and even a renaming discussion doesn't have consensus. Will the closer please disregard this "vote". As noted above, comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. Nfitz (talk) 23:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Notability is part of an article's quality. — Masem (t) 00:21, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- If notability was an issue the article would have been at AFD or another forum. It isn't. Please discuss this in an appropriate forum. Nfitz (talk) 00:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is currently ongoing RFCs about moving or merging the article to "Killing of...", so yes, it is being considered. — Masem (t) 13:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- As long as there is an ongoing RFC on whether this person merits a separate article, this article should not be up for consideration for ITN/RD. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is currently ongoing RFCs about moving or merging the article to "Killing of...", so yes, it is being considered. — Masem (t) 13:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- If notability was an issue the article would have been at AFD or another forum. It isn't. Please discuss this in an appropriate forum. Nfitz (talk) 00:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Notability is part of an article's quality. — Masem (t) 00:21, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's not a rule, @WaltCip. The (not a ) rule here is that RD's are based on quality - not the person - as long as the article exists. There's no AFD going on, and even a renaming discussion doesn't have consensus. Will the closer please disregard this "vote". As noted above, comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. Nfitz (talk) 23:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, very obviously a topic of significance receiving international coverage. Morgan695 (talk) 17:28, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD The death itself is notable, as the assassination of a CEO is unusual. The article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's remarkable that Brian Thompson (disambiguation) and Brian Thompson got high traffic yesterday -- more than Elon Musk or Michel Barnier. This shows that lots of readers are looking for the topic and having trouble finding it. ITN's primary purpose is
To help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news.
As the name is common, putting it in RD without any prose seems inadequate and so a blurb would be appropriate. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:57, 6 December 2024 (UTC)- As stated many many times, ITN is not picking how it handles ITNC based on viewcounts. — Masem (t) 13:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- We need to keep in mind around all of this that this is the type of sensationalist journalism that we should not be trying to promote on WP as an encyclopedia. For the mainstream media, it is clearly a story that is driving them clicks, and its being heavily discussed on social media (not necessarily in good ways), but from the standpoint of an actual encyclopedic-level event, it so far has very little impact on the larger picture. This is the type of bias we have to be very cautious of falling for. One person, who was not notable, was killed by another person, who was not notable before all this, which most of the time would have been buried to local news. But because this happened in NYC in broad daylight, and that the person that was killed was head of a company that numerous people want to hate, its blown up to this big story. Type of stuff that if this had happened before the Internet, we'd probably never would have covered. --Masem (t) 13:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pretty much what Masem said; the story doesn't have legs. No long-term significance to speak of, in contrast to something such as the Sandy Hook shootings, the reverberations of which are still felt to this day. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- There could be implications in the future (what social media cheering on is this form of vigilante justice against anti-consumer corporations, and I would not be surpised if we similar incidents) but that's a huge CRYSTAL that we shouldn't be using to claim importance on WP. The event can be documented, but that doesn't make it ITN. And to add to this, to try to stretch what little pre-death coverage there was for the bio article, there's BLP problems now with it (the whole controversies section is more a corporate matter than him as a person), which is not appropriate at all. This is a prime example of how bad we are nowadays around NOTNEWS and dealing with such matters. — Masem (t) 14:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree with this
Type of stuff that if this had happened before the Internet, we'd probably never would have covered.
The killing of a CEO of a major company in broad daylight would always been a big story, even in 1980. Also, just because it "would not have been notable in 1980" does not mean that it is not notable in 2024. GNG is clearly met due to the media coverage surrounding the person's killing (and the current search for the perpetrator). Natg 19 (talk) 18:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)- A burst of news coverage, of which this still is, is not sufficient for notability per GNG and NEVENT. There is no indication of enduring coverage. Same applies to BLP, which is why BLP1E exists.
- And keep in mind, we are seeing the impacts of 24/7 news coverage (which didn't exist before the internet) and the aspect that social media attention is keeping this as a high-priority story for the media. The amount of coverage about Thompson and the impact on UHC is surprisingly small compared to the coverage of the manhunt for the suspect. Masem (t) 18:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you (or WaltCip) feel so strongly about this, feel free to nominate this article at AfD. Currently, this article is well-cited and is solidly written, which meets the standards at RD. ITN is not for arguing for or against an RD's notability. Notability discussions should occur at the appropriate venues. Natg 19 (talk) 19:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree with this
- There could be implications in the future (what social media cheering on is this form of vigilante justice against anti-consumer corporations, and I would not be surpised if we similar incidents) but that's a huge CRYSTAL that we shouldn't be using to claim importance on WP. The event can be documented, but that doesn't make it ITN. And to add to this, to try to stretch what little pre-death coverage there was for the bio article, there's BLP problems now with it (the whole controversies section is more a corporate matter than him as a person), which is not appropriate at all. This is a prime example of how bad we are nowadays around NOTNEWS and dealing with such matters. — Masem (t) 14:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pretty much what Masem said; the story doesn't have legs. No long-term significance to speak of, in contrast to something such as the Sandy Hook shootings, the reverberations of which are still felt to this day. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The RD requirements as laid out in the ITN guidelines are met. Opposing for WP:GNG reasons is trying to litigate the merge discussion on the article's talk page through its ITN nom. It behooves noting that at the present time, there are 40 votes opposed to merging and only 19 votes in favour - the anti-notability argument is a minority view which is far from consensus, and trying to "win" the discussion here in defiance of consensus is shortcutting the process. If an admin DOES take the underlying WP:GNG argument into account, they should look at the discussion holistically, including reading the entire merge proposal discussion on the article's talk page. If the oppose votes outnumber the support votes here, that gives a false impression because there is an emerging consensus that he is sufficiently notable for his own article (and in turn, for RD so long as quality requirements are met). FlipandFlopped ツ 16:21, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. The article is now expanded and suitable for RD. This seems like a case where a notable death brings light on an individual that arguably met the notability standards beforehand, given the pre-killing sources available. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support. Per Masem, this is clearly WP:BLP1E territory, but per Flipandflopped, this is not the appropriate venue to be considering notability. Andrew Davidson made the good point that ITN's purpose is to allow people to find information they may have seen in the news on Wikipedia. This isn't the place to be debating whether his death should be in the news. Rather, we should be taking what is in the news and directing users to its location on Wikipedia. /home/gracen/ (yell at me here) 23:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Chiung Yao
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, TVBS
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:1945:DA90:79BF:B3FA (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Cheetahze (talk · give credit) and Vycl1994 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Taiwanese romance novelist. 240F:7A:6253:1:1945:DA90:79BF:B3FA (talk) 11:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support if the CN can be addressed. It's being widely reported in English speaking press as well so those sources could be used to improve the article. Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:32, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support CN has been addressed. --Free ori (talk) 23:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks ready to go. Gelasin (talk) 05:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good to go, tagging ready. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Should this use a blurb as per WP:ITNRDBLURB? The death itself is newsworthy. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 01:21, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think "suicide" qualifies to many here as a "newsworthy death" (and many are opposed to death blurbs in general except in rare cases). Natg 19 (talk) 03:34, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
December 3
[edit]
December 3, 2024
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
2024 XA1 impact
[edit]Blurb: 2024 XA1 impacts Earth over eastern Siberia. (Post)
News source(s): [3] [4]
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Elios Peredhel (talk · give credit)
- Created by KyloRen2017 (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Not sure if this is notable enough, but being a meteoroid that struck inhabited areas and was witnessed by many, I will nominate this. 11th successfully predicted impact ever. Elios Peredhel (talk) 07:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good faith nom, but it's hard to find the ITN justification here. While it's still novel to accurately predict a meteroid's impact with Earth before it happens, it's already far from a "first," and outside of this, has seemingly little for ramifications. It'd be an excellent DYK candidate, however. Nottheking (talk) 08:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose the coverage seems pretty brief and minor. And it was so small (only 700 millimetres) it didn't even reach earth. There's millions of impacts a day! Nfitz (talk) 00:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose; not notable enough for a blurb. Gelasin (talk) 05:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 Namibian general election
[edit]Blurb: Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah (pictured) is elected as President of Namibia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah (pictured) is announced the winner of the 2024 Namibian general election
Alternative blurb II: Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah (pictured) is announced the winner of the disputed 2024 Namibian general election
Alternative blurb III: Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah (pictured) is elected President of Namibia, while her SWAPO party wins a plurality of seats in the National Assembly.
