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 |
Glossaryedit
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 stepsedit
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.
Headersedit
Voicing an opinion on an itemeditFormat 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 updateseditThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
editArchives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives
Sections
editThis 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 9
edit
December 9, 2024
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
|
(Closed) Ali Mahmoud Abbas
editThe 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): (LBC Group)
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.
Well sourced and covered deserves nomination
- Oppose The article has no details of the death which might be expected in the circumstances. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson Considering as developing story, would it be on a presumed death. QalasQalas (talk) 12:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait Unconfirmed other than some videos on Twitter that may or may not be him. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose we should never use social media as a source. Abcmaxx (talk) 16:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- oppose a quick google search provides 0 articles talking about his death, if it happened at all. Scuba 17:19, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Rumors and a dubios video. Grimes2 (talk) 17:23, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose until his death is confirmed by literally any other source. His article states he's still alive. Departure– (talk) 17:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Siaosi Sovaleni
editBlurb: Prime Minister of Tonga Siaosi Sovaleni resigns ahead of a vote of no confidence. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, ABC News (Australia), AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by Moraljaya67 (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: His article has 30 references, but the resignation of head of government is enough for posting. Moraljaya67 (talk) 13:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article is hardly updated with only one sentence in the body about the resignation. Maybe an article about this apparent political crisis would be preferable to the article about the PM himself, but a head of government resigning appears notable enough for ITN. Departure– (talk) 17:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Departure– adds separate article QalasQalas (talk) 17:59, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Eras Tour ends
editThe 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: American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift's concert tour, The Eras Tour, concludes in Vancouver, Canada, becoming the highest-grossing tour of all time and the second-most attended after 149 shows. (Post)
News source(s): The Canadian Press
Credits:
- Nominated by Rushtheeditor (talk · give credit)
- Oppose No precedent for posting the end of events generally, let along individual musicians' tours. Factoids are DYK candidates. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The end of the tour is not the type of aspects we'd post at ITN (we dont even post retirements outside of government leaderships), and the fact it is the highest-grossing is mostly trivia. --Masem (t) 04:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose No series of connected note worthy, unexpected things occurred during the tour making the tour itself infamous to get its end posted. Just like one of the things that made Notre Dame's reopening note worthy for ITN was the reason it got closed- fire. Things like facts could be posted on DYK as suggested above. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 05:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. The Kip (contribs) 05:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose As much as I like Taylor Swift, the end of her tour isn't necessarily news Dyaquna (talk) 05:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment We did post Avengers: Endgame record as the highest-grossing film, not sure what makes this aymore DYK than that. Gotitbro (talk) 07:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I was not aware of that posting, but I would be 100% against it. Natg 19 (talk) 07:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose and close is not the type of content that should be posted on Main Page. Not ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
December 8
edit
December 8, 2024
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Closed) 2024 Israeli invasion of Syria (ongoing)
editThe 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)
News source(s): Axios
- Oppose This is very limited and does not compare to the other "ongoing" conflicts. This is day 1 and might not last much longer. It is a limited reaction to the fall of the Syrian regime. Tradediatalk 22:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now, although replacing Syrian civil war with it could be reconsidered in the following days to weeks if this turns out to become the main theater of fighting. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. These are skirmishes around the Golan Heights, which Israel has occupied for decades. Calling it an invasion of Syria is preposterous. Khuft (talk) 23:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb, oppose ongoing – I would support incorporating this into the current Damascus blurb somehow, Israel's first incursion into Syria since 1974 is still notable, even if its one of many Israeli invasions in the past year. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:49, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps: "Syrian rebel forces capture Damascus and Israel invades southern Syria as overthrown president Bashar al-Assad (pictured) flees to Russia." Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- There's way too much going on now to be able to fit everything into a blurb. I think it's best to just hit the key points. Bremps... 00:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with this blurb. 2605:8D80:560:54FC:A9EE:899B:AD28:4E0F (talk) 00:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not every special military operation is an invasion. Israel invaded Syria decades ago and still hasn't left. But there are now Israeli settlements in the occupied territory - so I'm fine with adding an ongoing about ethnic cleansing. Nfitz (talk) 00:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Is special military operation a sarcastic reference to Putin or not? I'm genuinely curious as I don't have that much background knowledge about who did what in Syria. Bremps... 01:25, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes it is. Israel hasn't even entered an area of Syrian control. They've merely put some troops into the Area of Control, that is, if anything, UN territory. Nfitz (talk) 02:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Is special military operation a sarcastic reference to Putin or not? I'm genuinely curious as I don't have that much background knowledge about who did what in Syria. Bremps... 01:25, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps: "Syrian rebel forces capture Damascus and Israel invades southern Syria as overthrown president Bashar al-Assad (pictured) flees to Russia." Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - no prejudice if Israel captures Damascus. This appears to be a minor operation. Nfitz (talk) 00:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose And we need to stop piling up things in ongoing, its far too long right now as is. --Masem (t) 01:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose minor enough that the new Syrian government doesn't seem to have reacted to it. Israel says it's limited to a defined region. Juxlos (talk) 03:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, if it gets bigger we can circle back This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose A rather minor, seemingly limited part of the ongoing events in Syria . The Kip (contribs) 05:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose not the main issue in any way. And yes, the ongoing section needs a swift trim. TaBaZzz (talk) 05:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Rebel forces capture Damascus
editThe 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: Syrian rebel forces capture Damascus following multiple offensives by various opposition groups. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Syrian president Bashar al-Assad (pictured) flees as rebel forces capture Damascus following multiple offensives by various opposition groups.