News source(s): (Al Jazeera) (BBC)
Credits:
- Nominated by Ornithoptera (talk · give credit)
- Updated by IntergalacticOboist (talk · give credit), Ornithoptera (talk · give credit) and Borgenland (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Needs some updating, I will try and attend to this when I’m home from work this evening. Updated, aftermath section added. The election was called for Nandi-Ndaitwah earlier today by major networks, amid the counting process. She is set to become Namibia’s first female president. Ornithoptera (talk) 20:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
soft oppose results still coming in, even the articles cited by nominator note that the election is being disputed. not sure why they'd treat it as if Netumbo uncontroversially won. Scuba 21:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)- Please keep in mind WP:AGF. It was not my intention to imply such a thing. In terms of the vote count, it is 90 percent in, and preliminary investigations by the African Union didn’t note any sort of discrepancies thus far. Seems like Itula challenged the previous election results as well, but I’m not familiar regarding the blurb's wording if the previous presidential election was on ITN. Ornithoptera (talk) 21:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry if I sounded accusational, but the general rule of thumb is that if there is any doubt in an election results to word the ITN blurb along the lines of "was declared the winner of" instead of "won the". Scuba 01:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Changing vote to support the article has been updated. Scuba 15:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please keep in mind WP:AGF. It was not my intention to imply such a thing. In terms of the vote count, it is 90 percent in, and preliminary investigations by the African Union didn’t note any sort of discrepancies thus far. Seems like Itula challenged the previous election results as well, but I’m not familiar regarding the blurb's wording if the previous presidential election was on ITN. Ornithoptera (talk) 21:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hold but support when final results are declared This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. This is an election of a country's head of state and government. 99.18% of the vote is in and with almost 58% of that vote going to Netumbo, it seems clear the remaining votes will not be enough to change the outcome. I think this is safe to post. Gelasin (talk) 03:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Would be a lot cooler if it were longer but this is postable. Bremps... 06:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is in good shape. The Kip (contribs) 22:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom. IDB.S (talk) 05:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support No outstanding issues. @Admins willing to post ITN: we look to have consensus. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted a modified ALT1. Schwede66 23:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Schwede66, mind throwing me and the updaters a credit? Thank you in advance! Ornithoptera (talk) 00:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oops. Completely forgot about credits for anything that I've posted this morning. Sorry; I'll fix that. Schwede66 00:16, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Schwede66, mind throwing me and the updaters a credit? Thank you in advance! Ornithoptera (talk) 00:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Alt3 to show that there are spearete electiosn for pres and parliament. Sheila1988 (talk) 13:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Mohamed Ali Yusuf
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Idil News)(Garowe Online) (Hiiraan Online)
Credits:
- Nominated by QalasQalas (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: former Puntland vice president and Minister of Finance died on December 3, coverage of his death confirmed. The overall article seems well-sourced with reliable and primary citations needed for nominations.
- Soft support article lacks any sense of prose, just being bullet points, and there is a random map for some reason, but everything is properly cited. Scuba 16:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Particular thanks to @Alsoriano97 and @Sahaib who removed unnecessary random maps. QalasQalas (talk) 18:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- On one hand, it's WP:PROSELINE, on the other hand, it's hard to get the article to a much better state considering that not every country has a strong press. Bremps... 19:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The article is well-sourced. Gelasin (talk) 03:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Not the best prose ever, but I think it's good enough. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:04, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 South Korean martial law
[edit]Blurb: South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol declares martial law. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The South Korean National Assembly votes to lift the declaration of martial law by President Yoon Suk Yeol.
Alternative blurb II: The South Korean National Assembly unanimously voted to lift the declaration of martial law after President Yoon Suk Yeol declares it a couple of hours earlier.
Alternative blurb III: South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol attempts to declare martial law.
News source(s): CNN
Theparties (talk) 14:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment — There is an appropriate article at 2024 South Korean government crisis, but I cannot move it to mainspace. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:41, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for the appropriate article on the event to be mainspaced and developed adequately. Windfarmer — talk 14:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait until the ramifications are known. This was stated in a late night address and didn't state what measures were going to be taken. Most analysts are saying this is political posturing since he, being right-leaning, has had clashes with the left-leaning Parliament. Masem (t) 14:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just adding that once we have a better picture if the situation, this is completely appropriate to post. Just that it only happened a couple hours ago so there's no clear picture yet. — Masem (t) 15:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- The news is saying political parties have been suspended. Secretlondon (talk) 15:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- But there is also statements that the Parliament is meeting at a different location as to block the martial law statement. There's a lot of suddenly moving parts, and as ITN is not a news ticker, it's better to have a stable picture if what is happening than to rush a half finished article based on initial reports. — Masem (t) 15:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- The news is saying political parties have been suspended. Secretlondon (talk) 15:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just adding that once we have a better picture if the situation, this is completely appropriate to post. Just that it only happened a couple hours ago so there's no clear picture yet. — Masem (t) 15:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yonhap has reported that martial law suspended parliament and political parties, and banned all protests under threat of arrest. A head of state and government making an announcement like that alone, regardless of the actual implementation, is ITN material. Juxlos (talk) 14:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Yonhap reported that 'martial law army' is forcing their way into the SK Parliament. Isn't this essentially a coup attempt? Juxlos (talk) 15:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hard to say what it is. There's reports that members are being let into Parliament. In which case, it will quickly vote to end martial law. On the other hand, the order seems to suspend parliament - which given parliament is supposed to vote on martial law, would indeed be a coup. Where's the Prime Minister - I see no mention in the reporting; he's in for a surprise when he gets up in the morning. Nfitz (talk) 16:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Yonhap reported that 'martial law army' is forcing their way into the SK Parliament. Isn't this essentially a coup attempt? Juxlos (talk) 15:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very major news, first time since 1980 that South Korea experienced martial law GodzillamanRor (talk) 15:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support meets significance criteria.--Takipoint123 (talk) 15:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Moonreach (talk) 15:23, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability, wait for a better quality. 3000MAX (talk) 15:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait The parliament is in session—let's see if they override the proclamation. The AP (talk) 15:32, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- From what I've seen MPs have been prevented from entering the national assembly PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- [5] well the assembly is gathering as of now - so we should wait for the time being The AP (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- The opposition literally had to climb over the gates to get in, what is going on PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- The parliament voted unanimously, with 190 lawmakers voting to overturn the proclamation of martial law - and apparently the military have left the National Assembly. A YTN correspondent at Ministry of Defense stated that Spokesperson said until the president orders the quell, martial law is in effect - so it is pretty much not clear , and we should wait for new info to come in before posting it to the main page The AP (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- The opposition literally had to climb over the gates to get in, what is going on PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- [5] well the assembly is gathering as of now - so we should wait for the time being The AP (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- From what I've seen MPs have been prevented from entering the national assembly PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Major liberal democracy has the army occupying the capital city, martial law being declared with the national assembly suspended. Government taking control of media, political activities banned. This is massive and should be posted. But we definitely need more details ASAP, it seems like nobody knows what the hell is going on in South Korea right now PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait Until it is more clear what is going on. Gust Justice (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for at least 12 hours. Since the declaration was made at 22:30 local time, it will take longer to get consequences and write well curated article. Didgogns (talk) 15:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Somehow the article is well written in such a small amount of time, so I'd post-posting support Didgogns (talk) 17:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support in a few hours -- absolutely notable and major news. Information will be coming in very very quickly and very very messily, so we may need to wait a couple of hours since this is still very hot off the press.(Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 16:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The headline as it stands now is newsworthy, specifics can be added as the story develops. CitrusHemlock 16:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait Definitely ITN-worthy, but it's far too soon to nominate now. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 16:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes as it seems like the martial law is nullified by Parliament. It would be wise to wait a while before putting on the front page. 2001:D08:C5:E743:511:841C:EC2D:7A6C (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- The order prohibits activities by Parliament. This would suggest that it's certainly a coup attempt, given parliament has to approve. In an advanced democracy! This is important. Nfitz (talk) 16:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment National Assembly unanimously votes to declare it invalid according to CNN. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 16:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes as it seems like the martial law is nullified by Parliament. It would be wise to wait a while before putting on the front page. 2001:D08:C5:E743:511:841C:EC2D:7A6C (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is nothing short of an attempted coup. (the question remains if it's a military coup). This is massive news, the article appears to be good enough. Post now. Nfitz (talk) 16:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Nope, still too soon. How Yong will react to the nullification is a key point to know how this will play out, and until we know that, stability is still in question. — Masem (t) 16:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support in principle, but wait at least 12 hours. It's 1:30 am in Korea and the situation will doubtless change overnight. This appears to be an attempt at a self coup, which is certainly worth an ITN blurb whether it succeeds or fails. We don't know which it will be, but should do by tomorrow morning. Our article is a good start, given what we know so far, but is changing by the minute. Modest Genius talk 16:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support First declaration of martial law since South Korea's democratization. Still left to be seen if it'll last, but this is a major event being broadcast by a lot of news anchors. Dyaquna (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support big international news. Scuba 16:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait* since parliament has just lifted it. How to describe that? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 16:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Regardless, he still declared martial law. Scuba 16:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yoon doesn't seem to be backing down, all depends on whether the military follows parliament or the president. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- he did indeed back down. should still stay up regardless. Scuba 21:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yoon doesn't seem to be backing down, all depends on whether the military follows parliament or the president. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Regardless, he still declared martial law. Scuba 16:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait* since parliament has just lifted it. How to describe that? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 16:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Lean Support The martial law only lasted for around 2 hours but declaring it in the first place is already significant enough. It's very rare for martial law to take effect in general. INeedSupport :3 17:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I added an alt blurb to reflect the sudden lift. INeedSupport :3 17:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support for obvious reasons, but wait until the event ends.