Alternative blurb II: The Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad (pictured) collapses as rebel forces capture Damascus following multiple offensives by various opposition groups.
Alternative blurb III: The Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad (pictured) collapses as rebel forces capture Damascus.
News source(s): CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by Departure– (talk · give credit)
- Created by Stranger43286 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by KajMetz (talk · give credit) and Skitash (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Support A decades old dynasty that came to an end is definitely newsworthy. Rager7 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:48, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Much bigger than Notre-Dame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6c5d:5b00:23c3:c1ff:b038:b3a5:d438 (talk) 06:09, 8 December 2024
- Strong support THIS is actual news. A decade of war finally over Abo Yemen✉ 05:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- alt blurb 2 obv Abo Yemen✉ 05:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- EXTRAORDINARLY Support End of a 50-year regime, fall of the capital city. Possibly the end of a 13-year civil war. Top of practically every news site in the entire world. THE POSSIBLE LIBERATION OF MILLIONS OF SYRIANS! This is huge news, totally, totally support this! Vamos Palmeiras (talk) 05:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Support With how things are going, I think the article we should be using is "Fall of the Assad Dynasty" --MaximumMangoCloset (talk) 04:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yeah honestly just change it to "capture" because there is almost a 100% chance that it will fall by the time it is posted Lukt64 (talk) 02:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Clearly notable; this is probably the biggest story of the month so far. It's already on the front page of the BBC, the New York Times, CNN, and quite a few others. Looks like it's Assad who must go, after all. Gelasin (talk) 02:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, Assad is done
- Personisinsterest (talk) 02:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait altblurb It hasn't been officially confirmed that Assad has left. But when it does, support.
- Personisinsterest (talk) 03:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The rebels have apparently taken over various government buildings, and Assad has fled Damascus. I think a more suitable blurb would include “captured” or “taken over” Damascus, but this also works. They have completely won. Hungry403 (talk) 02:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support time to migrate Syria to Ba'athist Syria. Scuba 02:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Added altblurb – Assad has reportedly left the country. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 03:00, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support posting, preferably as soon as possible. Massive development in a long-running conflict. -insert valid name here- (talk) 03:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment – al-Assad is said to have fled Damascus, but not necessarily Syria. We should have the minimum information needed in a blurb like this until the fog of war clears up a bit. DecafPotato (talk) 03:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, maybe a silly thought but does it count as ITN/R as a change of who is charge of the executive? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 03:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Multiple sources saying al-Assad has left and his leadership of Syria is over. Jusdafax (talk) 03:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: "Assad regime collapses as Syrian rebels enter Damascus", Axios
- Personisinsterest (talk) 03:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support but wait for confirmation that Assad has been toppled and where he has fled to. This is one of the biggest stories of the year. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 03:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. There are unconfirmed reports that Bashar Al-Assad's plane has crashed. Sri Lanka Guardian. 104.171.53.110 (talk) 03:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy Support, No brainer. Needs clarifications on what is happening among many news to summarize a good headline for the front page. --AsianHippie (talk) 03:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy support Reuters reported the military essentially giving up, and the Prime Minister is "ready to cooperate". Juxlos (talk) 03:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Notability is obvious, and the article seems to be in solid shape considering how fast-moving the situation is. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 04:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- No question re supporting, but let's give it a few hours for details to stabilize. We have the ongoing entry which will help in the short term, and once we can affirm via sourcing what exactly all has happened, then we can post. Just a few hours should be enough. --Masem (t) 04:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Currently I prefer altblurb, but the situation is changing quickly. Either way, the regime has lost control of the country. Gust Justice (talk) 04:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes Indeed. Top news worldwide and notability is a no-brainer. The long 13 year civil war will finally conclude and Assad's regime and his Syria are completely toasted. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 04:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- STRONG support confirmed2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:28, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support: per above and Damascus has fallen
- QalasQalas (talk) 04:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Assad leaving doesn't necessarily [yet] confirm it has falled. At least we can say Assad is a gonner 2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- See AP: "Syrian government appears to have fallen in stunning end to 50-year rule of Assad family". Gust Justice (talk) 04:35, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't get, so what's your point? QalasQalas (talk) 04:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- The departure of the Assad family doesn't mean the government has fallen. Mubarak's family left Cairo and Sisi is stil there as same old, same old. Hear the PM. There is not new government.2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not analyzing what will happen in the future.