- JohnAdams1800 (talk) 17:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted main blurb. It can be updated when we know more about whether or not it is lifted. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment the assembly has managed to vote to lift it, and troops are leaving the building (they can't have been trying very hard to stop the vote). Still the attempt is hugely noteworthy. Though perhaps we'll have to change it to impeachment shortly. Nfitz (talk) 17:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Clarify that martial law has since been lifted, current blurb gives the impression that it is ongoing. Rose Abrams (T C L) 17:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Military is still maintaining martial law until Yoon orders them otherwise — Masem (t) 18:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Despite the National Assembly lifting the martial law, the military declares the vote invalid and declares that the martial law stays in effect until the president ends it. INeedSupport :3 17:34, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Considering that almost nothing in this situation's final yet, it's probably better to phrase the blurb as an attempted declaration. Added the third altblurb to reflect this. Yo.dazo (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Update I have updated to a variation of altblurb I and II. – robertsky (talk) 18:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pull - I feel my vote is useless at this point but here goes: For a rapidly developing event whose effects are not yet known, posting this within 3 hours of nomination with almost half the !votes being wait was jumping the gun ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 18:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed that it is currently unclear how to properly phrase blurbs for rapidly-developing events, but I think it's only right that something be posted as soon as possible—this is breaking news in the truest possible sense, after all. I'm also against pulling the blurb now, since it would imply that the news sources for this was incorrect in some way. Yo.dazo (talk) 19:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. As of now, MND is waiting for Yoon to call off the martial law, so it is in effect nonetheless, and thus the blurb is misleading. The AP (talk) 19:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The blurb makes it sound like the National Assembly lifted the martial law, which isn't the case, as the President still needs to proclaim it being lifted. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- looks like Yoon has instructed the military to back down from martial law [6], may need an updated blurb. Masem (t) 18:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Apparently a Kowiki user on Discord clarified that it was a machine translation error—and it actually translates to "Speaker of the National Assembly: I sent (letters) to the president and minister of national defense." The AP (talk) 18:34, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Bold Rephrase to "lift the state of martial law" instead of "lift the martial law". QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 18:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Post-Posting Support. Even if the martial law is lifted, it's still a shocking, disruptive, and controversial move that will likely have massive political implications for Yoon when all is said and done. Think the right call was made in posting this. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Reuters confirming Yoon will lift martial law following vote. Masem (t) 20:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Update 2 adjusted the published blurb to account for Yoon's announcement that lifted the martial law. Feel free to adjust the blurb further if required. – robertsky (talk) 00:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Muboshgu, shall we use the article's image instead? The image is already protected as it is being used on zhwiki mainpage as well. – robertsky (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- As long as it appears well at the size, I have no objection. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- dont forget to get the image protected before changing it. Masem (t) 01:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. Changed. It is already protected on commons. I have added to our media protection list as well. – robertsky (talk) 01:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- dont forget to get the image protected before changing it. Masem (t) 01:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- As long as it appears well at the size, I have no objection. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Muboshgu, shall we use the article's image instead? The image is already protected as it is being used on zhwiki mainpage as well. – robertsky (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Less of a comment and more of a question, but the National Assembly has began to vote on Yoon's impeachment after these events. Assuming he is impeached, would we, one, blurb it, and two, would we combine it with this blurb? User:TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 22:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- As that is likely to take place Saturday, it would be better to make it a new nomination to replace the current blurb (if still there) as to make sure the article is still of quality to post. — Masem (t) 23:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Neale Fraser
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:DCB8:3AB4:6112:814C (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Nohomersryan (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Australian tennis player. 240F:7A:6253:1:DCB8:3AB4:6112:814C (talk) 10:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now - The entirety of the statistics table sections are unsourced, and the sourcing in the Biography section is insufficient. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 14:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm seeing quite a few unsourced paragraphs in the Biography section. Gelasin (talk) 03:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
December 2
[edit]
December 2, 2024
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Debbie Mathers
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Independent, People, Rolling Stone
Credits:
- Nominated by Jalapeño (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Mother of Eminem, wrote autobiography My Son Marshall, My Son Eminem. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 contribs 10:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Well-cited enough to be postable. Fair-use image might needed to be removed per WP:F7. Bremps... 17:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support As a Stan since Stan I was able to stretch this page out in some areas. As for the image, I don't know. I've seen pictures survive for people who were much more public-facing than her. [7] Unknown Temptation (talk) 20:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Lucjan Brychczy
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Polish Radio
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Significant figure in his homeland Abcmaxx (talk) 09:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- We don’t post stubs. Schwede66 19:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose so long as it remains a stub. Gelasin (talk) 03:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) The moving sofa problem has been solved
[edit]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.
Blurb: The moving sofa problem has been solved (Post)
News source(s): arXiv
Credits:
- Nominated by Count Iblis (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose I've loved the Hammersley sofa gif in the article ever since I saw it and would love this article to be on the front page, but no third-party recognition shown. Wouldn't be opposed if some shows up. Blythwood (talk) 02:53, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Even ignoring the questionable nature of how significant this is, this is not yet a peer-reviewed published paper, nor covered by the news, so it fails on several counts. --Masem (t) 03:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Problems get solved all the time. The invention of plastic furniture movers that are placed under the legs of a sofa has done more for my upholstery transportation woes than this solution ever will and we didn't blurb those (although, now that I mention it...) Departure– (talk) 03:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability as per Masem. This is not yet peer-reviewed, nor covered by news. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:04, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing:Middle Eastern crisis
[edit]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.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by SuperbowserX (talk · give credit)
Nominator's elaboration: I suggest to update the Ongoing section to specify the broader Middle-Eastern Crisis, and group both the Israel-Hamas and Israel-Hezbollah conflicts under it in brackets, rather than have them be separate bullet points. Right now, the two events are listed separately in the Ongoing section as "Israel–Hamas war • Israeli invasion of Lebanon". My suggestion is we change this to "Middle Eastern crisis (Israel–Hamas war • Israeli invasion of Lebanon)", as both events are happening in the broader context of this crisis and their regional implications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperbowserX (talk • contribs)
- Oppose at least on article quality. It us a bit of an OR there as it is combining multiple events, some being connected, sone not, into a larger crisis, which doesn't seem directly supported by sources. Further, as a top level summary article with many nains/seealsos links, it is far too detailed and too much proseline. Masem (t) 00:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. Article is tagged as having multiple issues. Gelasin (talk) 02:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. That article is way too high level for the purposes of Ongoing. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I commend the effort to try and consolidate all the ongoing Israel/USA-Iranian proxy conflicts into a single article, but as it currently stands that article is of too low quality to be ITN. Scuba 06:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good faith nom, but, as per Masem, the article itself borders on OR. The Kip (contribs) 06:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Spade-toothed whale
[edit]Blurb: The first dissection of an intact spade-toothed whale (specimen pictured) begins in New Zealand (Post)
Alternative blurb: The seventh known specimen of the spade-toothed whale is dissected in New Zealand
News source(s): ABC Australia
Credits:
- Nominated by AviationFreak (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Q8682 (talk · give credit) and Nurg (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Seems of a similar nature and ballpark to the Iberian lynx blurb we posted a few months ago. Dissection is perhaps not the most relevant part of this story, but would be a nice break from the ITNR and war blurbs. The discovery/impact seems ITN-worthy, especially from an encyclopedia vs news-ticker standpoint. AviationFreak💬 17:32, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now - There are a whole lot of scientific advances I'd prioritize posting before the first dissection of a rare whale, let alone the start of it. I definitely agree, though, it seems every new blurb is an election where the incumbent loses or a war cycling. Departure– (talk) 17:44, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sadly the update is a bit sparse for now. The July updates were great tho, so if we're featuring it for that... that could be reasonable but a bit unusual. (image is amazing of course). I would love to support, but I think we need to add some prelimenary results of the disection first if such a thing can exist. It's a bit of a non-story right now. Common problem in the sciences of course. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 21:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not important enough for ITN. Tradediatalk 08:39, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
(Needs attention) 2024 Irish general election
[edit]Blurb: In the Irish general election, Fianna Fáil wins a plurality of seats in the Dáil Éireann. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Fianna Fáil wins the most seats in the Dáil Éireann following the Irish general election but does not achieve a majority
Alternative blurb II: Fianna Fáil wins the most seats in the Dáil Éireann following the Irish general election but their ruling coalition with Fine Gael and The Greens does not achieve a majority
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Created by Bastun (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Previous nomination resulted in consensus to wait until we have a winner; looks to be the case now. Coalition talks could be lengthy given Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael together are 2 seats short of a majority (88 seats), and the Greens have been reduced to just 1 seat (from 12 previously). Needs an aftermath section. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment the format should follow that of the French election earlier this year I think, which had a very similar outcome.[8] I have added an alt blurb which matches this. In any case we certainly shouldn't use "plurality" that's not a term used in the part of the world concerned. I haven't looked at quality yet. — Amakuru (talk) 12:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- but the difference here is no-one was expected to win a majority, the electoral system is geared towards coalitions. Abcmaxx (talk) 14:39, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait, then Support AltBlurb2 once ready per above. CDE34RFV (talk) 19:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- @CDE34RFV: what are we waiting for here exactly? Abcmaxx (talk) 22:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing anymore. It looks good and ready to go. CDE34RFV (talk) 06:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @CDE34RFV: what are we waiting for here exactly? Abcmaxx (talk) 22:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural support now that we have final results This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 05:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose as I'd like to see some expansion of the aftermath section, but I won't fight it. The Kip (contribs) 06:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is literally the result that seasoned observers were expecting; now we have it. Good to go. SerialNumber54129 13:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support - looks good to me. Don't think there's any need to go into the coalition's seats beyond just FF winning the most. estar8806 (talk) ★ 14:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: the 'electoral system' section lacks citations. Most of that is uncontroversial but nevertheless should be supported with references. The 'aftermath' section is a bigger problem, with several paragraphs on the implications for different parties that completely lack sources. The rest of the article is in good shape, but those two sections need fixing before posting. Modest Genius talk 16:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose, will change to support once uncited section is addressed, per Modest Genius. Apart from that, everything checks out. Ornithoptera (talk) 18:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support: counting is done, the article is updated, not sure why this ITN hasn't been updated to reflect that. Scuba 16:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Khalil Ahmad (politician)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Dawn
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs expansion. Ainty Painty (talk) 03:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I took the liberty of fixing the RD header, it was left as "nomination header" initially. Tube·of·Light 03:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, article is stubby. Aydoh8[contribs] 03:44, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. The article is a stub, and we don't post stubs. Gelasin (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
December 1
[edit]
December 1, 2024
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Closed, duplicate) RD: Kelly Powers
[edit]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.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- Comment Redundant. Already nominated on 6 December. Grimes2 (talk) 15:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Craig Rich
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Abishe (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Prominent stalwart at BBC as a renowned meteorologist. Abishe (talk) 21:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 Nzérékoré stampede
[edit]Blurb: At least 56 people have died and dozens of others were injured in a crowd crush during a football match at the Stade du 3 Avril in Nzérékoré, southern Guinea. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A crowd crush during a football match at the Stade du 3 Avril in Nzérékoré, Guinea, injures scores of people, resulting in at least 56 deaths.
Alternative blurb II: At least 56 people have died in a crowd crush during a football match at the Stade du 3 Avril in Nzérékoré, southern Guinea.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Created by Gianluigi02 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Borgenland (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Breaking news out of a country that is very difficult to find credible news reports from. Needs major expansion and Stade du 3 Avril article, details of the match that took place and aftermath section once the situation becomes more clear. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose on quality too short for now. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)- Unfortunately I don't see a lot of good chances for this to be expanded to an encyclopedic quality article. This is the tye of news event that can be slotted into one of our disaster lists, but whether a standalone can even work is questionable. Masem (t) 22:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support seems sufficient length now, though it could be expanded from the French wiki. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately I don't see a lot of good chances for this to be expanded to an encyclopedic quality article. This is the tye of news event that can be slotted into one of our disaster lists, but whether a standalone can even work is questionable. Masem (t) 22:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, seems to be a good length, high death toll
- Kowal2701 (talk) 16:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Mass casualty event, tragic news. Article is of sufficient quality. Bremps... 19:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support I came here to check why this isn't in ITN already! Renerpho (talk) 08:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Stadium article created as stub at Stade du 3 Avril. Renerpho (talk) 08:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: looks good to go now. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Stadium article created as stub at Stade du 3 Avril. Renerpho (talk) 08:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted ALT2. Schwede66 23:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Terry Griffiths
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport, Sky Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by Fats40boy11 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Welsh professional snooker player, coach and pundit. World champion (1979). Article is an FA. Fats40boy11 (talk) 06:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support - No issues that I can see. Mjroots (talk) 06:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Horrible news. Great man. Support inclusion in ITN. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 07:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Ian Redpath
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Australian former international cricketer Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is in good shape, sourced well. Pyramids09 (talk) 00:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks good. Aydoh8[contribs] 03:49, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good to go. HiLo48 (talk) 06:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support @Admins willing to post ITN: looks like unanimous consensus. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:02, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Quite a few references needed. Stephen 06:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Ongoing: Syrian Civil War
[edit]Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Ion.want.uu (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Yeah so basically things r getting pretty serious now with 3 offensives ongoing (SNA, SSG, some various southern rebel groups) so i figured now would be a good time to nominate for ongoing. P.S. if i messed up the nom sorry it’s my first time nominating User:Ion.want.uu
- Oppose It would make more sense to put Northwestern Syria Offensive as ongoing rather than the entire war. For example, The Israel-Hamas war is marked as ongoing, but not the I/P conflict in general. Pyramids09 (talk) 00:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as per Pyramids09. It would make more sense to put the Northwestern Syria Offensive in ongoing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: per Pyramids09 --- Elios Peredhel (talk) 04:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- would it be better than for me to close this nom then reopen with the suggested NW Offensive? Ion.want.uu (talk) 06:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I would wait until the current posted blurb concerning the offensive falls off. Abcmaxx (talk) 14:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for the current blurb to roll off, then support given the concurrent Southern Syria offensive (2024). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
2024 Romanian parliamentary election
[edit]Blurb: In the Romanian parliamentary election, the incumbent Social Democratic Party, led by Victor Negrescu (pictured), wins the most seats in both the Chamber of Deputies and Senate. (Post)
News source(s): Guardian Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Scu ba (talk · give credit)
- Created by Rosenborg BK Fan (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: ITN/R, national parliamentary election. Incumbent broke the year-long trend with elections and won, however, there are still coalition talks as to the exact composition of the government. Scuba 15:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment needs an aftermath section and some prose in the results, other than that it's a good article. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:39, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready. There's no prose at all on the results or aftermath, an unreferenced section and unreferenced table, a blank seats diagram, extensive WP:PROSELINE problems etc. The article needs work before it could be posted. Modest Genius talk 16:53, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Presidential pardon to Hunter Biden
[edit]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.