- WP:RS confirmed Reuters, AP and AFP
- Asad administration has fallen
- Damascus is under rebel control
- Syrian National TV said he jetted into a disclosed location
- QalasQalas (talk) 05:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- The departure of the Assad family doesn't mean the government has fallen. Mubarak's family left Cairo and Sisi is stil there as same old, same old. Hear the PM. There is not new government.2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Assad leaving doesn't necessarily [yet] confirm it has falled. At least we can say Assad is a gonner 2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Finally! It's confirmed. The articles are in the nice phase where it's comprehensive before it inevitably devolves into a WP:INDISCRIMINATE hellscape and are postable. Bremps... 04:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I've edited all blurbs to indicate the capture of Damascus, as current news reports. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 04:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Counter edit as untrue. The government collapses when there is a new governemtn and the PM is still talking about transitions. Biden's regime didn't collapse in november.2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Damascus captures =/= government collapse 👍 you must've misread my edit. Here are sources: NBC News, Al Jazeera. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 04:38, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Did you hear the PM? 2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- The PM discussed the peaceful transfer of power, not whether Damascus (the city) has been captured or not. Reliable sources are reporting that the city is captured. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 04:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Did you hear the PM? 2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Damascus captures =/= government collapse 👍 you must've misread my edit. Here are sources: NBC News, Al Jazeera. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 04:38, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Counter edit as untrue. The government collapses when there is a new governemtn and the PM is still talking about transitions. Biden's regime didn't collapse in november.2A00:F3C:A282:0:4C7A:412B:134E:D001 (talk) 04:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support on the top of every news site. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt2 Holy shit. A 50 year dynasty, gone. Top of every news site. qw3rty 04:59, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Fall of a capital city and a dictator, major news Dyaquna (talk) 05:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb for now. Most sources are reporting the capital has fallen. More than that is not yet widely confirmed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, but can we not have a smug-looking photo of the former dictator on our front page? Maybe the opposition flag (File:Flag of the Syrian revolution.svg) or something. If we must have a photo of him, then I suggest (File:Al-Assad 2022 (cropped).jpeg) instead.VR (Please ping on reply) 05:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The greatest news is the fall of the dictator. HurricaneEdgar 05:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support - one of the most groundbreaking news in this decade, the end of a long civil war Ive heard about my whole life, and the satisfying end of an evil and brutal dictatorial regime. Never have been more happier. CR-1-AB (talk) 05:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support - but with a different pic, maybe the one VR suggested — 🧀Cheesedealer !!!⚟ 05:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support with different picture per VR. FlipandFlopped ツ 05:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Urgent Support Refugees can go home now. Grimes2 (talk) 06:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can't tell if this is premature celebration of peace being achieved or a polemical anti-immigration comment, but either way, I'm afraid that right now is probably not a great time to travel to Syria Vanilla Wizard 💙 06:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- ??? Refugees are already returning from Lebanon. How is this different than the quick return of refugees from the camps in Thailand to Cambodia? Nfitz (talk) 06:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Because this particular conflict is too complex and multi-sided to know if the fall of Assad and the end of the war are necessarily the same thing. Vanilla Wizard 💙 07:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Absolutely - but also not a great time to stay in Lebanon either. (though some new refugees are fleeing to Iraq). But it was the "polemical anti-immigration comment" bit I was responding to. Nfitz (talk) 08:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I considered that to be a possibility because anti-Syrian-refugee sentiment is very common in Europe and in Turkey so "
Refugees can go home now.
" could have been read in multiple ways. Vanilla Wizard 💙 19:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)- Indeed, and the support comment has nothing to do with the ITN nom at hand. Also the refugess in Lebanon are not returning wholly voluntarily either [1]. Gotitbro (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I considered that to be a possibility because anti-Syrian-refugee sentiment is very common in Europe and in Turkey so "
- Absolutely - but also not a great time to stay in Lebanon either. (though some new refugees are fleeing to Iraq). But it was the "polemical anti-immigration comment" bit I was responding to. Nfitz (talk) 08:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Because this particular conflict is too complex and multi-sided to know if the fall of Assad and the end of the war are necessarily the same thing. Vanilla Wizard 💙 07:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- ??? Refugees are already returning from Lebanon. How is this different than the quick return of refugees from the camps in Thailand to Cambodia? Nfitz (talk) 06:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can't tell if this is premature celebration of peace being achieved or a polemical anti-immigration comment, but either way, I'm afraid that right now is probably not a great time to travel to Syria Vanilla Wizard 💙 06:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support but prefer that we use a picture of Assad, no strong opinions on any particular file. Without question one of the most significant things I've ever seen nominated for a blurb. Though I do have to respond to some of the comments that refer to this as the end of the civil war. As much as I'd like to be able to blurb that the civil war has ended, only time will tell whether the war will rage on even with Assad out of the picture. Historical precedent shows that dictators being deposed is often what precedes years of civil war. While it's never felt closer to being over, the rebel groups aren't exactly unified. Bear in mind that the rebel group that made the largest gains in territory this week is a splinter group that split from Al Qaeda – not exactly a group that the whole of Syria will peacefully be united under. But what we know to be certain is that the Assad era of Syria is history, and that is monumental news. Vanilla Wizard 💙 06:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Important side note: Unconfirmed reports that Assad might be dead. This of course doesn't belong in the blurb unless and until it is confirmed, but wow. Vanilla Wizard 💙 06:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Support Huge development in both the Middle East and the world.Sic semper tyrannis Pyramids09 (talk) 07:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support ToadetteEdit (talk) 07:21, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- ...Yeah, capturing Damascus—the capital of Syria and the real Eternal City (sorry, Rome)—seems like kind of a big deal to me. Support. Kurtis (talk) 07:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support this is the most influential events in modern history. This is the fall of a country's leadership dynasty of 60 years. If this isn't posted, Wikipedia is not aware of what real newses are. This indeed should be posted.MAL MALDIVE (talk) 08:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --Tone 08:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why ignore all the blurbs mentioning al-Assad specifically? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 08:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's not clear where Assad actually is, or if he's even still alive given the (unsubstantiated) plane crash rumours. Best not to mention Assad in the blurb. Nfitz (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- please post alt 2 Abo Yemen✉ 08:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why ignore all the blurbs mentioning al-Assad specifically? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 08:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Post-posting support ALT2 - a 13-year civil war, ended in a week. Incredible turn of events. The Kip (contribs) 09:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Second this. Saying that the regime has collapsed is appropriate, as this is what it is being described at. The fact that Assad's fate is unclear does not prevent it from being posted, as it doesn't say that happened to Assad. Gust Justice (talk) 09:59, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support adding Assad. Assad being removed from power is a major part of the story as well. Any updates regarding his fate could be added once confirmed as well. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strongest support possible. Add the "Assad" part, his regime has basically fallen. The civil war has come to an end. Incredible news. TwistedAxe [contact] 11:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Post-posting change to altblurb3 The big news is the fall of the regime, not just the capture of Damascus. Tradediatalk 13:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Trim "by opposition groups". To those not in the know, it could suggest groups opposed to the rebels. For those who do know, it's just redundant to same. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Bashar al-Assad has resigned, which is ITN/R so should be mentioned in the blurb. Davey2116 (talk) 15:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- ’’’Post-Posting Support’’’ today is a day of freedom for many — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ion.want.uu (talk • contribs) 15:28, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Adjusted blurb and switched image to Assad's infobox image. DatGuyTalkContribs 16:00, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment / Post posting support Wow. An ITN blurb being posted in....14 hours? Is that a record? I mean, it's deserved, but still...impressive. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:24, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- 14 hours might seem quick but if I recall correctly the death of Elizabeth II in 2022 was posted in under 10 minutes. I was shocked nobody made the nomination before me because I nominated it more than 25 minutes after the news first broke. Departure– (talk) 22:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not a record - but if we are going to take credit, I'd suggest a blurb about an hour before you opened this, in the Ongoing discussion. Nfitz (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- But I made the template nomination first, gosh darn it! It would have been nominated and I have no incentive to take credit beyond adding it to my user page. Departure– (talk) 00:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Huge news, the Syrian Civil War is now basically over, and this is undoubtedly a major point of major history, definitely Editor 5426387 (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Middle East needs peace. Muslims, Christians, Jews, non-religious… everyone in a common harmony. ArionStar (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
December 7
edit
December 7, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
RD: Darrell McGraw
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): US News
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: Former West Virginia Attorney General. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:42, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. The "early life and education" section is unsourced, and so is the first paragraph of the "political career" section. Gelasin (talk) 01:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose needs source work. Scuba 18:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing removal: Russian invasion of Ukraine
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: The frontlines have been mostly static for two years since Kherson was retaken, besides small Russian pushes and Ukrainian counteroffensives. Compared to the other wars currently in Ongoing, the invasion of Ukraine isn't at the same level of high-intensity conflict anymore. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose There's still plenty of developments in the war and surrounding geopolitical conflict, even those that don't involve the frontlines. There's more to war than territory, and this war, despite little land changing hands in the past year or so, has proven that. Departure– (talk) 21:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose as per this reasoning. The war is still very active and is the deadliest war of 2024 as per List of ongoing armed conflicts. Pluma (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom. I can't remember the last time I read any new news about the war. It's getting closer and closer to becoming a frozen conflict every day. Gelasin (talk) 22:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- A frozen conflict is one where active armed conflict has mostly ceased, which does not describe the Russo-Ukranian war, where the conflict is presently at its most deadly in years, despite little movement in the front lines [2]. Pluma (talk) 23:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Of course it's not currently a frozen conflict, but it's certainly heading in that direction. Most of the major territorial changes happened not long after the Russian invasion started almost three years ago. Gelasin (talk) 00:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you aren't seeing frequent coverage, I think you should be changing your newspapers subscription. Today there's most of a page here covering the Russian opposition that certainly involves the war. Yesterday the opposition had front-page coverage going onto to a 2-page spread. The day before there was a piece about trying to overcome the war damage with investment. With the recent increasing Russian advances and reports about their ever-increasing death toll, the nuclear sabre rattling over the deployment of longer range UK and US missiles there's been more coverage recently, as far as I've seen. Nfitz (talk) 00:45, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- A frozen conflict is one where active armed conflict has mostly ceased, which does not describe the Russo-Ukranian war, where the conflict is presently at its most deadly in years, despite little movement in the front lines [2]. Pluma (talk) 23:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It's in the news every day, contrary to e.g. the Sudanese war. Khuft (talk) 22:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose for now because of the ascendancy of the Trump administration in January, and the subsequent negotiations he has promised to bring about to "end the war" within days or weeks. The reality is, there will be renewed press coverage and increased clarity on the future of the war within the next two months. Trump's stated strategy will either cause a truce/stagnation along current boundaries (time for removal at that point), or a major escalation (in such case we will just have to re-add it). Removing from ongoing right on the precipice of that significant geopolitical "benchmark" in the conflict, just seems silly. We could instead wait to pull the trigger on removal just a little bit longer, at a more logical time when the future of the war becomes clearer in January. FlipandFlopped ツ 23:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose there is no credible argument that this is less static than the Sudanese civil war. The fact that most of the world's nuclear powers are invested in the situation in Ukraine, and that none of them are similarly invested in Sudan, does matter. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The credible argument is that Singa, Sudan, a city the size of Kherson, was retaken two weeks ago, while no such movement happened in Ukraine for two years now. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Did we miss that Ukraine launched a ground incursion into Russia just a few months ago? The Kip (contribs) 23:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The credible argument is that Singa, Sudan, a city the size of Kherson, was retaken two weeks ago, while no such movement happened in Ukraine for two years now. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Timeline of the Russian invasion of Ukraine (1 August 2024 – present) reports actions for every day. Grimes2 (talk) 23:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