Blurb: Hunter Biden, convicted on federal gun and tax evasion charges, is pardoned by his father, U.S. President Joe Biden. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Hunter Biden (pictured) is pardoned by his father, President Joe Biden, for all crimes "he has committed or may have committed or taken part in" over a period from January 1 2014 to December 1 2024
News source(s): AP Financial Times The Economist CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by 45.164.174.27 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose It's only being trumpeted between conservative and some extreme liberal voices complaining that Biden said he wouldn't do it in the first place. Hunter has been used as a political pawn and it's very much internal US politics that have little large term impacts. Masem (t) 00:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dismissing the pardon as insignificant overlooks its broader implications. The pardon of a sitting president’s child is a highly unprecedented event. Moreover, ignoring or downplaying the significance of a president pardoning his son blocks public scrutiny to the case, eroding Wikipedia's transparency as a free encyclopedia. It’s an event that speaks to transparency, fairness, and the potential for conflicts of interest, which affect the world's major power. The claim that "it’s only being trumpeted by conservative and extreme liberal voices" suggests that those who disagree with this action are merely a fringe group, which is a gross oversimplification (despite those two groups technically making up over half of the population). By framing the situation in such binary, partisan terms, you ignore the legitimate concerns of the broader public, many of whom may feel uncomfortable with such an unprecedented move regardless of their political affiliation, not even mentioning that there are 4 sources linked there, and none of them can be labeled as conservatives nor extremely liberal. It is essential to separate political leanings from legitimate critiques of power and authority. These concerns are not about "political pawn" narratives—they’re about ensuring checks and balances in governance, something that is central to any healthy democracy. Furthermore, the argument that this is a minor issue with "little long-term impact" fails to understand the symbolic significance of this act. Dismissing the matter as insignificant risks trivializing an important issue that could have far-reaching effects on the public's trust in their leaders. By not addressing this transparently, we allow a culture of impunity to develop—something that harms everybody. In conclusion, minimizing or disregarding the significance of such an unprecedented act is both naive and dangerous.45.164.174.27 (talk) 05:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Given how much criticism there exists on Trump's incoming administration, including those who he had already pardoned, this action by Biden is extremely small in the larger picture of things. It is not going to change the course of US politics one iota from the path it is currently on. It is not WP's place to right great wrongs, or in this case, to call out on the hypocrisy of what Biden promised verses what he actually did, and thus to question the public's trust in US leadership. Masem (t) 05:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dismissing the pardon as insignificant overlooks its broader implications. The pardon of a sitting president’s child is a highly unprecedented event. Moreover, ignoring or downplaying the significance of a president pardoning his son blocks public scrutiny to the case, eroding Wikipedia's transparency as a free encyclopedia. It’s an event that speaks to transparency, fairness, and the potential for conflicts of interest, which affect the world's major power. The claim that "it’s only being trumpeted by conservative and extreme liberal voices" suggests that those who disagree with this action are merely a fringe group, which is a gross oversimplification (despite those two groups technically making up over half of the population). By framing the situation in such binary, partisan terms, you ignore the legitimate concerns of the broader public, many of whom may feel uncomfortable with such an unprecedented move regardless of their political affiliation, not even mentioning that there are 4 sources linked there, and none of them can be labeled as conservatives nor extremely liberal. It is essential to separate political leanings from legitimate critiques of power and authority. These concerns are not about "political pawn" narratives—they’re about ensuring checks and balances in governance, something that is central to any healthy democracy. Furthermore, the argument that this is a minor issue with "little long-term impact" fails to understand the symbolic significance of this act. Dismissing the matter as insignificant risks trivializing an important issue that could have far-reaching effects on the public's trust in their leaders. By not addressing this transparently, we allow a culture of impunity to develop—something that harms everybody. In conclusion, minimizing or disregarding the significance of such an unprecedented act is both naive and dangerous.45.164.174.27 (talk) 05:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. Little to no long term impact. Wikipedia is not obligated to show every news item in ITN, and posting or not posting is not an issue of transparency. Natg 19 (talk) 06:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt it's not every day that the President of the United States pardons his son of any and all crimes, both known and unknown, over a decade long period, especially after promising to not to. Scuba 06:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. The Kip (contribs) 06:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Just one more addition to the very long list of people pardoned by the US president. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Heads of state pardon convicted criminals all the time. I don't see why is this one particularly notable given that he's not even been convicted on any of the criminal offences.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- He was convicted on criminal gun possession and tax fraud charges, just never got to sentencing on either case. Else the pardon wouldn't be necessary. Not saying that to support posting, just that these criminal convictions are on the books. — Masem (t) 13:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. Anyway, it doesn't change a lot.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- He was convicted on criminal gun possession and tax fraud charges, just never got to sentencing on either case. Else the pardon wouldn't be necessary. Not saying that to support posting, just that these criminal convictions are on the books. — Masem (t) 13:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, front page/top story of every news outlet. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, ultimately very little long-term significance. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - good-faith nom but very little long-term significance, especially on a global scale. estar8806 (talk) ★ 14:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, the fish stinks from the head down. SerialNumber54129 14:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose historically and internationally irrelevant. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
November 30
[edit]
November 30, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Marianne Preger-Simon
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Recorder
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by Cpfffr (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Pioneer of Modern Dance in the US, later psychotherapist, - the article was mostly there, missing details about husband and two children though. First indication that she died came on 30 November. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support 373 words. This is enough for a "Start" article. The article is also well sourced. Grimes2 (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Grimes2. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Lou Carnesecca
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:25B2:1C93:6185:C6D (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Neverilluminated (talk · give credit) and Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
240F:7A:6253:1:25B2:1C93:6185:C6D (talk) 06:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready. Two unsourced paragraphs and entirely unsourced coaching record. Flibirigit (talk) 22:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
2024 Copa Libertadores final
[edit]Blurb: In association football, Botafogo wins the Copa Libertadores after defeating Atlético Mineiro in the final. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In association football, Botafogo defeats Atlético Mineiro to win the Copa Libertadores final.