*Support There have been no significant territorial changes for almost two years. The fact that it’s in the news everyday isn’t a strong argument to keep it. For instance, the COVID-19 pandemic was removed when it was top news on a daily basis just because people got used that there’s a pandemic in the world. In the same way, people are aware that there’s a war in Ukraine, so there’s no need to keep it in ongoing forever.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- COVID was removed on 31 August 2022, with most of the !votes saying it was not "top news" any longer. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Subjective personal opinions have no value when we have facts (see Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in August 2022).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Consensus on ongoing topics is not "subjective personal opinions", its based on how frequently the article(s) are being updated with significant new developments. That's still happening in the Ukraine-Russia war, not so much in the Sudan civil war. Masem (t) 00:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Masem: Why is the Sudan civil war relevant here? ITN nominations are completely independent.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- This suggestion appears to originate due to the current support for the Sudan war removal (why suggest it now), and it is also useful to demonstrate the type of article coverage and improvements that we expect for Ongoing topics against what is not sufficient. — Masem (t) 01:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I’ve stricken my vote here in order to vote against the removal of that item. If daily updates are what’s needed, that one doesn’t seem to fail the test either. The problem is that people don’t care about Sudan as much as about Ukraine (latent racism).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 01:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- This suggestion appears to originate due to the current support for the Sudan war removal (why suggest it now), and it is also useful to demonstrate the type of article coverage and improvements that we expect for Ongoing topics against what is not sufficient. — Masem (t) 01:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Masem: Why is the Sudan civil war relevant here? ITN nominations are completely independent.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Consensus on ongoing topics is not "subjective personal opinions", its based on how frequently the article(s) are being updated with significant new developments. That's still happening in the Ukraine-Russia war, not so much in the Sudan civil war. Masem (t) 00:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Subjective personal opinions have no value when we have facts (see Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in August 2022).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- COVID was removed on 31 August 2022, with most of the !votes saying it was not "top news" any longer. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. The Kip (contribs) 23:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose one cannot make a credible argument that it is not an ongoing news event when the BBC and other major sources have an entire vertical on it This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:57, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Compared to Sudan, the situation in Ukraine is still being significantly covered. If we removed this now and there's been significant movement on the next day, it will no doubt be nominated again. Moreover, now that Assad's Syria, which Russia supports is expected to collapse within a few days or so, its a question if Russia will now step up its attack. If the war drags on and continues to be stale once the upcoming Trump administration takes office in January, I will consider support removing it. For now, I strongly support keeping it. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 00:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. There are still frequent updates, even if territory isn't changing much. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - WTAF? Nfitz (talk) 00:35, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. IDB.S (talk) 02:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Still receiving regular news coverage. -insert valid name here- (talk) 02:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Ghana general election
editBlurb: John Mahama (pictured) is re-elected as President of Ghana (Post)
Alternative blurb: The National Democratic Congress (Ghana), led by John Mahama, wins the Presidential and Parlimentary majority in the 2024 Ghanaian general election
News source(s): Aljazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by Heatrave (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Ongoing Ghanaian general elections for presidential and parliamentary candidates. Heatrave (talk) 12:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose good-faith nom. It is more typical to post elections to ITN once the results are in. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait We post election results, not the onset of the election period. I assume that means within 12hr we'll have them and then everything can be updated. --Masem (t) 12:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose until the election results are in and a winner is announced. Scuba 16:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hold till we have projection/results This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose until the results come in. Gelasin (talk) 01:42, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Results now confirmed, incumbent Vice President has conceded defeat.Heatrave (talk) 15:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support John Mahama wins election. Grimes2 (talk) 16:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Article structure looks good and it seems ready for posting. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are three headings labelled results. The last of those (a level-2 heading) should have more prose about the overall outcome of the election before I would consider this ready for posting. Schwede66 06:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
2024 Kwango province disease outbreak
editBlurb: At least 79 people have died from an outbreak of an unknown disease in Kwango, Democratic Republic of the Congo (Post)
News source(s): ABC News, USA Today, VOA
Credits:
- Nominated by Staraction (talk · give credit)
- Created by Noble Attempt (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: First death was reported 10 November 2024 but only recently has this started gaining media attention. 79 is the count from the Africa CDC, but local health authorities have reported 143 (as reported in ABC News). Article may need updating as this situation develops. Staraction (talk | contribs) 06:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait The area is remote and the WHO is still investigating. Per WP:MEDRS, we should wait for some test results. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for more information. If the disease is later known, it would be worth posting as such. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait per above, posting with more information availed later would be better than keeping readers in suspense, especially given than it may get forgotten later for some reason. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 16:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait There's not enough information. There are no test results yet which means it could end up being a known illness (or even a mix of different illnesses), in which case it's unlikely to be ITN worthy. Johndavies837 (talk) 18:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wait per all above. Gelasin (talk) 01:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Could be a while before anyone knows what it is. Bremps... 04:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose situation unlikely to develop further. Some of the sources in the article are also dubious (Newsweek is cited for some reason) Scuba 18:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing removal: Sudanese civil war
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: The war has slowed down significantly, the article is updated less and less frequently, and Ongoing is becoming bloated. Gelasin (talk) 04:38, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support due to bloat, decrease in edit counts. Scuba 05:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support It is time. It is only getting significant content updates about once a week. Tradediatalk 06:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support besides with the current limits Syria could use priority currently, but in the future we can change it if more news comes in Ion.want.uu (talk) 07:57, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, the war has not slowed down, with the major city of Singa, Sudan (259,000 inhabitants, as much as Kherson) having been recaptured only two weeks ago. The article points out that
[a]ccording to a report by the French newspaper Le Monde, as of November 2024 the war in Sudan has possibly entered its most dangerous phase since it began in April 2023. Both the SAF and RSF have officially ruled out settling the civil war through negotiations, with the only option on the table being total war.
War crimes are also still ongoing, like the 2024 eastern Gezira State massacres. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)- Just because events may continue to be ongoing doesn't make the topic necessarily suitable for ongoing. Ongoing line is for topics that generally get near-daily news coverage, and in the case of the Sudan war, its updates are in spurts, roughly weekly. — Masem (t) 12:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- oppose per Chaotic Enby Abo Yemen✉ 12:47, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ongoing is getting long, and this article isn't updated as frequently as the others. We can add it back if something changes to warrant that. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:07, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Chaotic Enby. It is still ongoing and if anything, has intensified since we first put it on. There are still daily updates on the timeline page which include major losses of civilian life. I also do not agree on precedent with removing a conflict from ongoing, even when the loss of life and devastation remains high or growing, just to free up space - too arbitrary of a reason, IMHO. FlipandFlopped ツ 15:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support—Not because the situation is calming down per se, but because the world is no longer paying as much attention as it once did. We don't have the civil war in Myanmar in Ongoing, and as far as I'm aware, it's no less deadly. Kurtis (talk) 16:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- And this is how systemic bias creeps in. The Russia-Ukraine war is much more static (no city comparable to Singa has been retaken since the frontlines stabilized two years ago), and yet, as it is more of a topic of interest to (mostly Western) editors, the war in Sudan is the one that is being considered for removal instead. "The world has moved on" is a very Western-centric way of putting it. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support; the world has moved on from Sudan as evident by the edit history slowing down. No longer worthy of ongoing. Kline • talk • contribs 16:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
the world has moved on
That sounded horrible, like really horrible Abo Yemen✉ 18:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)- I am not here to sugarcoat what the truth is. Obviously they are not on their own and should never be, but the news outlets are no longer interested in covering Sudan anymore, more important stories have developed. Kline • talk • contribs 20:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
*Support. Per most of the above. While the war still may be ongoing, there just isn't much coverage as it used to anymore. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 22:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Changing to Oppose. Maybe I was exaggerating at first. Despite partially feeling WP:CPP, the others have a clear point. Whether it is no longer being covered or the war has calmed down or not, the conflict isn't essentially over. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 04:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. The Kip (contribs) 23:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose mostly because there’s latent racism on the entire page (Sudan isn’t Ukraine and blah blah blah.) Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a news oulet, so it’s irrelevant however news oulets report about a story as long as they report about it. I see daily news reports on this war in the media (we don’t require the BBC to do it so frequently).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 01:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose the only reason that its not being covered as much is because western media just wont cover african countries. this deserves to be known about. Lukt64 (talk) 02:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Timeline of the Sudanese civil war (2024) gets regular updates, the assertion in the opening nom "war has slowed down significantly" is also demonstrably false. And I don't think the Ongoing panel is bloated, considering what we have at Portal:Current events only a minor fraction is highlighted here which barely takes a few pixels. Gotitbro (talk) 08:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
(Pulled) Northwestern Syria offensive
editOngoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Kianlolcat99 (talk · give credit)
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)
- Strong support per nom Abo Yemen✉ 12:46, 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)
- Support this is what is getting updated, not the article for the entire civil war itself. Scuba 03:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Five ongoings is going to push that to three lines and we may have problems with front-page balance in the future. We should probably consider if the Sudanese civil war is really needed at this point, given that its only getting significant content updates about once a week. --Masem (t) 04:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'd be fine removing Sudan. Scuba 04:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I've nominated it for removal. Gelasin (talk) 04:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I've voted in favor of removal. Scuba 05:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I've nominated it for removal. Gelasin (talk) 04:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'd be fine removing Sudan. Scuba 04:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support when the current blurb rolls off. The article is being updated very regularly, and RS are consistently covering it. Tradediatalk 07:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- stole my nomination :( Support though Ion.want.uu (talk) 07:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment make sure the ongoing says 2024 Syrian Opposition offensive Ion.want.uu (talk) 07:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, although the simultaneous 2024 Deir ez-Zor offensive (from the SDF, which is now fighting both the regime and the Syrian opposition) makes me wonder if Syrian civil war might be the better target (maybe with Timeline of the Syrian civil war (November 2024–present)). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Focusing on the HTS offensive on its own is already out-of-date, since the article was renamed and the Southern Syria offensive (2024) and the Palmyra offensive (2024) look like they're already converging towards Damascus - the Fall of Damascus could happen within hours,