News source(s): ge, Uol, AP, beIN, Forbes
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Solon26125 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: The image could also be this one, of Luiz Henrique, who scored the first goal of the match and was elected MVP of the final and of the competition. Solon 26.125 05:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support itnr. Probably post motm instead of club logo. 27.96.223.193 (talk) 05:50, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality missing aftermath section. Given Botafogo is showing that scrapping the long-established existing system of ownership prevalent throughout South America with the introduction of private investment is bearing results, this looks (for now at least) like a turning point; the article should mention this. Also the fact that Atlético Mineiro were clear favourites and did much better throughout the tournament until the disastrous final isn’t made clear either. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Abcmaxx hard to say Atlético were favorites - Brazilian media were not considering it as such, since despite Atlético's better campaign at the Libertadores, Botafogo leads the Brazilian Championship and may become its champion next Wednesday. There is a section on their road to the final as well. Also, both teams became privately owned, Botafogo is not the only one showing its results. Solon 26.125 22:01, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Solon26125: I stand corrected, but this is why what you said above should be included in the article, rather than just a simple match report. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Abcmaxx hard to say Atlético were favorites - Brazilian media were not considering it as such, since despite Atlético's better campaign at the Libertadores, Botafogo leads the Brazilian Championship and may become its champion next Wednesday. There is a section on their road to the final as well. Also, both teams became privately owned, Botafogo is not the only one showing its results. Solon 26.125 22:01, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
2024 Georgian post-election protests
[edit]Blurb: Protests erupt in Georgia after its government formally announces the country will suspend its application for EU membership. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Re-nominating as more comprehensive article has been created and previous nomination withdrawn. Protests have severely escalated, widespread police brutality akin to the 2020 Belarusian protests. The president has called the government illegitimate, which is very unusual. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support hopefully they can stop their oligarchs from trying to abolish their sovereignty. Scuba 03:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support on notability. This seems like a reverse January 6 to me, an American, with the president and a large number of protestors (and what seem to be a larger proportion of the civilian population) rejecting their recent election's results. Oppose on quality - everything's cited but it could definitely stand to be better organized. Departure– (talk) 04:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Make that strong oppose on quality - I just now noticed the amount of cn tags. Departure– (talk) 04:44, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality only. There's definitely violence associated with this, and the EU membership withdrawl itself is also newsworthy. But as noted, the article has many unsourced paragraphs, and I would urge those that want to see this posted to try to avoid day-by-day blows and try to write how the protests happened more narratively. --Masem (t) 04:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance. Lean oppose on quality for now, though the target article and blurb are better than the previous nomination. This reminds me of Euromaidan and the colour revolutions. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 04:58, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- I no longer object to the quality of the article, although there is still some room for improvement. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 07:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance. The quality is not perfect but seems to be improving; didn't spot any cn tags now. Yakikaki (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Support: Notable event; quality is slowly improving. Elios Peredhel (talk) 04:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The protests haven't yet succeeded to make any significant changes in country's politics, and the violence hasn't resulted in deaths and destruction of cultural monuments. The right to protest is one of the fundamental human rights, so a protest isn't notable for inclusion per se. As for the "suspended application for EU membership", this is a POV-pushing incorrect statement as it appears that the accession talks were only postponed. Moreover, even if the accession talks were suspended, they would have absolutely zero impact on the EU (frankly speaking, it's not a withdrawal from the EU like Brexit).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- They are burning effigies of Ivanishvili and firing fireworks at the parliament building, and Georgian Dream offices are being demolished. Police are beating men, women and minors alike to a pulp in the street in plain view. Protests don't have to be successful to be posted, the 2020 Belarusian protests were posted, and they weren't successful at all. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- The significance of those protests was that they happened in a dictatorship where authorities supress any form of democratic movement and there were no protests of that scale since country's independence. Georgia is more democratic than Belarus and has a history of similar protests in the past, so these protests aren't really that special for now. Burning effigies, firing fireworks and demolishing offices are regular activities conducted during violent protests everywhere around the globe. Unless there are confirmed deaths, severely damaged cultural and historical landmarks, or real changes in country's politics, I don't think these protests are ready for posting (article's quality aside).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Giving the last elections were equally quite blatantly falsified, the president has called the Georgian Dream, a party which wants to outlaw all opposition parties, a "rogue government", and what we are currently seeing is the authorities supressing any form of democratic movement, there is little difference between the two. The only difference is that Belarus has been a dictatorship since 1995 and not 2024. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that there's clearly a democratic backsliding in Georgia mostly because of the 'foreign agent' law, but I'm unsure to what extent the election results were falsified (if falsified at all). I spent almost two weeks travelling around Georgia last year and got a different picture than the one presented by the Western media. The majority of people acknowledged that they had to maintain normal relations with Russia due to the economic dependence and fear from potential Russian invasion. My conclusion was that many Georgians support Georgian Dream simply because they don't want a Ukrainian scenario or an economic collapse in case they introduce sanctions as requested by the EU (Note that Russia is one of Georgia's largest trade partners, many Russians visit Georgia and spend a lot of money there, and Russia is home to the largest Georgian diaspora in the world.). In other words, Georgia's geopolitics without a land border with the EU is such that they have to maintain good relations with Russia. That being said, I don't trust Western media about the situation in Georgia at all, especially the labels that not being pro-EU automatically means pro-Russian, and I believe that the election results were not falsified to the extent to change the winner (Moreover, there are only accusations from the opposition parties that the results were falsified with no proof, and international observers refrained from declaring that the election was free and fair or that there was an electoral fraud.). This is my opinion built upon my personal experience from visiting Georgia. Others may have other opinions.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Georgia is a close-knit society, with a small population. The country is full of KGB agents and people with pro-Russian interests. Unless you are Georgian or at least speak the language then the locals will not tell you the whole story in order to safeguard themselves. Many still remember the 2008 invasion, or the upheaval in the 90s. A third of the country is still occupied by Russia. The Georgian Dream has around 30-35% electoral support, which is significant, but no way do they have majority popular support, and the generational divide is very wide, as the younger population are staunchly pro-European. The pro-Russian element is to do with oligarch money, which they are using to buy power. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that there's clearly a democratic backsliding in Georgia mostly because of the 'foreign agent' law, but I'm unsure to what extent the election results were falsified (if falsified at all). I spent almost two weeks travelling around Georgia last year and got a different picture than the one presented by the Western media. The majority of people acknowledged that they had to maintain normal relations with Russia due to the economic dependence and fear from potential Russian invasion. My conclusion was that many Georgians support Georgian Dream simply because they don't want a Ukrainian scenario or an economic collapse in case they introduce sanctions as requested by the EU (Note that Russia is one of Georgia's largest trade partners, many Russians visit Georgia and spend a lot of money there, and Russia is home to the largest Georgian diaspora in the world.). In other words, Georgia's geopolitics without a land border with the EU is such that they have to maintain good relations with Russia. That being said, I don't trust Western media about the situation in Georgia at all, especially the labels that not being pro-EU automatically means pro-Russian, and I believe that the election results were not falsified to the extent to change the winner (Moreover, there are only accusations from the opposition parties that the results were falsified with no proof, and international observers refrained from declaring that the election was free and fair or that there was an electoral fraud.). This is my opinion built upon my personal experience from visiting Georgia. Others may have other opinions.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Giving the last elections were equally quite blatantly falsified, the president has called the Georgian Dream, a party which wants to outlaw all opposition parties, a "rogue government", and what we are currently seeing is the authorities supressing any form of democratic movement, there is little difference between the two. The only difference is that Belarus has been a dictatorship since 1995 and not 2024. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- The significance of those protests was that they happened in a dictatorship where authorities supress any form of democratic movement and there were no protests of that scale since country's independence. Georgia is more democratic than Belarus and has a history of similar protests in the past, so these protests aren't really that special for now. Burning effigies, firing fireworks and demolishing offices are regular activities conducted during violent protests everywhere around the globe. Unless there are confirmed deaths, severely damaged cultural and historical landmarks, or real changes in country's politics, I don't think these protests are ready for posting (article's quality aside).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- They are burning effigies of Ivanishvili and firing fireworks at the parliament building, and Georgian Dream offices are being demolished. Police are beating men, women and minors alike to a pulp in the street in plain view. Protests don't have to be successful to be posted, the 2020 Belarusian protests were posted, and they weren't successful at all. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on principle but Oppose on quality, none if the current protests are actually documented, only the govt level responses. Masem (t) 15:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Important enough especially in the context of the cold war between west and east. Tradediatalk 03:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Bob Bryar
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Post CNN Rolling Stone
Credits:
- Nominated by thrashbandicoot01 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former drummer for My Chemical Romance Tthrashbandicoot01 (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Equipment section has no citations, but once that's fixed should be good to post. PolarManne (talk) 23:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) 2024 Irish general election
[edit]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.