at most a few days. There's currently an RM to change from 2024 Syrian opposition offensive (singular) to 2024 Syrian opposition offensives (plural) - my prediction is that this will be snow closed by the time that this ITN proposal converges, but my predictions are often wrong. 2024 Syrian opposition offensive itself has not (yet?) been properly rewritten as an overview article - it still mostly focuses on the northwestern offensive. Boud (talk) 13:35, 7 December 2024 (UTC)- Battle of Damascus (2024) should be considered for this too. Boud (talk) 16:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Things are developing really quickly right now, so it's an article many readers would be interested in. It also is seeing intense coverage by many sources. Gust Justice (talk) 14:21, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Covered significantly in RS, and the situation is developing rapidly. Support ongoing. Schwinnspeed (talk) 15:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Massive changes going on and we might see a final conclusion to the 13-year civil war. I would say merge the Israel–Hamas war and the 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon into either one hook or remove the Lebanese one (ceasefire, in theory) instead of removing the Sudanese one - odd to have three Middle Eastern wars right smack dab next to each other all on ITN. Juxlos (talk) 15:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support, although maybe under Syrian Civil War, since the article is still focused mostly on the Northwest Offensive while it seems like there's an effort to transition it to being more about the reignition of the civil war at large. Pluma (talk) 20:51, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Getting widespread news attention. It seems that Damascus is about to collapse as well and we will finally see an end to this 13 year war. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 22:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Juxlos. If we have to clear up space to make this happen, I agree with merging the two Israel-related articles as opposed to removing Ukraine or Sudan. FlipandFlopped ツ 23:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support putting any Syrian civil war related article in ongoing. The situation is rapidly evolving. It's very possible that we'll be posting a blurb instead soon, as it's looking increasingly likely that the Syrian Arab Republic could cease to exist soon and Assad's reign will be over. But whether or not that happens in the near future, fast-moving situations like this are a great use of Ongoing. Vanilla Wizard 💙 23:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support 2024 Syrian opposition offensives - scope of the ongoing fighting has gone beyond just the northwest. The Kip (contribs) 23:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support - though with the quickly changing situation, there'll likely be need to adjust the text/target now that there are reports that Damascus has fallen. Nfitz (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- On the other hand, with report that Damascus has fallen, the Syrian army demobilizing, Assad fled, and the Russians evacuating their naval base - maybe this should be a blurb, once the media catches up to the overnight activities and the extent dawns on them. Nfitz (talk) 01:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 01:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Looks like it was pulled, presumably because events overtook it with the fall of Damascus. Shortest Ongoing ever! Presumably an ongoing will return once it falls off the tracker. Nfitz (talk) 08:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, this is the idea, it makes little sense to have an item both in ongoing and as a main blurb. Tone 08:43, 8 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
|
RD: Eddie Stobart
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph
Credits:
- Nominated by Ollieisanerd (talk · give credit)
- Created by SGBailey (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Robby.is.on (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: British businessman. Death announced on this date. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 16:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Dickie Rock
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Irish Times
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:31E4:1BA6:D6A9:2C91 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Alison (talk · give credit) and Joseywales1961 (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: Irish singer and member of The Miami Showband. 240F:7A:6253:1:31E4:1BA6:D6A9:2C91 (talk) 15:28, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate article - I've added missing sources for discography and a statement in the body text Josey Wales Parley 18:28, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Soft support wish he had a Discography source, but other than that it is okay. Scuba 18:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Short but it looks good enough to me. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Reopening of Notre Dame
editBlurb: Notre-Dame cathedral (pictured) reopens following reconstruction after the 2019 fire. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Notre-Dame de Paris cathedral (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)
- Support this altblurb once it opens: it should wait until the event has happened already and there is a picture of the reopening to attach instead of showing a picture from April. Pluma (talk) 20:56, 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)
- I'd be fine with this being a construction newsletter. Scuba 03:48, 7 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)
- I'm going to say it again: Any blurb starting "The Notre" sounds weird, for the same reason it would if it was all in English and started "The Our". GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support but I do not like the fact there's a separate article for the ceremony of reopening, it would make far more sense for a summary coverage of it to be in the fire article as the code to the overall event. We need to stop creating articles on every trivial event with excessive details, and think about comprehensive articles first and foremost. --Masem (t) 04:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support only because the event is notable and garners wide media attention. However, the personal opinions about how great and historically notable Notre-Dame is are irrelevant and redundant (this would have not been in the news this much had it been not notable).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:42, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb per Grimes2 Schwinnspeed (talk) 15:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Clearly notable and well-covered event, and nicely encyclopedic, but as a side I also agree very much with Masem above about the lack of necessity for separate articles about events like these. Yakikaki (talk) 19:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb per Grimes2, and suggest posting now as a clear consensus is evident. Jusdafax (talk) 19:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: Natg 19 (talk) 20:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The bolded target article should be either the reopening or Notre Dame itself. The fire article was already featured in the ITN before and now may be confusing. Brandmeistertalk 22:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that the fire should not be bolded. I just looked at the reopening article, and it is not much more than a stub. I fixed a sentence about the music program, but it has no reference. I came to add a recent image (that I took on 4 Dec) but found no place for it. I believe that it is less pretty than the one featured, but perhaps more informative, showing the rebuilt spire, cranes more clearly, and tents for the celebrations. It could be cropped, of course. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I also agree that the fire shouldn’t be bolded (it was when it actually happened more than five years ago).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 Romanian presidential election 1st round annulled
editBlurb: The first round of the Romanian presidential election has been annulled by the Romanian Constitutional Court due to Russian electoral interference. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The first round of the Romanian presidential election is annulled by the Romanian Constitutional Court.
Alternative blurb II: The first round of the Romanian presidential election is annulled by the Romanian Constitutional Court following allegations of Russian electoral interference.
News source(s): Euronews, Reuters, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Flipandflopped (talk · give credit)
Article updated
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)
- Support for the various reasons mentioned above; it's an unprecedented affair in recent history with global political ramifications. Joe (talk) 10:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I disagree with Gelasin and oppose altblurb 1. IMHO, the interference is what makes blurbing this now appropriate. If it were being annulled for some other domestic issue, I would say just wait and post the ITNR results with a little note about the delay in the blurb. I believe the consensus already formed that the alleged Russian interference is what is notable, and that this should be in the blurb. I've proposed a compromise altblurb 2 which weakens the language to "allegations", as opposed to stating the interference as a matter of fact. FlipandFlopped ツ 15:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb 2 per Flipandflopped. Aydoh8[contribs] 23:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready, has anyone addressed the tags on the article? Stephen 01:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. The article has orange tags and some of it are unsourced. Moraljaya67 (talk) 03:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose per above Giant orange banners and main page do not mix Bremps... 04:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Doesn't seem to be any orange tags or citation needed flags, good job User:Flipandflopped Bremps... 23:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose on quality per Bremps. charlotte 👸♥ 05:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)- Support charlotte 👸♥ 21:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Stephen, Moraljaya67, Bremps, Queen of Hearts, I addressed all the individual tags I could find and also removed an unnecessary section - the campaign section was duplicative of the "debates" and "leading campaign issues" sections which followed, so there was not anything to say. There was a generic "unreliable sources" banner at the top, but no individual tags to that effect. There are some cites to Facebook, but they are appropriate in context because they link to candidate statements and endorsements. Let me know if that's enough to shift your vote. FlipandFlopped ツ 16:09, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is significant enough given the fight between West and East in East Europe. Also, the quality problems seem to have been fixed. Tradediatalk 21:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted ALT2. All issues raised above seem to have been addressed. Schwede66 23:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Kelly Powers
editRecent 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)
- Posted Stephen 01:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Miho Nakayama
editRecent 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)
- Soft oppose per tables, however, an uncited Filmography hasn't stopped articles being posted before. Scuba 18:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes it has, often. Stephen 23:59, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready. Very shocked and saddened about her sudden passing but most of the table content in the article needs sourcing. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
RD: Stanisław Tym
editRecent 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)
- Oppose orange tagged. Ping me if the article is ever updated. Scuba 18:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Article is orange tagged and is a stub. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Maggie Tabberer
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3], [4]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Canley (talk · give credit), JackofOz (talk · give credit) and Erksahin (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)
- Support properly cited. Scuba 18:52, 8 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
editRecent 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)
- We do not post stubs, Scu ba. Schwede66 22:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Currently at 1491 B (241 words). —Bagumba (talk) 12:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- We do not post stubs, Scu ba. Schwede66 22:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Paolo Pillitteri
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Notizie
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: 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)
- Support I don't see any problems. Scuba 18:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 22:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can anyone figure out why the
ITN candidate template
does not produce a credit link for the nominator? Same as for the post above. Schwede66 23:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Can anyone figure out why the
- Think fixed it.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Wow. That looks like a bug alright! But thanks for mending it; credit is on its way. Schwede66 06:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
December 4
edit
December 4, 2024
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Princess Birgitta of Sweden
editRecent 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
editThe 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)
(Posted) Michel Barnier loses no-confidence vote
editBlurb: The French prime minister, Michel Barnier, loses a motion of no confidence. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The French government, led by Michel Barnier, collapses following the passage of a motion of no confidence in the National Assembly.
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/ckgxw9wj241t
Credits:
- Nominated by Tim O'Doherty (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Haers6120 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
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)
- Add alt1 and lean wait maybe we could wait if Macron appoint a new French PM in the coming days and combine two events into one blurb. Haers6120 (talk) 05:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt1 in principle but the quality on the new article isn't quite there yet. Background section needs citations. Unmarking as ready pending this being done. — Amakuru (talk) 07:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Original blurb is still ready to be posted, the blurb can always be changed to target the new article when improved. Re-marking as ready. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 20:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: decision should be made on this one ideally. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready as the collapse of the Barnier government article is orange-tagged. Schwede66 22:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Jared Isaacman nominated as NASA administrator
editThe 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)
(Posted) RD: Brian Thompson
editRecent 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)
- Support. I don't think this is clearly a BLP1E situation, at least to the point of meriting RD exclusion. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Posted This person has an article that's well developed and is clear of any issues. It hasn't been taken to AfD. Therefore, it's eligible for RD. Schwede66 21:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a controversy section that is a BLP violation as I noted above, and there are merge discussions on the talk page (which is equivalent to AFD), so this was a bad posting. Masem (t) 21:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi there, Masem. Not sure whether you wanted me to see your post, but if the answer is yes, please note that I don't have this page on my watchlist. Hence, you'd need to ping me. Either way, I'm working my way up this page now, and the next RD will push Thompson off the main page. Schwede66 22:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a controversy section that is a BLP violation as I noted above, and there are merge discussions on the talk page (which is equivalent to AFD), so this was a bad posting. Masem (t) 21:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Chiung Yao
editRecent 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), Vycl1994 (talk · give credit), Laterthanyouthink (talk · give credit), ForsythiaJo (talk · give credit) and Free ori (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)
- Her suicide sparked significant discussion about euthanasia in Taiwan and China, potentially making it a noteworthy event. However, there is no need to use a blurb, as it lacks substantial international recognition compared to other events during this eventful winter. Free ori (talk) 05:36, 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)
- Posted. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:55, 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
|