Blurb: The Irish general election results in a hung parliament between Sinn Féin, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In the Irish general election, (Party XYZ) wins a plurality of seats in the Dáil Éireann.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Created by Bastun (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
- Support Article is well-sourced and of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Support per ITNR and quality. SerialNumber54129 12:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Wait Obviosuly ITNR, but I don't think the blurb is particularly good. I would wait until we have a more definitive idea of how many seats each party will win, and then look at how reliable sources are describing the outcome. In particular, I think it might be preferable for the blurb to mention which party is the largest. Gust Justice (talk) 00:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Owing to the incredibly complex electoral system used in Ireland, this is about the only blurb we can post for a very long time. Abcmaxx (talk) 01:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe this is a stupid question, but how then do we know the results are going to be close without substantial results, besides the fact that polling SEEMS to show this is the likely result, seemingly similar to last election? DarkSide830 (talk) 04:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say it's a stupid question DarkSide830. We just don't know without substantial results truthfully. The vote transfers are going to differ from voter to voter, and first preference winner does not necessarily equate to whoever gets the most seats. Sinn Fein topped the polls last election, but didn't nominate enough candidates from what I recall, so their excess preferences flowed to smaller left leaning parties. The final coalition wound up excluding SF altogether. I feel like saying it is a hung parliament is reading the tea leaves a bit early. Per my previous comments, The Guardian's article that was used as the news source for this nomination doesn't even mention a "hung parliament" from what I could see. Ornithoptera (talk) 10:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe this is a stupid question, but how then do we know the results are going to be close without substantial results, besides the fact that polling SEEMS to show this is the likely result, seemingly similar to last election? DarkSide830 (talk) 04:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- There was a comment on the last time we ran the Irish election here, and he said that every election as long as he was alive resulted in a hung parliament; I dunno if that's true, but that's plausible. So this blurb indeed is not particularly good, so I'd suggest to wait until we have an idea on how hung it is, I guess. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Owing to the incredibly complex electoral system used in Ireland, this is about the only blurb we can post for a very long time. Abcmaxx (talk) 01:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support regardless of coalition talks, we should include the results as they are now. Scuba 03:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait While first preference votes have been counted, Ireland's STV system means that the final seat count for the various parties (which can determine who would be prime for forming the next government) is not. We have a rough guess using the initial preferences, but I would advise that we wait until we have more than the initial preferences to go off of. Another issue is that the article cited for the blurb does not even mention a hung parliament, it only speaks to the exit poll (which wound up showing Sinn Fein on top, despite Fianna Fail placing first) everything's speculative at this point. Ornithoptera (talk) 06:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait until more results come in, per Ornithoptera. Gelasin (talk) 07:04, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait per others and propose alternative blurb. We shouldn't use "hung parliament" in a non-Westminster context. It makes no sense, as the electoral system is not geared to generate a clear winner. We wouldn't say that the German general election resulted in a hung parliament either. Khuft (talk) 14:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Floods in Malaysia
[edit]Blurb: Floods in Malaysia displace more than 122,000 people. (Post)
News source(s): Channel News Asia
Nominator's comments: Worth for Wikipedia to monitor and consider adding information if it gets worse. 129.126.8.5 (talk) 10:27, 30 November 2024
- Comment Cleaned up nomination to help IP user who wished to nominate this. 2024–2025 floods in Southeast Asia and South Asia was the only related article I could find. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, sadly. Flooding in SE Asia countries is very routine with thousands killed each year, the problem is that there is usually no single major flood event that gets significant attention in the news to make any single flood event newsworthy. --Masem (t) 13:10, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm astonished you apparently think SE Asian lives are worth less, since they routinely die every year. Banedon (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am speaking to how reliable sources cover these, which give far less attention to other mass casualty events. If these floods where given the same weight of coverage as hurricanes, that would be different, but the fact that we really only see these floods get covered a few times each year despite thd death toll and impact on people there is a sign that these events are more routine. — Masem (t) 16:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm astonished you apparently think SE Asian lives are worth less, since they routinely die every year. Banedon (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. Floods in this region happen too often for this one to be newsworthy enough for ITN. Gelasin (talk) 06:23, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
(Needs action) 2024 Icelandic parliamentary election
[edit]Blurb: In the Icelandic parliamentary election, the Social Democratic Alliance, led by Kristrún Frostadóttir (pictured), wins the most seats in the Alþingi. (Post)
News source(s): AP Bloomberg
Credits:
- Nominated by Scu ba (talk · give credit)
- Created by Number 57 (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: ITN/R, national parliamentary election. Another incumbent lost, however, there are still coalition talks as to the exact composition of the government. Scuba 15:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Appears to be in mostly good shape - there's just one paragraph lacking citation in the Electoral System section. As well, some response to the results in the article would be appreciated. Departure– (talk) 15:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support, per above. Some sections lack citations but apart from that it should be pretty much ready to go. Ornithoptera (talk) 18:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support quality good enough to post and (sadly) better than most election articles. @Admins willing to post ITN: consensus to post before it expires? Abcmaxx (talk) 17:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are a concerning number of citation needed tags, though. Schwede66 18:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
References
[edit]Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline 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: