Wikipedia

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/March 2018

< Wikipedia:In the news | Candidates

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

March 31

edit
March 31, 2018 (2018-03-31) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

[Posted] RD: Margarita Carrera

edit
Article: Margarita Carrera (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

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 perhaps a little short but has been updated and sourcing seems OK Dumelow (talk) 09:14, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Problem solved.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:08, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Peg Lautenschlager

edit
Article: Peg Lautenschlager (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

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 has been updated and appears to be fully referenced Dumelow (talk) 09:08, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Rambling Man, I have now added reliable references for these results - Dumelow (talk) 21:46, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support good enough for me now! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Chris Edwards

edit
Article: Chris Edwards (boxer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, World Boxing
Credits:

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 national boxing champion. Pretty well sourced now. Black Kite (talk) 12:51, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2018 Land Day incidents

edit
Article: 2018 Land Day incidents (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Admittedly, I'm struggling to think of a blurb that is both succinct and neutral (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Clashes kill 16 at the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Clashes kill 17 Palestinian protesters and injure more than 1,400 others at the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Clashes at the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip leave 17 Palestinian protesters dead and over 1,400 others injured.

It seems like an entry of some kind for the 2018 Land Day incidents would be in order, if anyone can come up with a suitable blurb. 89.240.143.247 (talk) 21:20, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. All over the news, will run for a while. Black Kite (talk) 10:10, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article is level 4 edit protected or somesuch, I've asked that the list of victims be refed or deleted but it's gone no where. Maybe someone here with the right barnstars and flags can go and clean that up so we can post it. Without that section it's easily as long as the slew of other irrelevant disaster stories which are routinely posted. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:41, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is an unsourced paragraph, in addition to the above mentioned issue with the victim list. When those two issues are resolved, I support. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Muboshgu and LaserLegs: I tried to add some citations and fix the raised issues. --Mhhossein talk 20:55, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it is fixed. I now Support as it's ready. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:08, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I still don't think a list of the individuals is encyclopedic but it's refed so support GTG --LaserLegs (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 30

edit
March 30, 2018 (2018-03-30) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports

[Closed] Win Myint appointed President of Myanmar

edit
Stale. Stephen 01:07, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Win Myint (politician, born 1951) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Win Myint is sworn in as President of Myanmar. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Win Myint is elected by the Electoral College as President of Myanmar
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: ITNR as head of state change and it ain't a small country barely in the news. Lihaas (talk) 18:34, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] RD: Bill Maynard

edit
Stale, unimproved. Stephen 03:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Bill Maynard (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-43596854
Credits:

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 actor. Needs a few extra references. Aiken D 12:57, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 29

edit
March 29, 2018 (2018-03-29) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

[Updated] Update on Russian diplomat expulsion story

edit
Article: Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Cross-posted from ITN/Errors where it was deleted: Apparently Russia now intends to expel at least 60 diplomats as a retaliation for having their diplomats expelled by the Western nations. Should we update the blurb with this? This is pretty serious. WaltCip (talk) 11:24, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian Presidential election 2018

edit
Articles: Egyptian presidential election, 2018 (talk · history · tag) and Abdel Fattah el-Sisi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Incumbent Abdel Fattah el-Sisi wins the Egyptian presidential election, 2018 (Post)
News source(s): [1] [2]
Credits:

Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 Banedon (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Emiliano Mondonico

edit
Article: Emiliano Mondonico (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BT
Credits:

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: This article is looking very well referenced due to the work of two specialists in Italian football. Harambe Walks (talk) 20:50, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Pope says there is no Hell

edit
Nomination withdrawn per 331dot's comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Pope Francis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In an interview, Pope Francis states there is no Hell. (Post)
News source(s): Newsweek and numerous other sources.
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Religious news doesn't often make it on here but this sounds pretty significant not least because it at least appears to contradict what the Roman Catholic Church has traditionally taught on this subject. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I honestly am not sure about the merits of this at the moment. But skimming the Newsweek piece, the Church is stating that it was not a formal interview but a private conversation and is challenging the accuracy of the transcript. Either way, this isn't the Pope making a formal declaration of Church policy/teachings. 331dot (talk) 16:42, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair point. This is not an ex cathedra pronouncement and it changes no doctrine. I may withdraw this. However the Vatican's response is not really a denial. They play this game whenever this Pope puts his foot in his mouth by issuing a non-denial denial. "Well he may not have been accurately quoted... blah blah blah." -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:44, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also a fair point. 331dot (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] RD: Rusty Staub

edit
Stale, unimproved. Stephen 03:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Rusty Staub (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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: Looks mostly well sourced (but there are some unsourced bits and pieces that need to be cleaned up). Every morning (there's a halo...) 15:39, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 28

edit
March 28, 2018 (2018-03-28) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Posted] 2018 Valencia, Venezuela fire

edit
Article: 2018 Valencia, Venezuela fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A fire in a police station in Valencia, Venezuela kills at least 78 people. (Post)
News source(s): Guardian BBC CNN ABC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Large death toll, lots of media attention, but article is very new and also very small, so expansion is clearly needed. Note also that ABC News [4] says this is "one of the worst catastrophes involving the nation's prison system." Every morning (there's a halo...) 15:20, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I’ve been adding a bit. It’s now a “start” class, and I’ve rated it as such. Jusdafax (talk) 05:13, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have now added a “Background” section and upgraded the article class to C. Jusdafax (talk) 23:27, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Clément Rosset

edit
Stale, unimproved. Stephen 03:42, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Clément Rosset (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Truong, Nicolas (28 March 2018). "Mort de Clément Rosset, philosophe de la joie tragique". Le Monde. Retrieved 29 March 2018.; Franck-Dumas, Elisabeth (28 March 2018). "LE PHILOSOPHE CLÉMENT ROSSET RATTRAPÉ PAR LE RÉEL". Libération. Retrieved 29 March 2018.
Credits:

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: French philosopher Zigzig20s (talk) 12:28, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:LouisAlain: Would you like to help with this please? It would involve translating the French text.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:35, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Sir Eric McClintock

edit
Article: Eric McClintock (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Australian Financial Review
Credits:

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: Well sourced article --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:45, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Galaxy seemingly without Dark Matter

edit
No consensus to post. Stephen 23:29, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: NGC1052-DF2 (talk · history · tag) and Dark matter (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Astronomers report that galaxy NGC1052-DF2 has no detected dark matter. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Astronomers report that galaxy NGC1052-DF2 has no detected dark matter.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Astronomers report that galaxy NGC1052-DF2 appears to contain little or no dark matter. (Please note: this is the original blurb, to which many of the comments below refer)
News source(s): BBC, Irish Examiner, Herald Scotland, National Post (Canada)
Credits:

Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: The most important possibility is that this unexpected discovery, the first of its kind, may eventually prove that dark matter is real, and not just an illusion caused by a currently unknown effect of the gravity of ordinary matter. But, as with all important discoveries, further study will be needed before any of this can be confirmed (so using that argument to oppose posting would seem to logically rule out all or almost all important discoveries, with the initial story being rejected as unconfirmed, and the eventual confirmation(s) later rightly rejected as not news). Also the first of the two main target 'articles' is currently a section of another article (reached via a Redirect), which, for all I know, may well have to be changed to being its own article. Tlhslobus (talk) 05:28, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Dark matter is 85% of all matter so this is.. interesting. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:50, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "appears" and "little or no" render this DYK material. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:23, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Agree with TRM, this is probably better suited for DYK although I am not sure if there are enough information at the moment to expand. Alex Shih (talk) 06:59, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on merits, though I haven't had a chance to look at the article quality. This is in the news and I think fits points 1 and 3 of the purpose of ITN. GoldenRing (talk) 10:45, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose - certainly significant, but I agree with TRM and Alex Shih that this is probably better suited to DYK. Stormy clouds (talk) 11:07, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Interesting and noteworthy. The blurb does not sound news-y, and if this were good to go for DYK then I would tell them to go there. But I support it on its merits per GoldenRing. talk to !dave 12:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it’s a single paper, and may be overturned. With the “appears to” it makes little sense to report it as fact. Juxlos (talk) 13:06, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While astronomic topics are a welcome addition for ITN, this appears highly speculative and will be impossible to prove out in any real time scale. --Masem (t) 13:50, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support if areas of concern are fixed. I support this based on merit, but I do agree with the oppose !vote rationale that DYK is more fitting. Blurb should be modified if added into ITN, as Juxlos pointed out that "appears to" heavily implies that these findings remain early and speculative rather than confirmed and objective. It is also worth noting that this blurb puts both in-text links in bold; the primary article for this ITN submission should be bolded, and all article links should simply be non-bold links. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 15:19, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Thanks for all the replies, and especially all the suggestions to take it to DYK. I've never done a DYK before, and I'm finding all sorts of potential banana skins when trying to prepare this one for nomination there, such as whether what is currently a Redirect to a section of another article will do (seemingly not), and whether, despite TRM's comment above, 'appears' and 'little or no' are incompatible with "The hook should refer to established facts that are unlikely to change" (from here), and whether it is problematic that the 'little or no' is another editor's paraphrasing of the Nature paper, whereas the cited BBC article just says 'no', and so on. So I've decided I would probably prefer to leave any DYK nom to some editor more familiar with that process than me (and find some simpler case for my first DYK nom some other time, if ever). Meanwhile I was thinking of withdrawing this nom here due to the DYK suggestions, but as DYK also seems problematic, and as there have so far actually been 4 support !votes (5 if you include me, as against 5 opposes), so that it is just possible (tho seemingly unlikely) that a consensus for posting could yet emerge, I've decided to leave any decision on closing this nom to others. Thanks again to all, and regards, Tlhslobus (talk) 16:02, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re DYK, redirects are out and the entire article, never mind the hooky section, is far too short for DYK at present. If it could be expanded I see no reason in principle why it should not be acceptable there. You can always write a hook that quotes someone; that will remain true (ie that s/he said x) even if the opinion subsequently turns out to be incorrect. (Which is the line the BBC report has largely taken.) Espresso Addict (talk) 18:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment
    • 0) As I don't expect this nom to succeed, this comment is probably mostly 'just for the record' and/or 'just for future reference', etc
    • 1) Bold Links: Per Brendan The Wizard, I've changed the blurb to just one bold link.
      • 1b) Currently that is NGC1052-DF2 because, being short, it has no Citations Needed issues, etc
      • 1c) However if Dark Matter is deemed (now or later) to be of adequate quality then I would marginally prefer it to be the bold link, as somewhat better serving ITN's stated purpose of giving readers the background to the story, so I've added this as altblurb1
      • 1d) But actually WP:ITN is currently a bit ambiguous about how many bold links there can be, tho the '(s)' in "with an emboldened link to the updated article(s)." (here) appears to imply that one can have more than one, so if a posting admin wants to bold both articles (in the unlikely event this gets posted), please feel free to do so.
    • 2) Re-wording: Due to various objections above about 'appears' and 'little or no', I've re-worded the blurb as: Astronomers report that galaxy NGC1052-DF2 has no detected dark matter. (This is repeated with Dark matter bolded in altblurb1, per item 1c above).
      • 2b) However I've left the original wording as altblurb2, as I think the original wording is actually much better. As far as I'm concerned, objections to 'appears' and 'little or no' and objections like "it’s a single paper, and may be overturned" and "With the “appears to” it makes little sense to report it as fact", etc, are dangerously misguided. With science stories, the only thing we should normally report as fact is that scientists have published something. Anything else tends to mislead our readers about the inherently speculative and reversible nature of Science, thus encouraging Cargo Cult views of Science. It has also led us to mislead many of our readers in practice (even if in theory we can always arrogantly blame them for their 'ignorant misunderstanding', etc), and perhaps also unnecessarily damaged our reputation, by posting stories like Dua's layer without qualifying words like 'possible' (for all except that story's last day at ITN). And it comes from a mindset that would prevent us reporting many of the most important results in Science (such as the Michelson–Morley experiment, and Eddington's 1919 General Relativity test, etc), initially (and wrongly) because they might be reversed, and later (and rightly) because they were no longer news.
    • 3) DYK v ITN: Despite above suggestions, I no longer think this is suitable for DYK, as, among other things, it would seemingly require questionably moving an article section to become a new article, and then padding it out with unencyclopedic waffle to fill the size requirements, etc. Meanwhile I think it remains entirely appropriate for ITN, for reasons well stated above, especially by GoldenRing (for which many thanks).
    • 4) Regards, Tlhslobus (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, if that even carries any meaning given my perceived inconsequential status. I would like to at least thank Tlhslobus for the hard work and determination in bringing this article to discussion. As little as a year ago, this page was highly informative with genuine discourse from international viewpoints. I could always count on it to educate me regarding various news items with commentary from those more familiar with the events than populist news outlets. These days, sadly, it degenerates far too quickly into passive aggression and nasty attitudes. It's neither enjoyable nor educational when that happens. There also seems to be far too much weight given towards pointless sporting events, but that's only my opinion. I come here for the education, not the drama, and not for its value as a sports almanac. 165.225.0.85 (talk)
Thanks for your kind words and your support, 165.225.0.85. Incidentally, if you're worried about your perceived status here, the quickest way to improve it is almost certainly to create a user account for yourself. It's free and all you need is an e-mail address (and you can then click on 'Create account' at the top of this page). Anyway, thanks again, and regards. Tlhslobus (talk) 13:13, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: To say that a galaxy "has no detected dark matter" is poor grammar. "Scientists are unable to detect any dark matter in galaxy x" would be an improvement. — Hugh (talk) 20:47, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Bobby Ferguson

edit
Article: Bobby Ferguson (footballer, born 1938) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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: Going out on a limb here. Practically all of this I have sourced from the obituary in the local newspaper ([10]) but for somebody who worked for a medium-sized football team in the 1970s and 1980s that may be as good as we get. Harambe Walks (talk) 23:01, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Peter Munk

edit
Article: Peter Munk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Global News
Credits:

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: Founder of Barrick Gold. Article is pretty well sourced as is but there are a few unsourced statements (notably in the Honours section). Floydian τ ¢ 19:27, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose until orange tag issues are fixed. Challenger l (talk) 20:53, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Really? You'd hold this back based on a tag added 30 minutes ago because the lede isn't long enough?!? ITN has become a bureaucratic red tape these days. Article is fine. - Floydian τ ¢ 20:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Smith and Warner sacked from international cricket

edit
Posted, and there's no need for debates about cricket popularity. Stephen 23:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: Steve Smith (cricketer) (talk · history · tag) and David Warner (cricketer) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Cricket Australia ban Steve Smith and David Warner for twelve months and Cameron Bancroft for nine months from international cricket amid a ball tampering controversy. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ As a result of the verdict given by the CA, both Steve Smith and David Warner have been banned from playing in the upcoming 2018 Indian Premier League season.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Cricket Australia bans Steve Smith and David Warner for 12 months from all top-flight cricket in the aftermath of a ball tampering incident.
News source(s): (BBC Sport), (CNN),

(ESPN Cricinfo)
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This is one of the breaking news in the aspect of the sport of cricket as two most prominent cricketers have been banned for one year has been the story on the headlines. Abishe (talk) 14:35, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There have been several previous incidents - see Ball tampering - but this seems to be the biggest in terms of media reaction and severity of punishment.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:17, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is no way this would fail NEVENT. The amount of coverage generated means it would quickly overwhelm the article on the tour and raise UNDUE concerns, as Jayron32 notes above, so it has rightly been spun off into its own article.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:49, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A burst of short-term coverage and no longer-tail coverage would fail NEVENT/GNG. That's a core element of WP being NOT#NEWS comes into play, we're looking for news events that have a longer-lasting impact. If this event started a large investigation into cheating in cricket, then perhaps the article is justified, but right now, with all those involved having asserted their guilt and taken the punishment, it seems like the end of the story here. Its still enough to include in a more notable standalone article. --Masem (t) 18:55, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a burst, this has been massive news for days and will continue to be so while the fallout is analysed, it'll no doubt have an impact on the way in which the ball is inspected and treated by umpires, and is very much not the end of a story. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is huge - the Australian cricket captain is arguably the most high-profile sportsperson in the country and he's been banned for a year for cheating.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:51, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Big news right now, biographies updated, etc. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WaltCip. Huge impact on an international sport, I'm even seeing it in my news feeds here in the U.S. Davey2116 (talk) 19:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt 2 I don't particularly find this very interesting, but it dominates Australian news (even saw one article say the cricket captain is the second most important person in Australia, after the prime minister), and it's not mine to judge what should be interesting to Australians. Banedon (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. What even is this sport? Trivia. Sandstein 20:38, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    What even is this !vote? Absurd. Cricket is far more global than (say) American football, or ice hockey, or college basketball... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't particularly care about the nomination but that is patently false, TRM. You might be right about the American-style football bit, since that is primarily played in the US, but ice hockey and basketball? First, "college basketball" is not a sport, but a level to distinguish between professional and amateur. I know you know this, but I thought I'd point that out for others. Basketball and ice hockey are international sports which are played at the Olympic level and cricket is, well, not. It's mostly popular in the UK, the Indian subcontinent and Australasia, but that's about it. — Moe Epsilon 22:37, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You forgot about Southern Africa (Zimbabwe and South Africa where coincidentally the cheating happened) and the English-speaking Caribbean (Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, etc.). Gizza (t)(c) 22:56, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment clear consensus to post now, so good to go, marking as ready. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:47, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. I've not bolded the tampering article for now, first because I think "scandal" is a poor choice of title & second because it has no lead and thus is confusing if you have not been following this. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:07, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment both articles have unreferneced paragraphs. I don't know what "On 6 September 2017, while playing against Bangladesh at the Zohur Ahmed Chowdhury Stadium, Chittagong,he became the sixth Australian player to score back-to-back test hundreds in Asia after Allan Border, Bob Simpson, Damien Martyn, Mike Hussey and Michael Clarke." means but it's unreferneced. If you're going to pile on "support OMG big news" could you at least take a cursory glance at the article? This is absurd. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:15, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The target has been changed. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:23, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks TRM. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:28, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Kim Jong Un visits China

edit
SNOW Close, interesting nomination nonetheless, but the consensus is almost completely against posting this. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 15:47, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: China–North Korea relations (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing. (Post)
News source(s): (The New York Times)
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Momentous visit - probably going to be rivalled in news value only by Trump visiting North Korea. —Colipon, 02:45, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 27

edit
March 27, 2018 (2018-03-27) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Closed] Fabiano Caruana qualifies for World Chess Championship

edit
The Championship itself is ITN/R. Clear consensus against posting makes this a snow closure. Checkmate. Stormy clouds (talk) 22:44, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: Candidates Tournament 2018 (talk · history · tag) and Fabiano Caruana (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Fabiano Caruana becomes the first Italian person to qualify for the World Chess Championship. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Fabiano Caruana becomes the first American to qualify for an undisputed World Chess Championship since 1975.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Fabiano Caruana wins the Candidates Tournament 2018 to qualify for the World Chess Championship.
Credits:
Nominator's comments: (dozens of undisputed chess world championships have been played since the first in 1886, and 2018 will be the 16th since 1972) If posted at all should be now since he's unlikely to win — his opponent's stronger than him (Magnus) and Americans haven't even been runner up since 1907 besides that one time that genius played in 1972 then went crazy (Kamsky lost the FIDE World Chess Championship 1996 to the favorite but that shouldn't count since there were 2 rival championships in the 90s and he missed out on getting into the stronger one by 1 place) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
He, not she. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:57, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly would be notable if a woman had qualified for the World Championship, but we're still waiting for that.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:00, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
He's a citizen of both the US and Italy but moot point as this is snow close. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:39, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 26

edit
March 26, 2018 (2018-03-26) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Closed] RD: Zeke Upshaw

edit
Notability is in doubt At least 8 editors have expressed serious doubts that the subject passes the relevant guidelines for establishing encyclopedic notability. AfD anyone? -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:52, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Zeke Upshaw (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post The Guardian
Credits:

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: Professional basketball player collapsed during a game and died two days later. —Bagumba (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
He appears to fail WP:NBASKETBALL as he has not "won an award, or led the league in a major statistical category of the NBA G League" - merely appearing in a minor league is not sufficient.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:25, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that WP:NBASKETBALL is not met. I estimate it would have had a 50-50 chance of surviving at AFD (based on GNG arguments) if it had been created before his recent death. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:31, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Sergei Mavrodi

edit
Article: Sergei Mavrodi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News
Credits:

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 in decent shape. Post-Soviet folks remember his now ridiculous MMM commercials on TV. Brandmeistertalk 14:21, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Expulsion of Russian Diplomats

edit
Articles: Russia-United States relations (talk · history · tag) and Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President Donald Trump orders the closure of a Russian consulate in Seattle, Washington and the expulsion of 60 Russian officials in retaliation for the attempted murder of Sergei V. Skripal. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Eighteen countries announce the expulsion of Russian diplomats in response to the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal.
News source(s): NYT Guardian
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The toughest ever action taken against the Kremlin by the Trump administration to date. WaltCip (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, corrected.--WaltCip (talk) 13:19, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Were there a wave of supporting expulsions from other countries? -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:42, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They did not say. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait this is barely discussed at the target article, and Russia's reaction hasn't happened yet. It might be better as "Ongoing" rather than a blurb (for the third time this month, as Ad Orientem notes). power~enwiki (π, ν) 16:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ongoing linked to Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal#Aftermath and international consequences might be good. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 17:47, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Enough focus on the poisoning, plus this retaliation is just symbolic, especially if you do it after UK as a gesture. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 16:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'll put my full support behind the altblurb. The blurb I proposed was just what came up in my news ticker, so I put it up there, assuming that it was notable because it's President Trump doing this.--WaltCip (talk) 17:06, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not a comment towards WaltCip, but this is something I noticed is that many news stories are making this "Trump" related ("oh, and there's some EU countries doing it too" as an afterthought), when the actual news is that the US is doing this with their NATO partners. Perfect example of media bias to watch for at ITN here. --Masem (t) 17:12, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb (or ongoing would also work). This is NOT a Trump story. I cannot think of the last time eighteen different countries all expelled diplomats in a coordinated protest. Yes it's follow-up from the Skripal case, but it's generating headlines and that's as big a diplomatic response as you can get without imposing further sanctions. However the article needs to be adjusted to reflect that this was an international move, with the US as just one of the countries involved. I also suggest an additional anchor or section link on 'expulsion' so readers get taken straight to the update. Modest Genius talk 17:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question so where is the update in Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal? --LaserLegs (talk) 17:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal#Aftermath and international consequences. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2018 Kemerovo fire

edit
Article: 2018 Kemerovo fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 64 people are confirmed to have died in a fire that tore through a shopping center in the Siberian coal-mining city of Kemerovo. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Still in stub stage. It is getting updated. Sherenk1 (talk) 03:07, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum I was taken in by some unsourced info added by a new editor whose Russian-language summary claims that the real death toll is much higher, a rumor that may well be true and has been repeated on comments sections elsewhere but ... we have to stick with 64 for now. Daniel Case (talk) 20:26, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 25

edit
March 25, 2018 (2018-03-25) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime
  • A suspected drunk driver loses control while fleeing police in Maputo, Mozambique, strikes a crowd, and kills 21 people, injuring 30 more. (The Nation)

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Posted] RD: Jules-Aristide Bourdes-Ogouliguende

edit
Article: Jules-Aristide Bourdes-Ogouliguende (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Africa News
Credits:

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: Political figure from Gabon; article is, surprisingly, not a stub and well-sourced. EternalNomad (talk) 02:08, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Jerry Williams

edit
Article: Jerry Williams (singer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [11] , [12], [13]
Credits:

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 is well sourced. --BabbaQ (talk) 13:43, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is an official site for charts in Sweden used for basically all Swedish singer articles. It has not been an issue in previous noms. Otherwise I could remove the sections all together if it is an issue.BabbaQ (talk) 13:48, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it is official, I would have no objections. It looks kinda cheaply made and unprofessional, which is why I asked. Just raised an eyebrow for me; it could be reliable, but being unfamiliar with Swedish music press, I thought I would follow up. --Jayron32 13:52, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have removed the sections all together for now. They were filled with red links anyway. I will probably return the sections later on with better sources for each song. The rest of the article is referenced. BabbaQ (talk) 13:58, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This would not be an acceptable solution for quality concerns for RD posting. If the person is a professional musician, I expect to see a list of songs/albums they have been on, and lacking that, this article is incomplete. We can't sweep sourcing issues under the rug like that. --Masem (t) 14:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Pakistan Super League

edit
No consensus to post. Stephen 11:10, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2018 Pakistan Super League Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In cricket, Islamabad United win the Pakistan Super League, defeating Peshawar Zalmi in the final. (Post)
News source(s): ESPNcricinfo, Gulf News, Arab News, Reuters, The Indian Express
Credits:

Article updated
 39.57.244.160 (talk) 08:36, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Moreover, page views, as demonstrated by the Signpost Humour article, are misleading, and some very poor quality articles attract massive amounts of views. ITN enshrines quality as well, and posting on pure popularity would remove this aspect of the criteria. Plus, ITN would just be a list of the newest films released. Stormy clouds (talk) 10:01, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: André Bourbeau

edit
Article: André Bourbeau (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Huffington Post
Credits:

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 is well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:38, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Removed] Remove 2018 UK higher education strike from ongoing news

edit
Article: 2018 UK higher education strike (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: Adding header. Originally proposed by Mtaylor848 LaserLegs (talk) 13:22, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This has had little media coverage in the UK; I would imagine most people don't know it is going on. It is certainly not notable to a global audience and looks completely silly next to the other ongoing news articles. I can't see that it has too much notability beyond its newsworthines. Moreover the article is pretty poor and lacks balance and neutrality. Mtaylor848 (talk) 11:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose the article seems up to date, the event is still ongoing, and I'm not really seeing that it's "pretty poor" or "lacks balance and nutrality [sic]". Perhaps you could clarify your objections? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:46, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per TRM. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:08, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Still ongoing and continuing to generate significant coverage (it took a matter of seconds to find new articles about it from the Guardian); it has become the largest strike the UK's higher education sector has ever seen. I see no particular reason to remove it, and saying it quote "looks silly" is an IDONTLIKEIT argument. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 22:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Lying as it does at the intersection of education and economics (and health care, although this particular strike does not directly relate to that sister issue), it does have significant relevance to a global audience. The details may be UK specific, but the friction point itself is symptomatic of broader issues which are currently sweeping much of the western world. The UK's choices in this will have broad ramifications. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'm not seeing anything about this whatsoever on the entirety of the BBC News page. Is there something I'm missing? Does BBC not think this is a big deal?--WaltCip (talk) 10:57, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[citation needed] for that statement! That would be extremely surprising and inconsistent with other BBC output (e.g. radio & TV). Modest Genius talk 13:24, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • That's... rather counter-intuitive. Well, I'll take everyone's word for it in terms of its notability.--WaltCip (talk) 18:16, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • With a UK IP address I can see no links to it on the front page of BBC News, no obvious coverage or media. I watch BBC News everyday and have seen no mention at all of it. Industrial action these days tends not to get much media coverage; the only time it may is if it creates widespread inconvenience such as tube/train strikes.Mtaylor848 (talk) 19:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment - The article has numerous pictures of strike supporters and a great deal of material relating to that side yet little content and no pictures representing the other side. That to me suggests it is lacking in neutrality. Of course there are articles in the Guardian; this is broadly their coverage however finding articles in newspapers and on the internet does not mean it has significant enough coverage. Has in the past week (if at all) the issue featured prominently in a popular newspaper, on television news, on the BBC News front page; I doubt it, let alone it having international noteworthiness. Industrial disputes do not make big news these days and this one is no different. It being the 'largest strike in UK higher education' doesn't really give it any great weight. Saying it 'looks silly' is not an 'I don't like it argument'; I am just pointing out the absurdity of having a relatively trivial article such as this one next two two articles of major offensives with international coverage. I have a UK IP address; scanning the BBC News website, the Sun, the Mail and the Times I can see no prominent coverage. In fact besides this link it is necessary to search under specific terms to find link to it on the internet. Mtaylor848 (talk) 19:52, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove. According to the article and the UCU website strike action finished on 20 March. I know negotiations are continuing, but right now no-one is on strike. Iff further rounds of strikes occur we can reassess, but right now having an article entitled 'XXX strike' in the ongoing section is misleading if no strikes are in fact going on. Modest Genius talk 20:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
'Inevitable' is way too strong - the two sides appear to be close to a deal, so that seems more likely than further strikes. Assuming that more will be announced at some unknown time is WP:CRYSTAL. Modest Genius talk 13:23, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove per Modest Genius. Banedon (talk) 22:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal, per Modest Genius. The event is no longer in the UK press that I see, and while the article is still being worked on, editing has been pretty slow over the past few days. Until consensus to remove develops, or the strike restarts, I have changed the wording from "strike" to "dispute" for accuracy. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:57, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove that's the reasonable action. It has run its course and is no longer ongoing./–Ammarpad (talk) 07:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose removal Reading the article, it appears that there is still ongoing, active news regarding the strike; there's expected to be more information over the next few days (March 28 is a date mentioned for next major announcement from the negotiators, according to the article text). Given that, and the article is actively being edited, I see no good reason to remove it. --Jayron32 13:10, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove per nom and per ModestGenius.Tlhslobus (talk) 14:14, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove per nom. "The strikes might continue" is not a valid reason to keep a dormant news item up on the main page, especially with as limited coverage as there is. Collective bargaining is always an ongoing process, no matter what field it occurs in.--WaltCip (talk) 15:17, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove I'm unsure why this originally was posted on ongoing, instead of a blurb a month earlier, since the strike had already finished on 20 March. Personally, I don't understand why a labour strike over pension rights in one domestic industry would ordinarily be ITN material (consider if it had happened in America, for example) though I will concede that the staggered approach - 14 days over the course of a month - to the action gave their cause, and the disruption to students, optimum media coverage. Which I suppose is what strikes are meant to do. However, coverage since then has barely registered, as shown by the (non-news) references used to support the proseline added. Piecemeal negotiations about whether a deal can be reached (think Brexit) or whether further strike action is warranted over the next few months isn't what I consider blurbable material or adequate incremental updates for ongoing. Fuebaey (talk) 15:55, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove - per WP:CRYSTALBALL and the end of the event. We removed the Austin Bombings as soon as he died, same goes here. - Floydian τ ¢ 18:00, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove - per Modest Genius. Jusdafax (talk) 12:22, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removed. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:45, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Qantas

edit
No consensus to post. Stephen 23:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 
Article: History of Qantas (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Qantas Boeing 787 Dreamliner operates the first ever scheduled non-stop flight between Australia and Europe (Post)
News source(s): "Australia-UK: First non-stop flight arrives in London from Perth". BBC News. British Broadcasting Corporation. 25 March 2018. Retrieved 25 March 2018.Munk, David (25 March 2018). "First non-stop scheduled flight from Australia to Britain lands after 17 hours". The Guardian. Retrieved 25 March 2018.
Credits:
 Bahnfrend (talk) 06:51, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's not arbitrary, when this flight returns early tomorrow (UTC) Europe to Australia will be the 30th and last combination of non-Antarctic continents to be done (and I checked the long ones both ways to ensure wind allows nonstop both ways) This will be a historic moment in aviation. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:43, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not really “historic”. It’s been done before in longer distances as on of the above users noted. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 21:58, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose more of a DYK but I'm not sure there's a suitable article for that, since most will fail DYK's arcane ruleset... sorry. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose The first non-stop flight from the European continent to Australia is certainly an interesting milestone, and it would be refreshing to post something other than international turmoil. I'm open to the idea and I applaud you for finding a unique item in good faith, but I don't think this is significant enough to feature. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 22:51, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 24

edit
March 24, 2018 (2018-03-24) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
  • The Kofu District Public Prosecutor’s Office in Japan announces nobody will be prosecuted over the collapse of the Sasago Tunnel, which killed nine and injured three. Officials say the collapse would have been difficult to predict. (The Japan Times)
  • Two men are rescued from a capsized dredger off Malaysia after 50 hours in an air pocket in the engine room. The death toll so far is nine, with rescue efforts underway to search for more survivors. (Sky News)

International relations

Law and crime
  • A car is deliberately driven into a group of schoolgirls in Glasgow, Scotland, injuring five. Police launch an attempted murder probe. (BBC)

Politics and elections

[Posted] RD: Arnaud Beltrame

edit
Article: Arnaud Beltrame (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): "Tributes paid for hostage-swap policeman". BBC News. 24 March 2018. Retrieved 24 March 2018.; "France terror attack: Hero policeman married hours before he died". Sky News. 25 March 2018. Retrieved 26 March 2018.; Willsher, Kim (24 March 2018). "Gendarme who swapped place with hostages hailed a hero in France". The Guardian. Retrieved 26 March 2018.
Credits:

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: There is a blurb about the event, but this hero deserves an RD in his own right.Zigzig20s (talk) 05:30, 26 March 2018 (UTC) Zigzig20s (talk) 05:30, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Rambling Man: And now?Zigzig20s (talk) 10:16, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fix the bare URLs and we're on. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:17, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Rambling Man:Done.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:42, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind--I did.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've also added more references. More than ready.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:05, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Bill Lucas

edit
Article: Bill Lucas (athlete) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Athletics Weekly
Credits:

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 is well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:09, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] March For Our Lives

edit
Article: March For Our Lives (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Hundreds of thousands of protesters in the US participate in the March For Our Lives protest against gun violence in the United States (Post)
News source(s): [14] [15] [16] [17]
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Major event taking place in lots of places around the world. Article reads like a list though. – Nixinova ⟨ T | E ⟩ 20:27, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Sources can't seem to agree on the size, one says in a caption "hundreds of thousands" across the globe another of your sources say "tens of thousands" across America, assuming both are credible statements a majority of marchers would be outside of "America", just a thought. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.150.255 (talk) 21:08, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose In the past we have almost always declined protests involving domestic political issues unless they were extraordinarily large, which this really wasn't, or there was some other factor that makes them unique. Protesting against (and for) guns is as normal and American as hot dogs and fireworks on the Fourth of July. There is nothing here that warrants mention on ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you are mistaken about the magnitude of this multifaceted campaign. Sca (talk) 00:32, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Typically in the millions. This is simply the latest in a seemingly endless series of protests since the Clown in Chief got elected and it is pretty run of the mill in terms of size, maybe even on the small side. Most of these, with the exception of the Women's March, which did number in the millions, we declined. Almost all of them got a lot of short term news coverage. If are going to start posting these kinds of things, I could easily see a lot of nominations of this sort coming in. Unless of course this is one of those America is special kinda noms. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just going off of Timeline of protests against Donald Trump, I don't see anything as big as this, aside from the Women's March, of course. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:57, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That article looks like an anti-Trump WP:COATRACK and seems to list almost every gathering no matter how trivial that garnered even a mention in the local news. I suspect it was created in response to this archived RfC that put restrictions on what protests could be listed at Protests against Donald Trump. Even though I may not like it, I can read the score and this is going to get posted. But my oppose stands. [Saluting the flag as the ship goes down.] -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't have much to do with Trump; these kids just want sensible gun laws. – Nixinova ⟨ T | E ⟩ 22:40, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PP Support Striking my oppose. I am satisfied at this point that the news coverage warrants posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Stormy clouds: Dominant where? You might be quite surprised but the world doesn't limit itself to the US. And calling it a global event in the blurb is a sheer lie.Manish2542 (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of demonstrations taking place worldwide... What are you talking about? – Nixinova ⟨ T | E ⟩ 00:28, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - per Stormy clouds, among others. The only thing I'm not sure about is whether this is merely of similar significance to the Women's March, or whether it's of greater significance. Either way I supported then so I should logically also support now.Tlhslobus (talk) 23:40, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Stormy cloud, Sca, etc. Insane that 20 minute canoe race makes it to ITN but this does not. Gamaliel (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment does the article really need the maps? power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support well over one million have protested nationwide, including 800,000 in Washington. It makes just the Washington march the third largest protest in American history alone, surpassing the Million Man March (which had at most 800,000 people, despite its name). Half a million more people have marched in this than in the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. To quote the former Vice President, this is a big effing deal. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 23:56, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted I am both involved and opposed, but consensus is clear beyond any reasonable doubt. If any admin objects feel free to revert. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:58, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posing oppose on quality I wouldn't recommend pulling, but I really have to think that an article that is effectively WP:PROSELINE is not our best work. It would have been better to have this tabular, after a brief introduction as well as a summary after the events were over to estimate the population. I do think the activity is ITN material, just that the article, plainly, sucks in quality terms. --Masem (t) 00:46, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe worse, there were 11 CNs (Citations Needed) when I looked shortly after it was posted, and there were still 11 CNs when I looked a few minutes ago, 12 hours after posting. (And I suspect several citations don't properly support the text, tho I haven't really checked). I should probably have supported on principle, but temporarily opposed on quality. Last night I spent 5 to 10 minutes looking for supporting citations for the French planned marches (after first finding nothing re my native Ireland), and could only find one from ABC for something having taken place in Paris, which is not quite the same thing as a citation supporting a plan, and in the end I decided to go to bed, and I'm not sure I want to spend time on it today (per WP:NOTCOMPULSORY and WP:BNO if necessary). Maybe the CNs will get fixed as Americans wake up today, though they weren't fixed by them yesterday evening. Maybe temporary pulling would encourage fixing, but I'm far too cowardly to suggest that   (though perhaps somebody a lot braver than me might). Tlhslobus (talk) 11:18, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, is the above and/or below Post-posing (instead of Post-posting) a deliberate or merely Freudian slip, but an amusing one, perhaps suggesting that most of us supporters are merely poseurs too busy Virtue signalling to bother with irrelevant details like article quality  ? Guilty as charged, at least in my case  . Tlhslobus (talk) 11:35, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My error, was not deliberate. --Masem (t) 14:15, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posing support - This has recieved world wide attention. Is the main news on every media service right now whether we like it or not.BabbaQ (talk) 11:26, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Modification I'm not against posting the blurb but why "around the world"? This is mainly an american-centric event and the "planned" rallies that took place outside the US barely mobilised people there. The blurb should be modified to "major rallies in the US".Manish2542 (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That may be a legitimate point but it probably belongs at WP:ERRORS. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:35, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Recent BBC article says: "With events not just in the US but as far afield as London, Paris, Mauritius, Tokyo, Stockholm, Sydney, Geneva and Berlin," [18]. One of the things that is notable about this protest is that it has spread beyond the national boundary. Espresso Addict (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As noted above, there were supporting demonstrations in Europe – Paris, Berlin, Hamburg, London – and elsewhere. "Around the world" does sound a bit hypey and POV, though. Possible replacement: "Hundreds of thousands of protesters participate in March for Our Lives rallies for tighter gun control in the United States, with supporting demonstrations in Europe and elsewhere." Sca (talk) 21:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ERRORS. ERRORS. ERRRORS. And "elsewhere" is hardly encyclopedic, is it?!! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:34, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Having done a little more online research, I agree re "elsewhere" (see change above), but otherwise I don't understand your comment at all. Can't you see that I'm basically agreeing with Manish2542's objection to "around the world" – ??? – "Errors?" – baloney. Sca (talk) 22:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 • In NYT's pictorial series "Photos From the 'March for Our Lives' Protests Around the World," nearly all are from the U.S. Exceptions include Paris, Berlin, Hamburg and Bogotá, Colombia. Thus in this case too, "around the world" seems an exaggeration, and I tend to agree with Manish2542 on this point. Sca (talk) 22:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, that's protesting a hot war with bombings and boots on the ground. Somewhat of apples to oranges considering that this issue would otherwise be purely domestic.--WaltCip (talk) 18:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The anti-Iraq War protesters in London were 1 million, not 10 million.Tlhslobus (talk) 14:25, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is a very politically charged topic with a lot of pro and anti propaganda surrounding it. I've read numerous dubious claims that that range from a few thousand supporters to millions of supporters showed up (clearly the reality is somewhere in between). What makes this protest different from others around the world such as the ones happening in Catalonia? Also, this is a very US-centric topic, I question its worthiness of international interest to begin with.Spoonlesscorey (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Far and away the No. 1 Eng-lang story for several days. Gun control, or the lack thereof, remains a hot topic in the U.S. and Europe. That it's "politically charged" is obvious, and only enhances its significance. Sca (talk) 00:34, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Lys Assia

edit
Article: Lys Assia (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Blick.ch, Metro
Credits:

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: Relatively short article, but nonetheless well-sourced. --PootisHeavy (talk) 19:09, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] The Boat Race 2018

edit
Article: The Boat Race 2018 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The annual Boat Races are held, with Cambridge winning both the men's and women's races. (Post)
News source(s): Daily Telegraph
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Fixed up, basically FA quality article, ITNR as we all know... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

March 23

edit
March 23, 2018 (2018-03-23) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections
Science and technology

[Posted] Carcassonne and Trèbes attack

edit
Article: Carcassonne and Trèbes attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A gunman takes hostages at a supermarket in Trèbes, France, before fatally shooting three people and then being shot dead by police. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A gunman is killed after killing a self-sacrificing police "hero" and three other victims in a terrorist attack in Trèbes, France.
News source(s): BBC Telegraph NYT Guardian
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Unclear if it was a terrorist attack so far, though the gunman reportedly pledged allegiance to ISIS and the prime minister says all signs point to it being a terrorist attack. Every morning (there's a halo...) 18:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - even if it is a terror attack, it is too small to merit posting. Stormy clouds (talk) 18:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as "The Islamic State released a statement calling him a "soldier of the Islamic State", and French president Emmanuel Macron called the attacks an act of Islamist terrorism." means that has been confirmed as terrorism to an extent that authorities find satisfactory, as well as claimed; "too small" is objectively meaningless and doesn't determine notability, while on the other hand, "He swore allegiance to the Islamic State and demanded the release of Salah Abdeslam, an Islamist accused of involvement in the November 2015 Paris attacks" makes this event notable as a type of attack with demands and conditions for hostage release that had never been made before in Europe by the IS. LjL (talk) 19:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Has been in all international and national media today. Article seems ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's just too small scale for ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support While this incident has resulted in less fatalities than we usually post, it is prominently in the news. The article's quality is also pretty high. Half of our current blurbs occurred more than a week ago. Mamyles (talk) 21:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it's in the news (that shooting in Afghanistan is not, BTW), article is decent. ISIL will take credit for mild food poisoning, no need to mention it in the blurb. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:24, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral This event has already generated several responses from prominent world leaders, which demonstrates worldwide significance. However, events just as worthy of featuring have been rejected.BrendonTheWizard (talk) 00:37, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This was the first deadly terrorist attack in Western Europe in several months, and is being covered internationally. EternalNomad (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support an unusual terror incident in Europe. Certainly more newsworthy than than the regular school shootings in America. The Rambling Man (talk) 01:08, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • An unusual bombing incident in the U.S. gets opposed, and this gets supported. Because the American terrorist is white? General anti-U.S. bias here? I'm genuinely curious. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:32, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Domestic terrorism vs international terrorism, most likely. --Masem (t) 01:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • That seems to me to make little difference. In these two examples, one is a Christian extremist and the other is a Muslim extremist. One resulted in three dead, the other resulted in four dead (including the perps). I'm still at a loss. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:48, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • Personally, I would have supported the inclusion of both based on what you've described. Terrorism is terrorism. The article you were referring to appears to be more ready for featuring on the main page than this one with the amount of fatalities the event caused being nearly identical and the number of injuries caused by the other article being greater, so I've demoted my response to neutral out of a desire for consistent standards. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 03:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's anti-US bias, mostly. The US rarely calls white terrorists "terrorists" which doesn't help. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:03, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Domestic terrorism with little effect where the assalaint had already been killed within shot time, not ITN worth. –Ammarpad (talk) 03:56, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but I completely agree with Muboshgu and BrendonTheWizard. We should post this one, but we should also have posted the Austin bombings. There is a clear double standard here that needs to be addressed. Davey2116 (talk) 04:04, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose- small-scale shooting incident, besides the blurb is too long. - 58.27.134.33 (talk) 08:25, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb or something similar that mentions the police hero. It's this self-sacrificing heroism that seemingly makes the event unusual, exceptionally newsworthy, and ITN-worthy. (Please note that I support posting even if I don't get an altblurb). Tlhslobus (talk) 10:17, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • We generally do not call out acts of heroism in blurbs (since what is a "hero" is going to be very subjective). A police officer putting his life before others is part of their job. --Masem (t) 12:40, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that it would be inappropriate to use the term "hero" in an alt-blurb. Yes, the police officer was heroic, but that is not the story here, really. To some, (they are wrong, but they exist), the terrorists are heroic for their actions. Stormy clouds (talk) 12:42, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • He's called a hero by the French President (among many others) and by a very large number of Reliable Sources in their headlines and their texts, and it is in quotes in the altblurb. Wikipedia goes by what Reliable Sources say, not by what a few terrorist supporters may think. And his heroism is what makes this story interesting to readers. Omitting it will disimprove the encyclopedia, contrary to WP:IAR and the related 5th Pillar of Wikipedia, WP:5P5, by causing the story to be missed by many readers (unless one thinks that causing readers to miss a story somehow improves Wikipedia), tho many (but fewer) will probably still come anyway because they already know about his heroism and want to read about it.Tlhslobus (talk) 19:25, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as others mentioned, had this been in the US (or the middle east or africa or the rest of the world really) it won’t receive support. Juxlos (talk) 10:32, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Except it wasn't in those places, which is kind of the point. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:55, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • Whether or not it was in those places shouldn't be a factor; terrorism by fair-skinned non-Muslims is still terrorism. The opposition to posting the Austin bombing cited relatively few deaths, which is the same in this situation; the only thing that changed is whether or not it was motivated by Islam. Wikipedia's standards should be objective and not subject to one's POV. While I do believe that the Carcassonne and Trèbes attack is worthy of the ITN section, I can't bring myself to support one being posted and not the other. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 20:55, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also others said that before there was any mention here of a police hero, so it's at least possible that might have made a difference to their view (because I entirely agree that without the 'hero' angle this would not be ITN-worthy, at least in my view - indeed I wouldn't be involved here without it). Tlhslobus (talk) 11:02, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • A reminder: We did post the Austin bombings, they were only posted to ongoing, rather than a blurb when the situation ended. --Masem (t) 12:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • We did, but we didn't. It got on ongoing with some thinking it was an inappropriate decision based on the opposition that did exist, then when it went up for a blurb it got shot down hard, even though it differs little from this story. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • We really didn't. I agree with Muboshgu; it wasn't accurate or appropriate to place it in the ongoing section, and the only reason why it was placed there was because of the speedy closure (<1 day of discussion is rather quick to deem it infinite) where the opposition cited reasons that seem to be generally overlooked during this discussion. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 20:56, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The police officer who intervened in the attack has now died. This makes the attack notable for several reasons, with five dead including the perpetrator:
    • This is the deadliest terror incident in France since the attack in Nice.
    • If this had happened in any European country other than France, it would almost certainly be posted.
    • If it had occurred in France pre-2015, it certainly would have been posted.

184.151.37.41 (talk) 14:12, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually we may be not necessarily be too far off 'consensus' as understood in these parts, as I currently make it 10 to 5 in favour (and 3 to 1 in the last 4 !votes, the ones since the hero cop got mentioned here) and though it's not supposed to be a vote, assessing admins have sometimes been known to deem 2 to 1 a consensus by supermajority, especially if support is moving in the right direction. At any rate that's a question for them to decide, not us. Tlhslobus (talk) 19:02, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Zell Miller

edit
Article: Zell Miller (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Atlanta Journal Constitution
Credits:

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.

 It's Wiki Time (talk) 16:25, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, the "Senate" section is more than I can fix now; if nobody else gets to it I'll try in a few hours. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I took a hatchet to the unsourced material in that section. No {{cn}} tags remaining, but somebody else needs to review it before I'd support posting. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Much improved but still a few gaps. I have added tags. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:55, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Antigua and Barbuda general election, 2018

edit
Consensus is unlikely, closing. Alex Shih (talk) 06:45, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 
Article: Antiguan general election, 2018 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Antigua and Barbuda Labour Party led by incumbent Prime Minister Gaston Browne wins the Antigua and Barbuda general election, securing 15 of the 17 seats in the House of Representatives (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Antigua and Barbuda Labour Party, led by incumbent Prime Minister Gaston Browne (pictured), gains the most seats in the House of Representatives.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The Labour Party of Antigua and Barbuda gains the most seats in the House of Representatives.
News source(s): [19], [20], [21]
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
 WTKitty (talk) 11:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 22

edit
March 22, 2018 (2018-03-22) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology
  • Human genetics
    • DNA tests confirm Ata, an unusual six-inch-long mummy found in Chile in 2003, to be the remains of a newborn human with genetic mutations. (BBC)

[Posted] RD: Wayne Huizenga

edit
Article: Wayne Huizenga (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 17:19, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Trump announces tariffs on China

edit
Clear consensus against posting, so there is not a snowball's chance in hell of this being posted. Stormy clouds (talk) 14:41, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Trump tariffs (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President of the United States Donald Trump signs an executive memorandum announcing his plan to impose tariffs on up to $60 billion USD of goods made in China. (Post)
News source(s): CNBC BBC NYT The Independent (many more if you look for them)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: I realize that the sanctions may well not take effect, since Trump just signed a memo basically announcing this intention on his part. But there has still been a HUGE reaction from China, which says they will “take all legal measures to protect our interest”, [22] and US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer says that "China is likely to retaliate against the tariffs by targeting U.S. agricultural products that are reliant on the Chinese export market." [23] Stocks have also fallen. I think this adds up to a significant enough event to post IMO. Every morning (there's a halo...) 21:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense! Thanks for the edification, power~enwiki! Chetsford (talk) 23:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 21

edit
March 21, 2018 (2018-03-21) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Stale] Turing Award

edit
Unfortunately this happened before the oldest item currently on the template (24 March), so is stale. Better luck next year. Modest Genius talk 13:28, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: John L. Hennessy (talk · history · tag) and David Patterson (computer scientist) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ John L. Hennessy and David A. Patterson win the Turing Award for their work on a simplified computer architecture. (Post)
News source(s): NYT, Wired, Xinhua
Credits:

One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Needs work. One reads like a CV, the other is plagued with proseline. Fuebaey (talk) 17:28, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Kabul suicide bombing

edit
Article: March 2018 Kabul suicide bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A terrorist bombing kills 33 people in Kabul. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A terrorist bombing in Kabul kills atleast 33 people, injuring more than 65 others.
Alternative blurb II: ​ A terrorist bombing kills atleast 33 people in Kabul.
Alternative blurb III: ​ A terrorist bombing kills atleast 33 people in Kabul, injuring more than 65 others.
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

Article updated

 50.30.144.22 (talk) 00:27, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's not FA but it is passable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Short but just about enough there now.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's less than 250 words of readable prose. We don't post stubs to the Main Page.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is close enough by my count, so it has my support. -- Tavix (talk) 17:47, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Kuczynski resigns

edit
 
Article: Pedro Pablo Kuczynski (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President of Peru Pedro Pablo Kuczynski resigns, amid a scandal over Operation Car Wash (Post)
News source(s): BBC, New York Times
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Sitting head of state resigns. Cambalachero (talk) 21:27, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

support came here to potentally nom and its itnr as head of state change. Tomorrow he will be replaced by VP Martin Vizcarra.Lihaas (talk) 09:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Muboshgu: The image does not show for me. --Saqib (talk) 14:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Coz it has been deleted.  samee  converse  18:53, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Austin bomber blows himself up

edit
It's pretty clear this is going to be argued ad infiniteum. Consensus will never be reached. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:02, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Austin serial bombings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Austin bombings suspect kills himself in an explosion as authorities close in. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the United States, the suspected perpetrator of the Austin serial bombings kills himself in an explosion.
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:
Nominator's comments: As suggested below, proposing a blurb for this. It is still in the news and the suspect blowing himself up will create new interest in the story. Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:48, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Pulled from ongoing and not put in a blurb? Seems irregular to me. Major story that has dominated U.S. news (and been in news across the globe, not that that's necessary for ITN criteria) and has now reached its conclusion. Article is in good shape, and was just on the main page. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:53, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, not without precedent; this was recently pulled from ongoing after few hours of posting and opposed to be converted to blurb even though most of the blurbs then were older than it –Ammarpad (talk) 17:12, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak weak support I feel this was a domestic violence situation, equivalent to why we don't post shootings in the US. However, I recognize that "targeted bombing by shipped package" is a novel metric that made this significant ww news moreso than other facets. --Masem (t) 17:05, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose IMO, this was never an ITN-level story. Lepricavark (talk) 18:11, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. How many times is this same story going to be discussed? An attack that caused two deaths (plus the attacker) and no wider reaction is not a major enough encyclopaedic event to merit an ITN blurb. If we posted every terrorist (or criminal, if you prefer) attack in the world that killed two people we would have hundreds a year, maybe thousands. See List of terrorist incidents in March 2018 just as an example. Modest Genius talk 18:17, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Those are mostly (or all?) one-off events as opposed to somebody working over the course of weeks, for one thing. Most of those appear to be in war zones while Austin is not in one, for a second. Nobody says we can't be nominating and posting Boko Haram or whatever else. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:45, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it is an unusual and for that reason it has made headlines and is ITN worthy. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:ADD7:661C:B5A0:D000 (talk) 18:59, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
support CLEARLY been in the news this week. Further if attacks with barelycasualties and teachers protests in London are notable. This is far above noteworthy-ness. Still, it is not clear that it is 100% over yet either.
btw- clearlylocal sources are going to better (and there are other articles too).Lihaas (talk) 19:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The claim that it was already determined to be ITN-worthy is extremely debatable. I continue to believe that there was no consensus in the original thread, and there is clearly no consensus for posting here. Lepricavark (talk) 04:50, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the bombings killed 2 and injured some. If this was a school shooting, it would be an overwhelming oppose. Juxlos (talk) 10:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's not some sort of numbers game, it's about impact: by the mindless bean-counting argument on display, John Lennon's murder wouldn't have counted because, after all, it was only one death. --Calton | Talk 13:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per most of the above users, a local level incident with casualties only reaching the single digits almost never makes the ITN bulletin, while there are some past exceptions, roughly 90% percent of the time attacks like these do not make the cut. Kirliator (talk) 14:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose considerable overhype is written all over this nomination (alongside irony), all because of a series of attacks that were relatively minor in size. SamaranEmerald (talk) 14:20, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose, partially because the article at the moment seems to be uncertain about labelling the attacks incidents of terrorism (we all know what they would be called if the bomber weren't an American...) and also because given that we've already posted the bombings themselves to ongoing (and then removed them) I would want to see a lot more coverage for the attackers death to post that as a blurb in and of itself. Vanamonde (talk) 15:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Pulled] Pull: Austin bombings

edit
Article: Austin serial bombings (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: They identified, found, and chased down their culprit, who blew himself up in the chase, effectively ending the situation. The police are still making sure no other packages are out there, but the situation is otherwise completed. --Masem (t) 13:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The suspect is dead, the case is closed. Any further details are purely ancillary.--WaltCip (talk) 15:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What if he had accomplices? What if there are other bombs out there that haven't yet been found? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And what if the Fed raises interest rates? What if Trump is found to have colluded with Russia? What if the world ended tomorrow? It's not the job of ITN to predict what may or may not have happened, and use said prediction as the basis for notability.--WaltCip (talk) 17:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Even at the peak of the bombing it wouldn't have been posted if it were nominted for blurb and only marginally gained support for this ongoing posting. In addition, I Support removal from ongoing since reasonably it is no longer so with the death of the suspect. .–Ammarpad (talk) 15:29, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • We don't just pull something from ITN because it is resolved. By that logic we could pull every blurb currently on there because those stories are resolved. It's still in the news, because the suspect has been dead less than 12 hours. It was a mistake to pull the U.S. federal government shutdown blurb and we should not be making that into standard operating procedure here. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:58, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • While I mostly agree with you, the situation is a bit different for ongoing; however, the criteria here is that the article is still receiving regular updates with new information, and it seems likely that that will go on for a bit yet, so I'd weakly oppose removing this at this point. GoldenRing (talk) 16:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict × 2) No, we do pull ongoing items when they're no longer "ongoing". That's common. Removing " blurb" may be less so, but this is not blurb, it is something posted while it is ongoing..and wouldn't hurt if it is removed when it is no longer ongoing. Nonetheless, I can agree with you that it is too soon to be removed now. –Ammarpad (talk) 16:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair point re: pulling a blurb vs. pulling ongoing. Still, it seems to me ongoings often become blurbs when no longer "ongoing" without discussion necessary. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:57, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it's not notable enough for a blurb then why do we bloody have it up there as ongoing??--WaltCip (talk) 15:29, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Because when it was nominated, editors were trying to compare the significance of this to the Unibomber, which was crystal-balling the event. It was simple domestic racially-motivated terrorism , which, given that this is the US, is not something we would have otherwise posted if we knew the facts beforehand. --Masem (t) 15:37, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull. The event is over and an attack with two deaths (plus the attacker) is not significant enough to merit a blurb. I'm puzzled as to how this made it into the ongoing section in the first place, given the amount of opposition it received. Modest Genius talk 16:12, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pulled, as suggested. It is not ongoing anymore, it can be considered as a blurb, if a consensus is reached. --Tone 16:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 20

edit
March 20, 2018 (2018-03-20) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and incidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Posted] RD: Peter George Peterson

edit
Article: Peter George Peterson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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 has been updated and fixed referencing issues --> --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Katie Boyle

edit
Article: Katie Boyle (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Needs minor attention to referencing. The book section should be easy enough to deal with. Mjroots (talk) 18:34, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Northern white rhinoceros

edit
Item already listed as a Recent Death. Stormy clouds (talk) 17:22, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Northern white rhinoceros (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Last male Northern white rhinoceros dies in Kenya. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Sad news that yet another species probably is heading towards extinction if in vitro fertilisation (IVF) techniques aren't successful. cart-Talk 13:47, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Abel Prize

edit
Articles: Robert Langlands (talk · history · tag) and Abel Prize (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American-Canadian mathematician Robert Langlands wins the Abel Prize. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Mathematician Robert Langlands wins the Abel Prize for his development of the Langlands program.
News source(s): Abelprize.no
Credits:

One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Article needs some work. –Ammarpad (talk) 11:26, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yeah, getting the necessary level of referencing in Robert_Langlands#Research is going to require some serious mathematical understanding. --LukeSurl t c 11:54, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I have posted about that on the talk page, hoping to resolve it, but now looking at how it was added. –Ammarpad (talk) 11:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • We should really mention the Langlands program in the blurb, as that's what he won it for; altblurb added. Unfortunately that article is in an even worse state for referencing, so we're a bit stuck without an expert. The rest of Langlands' article looks OK, it's just the research section that's problematic. Modest Genius talk 12:02, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Even with a bit of basic understanding of modern algebra, I tried reading even the lowest-level summary of the Langlands program and while I understand where its going, nowhere close to understand the levels of detail that are necessary to explain it at a basic level; its not the type of thing I can even see an easy layman's version coming about, outside of being towards a grand unified theory of everything. --Masem (t) 14:33, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with the above on the need for an expert to clean up the articles. I'm in favor of including "Langlands program" in the blurb. Davey2116 (talk) 17:25, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the research section, which was the only problem, has been improved from its former zero-source state. Courtesy ping @LukeSurl, Modest Genius, Davey2116, and Masem:. –Ammarpad (talk) 00:58, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm going to have to oppose until someone can explain his research section in more layman terms. Not talking about dumbing down to simple.wiki prose here. I don't think it's an unfair request to write in a way a non-expert mathematician (yet average adult, native English reader) can understand. Fuebaey (talk) 18:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It's cutting edge math research in an area where most of the concepts aren't even introduced to students until postgraduate studies. The idea that most of this is every going to be presentable in layman's terms is pretty unrealistic. WP:ONEDOWN would suggest shooting for something like the level of someone with a BS in Mathematics, but even that could be quite challenging at times. About the best bit of a lay description is already offered by the intro of Langlands program: "In mathematics, the Langlands program is a web of far-reaching and influential conjectures about connections between number theory and geometry." But trying to really explain what they are talking about isn't going to be possible at a lay audience level. Dragons flight (talk) 19:31, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Langlands' article is now in good shape. I still think we should include "Langlands program", to if anything give the reader a sense of how groundbreaking his work is. As a non-expert, I first heard about the Langlands program when the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem was announced. Davey2116 (talk) 04:26, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This article has been fixed reasonably as the main problem was the too technical research section. Simplifying this pioneering, doctoral-level work beyond that so as to be comprehended by all English speakers is tantamount to Lying to children and means it will never be posted. –Ammarpad (talk) 09:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The biography still has swathes of unreferenced text. Stephen 23:24, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It is not perfect, and not cited by evry single word, but it pass the point of reasonable article. Can you point out 'the swathes of unreferenced text'?. –Ammarpad (talk) 04:19, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is much improved. The research section is indeed impenetrable to non-mathematicians, but I doubt there is much that can be done about that. The bigger problem is that there are still entire paragraphs with no references. Either add citations or cut them completely, then I think this could be posted. Modest Genius talk 11:42, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I have fixed that and added more content and references. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:42, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted, just squeezed it in as the last item. Stephen 22:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Nicolas Sarkozy arrested

edit
Clear consensus against posting the mere arrest of a former government official. Sca (talk) 14:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 
Article: Nicolas Sarkozy (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former President of France Nicholas Sarkozy (pictured) is arrested by police and held for questioning regarding allegations the 2007 French presidential election was influenced by Libya. (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg ABC News
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The arrest of the former head of state of a permanent member of the UN Security Council is of sufficient relative rarity to make it noteworthy. It has been covered widely outside of France. Chetsford (talk) 08:23, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would note that on rare occasions arrests do get posted, such as with El Chapo in 2014. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is not a case like El Chapo where the subject had been wanted for some considerable time. In those cases the arrest is newsworthy rather than, as here, the allegations but BLP considerations rightly mean that we don't post for just allegations. Also I think that being arrested for questioning is less significant in a civil law system such as France than in a common law system like the UK and USA (but having written that I'm now less certain than I Was). Thryduulf (talk) 11:48, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do think that the arrest of a former head of state on charges related to their own election to office might merit posting(Sarkozy is being investigated for allegedly accepting illegal campaign contributions) although right now he is just being questioned. 331dot (talk) 11:59, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ritchie333: Is a former President not a public figure and covered by WP:WELLKNOWN?(genuine question) 331dot (talk) 12:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, good point well made (for those watching at home, here is an important lesson as to why you should read policy instead of just quoting it with what you think it says) - nevertheless, until there is an actual conviction, I think we should err on the side of caution. There's plenty of mud thrown at Trump, but not much has been proven yet in a court of law, for instance. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:22, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree that posting now is not appropriate(count that as a formal oppose). 331dot (talk) 12:24, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The only time I'd think we'd post the arrest of a leader is if it was while they still held office. Otherwise, as pointed out above, we'll wait on the conviction itself to post. --Masem (t) 14:11, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per most of the above. If he were still president I would probably support on the basis that sitting presidents being arrested is pretty unusual. But he is not in office. And last I looked he has not actually been charged with anything... yet. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Ayaz Soomro

edit
Article: Ayaz Soomro (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Dawn
Credits:

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: Short but well referenced. Lets see if it just needs one Support before getting posted like the RDs from West or it requires Support from everyone on WP before getting posted because of the usual WP:BIAS. 39.48.73.97 (talk) 07:08, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Cambridge Analytica

edit
No consensus to post. Consider renominating if there are formal charges/convictions. SpencerT♦C 21:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Cambridge Analytica (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The UK's Information Commissioner will seek a warrant to look at the databases used by British firm Cambridge Analytica, a company accused of using personal data of 50 million Facebook members to influence US presidential election in 2016. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Big news, fall in Facebook stock. Sherenk1 (talk) 04:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's yet another facet of the investgation of the election. --Masem (t) 06:01, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sure, but, I mean, 50 million users is pretty significant if you ask me. That said, if anything were to be posted, I'd probably use a different (and shorter) blurb to take note of the general incident. Master of Time (talk) 06:38, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose keywords being "will seek a warrant". It's a long way from "will seek a warrant" to "have received a warrant" to "have found something" to "have concluded that Cambridge Analytica has used the personal data of 50 million Facebook members to influence the 2016 US presidential election" to "have enacted ____ as punishment". When we get to the last step, then we can reexamine. Banedon (talk) 06:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I think that, once the warrant is served, this would be very much worthy of revisiting. However, as of now, a person announcing their intention to maybe do something at some point in the undetermined future may be a little too much on the edge. Chetsford (talk) 08:28, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - There's no there there. Not an actual finding of fact of election tampering.--WaltCip (talk) 11:01, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose at least until formal charges are brought. 331dot (talk) 11:03, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Incidentally, a fall in stock price is meaningless. The market volatility is at its highest that it's been in years. The stock is just as likely to recover once the market-timers stop panic selling and buy back in within a few days.--WaltCip (talk) 11:09, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support dominating the news since this weekend, decent article. --76.122.98.135 (talk) 12:10, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
IP user, we don't generally post allegations or investigations. Formal charges, maybe; convictions, likely. But not every step in the process. 331dot (talk) 12:12, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was "CosmicAdventure" (scrambled my password to enforce a wiki break and then lost it ... oops). It's in the news now, the article is decent now, post it now. #twocents anyway. --76.122.98.135 (talk) 12:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is one of those cases where it will be WP:Crystalball up until the point that it's stale. In two years, FB will have gone the way of Myspace, and this is why. The warrant is not the issue, it's Facebook obscene breach of trust. GCG (talk) 12:28, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This is angle I was going for. Maybe someone can help write blurb from this viewpoint. Sherenk1 (talk) 12:41, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We need FB or a gov't doing the "action" in the blurb I think; we can't say "A whistleblower says..." Perhaps "FB acknowledges the unauthorised disclosure of data on 50 MM users to CA...blah, blah" GCG (talk) 12:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 19

edit
March 19, 2018 (2018-03-19) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Closed] RD: Keith O'Brien

edit
Stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:14, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 
Article: Keith O'Brien (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Guardian The Times Vatican News
Credits:

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: This person is the last cardinal in Scotland, and there is a developing story about his behaviour around other people. Do the Danse Macabre! (Talk) 20:16, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Sudan (rhinoceros)

edit
It's been posted, the dis-ambig has been added, we're done.--WaltCip (talk) 11:11, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Sudan (rhinoceros) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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: The world's last surviving male northern white rhino. Sherenk1 (talk) 07:12, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I just got an edit conflict trying to post this here! Most statements in the article are referenced, but I haven't explored all the cites in detail. Will try to do some more cleaning up tonight. Ackatsis (talk) 07:16, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguator added, enough people are genuinely confused about this, and no good argument not to do this in this one case has been presented. Fram (talk) 08:40, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted to Ongoing] Austin package explosions

edit
Article: Austin package explosions (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, Reuters
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Ongoing serial bombings Valoem talk contrib 19:28, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry this is my first time nominating, ongoing is fine. Valoem talk contrib 20:11, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't understand that logic. Suppose this was posted as an ongoing item, does that mean it would remain an ongoing item until the case was solved? Chrisclear (talk) 04:48, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It would remain an ongoing item while there were significant developments and regular updates.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:30, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
10 support and 12 Oppose and we still posted. Disclaimer: I supported posting it. Sherenk1 (talk) 05:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Opposition to posting a blurb is different from opposition to posting to ongoing. Master of Time (talk) 05:50, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is also not a straight vote. 331dot (talk) 08:14, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pull - My count is 12 Support votes (incl. the nominator) and 12 Oppose votes. There was no blurb MoT, so everyone who voted Oppose actually opposed posting to Ongoing. 39.48.37.7 (talk) 08:59, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Discussions like this are not a straight vote, but a weighing of arguments as well. 331dot (talk) 09:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Which will create more interest in the story. Seems odd to remove it when our readers will be looking for it. Pawnkingthree (talk) 10:22, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But the suspect is dead, meaning that the bombings have stopped and that the story is effectively over. No longer ongoing.--WaltCip (talk) 11:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 18

edit
March 18, 2018 (2018-03-18) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

[Closed] First self-driving car fatality

edit
No consensus. Stephen 23:27, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Autonomous car (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Elaine Herzberg becomes the first uninvolved pedestrian to be killed by an autonomous car. (Post)
News source(s): [24] [25] [26]
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Putting this here when the crash happened, but it has continued to generate coverage. "Uninvolved pedestrian" because she wasn't part of the test. Banedon (talk) 08:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm pretty sure someone has already been killed in relation to a self-driving vehicle before this happened. How many specific scenarios are we willing to post blurbs for? I can't say I support this one. Master of Time (talk) 08:06, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I think the fact the victim's article is heading for deletion says it all. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. While unfortunate, this is being reported as a relatively minor story. I also think long term this will just be a footnote in the history of autonomous cars; few people (unfortunately) will know who this person is. Most people don't know who the first pedestrian killed by a regular car is. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Cars with drivers kill hundreds more on a daily basis.--WaltCip (talk) 11:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It was more a matter of when there was going to be a self-driving car-related fatality, the industry never claimed perfection. This happened to be it, but it came as no surprise. --Masem (t) 15:05, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are huge numbers of people killed by vehicles every day; the fact that this particular vehicle was more automated than previous ones makes it a piece of trivia. I would suggest DYK instead, but the article looks like it fails WP:BLP1E. Modest Genius talk 16:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Road deaths are a common occurrence, and it was inevitable that someone would eventually be killed by an autonomous car. Also, the proposed blurb stating that the pedestrian was 'uninvolved' is inaccurate. The town's police chief has said that an initial investigation indicates that the crash was unavoidable, caused by abruptly stepping into the street. Mamyles (talk) 16:54, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: David Cooper (immunologist)

edit

Article: David Cooper (immunologist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Kirby

News.com.au
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Australian immunologist who diagnosed the first case of HIV in Australia. Article is a little short but is well sourced. I may try to expand it later if I get time Dumelow (talk) 14:17, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Russian presidential election, 2018

edit
Posted, that is about it. The article is being constantly expanded to address the comments of those who wanted more content. As editors noted that it is time to close this, I am closing. --Tone 17:12, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Russian presidential election, 2018 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Vladimir Putin is reelected as President of Russia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Vladimir Putin is elected as President of Russia for a fourth term.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Vladimir Putin is elected to fourth term as President of Russia.
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, Reuters, dpa ((in English), Zeit (in German)
Credits:

Article needs updating
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Added now to assess article quality so as to make it ready to post as soon as election results are announced. Blurb can be specified at that time. Sherenk1 (talk) 11:38, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not saying this to be pointy, but ITNR thinks the election of a head of state is notable, but that is based on the notion that an election is a choice by a populous. There is a threshold of corruption where the preceding cease to be an election in the conventional sense of the word, and what happened in Russia today certainly exceeds that threshold.GCG (talk) 20:04, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on decades of newspaper editing, I must strongly disagree with this unilateral deletion of another's proposal. Replaced blurb as Alt2 once again.
Go fly a kite. Sca (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant personal comments.
  • Comment We have posted w/o any editorial comment some of the most corrupt and patently fake elections ever staged. We are likely going to do the same for the reelection of the President of China whose manner of election would probably make Stalin smile. There is no question that this whole thing has been rigged from the word go. And yes that needs to be in the article before I will support it. But not in any blurb on ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree with presenting a short blurb without the fraud, and that the fraud needs to be mentioned in the article. I started a talk page thread there about it. I don't know exactly how to write the fraud section that the article needs to be complete. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:09, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Significant news about the reelection of a major world figure in a major country. I would change alt-blurb II to say "his" fourth term, though. Master of Time (talk) 22:11, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment what Ad Orientem said. All of you whinging about "corruption" should look closer to home, and accept that Wikipedia is not here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, merely to report what has actually happened. Where did it all go so wrong for so many of you? Incidentally, refusing to post this until some kind of "fraud" section is added to the article is bullshit, and pure systemic bias, arguably worse. We post per RS, so as and when we have consensus to post based on the results, that's what we do, we don't wait for admins who don't like the result to declare their own posting criteria, that's complete and utter bullshit. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • We post updated articles, that means articles should be relatively complete. Without fraud allegations, this article is missing significant context. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • The allegations seem to be primarily coming from western press at this point, not internally to Russia (contrast to the last US election where it was definitely internal). At this point, external allegation are not needed. If there does come internal allegations raised, that can be added, but it is not necessary for an ITNR posting, and like TRM, I have a great concern a number of editors are seeing the requirement of having them as righting great wrongs. We are not in that business. --Masem (t) 22:28, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Masem: Golos is internal, and they're reporting alleged violations.[29] – Muboshgu (talk) 22:31, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • Once WP:RS are declaring results, this should be posted, we don't need to wait for some "admin" version of the "truth", perhaps these "admins" should step aside and allow others to make judgements here, the kind of judgements we expect from our admins, not those which are personal and against the principles of Wikipedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • (ec) Even with that, because WP handles news of allegations carefully, I would only expect initial mention that there might be allegations. It would be irresponsible of us to try to document a full allegations section until Russia's election organization can actually comment on it. Initial statements would fine, but they are not necessary to consider this article complete for ITN posting. --Masem (t) 22:36, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to remind everybody that, apart from the technical ability to post things on the front page (and the obligation to assess and act according to consensus when doing so), admins don't have any special powers here. People unhappy with the content of the article would be advised to add referenced content, or discuss the flaws of the article on the talk page. power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:37, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: As to why it is news, you will need to take that up with the news media; here at ITN we do not editorialize or make judgements about the validity, fairness, or legitimacy of elections. That's for readers to decide for themselves. This event is what passes for an election in Russia. That's all we are interested in. 331dot (talk) 11:25, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull until the article sufficiently covers the allegations of fraud. We don't editorialize in ITN blurbs, but we also shouldn't post articles that are missing important information. Lepricavark (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Right now, there's claims of ballot stuffing and the like, and that's in the article as well as the election committee's response that there was no major incidents they had observed yet, but there's no formal claims or allegations that we as WP can rightfully justify a complete section on and stay within NPOV. There will likely be more in the next several weeks, just as there was with the US election, but for ITN, the article properly covered the key event. --Masem (t) 14:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep feel free to embellish the Reactions section which is already quite descriptive. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] RD: Li Ao

edit
Stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Li Ao (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [30]
Credits:

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 well written and sourced Oceangai (talk) 14:33, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 17

edit
March 17, 2018 (2018-03-17) (Saturday)
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Closed] RD: Sushil Siddharth

edit
Stale. Older than oldest RD. SpencerT♦C 17:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Sushil Siddharth (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hindustan and Navbharat Times
Credits:

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.
 Skr15081997 (talk) 15:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Ameenah Gurib

edit
Was nominated on the 12th, and not posted because of quality which is still not sufficient. Stephen 22:27, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Ameenah Gurib (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President of Mauritius Ameenah Gurib resigns amid financial misconduct allegations. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ President of Mauritius Ameenah Gurib resigns amid credit card scandal.
News source(s): Al Jazeera Bloomberg BBC Times of India NYT 1 NYT 2
Credits:

Article updated
 39.48.73.97 (talk) 08:15, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Mike MacDonald

edit
Article: Mike MacDonald (comedian) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC
Credits:

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 well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:02, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Xi Jinping reappointed president without term limits

edit
 
Article: Xi Jinping (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Xi Jinping (pictured) is re-elected as the President of the People's Republic of China with no term limits by the National People’s Congress. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Xi Jinping (pictured) is re-elected as the President of the People's Republic of China.
News source(s): AFP, Reuters, Al Jazeera
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Should qualify under WP:ITN/R as an indirect election for head of state. starship.paint ~ KO 03:30, 18 March 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Previous, related nomination on the removal of term limits on March 11. Current nomination is on the reelection of President on March 17, and has a different target article
  • Name: Chinese presidential term limits removed
  • Date: March 11
  • Alternative blurb: ​The National People's Congress removes term limits for the President of the People's Republic of China (incumbent Xi Jinping pictured)
  • Alternative blurb II: ​The National People's Congress removes term limits for the President of the People's Republic of China, with Xi Jinping as the incumbent president.
  • Alternative blurb III: ​At the 2018 National People's Congress, the Chinese legislature removes term limits for the President of the People's Republic of China (incumbent Xi Jinping pictured)
  • Sources: BBC,CNN, Reuters

Nominator's comments: Significant change in way of governing in one of the most significant countries now. More from The New York Times on why this is a big deal. Feel free to add more blurbs and suggest alternative target articles as the current one is not detailed starship.paint ~ KO 09:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Conditional support Widely covered and highly notable, might very well not have more Chinese presidential succession for a while. Article needs significant extensions though. Also blurb feels a bit long. Juxlos (talk) 11:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Change to Support focusing on the presidency instead of the meeting per below. Juxlos (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality - article tells us nothing more than the blurb and is almost as long. The reason your struggling with the blurb is we can't say what RS are saying per WP:crystalball. The part we can say doesn't feel all that newsworthy. GCG (talk) 11:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The PRC is free to use its legal processes to change its laws about how long the President serves whenever it wishes. This will have little effect. 331dot (talk) 12:16, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would add that this legislature is essentially a rubber stamp body anyway. If Xi didn't want it, they wouldn't do it. 331dot (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
With the exception of Mao Zedong, the term limit seems to be obeyed in general. While the body may not exactly be a proper democratic one this still implies a major event in Chinese politics. If Trump even formally proposes doing this it will be all over the news in a heartbeat. Juxlos (talk) 12:54, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FYI the US President has no formal role in crafting US Constitutional amendments. He can't push one through Congress (2/3 vote needed) or through the states (3/4 of the states). He can propose whatever he wants but it's unlikely it would happen. I believe he has joked about doing something similar to this Chinese action. 331dot (talk) 19:14, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Stormy clouds (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There was an uncited section, now fixed. Juxlos (talk) 10:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, still opposed. The new target has only a brief mention and offers no more information than what is in the blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but that's currently the bold link in the blurb. If there's a better location for an update, that's fine. We do need one somewhere. Modest Genius talk 13:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle. If allowing presidency for life in the most populous country and second-largest economy in the world, which directly impacts 1.4 billion people and has large potential to affect international relations, does not merit a blurb, then I'm really wondering what the political news should be concerned with to get included.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think there is a lot of support in principle because this is a huge power grab for Xi. However, he is only the third leader of China since the President role became synonymous with the supreme leader, and he is just now entering his second term. The narrative that he is becoming Mao-like or ruling for life is highly speculative. GCG (talk) 13:37, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominal or not, it’s still the head of state position, the same way we care about the Queen of the United Kingdom. Juxlos (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reluctant oppose as it's a significant story that is getting coverage, but neither proposed target has been sufficiently updated - the 2018 Congress article is still a stub and there has been a mere two line update to the new target that tells us little more than the blurb.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I didn't get a ping even though I see you tried. Anyway, I don't think the blurb needs to mention term limits or lack thereof, which is a separate issue from who the President is(even if the legislature is just rubber stamping the choice of President). 331dot (talk) 07:26, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is this really an indirect election to make this ITNR? The election was squaring from those already sitting in the national congress in contrast to, eg, the US's electoral college. Normally Election ITNRs point to an election article, (and the winner if that article is in good shape), but clearly there's nothing close to that here. I am not saying that there is not something to put to ITN here between the combination fo the term limits and this recent "rubber stamping" by the congress, just that I don't think we should consider this ITNR. --Masem (t) 13:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know their system; is the Congress even given more than one candidate to in theory choose from?(even if Xi winning is predetermined) Even if Xi is the only option, could they in theory not choose him? It would still nominally be an election for head of state (again, even if the result is predetermined) 331dot (talk) 13:50, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland win Six Nations

edit
 
Article: 2018 Six Nations Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In rugby union, Ireland win a Grand Slam in the Six Nations Championship. (captain Rory Best pictured) (Post)
News source(s): RTÉ BBC
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Article needs some referencing, but is in an alright state. Item is ITN/R, and derives additional notability as it is only Ireland's third Grand Slam (and happens to fall on St. Patrick's Day). Stormy clouds (talk) 16:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is just winning the Grand Slam on ITNR? They won the Six Nations a week ago.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This nom is for the Six Nations as a whole. We wait until the tournament is concluded. Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:58, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until improved. Compare 2016 [32] where the item was nominated in a state similar to the current one but was not posted until there was prose on the actual games themselves. (For some reason, this seems not to have been posted - or even nominated - at all in 2017.) There are also a number of uncited statements. Black Kite (talk) 12:17, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs update. Now is the correct time to nominate this, but at present there are only three sentences of prose in the article about the results of the entire tournament. The rest is all build-up, tables and team sheets. This needs a few referenced paragraphs describing the progress of the tournament. 2016_Six_Nations_Championship#Story_of_the_tournament is an excellent example, though it doesn't need to be quite that detailed to be posted. Modest Genius talk 14:07, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 16

edit
March 16, 2018 (2018-03-16) (Friday)
International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

[Closed] 2018 UMBC vs. Virginia men's basketball game

edit
Safe to say this will not be posted. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2018 UMBC vs. Virginia men's basketball game (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The UMBC Retrievers became the first #16 seed in NCAA Tournament history to defeat a #1 seed with their 74-54 win over the Virginia Cavaliers. (Post)
News source(s): [33]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Because its a article about a notable upset and no other college who was a 16th seed ever defeated a top seeded team in NCAA history. UMBC vs Virginia (talk) 03:17, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Portal:Current events/2018 March 16 is the appropriate page for this type of news story, and it is already included there. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:34, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Adrian Lamo

edit
Article: Adrian Lamo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

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 well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Louise Slaughter

edit
Article: Louise Slaughter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today
Credits:

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.

 It's Wiki Time (talk) 16:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with the tables? They don't look as nice as the ones at Susan Collins, but reverse-chronological is pretty normal. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:16, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Whether it's "pretty normal" or not, it's not acceptable. Show me an encyclopedia that lists events in reverse order. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:33, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've had that same argument on election pages in tables that list polling, and have often found myself in the minority in hating reverse chronology. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's just unacceptable, so until that's fixed, and all the unreferenced issues, this is a definitive no. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I could be wrong about this, but isn't there some coding wizardry you can add to a sortable table so it defaults to showing a certain way round? Black Kite (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There sure is, but the default should be chronological. That needs re-work. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed it - now in chronological order. One of the very few things that Visual Editor is useful for. Black Kite (talk) 19:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reverse chronology is the standard on many of these pages. Is that being a no-no codified anywhere in MOS? If so, would be nice to fix up some of the tables like Opinion polling in the Canadian federal election, 2015, Opinion polling on the Donald Trump administration, Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election, Opinion polling for the Russian presidential election, 2018. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#Order_of_events would be the place to include it for biographies. I don't think there's an MOS sub-page relevant for the "Opinion polling" pages, which have problems beyond their ordering. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:58, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Again, how many encyclopedias are publishing reverse-order information? None is the answer. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:14, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If it's so obvious, it should be easy to find consensus to state that in the site policies. The section of MOS:BIO currently says Within a single section, events should almost always be in chronological order. Exceptions to this rule may be apply to lists of works, such as publications or other media productions, where the most recent may be listed first, as well as for distinctions such as orders, decorations, and medals. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:24, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Again, how many encyclopedias are publishing reverse-order information? None is the answer. I've already challenged this absurd MOS exception. Time we all started acting like we're building a real encyclopedia, not a tabloid. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:29, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 15

edit
March 15, 2018 (2018-03-15) (Thursday)
Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Sports

[Posted] Blurb: Marielle Franco

edit
 
Article: Marielle Franco (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Member of the Rio de Janeiro City Council Marielle Franco and the driver Anderson Pedro Gomes are assassinated in a drive-by shooting in Rio de Janeiro's city center. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Brazilian politician and outspoken police critic Marielle Franco is killed along with her driver in a drive-by shooting in Rio de Janeiro.
News source(s): BBC, CNN, Vice News, MintPress News and virtually all major news outlets.
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The assassination happened on 15 March, UTC time. RedUser (talk) 02:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Highly relevant news. 189.40.83.173 (talk) 06:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb per the fact it's dominating Brazilian news and led to tens of thousands of protesters taking to the streets. Banedon (talk) 06:58, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Strongly relevant. She was a human right defender and city council. Today, after her murder, theres a massive people spreading fake news and lies about her at social networks. This is a important channel to keep the truth alive.
  • Support - led to huge protests. Article is ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 15:34, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose only on quality Just looking through the BBC, there are good reason why authorities believe this was a targeted assassination, but the article on her does not go into those. I think that needs to be added to understand this being ITN a bit better. I fully agree the item is ITN-worthy, just not article quality. --Masem (t) 15:46, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article was recently expanded to include that information. Also, some other news: Wall Street Journal, St. Louis American, ABC News, New York Times, Blavity and Financial Times. RedUser (talk) 22:29, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, all good now for me. Support. --Masem (t) 00:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Carlton Gary

edit
Article: Carlton Gary (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune
Credits:

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: American serial killer executed by lethal injection. Not the most pleasant of topics perhaps but the article is in pretty good shape - Dumelow (talk) 23:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the dead links- Dumelow (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Slovakian Prime Minister resigns

edit
Consensus to wait until new government. Stephen 23:26, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: Robert Fico (talk · history · tag) and Peter Pellegrini (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico announces his resignation over the murder of a journalist and designates Peter Pellegrini to form a new government. (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, BBC, The Guardian, SCMP, Aktuality (local source)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Interestingly, a day after his Slovenian counterpart. Peter Pellegrini is now PM-designate, but his article is a bit on the short side. Fico's article is long and well-referenced, though. Juxlos (talk) 22:29, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Fico's article has not been adequately updated to discuss the circumstances of the fall of his government. This is even more important than normal given the rather sensational blurb. Pellegrini's article is only a half step over a stub and will require significant expansion before it can be linked on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on principle, oppose on quality ITNR transition of a world leader, but as noted above, we really need more about why Fico's resigning. --Masem (t) 00:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fico's article looks better. The other one is still in need of drastic improvement though. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] RD: Tom Benson

edit
Stale.--WaltCip (talk) 15:42, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Tom Benson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

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: Influential sports owner and businessman dies at the age of 90. Lepricavark (talk) 21:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Miami bridge collapse

edit
SNOW Close, tragic but consensus is almost entirely against posting this event. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 23:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Florida International University pedestrian bridge collapse (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A new pedestrian bridge in Miami, Florida collapses days after being installed, killing at least six people. (Post)
News source(s): Miami Herald, BBC, ABC Australia, New York Times
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Article needs expansion, but the news story is receiving international coverage. Highly unusual, given that it's a new bridge and using a modern method of construction. SounderBruce 20:13, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"...killing at least six people." That's a long-term impact.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it is a new construction method, glitches or problems are to be expected. It doesn't mean this accident will be the death of this method. I don't think we even know if the accident was related to the construction method. 331dot (talk) 20:25, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose trivial accident, if this had occurred anywhere else on planet Earth it would be universally greeted with "meh", so ... "meh". The Rambling Man (talk) 20:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose certainly a tragedy, and brand new bridges are not expected to fail, but the death toll is too low for ITN. Lepricavark (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support – making international news; new construction method lends to greater notability than an old decaying bridge collapsing. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - unquestionably sad, but I don't feel that a sufficient number of people have died for this to merit posting. If it happened elsewhere, it would likely not even have an article - we must avoid bias, even if it means letting nominations like this fall to the wayside. Stormy clouds (talk) 20:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose at this time. Tragic, but not generally significant enough based on what we know now. 331dot (talk) 20:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose although undoubtedly a tragic event, it is ultimately a minor accident at best, the bridge was also not fully completed according to the article provided. SamaranEmerald (talk) 20:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. –Actually strong oppose, if it means anything. Relatively minor incident at unfinished bridge. If it were not in the US, it may not even get article talk less of going to main page. –Ammarpad (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pile on Oppose At the risk of sounding callous; things break and people die. We just can't post every fatal accident that garners some short term, even if sensational, news coverage. Although there is no written rule, in my experience accidents with low death tolls usually don't make it onto ITN. Our motto is not "if it bleeds it leads." It has to bleed a lot. Prayers for those affected... Kyrie eleison. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Number of fatalities isn’t currently large, but nature of the incident and fact that it was a new structure sways it for me.yorkshiresky (talk) 22:51, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above opposers, arbitrary at best, bridges especially new ones tend to have problems within days after they open, take the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge for example, it had problems almost immediately after it opened, and as a result it collapsed several months later. Kirliator (talk) 23:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 14

edit
March 14, 2018 (2018-03-14) (Wednesday)
Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Closed] Toys R Us

edit
This dead horse is getting cold. Brandmeistertalk 15:17, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Toys “R” Us (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Toys “R” Us says they are closing in the US and UK. (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Big news. 172.56.7.104 (talk) 00:49, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@AusLondonder: I agree that this does not merit posting, but "international significance" has never been required for any ITN posting; if it were, very little would be posted. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Slovenian Prime Minister resigns

edit
Consensus was to wait.--WaltCip (talk) 15:42, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Miro Cerar (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Slovenian Prime Minister Miro Cerar resigns after the supreme court of Slovenia annuls the results of a government referendum. (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: From the source, Slovenia has also had "a wave of strikes and protests by public sector workers", including a strike by teachers that shut down schools on Wednesday. Banedon (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wait per Masem below. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • also he’s still formally prime minister if I’m reading this correctly
I agree. Inatan (talk) 18:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You think whether or not there is a big scandal is relevant to whether or not this should be posted on ITN? Banedon (talk) 21:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is better to wait until the election here. He resigned a couple of months before the regular election would take place, and the resignation is being interpreted as a strategical move in view of tensions in the coalition and some other cases, such as the referendum being overturned. Cerar will remain acting PM until the election so there is no major change expected. --Tone 20:27, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] UK Expels 23 Russian Diplomats

edit
Article: Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United Kingdom formally accuses Russia of the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal by a nerve agent and expels 23 diplomats. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In response to the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal by a nerve agent, the United Kingdom expels 23 Russian diplomats.
News source(s): NYT and virtually all major news outlets.
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The original blurb just fell off ITN as the situation is rapidly escalating into a serious international incident/crisis. Russia is threatening unspecified retaliation. I think recent developments justify reposting. If this drags out we might want to consider ongoing. The article is in good shape. Ad Orientem (talk) 14:28, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My intial reaction after seeing BBC's "to expel" headline was also 'wait,' but evidently they've been given official notice – they just have a week before they have to say "До свидания." – Sca (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, good thing we're in a formal union with those countries so they can back us up. Oh, wait..... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It was. However it just got bumped off the ITN bar with the posting of Stephen Hawking's death. That blurb only addressed the attempted murder, not the most recent and rather dramatic developments. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What precedent is that? I don't recall the last time we discussed posting the expulsion of diplomats. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, but we had lots of nominations not posted because it "hasn't happened yet", e.g. your Kim-Trump meeting nomination. Banedon (talk) 20:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this has happened. The named diplomats have to leave the country. I'm not sure what happens to them if they don't but I'm guessing it involves arrest. So you actually support this but oppose it for consistency? 331dot (talk) 20:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is for consistency. It's not that the diplomats don't leave the country, but rather that the UK can change its mind. Again, this is using previous arguments for not posting XYZ per WP:Crystal and all that. Banedon (talk) 20:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply. 331dot (talk) 20:55, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Expelling diplomats is not common. The mass expulsion of more than 20 is w/o recent precedent. You would have to go back to the dark days of the cold war to find something like this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:48, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I would have posted this, but I'm not seeing language in the article to match the blurb. Perhaps something along the lines of "After Russia refuses to cooperate with the investigation of the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal, the UK expels 23 Russian diplomats as undeclared intelligence officers." This matches the language of news sources, c.f. [34]. Accusing Russia of Murder does not appear in reliable sources as such. This seems to have the support as an article worth the main page, but the blurb needs to be nailed down better. --Jayron32 23:28, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
“Their response has demonstrated complete disdain for the gravity of these events,” May told MPs. She said: “There is no alternative conclusion other than the Russian state was responsible for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter.” [35] -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:37, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you can make that language more explicit in the article, I will post this. --Jayron32 23:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Added alt blurb as a back-up. Brandmeistertalk 23:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Posted The altblurb. I am more comfortable with that language. In specific, the changes to the article do not reflect the sources still. I'd rather the Wikipedia article directly quote May than paraphrase. For material this sensitive, it's important we speak in the voice of our sources, and not in Wikipedia's voice. "Formally accuse" is not language that appears in the sources. --Jayron32 23:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I too like the altblurb, but wonder if the phrase "by a nerve agent" will be readily understood. Would "by a nerve-acting poison" be better, perhaps? Sca (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively, would "with a nerve agent" be better? Sca (talk) 00:09, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Jim Bowen

edit
Article: Jim Bowen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

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.

 Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Parking this here for now. I suspect people will oppose, because the article is not in a good shape. However, we got Ken Dodd improved to be posted, so I think we might be able to do it again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Super, smashing, great Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted blurb] Stephen Hawking

edit
Enough of the pile on. That's plenty of PPS. If anyone want to discuss whether we should wait a minimum amount of time before posting, then you're welcome to WT:ITN. -- KTC (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Stephen Hawking (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ British physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking dies at the age of 76. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Article is in good quality, but does need a bit of spotchecking. SounderBruce 03:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post Post Support - As per everyone else. It’s almost impossible to find a media that doesn’t show this as a headline or at least first page news. Juxlos (talk) 11:46, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Post-posting support. But it seems this was 17 minutes from nomination to posting. Is this a record for ITN? And for ITN article quality assessment? And for articles where the nominator writes 'Article is in good quality, but does need a bit of spotchecking.', where nobody else commented on article quality except the poster, and where the infobox was not (and still is not) even flagged as updated? Was such haste necessary or advisable? Or does it set a worrying precedent? I understand, perhaps mistakenly, that it was concerns about haste like this after the death of a revered figure that lead the Catholic Church to invent the post of Devil's Advocate, so might ITN benefit from something similar? (Please don't bother answering any of these questions here, as I'm only asking them to provoke thinking on the matter, and this is probably the wrong place to discuss them further, and anyway I'm not really interested in discussing them myself as this comment is hopefully just a one-off breach of my decision to try to stay away from ITN). Tlhslobus (talk) 11:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article is a former FA; even thought it was delisted in 2014, I know people have kept a close eye on it so I wouldn't have believed it any worse than B-class at any time - I suspect other people knew / felt the same and hence insta-supported. PS: I await Donald Trump's reaction to Hawking's death with interest. Just sayin'. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's a shame though that an article about such an important person is not a FA or at least a GA.... Regards SoWhy 12:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Donald has just tweeted that he is bigly saddened to learn that Wikipedia has posted the death of a character who once appeared in The Simpsons, but unsurprized as he always knew Wikipedia was Fake News. Tlhslobus (talk) 11:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Figures.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Almost. That's a parody account. Although it says something that in this day and age one can easily believe that the US President could have said something like this. Regards SoWhy 12:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The fastest posting to ITN was Hilary Putnam's RD, back in March 2016. That took only 11 minutes. In that particular case, the article was featured, and the new RD criteria were in place, so it did not take long for a consensus to develop.--WaltCip (talk) 12:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 13

edit
March 13, 2018 (2018-03-13) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology
Sports

[Posted to Ongoing] 2018 UK higher education strike

edit
 
Article: 2018 UK higher education strike (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The UK higher education strike over changes to pensions continues into its fourth week with potential further disruption set for April to June at over 60 universities after the University and College Union (UCU) overwhelmingly rejects revised offer from employers' representatives. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Talks to end the 2018 UK higher education strike collapse resulting in up to 16 university campuses being occupied by student solidarity groups in escalating dispute.
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, Independent, Times Higher Education, The Times, Xinhuanet, Irish News, Cyprus Mail, The PIE News, The Straits Times
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Times describes dispute as "the worst industrial action at universities in modern times". Stinglehammer (talk) 12:16, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added a few links to sites outside of UK inc. Singapore, China, Cyprus, Ireland etc.Stinglehammer (talk) 15:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, seems it as in the news in these countries 2-3 weeks ago... 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 18:59, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can you login, please? Hard to argue with an address. Article did not exist 2-3 weeks ago. It exists now. Strike escalated on Tuesday this week when long hoped-for resolution, after 6 days of talks at the Acas conciliation service, resulted in an 'overwhelming' rejection by university staff. This rejection of the Acas agreement hardened the two positions, exposed deep divisions between the two sides and escalated the strike so that it is now set to continue for another 14 days; doubling the strike and doubling down on its effects as the new strike days will take place in the important April to June exam period. The elongating & escalating of the strike happened this week with resolution seemingly a long way off. That's why nomination was put in.Stinglehammer (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not everyone has and wants an account. Unneccessary opening statement. Propose you retract. As for your argument. Not sure I am convinced, as you offer an interpretation using dramatic words. I checked the Guardian. If an important turning point, I would expect a British newspaper to offer extensive coverage. Nothing off that, even taking into account that the Russia news dominates headlines. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry,I will retract of course. Wrongly assumed after your first Oppose comment I was discussing with a random IP address that hadn't read the nominated article or the thread discussion. Which after discussing the nomination for so long got my back up. Apologies again. Will moderate my comments in future. As to the substance of your point, it depends what you mean by extensive coverage. There has been sustained coverage from Guardian, Times, BBC, Times Higher Education, Independent etc. over the last 3 weeks which includes coverage of the rejection this week. Given BBC, Times & Guardian etc. have covered in number of articles over the period and ITN has not covered at all, I propose there is case for inclusion now strike is entering an escalated 2nd phase.Stinglehammer (talk) 21:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this dealing with "the appropriateness of topics in general rather than the specific story"? This strike affects university staff at all UK universities established before 1992. 64 of them. Not a one-day strike either. Looking at a period of twenty-eight days of sustained striking now that talks have broken down. Strikes can be extremely newsworthy: (timeline of strikes). Stinglehammer (talk) 09:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not to make it too trite, but I'd call this a "first world problem". Yes, a good number of people (profs, students, supporting staff) are affected, but we're talking about being inconvenienced over labor issues. It's the same reason we don't post when winter storms shut down airports and cause extreme disruption to traffic in the US - its not a significant long-term issue. Add that this is stale news - the strike has been going on for some time, and this is an arbitrary point to announce it. --Masem (t) 13:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The dispute is about the future of UK higher education and how it is funded so it does indeed have longterm significance. The strike has resulted in a stalemate between the two sides grinding an important sector to a halt, a sector with international significance. Why are we equating this prolonged sector-wide strike with a one-off weather/transport issue? Not the same. The plane crash reported on ITN is a one-off event for that matter so why are we covering that? Hardly stale news either when after protracted talks the agreement has just been rejected in the last two days and a further 14 strike days are to go ahead now as a result, effectively doubling the strike and doubling down on its effects. Not arbitrary if you take that as your ITN blurb.Stinglehammer (talk) 17:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - UK education system grinding to a halt as classes cancelled at 60+ of UK's oldest universities for an extended period from February up to (potentially) the June exam period is entirely worthy of ITN. Thousands of university staff and students all affected in the stalemate. Stinglehammer (talk) 14:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A bunch of students can't go to class. It may be mildly disruptive, but it's not especially significant or lasting in any way.--WaltCip (talk) 14:24, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"bunch" is way too blithe. 126,000 students have asked for their fees to be returned so far and that's before exams have been affected and standoff is now an entrenched one with goodwill of staff now permanently eroded. That will be a longlasting effect of the dispute for years to come and difficult to recover. Strike is also seen as emblematic of wider discussion on the future of higher education. e.g. BBC article - "The more you talk to people, the more they understand what the big issues actually are. Yes it's about pensions but, fundamentally, its about defending higher education against further cuts and marketisation." Ergo, the scale and nature of the dispute is historically notable for ITN.Stinglehammer (talk) 14:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, ongoing since February. Has it featured in ITN in this time though? News from yesterday is that after 6 days of talks, an agreement has been rejected yesterday resulting in further entrenchment (and 'bad blood') in addition to the prolonging of the strike with a further 14 strike days now looking likely to take place in the important April to June exam period unless a mutually agreeable way forward can be struck. Stinglehammer (talk) 15:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  Done Added shorter alternative blurb above. Stinglehammer (talk) 15:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We should be careful not to end up as UKpedia too. Banedon (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Please do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." - Passing of Ken Dodd and Jim Bowen is very UK-centric for instance. Compare with universities which are international by their very nature.Stinglehammer (talk) 09:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant. We would post the passing of Ken Dodd and Jim Bowen regardless of their nationality under the current ITNRD criteria.--WaltCip (talk) 12:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Point I was making this idea of "only relating to a single country" is not one ITN is supposed to go in for per the guidance page. Beyond that, the point is the UK Higher education sector has international relevance. The Bowen/Dodd point was just a throwaway followup as you can't get more 'UKpedia' than Ken Dodd and Jim Bowen.Stinglehammer (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, this is a total false equivalence. Not the same at all. Half of all UK universities and some of the oldest in the world (inc. Hawking's alma maters Oxford and Cambridge) have ground to a halt in a stalemate with its staff which looks set to continue into pivotal exam period and have repercussions for sector for years to come in terms of the 'bad blood' that has been engendered. By same token, the Italian elections could be considered 'local' news... but it has international significance. UK higher education has international significance likewise in its students, staff, teaching & learning, research & development etc. Stinglehammer (talk) 22:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If we accept that UK higher education has international significance because of international students and staff, then most things have "international significance" since in the globalized world we live in someone is bound to be international. That Hawking's alma maters are involved is irrelevant - Hawking is also only one person. To argue that Oxford and Cambridge are independently notable is another thing, but that's still a stretch; there are plenty of other notable universities (e.g. Harvard, MIT, Tsinghua, UTokyo ...) that are not on strike. Banedon (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Again this is a false equivalence. There are plenty of places where there are no elections, where there are no plane crashes, where there are no sector-wide education strikes. But where there are this is news. I mentioned Hawking because he is included on ITN and he is one man, as you say, albeit a giant in his field. He has thousands of colleagues who are similarly respected internationally, working at extremely notable institutions like Oxford, Cambridge and over 60 others where they have ceased to work and look like they will continue to be on strike for a prolonged period. This is crippling for the sector; an important sector in the UK and abroad. Therefore this is news.Stinglehammer (talk) 23:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unclear why this should be posted now, and not when the strike began. It's not like anything important has happened in relation to this strike in the last few days. The blurb says it all, "continues into its fourth week with potential further disruption set for April to June". 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you read the article's section on the Acas agreement onwards which makes it clear that there are indeed important recent developments. The talks are important because it effects whether there will be further strikes.Richard Nevell (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure did that. Also read the section that came after the Acas section? Looks like this "important" agreement was rejected just a few hours later. Must have been an important development, indeed. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, in fact it sounds rather a lot like news to me. Richard Nevell (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Talks went on for 6 days. Acas agreement was rejected overwhelmingly by university staff across the UK when it was put to them by representatives the next day. Time for decision is not relevant - the rejection of the agreement is all. Shows the depth of feeling and that the employers' position did not go anywhere far enough. Thus deepening the divisions between the two sides and causing deadlock for entire sector until situation is resolved.Stinglehammer (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is an important and escalating story. As strikes enter their fourth week between 14 and 16 university campuses have been occupied by student solidarity groups, supporting staff and protesting marketising of education. This story speaks to a wider narrative around the UK HE sector and to student-led protest (national walkout day in the US yesterday for example). I think the summary needs to be updated to reflect the increasing direct action from student groups. Ammienoot (talk) 19:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral for Ongoing, which seems a more appropriate place as it has been, well, ongoing since February. There doesn't seem to be a pressing reason to post this as a blurb right now.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for ongoing, clearly no real clear blurb here, but this is an ongoing issue, and now there's talk over students suing for recovery of their fees, this is a really big deal right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt blurb - Talks to end the 2018 UK higher education strike collapse resulting in up to 16 university campuses being occupied by student solidarity groups in escalating dispute.Stinglehammer (talk) 22:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Duly noted. And obviously you'd normally want a wider spread of world news featured but passing of Stephen Hawking, the poisoning and the historic nature of the UK higher education strike are all huge stories with wide implications. Stinglehammer (talk) 11:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, a lot of people in the UK speak English, so why not. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:44, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just giving this thread a bump as the article has been significantly expanded and a new image gallery added. Think it looks good. Stinglehammer (talk) 10:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just sifted through the BBC website and the NYT World section and I'm finding no mentioning of this particular story (but plenty about Brexit).--WaltCip (talk) 12:48, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not really comparable to the shutdown, is it? That lasted, what, two days? This strike has been ongoing (and still is) for five or so weeks, right? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:51, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yet much like the shutdown, it has essentially disappeared off the news cycle. Might have something to do with that independent committee that was formed yesterday to address the issues, but even before then, the news simply stopped.--WaltCip (talk) 13:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, if this has been ongoing for five weeks, how is this not considered stale? If it's ongoing, post it as ongoing. Not as a blurb.--WaltCip (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this has been ready for quite some time now, is there any good reason it hasn't been posted? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:53, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, but neutral for ongoing. It's a large-ish strike and disruptive to students, but doesn't have the long-term encyclopaedic impact required for ITN. This is an argument about pension provisions; whichever way it's resolved isn't going to fundamentally change the UK higher education sector, let alone anything beyond that. (Disclaimer: I know many people involved in the strike, which is also affecting my own work. If anything that should bias me the other way.) The article does seem OK and there are lots of small updates rather than one big event, so I wouldn't be opposed to listing this in ongoing, but it's not blurb material. Modest Genius talk 13:56, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative blurb - ​Talks to end the 2018 UK higher education strike collapse resulting in up to 16 university campuses being occupied by student solidarity groups in escalating dispute. - This was the alt blurb based on rejection of the Acas agreement last week. Might need to come up with alternative blurb again as we're almost a week past the rejection. Support for ongoing as a minimum. NB: It might change the H.E. sector because a different funding model is required to break the impasse. Ultimately we don't know what the end result of the strike will be on the higher education sector but we do know 14 further strike dates are to be announced this week; doubling the strike period and doubling down in its impact by affecting the important exam period.Stinglehammer (talk) 22:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • NEW ALT BLURB - 14 further strike days at 65 universities to be announced this week in escalating 2018 UK higher education strike. Open to other suggestions. Stinglehammer (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stale - The oldest entry on ITN is now newer than the date of this entry.--WaltCip (talk) 10:58, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is still ongoing news and news that ITN could & should absolutely have covered. I don't see why this was delayed. The blurb was posted as ready for several days last week. I propose this is either posted as ongoing or we wait a day until the news covers the announcement of the 14 more strike days. When it will still be news of "the worst industrial action at universities in modern times".Stinglehammer (talk) 11:24, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to re-nominate this as ongoing then before this drops off the queue, which it will do at 00:00 GMT time tomorrow.--WaltCip (talk) 12:51, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] 2018 Sukma attack

edit
No consensus, and article was rolled into a larger article. Stephen 00:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2018 Sukma attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An IED blast kills at least nine CRPF personnel and injures six others in Sukma district, Chhattisgarh, India. (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, Herald Sun Hindustan Times
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The Draft needs a Review before it could go to ITN on Main page. Its a stub atm but will expand it later. 39.48.86.22 (talk) 09:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  Done, the article can now hopefully be judged above stub-level. 39.48.144.155 (talk) 09:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Trump sacks Tillerson

edit
Good faith nom but consensus is clearly opposed to posting. In general changes in political offices below the level of national head of state or government are rarely posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Rex Tillerson (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the United States, President Donald Trump sacks Rex Tillerson as United States Secretary of State. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the United States, President Donald Trump fires Rex Tillerson as United States Secretary of State.
News source(s): BBC CNN The Hill Washington Post
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: I'm aware that this will get oppose !votes for being U.S.-centric, but the article update has been thorough and it's even the top story on BBC (beating out the fallout from the Russian poisoning). Davey2116 (talk) 14:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Trump's cabinet has been a revolving door since his inauguration to the point of being almost as typical as sunrise and sunset. Rex Tillerson's sacking is neither unexpected nor overly significant.--WaltCip (talk) 14:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And its placement on BBC, I think, is immaterial. I'm still of the belief that the Russian poisoning is a non-story.--WaltCip (talk) 14:57, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe revise and check your logic - this does not make you look like an intelligent person. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:188B:D30F:20F4:98AF (talk) 17:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is true. How about Putin sacking Dmitry Medvedev? That would have a slightly higher chance of being posted, but still not much. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 18:58, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as a simple personnel change, and it is true this wouldn't be considered for most other countries. I have added a blurb with US terminology (fired) 331dot (talk) 15:19, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support making headlines, decent article. We can talk about "other countries" when "other countries" currency is used as a global trade standard, when "other countries" have military bases in 180 countries and fleets of ballistic missile submarines, when "other countries" engage in nuclear brinkmanship with North Korea. The sudden departure of SecState is a big deal. The false equivalences are comical. --76.122.98.135 (talk) 15:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Systemic bias is not comical and something we should take seriously. This is not the pro-USA Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This also was not sudden and was long expected. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, you don't fight "systemic bias" by suppressing stories from countries you consider to be over represented. It was long speculated, not so long expected, and it's not common for a sec state to go mid-term. --76.122.98.135 (talk) 17:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
IP editor, have you tried Conservapedia? You might be more at home there. Here at Wikipedia, though, we don't post stuff like this. And if we post every tiniest thing about a certain country, then you do counter the bias by "suppressing" stories- there are too many countries in the world to do that for, ITN would be flooded. You may even consider starting a wiki at Wikia, where all United States-related news is posted. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 17:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The snottiness is unwarranted. The IP has a valid point about comical false equivalences, even if I disagree with his support for posting this. Lepricavark (talk) 18:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the snottiness. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 19:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
General elections of all sovereign States are on the recurring events list. Routine dismissals of officials who serve at the pleasure of the President are not. If you feel elections should not be, please propose their removal. 331dot (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The last sec-state dismissed mid term I think was Haig back in the 80s, I didn't look to see how frequent before that. Not exactly "routine". --76.122.98.135 (talk) 17:15, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Removed] 2018 anti-Muslim riots in Sri Lanka

edit
Article: 2018 anti-Muslim riots in Sri Lanka (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: According to the article and external news sources this is no longer "ongoing." Tension has been defused and normalcy returned. –Ammarpad (talk) 07:55, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 12

edit
March 12, 2018 (2018-03-12) (Monday)
Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime
  • Austin package explosions
    • Police in Austin, Texas announce that three package bombs in recent days that have killed two people and injured one more appear to be connected. The packages were left off at three separate locations and were not placed there by any delivery service, police say. (CNN)

Politics and elections

Sports

[Closed] RD: Nikolai Glushkov

edit
Stale. Stephen 23:36, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Nikolai Glushkov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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.
 Count Iblis (talk) 18:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on article quality. Huge CN for claims surrounding his death which are a serious BLP FAIL. That needs to be fixed PDQ or I am going to remove it. Beyond that some of the sources are Russian and we need to have a close look by someone familiar with Russia and the current state of affairs there to determine their reliability. No, I do not regard Russian sources as presumptively reliable. Too much is going on over there. And lastly the article really needs a lot of copy editing for better reading. I am having a hard time figuring out the plot to the backstory which sounds simultaneously bizarre and slightly incomprehensible. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the BLP vio. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:35, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Which has subsequently been fixed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] RD: Craig Mack

edit
Stale. Stephen 23:36, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Craig Mack (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN Rolling Stone
Credits:

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: A 1990s rapper dies at age 46. Davey2116 (talk) 13:48, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Oskar Gröning

edit
Article: Oskar Gröning (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Spiegel, BBC
Credits:

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: He reportedly died on March 9, but Spiegel, the first source to report, is only reporting it today. Article seems to be in good shape. Masem (t) 02:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] US Bangla Airlines Flight 211

edit
Article: US Bangla Airlines Flight 211 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 49 people are killed after US Bangla Airlines Flight 211 crashed en route from Dhaka, Bangladesh to Kathmandu, Nepal. (Post)
News source(s): IE
Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Numbers are likely to grow looking at what happened to the aircraft. This should be mimimum for ITN notability. Lihaas (talk) 11:18, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ameenah Gurib announces her resignation as President of Mauritius

edit
Article: Ameenah Gurib (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ameenah Gurib announces her resignation as President of Mauritius. (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg

Nominator's comments: and other sources have reported this in the past few days. SecretName101 (talk) 10:53, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • comment change in head of state is ITNR so a new pone will get posted but I imagine she will be acting till then.Lihaas (talk) 11:09, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The Presidency of Mauritius appears more ceremonial than of a true leadership position (the PM is the leading state official there), this might beg the question if this should be considered ITNR. --Masem (t) 13:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Prime Minister is head of government, not state. We should expect an "acting" President to take over, which would not be ITNR. The replacement being elected or assuming office would be. I still think we should be using the yellow-shaded from here for ITNR, but that idea was shot down. GCG (talk) 16:30, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As a matter of practice we have generally posted changes in head of government as well as head of state assuming that the article is up to scratch. In any event this is ITNR. I have added a couple CN tags but the article is not in bad shape overall. Fix those and I would think this will be postable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support resignation of any major post, even if wields less power than other positions is signifigant, especially if there is a scandal, which there is. Should be postedUser:Awestruck1(talk) 20:22. 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support According to ITNR only the succession of head of state is ITNR; however I would still post now and update blurb when a successor is determined. Banedon (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If that happens, I would still rather post this and the successor assuming office. Banedon (talk) 20:30, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 11

edit
March 11, 2018 (2018-03-11) (Sunday)
Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

[Posted] RD: Ken Dodd

edit
Article: Ken Dodd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating
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.

 The Rambling Man (talk) 05:49, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I see the issue template but look at the article without snap judgements: I really don't see the issue. Not every assertion is referenced but we do not have huge tracts of unreferenced text (especially when implied references are included - not every reference needs a ref tag) and the article is reasonably well developed. Remember we do not require FA standard here. 3142 (talk) 09:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I think we all know we don't need FA quality here, but since this is a BLP, referencing for pretty much every claim is required. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Given we are discussing a recent death BLP by definition does not apply. 3142 (talk) 09:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@3142: As I understand it, BLP applies to recent deaths as well(for about a year I think). 331dot (talk) 09:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We can all do without this bickering.--WaltCip (talk) 11:07, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Plese read WP:BLP before making false assertions. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is a difference between a false assertion and an honest mistake. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don't start again 331dot, you're already close. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've done a cull of the photos. There are now four (in appropriate placing) Infobox, one of his statue in the honours section, and two in the comedy section (one with his signature tickle sticks, the other from earlier in his career). The others were either unflattering or un-necessary (repeat of the statue, his house etc). If I have time later I will look at the sources. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Togo D. West Jr.

edit
Article: Togo D. West Jr. (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

Article needs updating
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: Updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Karl Lehmann

edit
Article: Karl Lehmann (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Kardinal Karl Lehmann ist tot FAZ
Credits:

Article needs updating
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: Not ready yet, but I'll work on it Iselilja (talk) 09:00, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 10

edit
March 10, 2018 (2018-03-10) (Saturday)
Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

RD: Hubert de Givenchy

edit
Article: Hubert de Givenchy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

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: Supposedly the tip-top in his field with regards to fashion design. I'm not sure if that merits a blurb, but here it is for RD nonetheless. WaltCip (talk) 15:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Millie Dunn Veasey

edit
Article: Millie Dunn Veasey (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WRAL
Credits:

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 --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:10, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 9

edit
March 9, 2018 (2018-03-09) (Friday)
Arts and culture

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

[Posted] RD: George A. Sinner

edit
Article: George A. Sinner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Star Tribune, Bismark Tribune
Credits:

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 --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Martin Shkreli

edit
Consensus is strongly against posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Martin Shkreli (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Businessman Martin Shkreli is sentenced to seven years imprisonment for money fraud. (Post)
News source(s): [36]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Feel free to add another blurb etc. I find this to be a article ready for posting at ITN. BabbaQ (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Winter Paralympics

edit
Article: 2018 Winter Paralympics (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2018 Winter Paralympics open in Pyeongchang, South Korea (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: 2018 Winter Paralympics opening ceremony exists but is a stub. For the Winter Olympics we posted the main article. LukeSurl t c 14:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted to Ongoing] Ongoing: Afrin operation

edit
Article: Turkish military operation in Afrin (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Having the Ghouta offensive posted but not this one is a bit strange. Maybe the civilian casualties are heavier in Ghouta, but Afrin has seen a lot more military losses. It's also a whole new front that is relatively unusual within the context of the 7-year long Syrian Civil War. And the involvement of pro-government forces against the Turkish military makes it even more unique. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 08:42, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Bernardo Bernardo (actor)

edit
Stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Bernardo Bernardo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBN
Credits:

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: This actor is a well known actor not only in the Philippines and has been a recipient of the Gawad Urian Award for 2 times. Abishe (talk) 06:30, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Withdrawn] Trump and Kim agree to meet

edit
Clearly not going to happen. It's disappointing that the historic nature of just this agreement to international relations is not being appreciated, but I know when the horse is dead. 331dot (talk) 12:29, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: North Korea–United States relations (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un agree to meet by May, with Kim agreeing to discuss denuclearization. (Post)
News source(s): NBC BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: This announcement is significant and being widely covered. The relations article seems a logical one to update. 331dot (talk) 01:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until they actually meet in 2 months. SamaranEmerald (talk) 01:52, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This mere announcement is unprecedented (unlike tariffs which nations are free to do). Even if the meeting does not occur, this announcement is a high point for relations. 331dot (talk) 01:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I have to agree. No opposition to posting this now, and I'd probably post it twice (now, and when it takes place). --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:00, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Nefarious intentions" are irrelevant. 331dot (talk) 11:33, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the announcement is already historic, even in the case this should not happen. Yes, sometimes announcements are newsworthy. Whether it happens in May or not, it will have a impact, more so than the usual ITN fare of bus accidents, fires and terrorist attacks. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:9812:AD74:9650:415A (talk) 06:38, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per all of the above minus zzz, widespread coverage yes, but premature in nature. Until this meeting is occurs, it is overhyped at best. 161.6.7.1 (talk) 07:14, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose which is really what all the wait votes mean, we're not keeping this nomination open for two months. Let's see what happens, if it happens. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure it is being appreciated how significant this is. This is one occasion where the announcement is significant as this sort of thing was avoided by US Presidents since the Korean War. It isn't "premature" to announce a future meeting when it is the annoucement that is notable. This is essentially the high water mark of US-NK relations and it comes so close to when war was being threatened months ago. The mere fact that the two men have announced that they want to meet is very significant, even if the meeting does not occur. This is being covered worldwide as significant, Le Monde, Irish Times, India, and many others. 331dot (talk) 11:33, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Editorial discretion might be prudent here. There really is no doubting that the story is international in scope, and diplomatically, this would be a huge deal - if it wasn't for who the two leaders are that are making this arrangement. One of the two leaders is frighteningly unstable, and the other has a tendency to change their mind on an almost predictable basis (I'll leave it to your imagination to figure out which is which). The more significant story will be if the meeting actually occurs. As it is, this is not Nixon going to China.--WaltCip (talk) 11:58, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also worth considering that this is an encyclopedia and not a newspaper, so if you look back in time, do you honestly think you'll find discussions or entries where people agreed to do something that might lead to something in the short-term future? Or do you think you'll find the records reflect things that actually happened? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:17, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. If/when this meeting actually happens it might be suitable for ITN, depending on what arises from it. But simply agreeing to meet in a few months time isn't historically significant. Make a new nomination when the meeting occurs. Modest Genius talk 12:22, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Since the closure with the editorialising note about some of us simply "not appreciating" the historic nature of this has been restored by an involved admin (thanks for watching!) then it's important here to note that no-one here suggested that the agreement wasn't notable and no-one here said they didn't appreciate its potential significance, but please don't editorialise when closing your own nominations. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] US tariffs on steel and aluminium

edit
Consensus is against posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:01, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Trump tariffs (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ US President Donald Trump imposes a tariff on imported steel and aluminium amidst threats of retaliation from other countries (Post)
News source(s): [37]
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: This has been in the news for quite a while, and Trump's finally gone ahead with the plan, so nominating now. Article not updated yet as of time of nomination. Banedon (talk) 01:22, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd still say post and update blurb if Congress stops it. Waiting for something to really happen is to me similar to not posting the Cuban missile crisis until either side actually launched missiles. Banedon (talk) 01:29, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying don't post it per se but we will look silly if we post this and the next day a court halts the move or Congress repeals it. 331dot (talk) 01:45, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this is just like the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:17, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

March 8

edit
March 8, 2018 (2018-03-08) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

International relations

Politics and elections

[Closed] RD: Wilson Harris

edit
Stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Wilson Harris (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

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: Important writer. Needs more sources, especially in biography section. Black Kite (talk) 12:10, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Ron Franklin

edit
Article: Ron Franklin (jockey) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Baltimore Sun, BloodHorse
Credits:

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 --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted to Ongoing] Sri Lanka riots

edit

Article: 2018 anti-Muslim riots in Sri Lanka (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Sri Lanka declares State of Emergency and blocks access to social media amids ongoing ethnic riots. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Sri Lanka declares State of Emergency amids ongoing ethnic riots.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Sri Lanka blocks access to social media to curb mobs organizing ethnic riots.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The ethnic riots in Kandy occurred for the first time in about 35 years since the Black July which was caused in 1983 between Tamils and Sinhalese Buddhists.
News source(s): 1

2
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The first time the country has declared State of Emergency after the 25-year civil war. And (probably) the first time ever that social media has been blocked. Rehman 03:02, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointers Jusdafax and Juxlos. I've made some changes to the article. Hopefully that's better. Rehman 11:00, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are still some minor grammar issues, but I guess it’s good enough now. Change to Support Juxlos (talk) 11:03, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I strongly support on significance and quality, but there's a lot of "who did what to whom when" going on in the talk pages, so I'd advise we proceed cautiously. Upon first glance, the article is well written and sourced, and seems to carry a neutral voice. The article title would be problematic *if* there is equal blame. GCG (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this should be under 6 March as that's when the state of emergency was declared. Otherwise, this should be ongoing because the riots have been happening since the end of February. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support I've been through the article once and worked over some of the prose. It isn't our best writing, but at the moment I'm not seeing egregious neutrality or verifiability issues. "weak" because I'd prefer the writing to be improved further. Vanamonde (talk) 13:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for Ongoing per TRM. I do think this passes on both quality and the importance of the story, but it's been going on for a while. Realistically it's stale for the ITN sidebar. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb – I haven't seen much coverage on major news sites. After searching awhile, I found an unnarrated video on BBC, dated March 7, under the headline "Buddhist rioters dispersed in Sri Lanka." Seems to be over for now. Sca (talk) 14:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A brief Google Search gives links from almost all major international news outlets including Al Jazeera, Reuters, etc. Juxlos (talk) 14:59, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is comprehensive, well written, and well referenced. Well done! Agnostic on blurb vs. ongoing, but the quality is good enough for the main page. --Jayron32 15:01, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sca: Clear reports have been provided by the international news sites such as BBC and Al Jazeera on the tense situation which has been spread between Sinhalese Buddhists and Muslims in Sri Lanka. Abishe (talk) 15:05, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

⇒ Among major English-language non-aggregation news sites, seems to be mainly Reuters. Sca (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 7

edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 7 Template:Cob

Pritzker Prize

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Posted] RD: Reynaldo Bignone

edit

Template:ITN candidate

March 6

edit

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2018 March 6 Template:Cob

[Posted] RD: John Sulston

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Closed] [Posted] Sergei Skripal (Russian Spy Poisoned)

edit

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Premature I think. He and his daughter are still alive (though critical condition), they're not sure what the poisoning agent was, and the media is quick to draw parallels to Litvinenko. --Masem (t) 16:42, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support now that its confirmed it was a nerve agent (not a random environmental thing) alongside the responding officer being ill with the same. --Masem (t) 18:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - If either dies, then it would be worthy of a post (possibly blurb) - Floydian τ ¢ 16:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Several EMTs were injured, and one remains in hospital. I think the premature train is pulling out of the station. GCG (talk) 17:07, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The only thing about the EMTs I can find is from the BBC in that 3 were treated for potential exposure; 2 were cleared, one still remained under testing 3 hr ago, but they certainly weren't "injured". --Masem (t) 17:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until one of them dies per above.--WaltCip (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Whether they die or not makes no difference - the poisoning itself is a big enough story. Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:49, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it's been confirmed that a "nerve agent" was used. This isn't run of the mill stuff by any means and regardless of whether the pair of them are still (barely) alive and whether or not parallels have been drawn to Litvinenko (how accurate!), assassination attempts of a known foreign spy on British soil, along with his daughter, is certainly worthy of posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. This could be about to turn into something quite serious. I would imagine the government will be under enormous pressure to respond, especially since it is not the first instance of this kind of thing by (almost certainly) Russian operatives on British soil. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Realistically, what are the geopolitical ramifications of this likely to be?--WaltCip (talk) 20:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We don't know, do we? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:16, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Made some small tweaks, but all good in general. Not something I'd ever expect to happen in Salisbury. !dave 18:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - articles are of good quality, the story is dominating the media at present, and given that there was clear and malicious foul play, this is a geopolitical issue regardless of whether or not they die. Stormy clouds (talk) 18:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. Might it be useful to add that a nerve agent was used, now that it's been confirmed? Black Kite (talk) 20:38, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose this isn't getting major coverage globally. It's there if I look for it, but otherwise it's drowned out. For example even BBC's World page currently has "US softens stance on metal tariffs" as the headline, followed by "Florida gun law moves step closer" and then by "Assad's forces push deeper into enclave". It's especially ironic since this apparently happened on Sunday and there was no coverage until now. Banedon (talk) 02:08, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's because for the BBC, it's not "world news", it's local news. It's the main story on the front page. Isa (talk) 03:25, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's still a sign that few / no other countries care. I learned about this story because of this nomination. I also read related stories because of this nomination, and if it continues to generate stories they are not showing up on my newsfeeds either. Banedon (talk) 19:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
reminder: do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And it's been headline news on that front page for the past four days. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:26, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still fail to see what consequences are likely going to come about for Russia, even if it were determined that the operative who poisoned him was on Putin's payroll. Perhaps an ambassador might be pulled out of the country, but nothing with any actual long-term significance. Feels like government shutdown-esque media hype.--WaltCip (talk) 12:05, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Who knows what the consequences are going to be? I don't have a crystal ball. But the use of a nerve agent against individuals in a high street setting in the UK is definitely significant. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:15, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    All I'm saying is that something like this might have had greater consequences during or before the Cold War era. As it is, this isn't exactly the shooting of Franz Ferdinand.--WaltCip (talk) 12:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sure no-one is comparing the possible consequences with the outbreak of the First World War, but the story was posted on its merit, not on the plethora of possible actions that may occur subsequently. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive bottom

[Posted] RD: Peter Nicholls (writer)

edit

Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Article is barely above a stub, would need to be expanded to better demonstrate his life's work. What is there is also poorly referenced. If expanded significantly and fully referenced, that would get my support. --Jayron32 13:19, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Re I haven't seen anything in the criteria that articles for RD must be of a certain length (here assessed as Start-class), so sorry for that. There seems to be some coverage of him from the 1970s and 1980s (like this full-length article) but mostly offline it appears. I'm not sure that I can fix it with the sources I can find but someone else might be able to. Regards SoWhy 14:10, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose (in part) of ITNC is, and I quote, "To showcase quality Wikipedia content on current events." (bold mine) There isn't enough information in this article to qualify as "quality". There's large gaps in his biography. It is no where near comprehensive enough to be a quality article. Since you think this person is important enough for recognition here, I'm flummoxed as to why you would then want to specifically refuse to improve the quality of his article, that you would want to tell the world that he's not worth writing a decent article about him. --Jayron32 14:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstood. I'm all for writing a quality article about him and I wish someone would. I just said that I am not able to do it because most of the sources that apparently exist are offline and thus outside my reach. I'm not an expert on ITN and just by reading WP:ITNRD I did not see any requirements that a certain quality was required. Which I apologized for. Since WP:ITN/A says Template:Xt, I don't think I should withdraw this, should I? Regards SoWhy 16:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, you're fine to leave it open. Quality issues can, of course, be fixed by anyone with sufficient interest in doing so. There should be no rush to close nominations. (I'm not in favor of closing them unless there's outright disruption anyways). --Jayron32 17:41, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] 2018 Antonov An-26 crash

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Abot

[Closed] Paula (1876 barque)

edit

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Ec

Yes, I thought it was closed too quickly as well. Sca (talk) 14:56, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive bottom

[Closed] RD: Shammi (actress)

edit

Template:Archive-top Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Several problems here. There is a "close paraphrasing" tag that has been at the top of the article for four years, and a watermarked image. Maybe these could simply be removed, but the article is also under-referenced, and the sources that are there look weak - blogs, gossip-type sites and a heavy reliance on Rediff.com (is that a reliable source?)--Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Pawnkingthree – Nixinova ⟨[[User talk:Nixinova!T]]![[Special:Contributions/Nixinova!C]]⟩ 19:03, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive-bottom

[Posted] USS Lexington (CV-2) wreck discovered

edit

Template:ITN candidate

March 5

edit

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2018 March 5 Template:Cob

[Posted] RD: Uri Lubrani

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Posted] RD: Trevor Baylis

edit

Template:ITN candidate

March 4

edit

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2018 March 4 Template:Cob

[Closed] RD: Russ Solomon

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Abot

[Posted] Italian general election, 2018

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Closed] RD: William McAlpine

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Ab

[Posted] 90th Academy Awards

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Closed] Tripura Legislative Assembly election, 2018

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment the background is going to have to be expanded substantially explaining the significance of this election. I don't consider the population of the affected region when reviewing noms. It's either "in the news" with a "quality update" or it isn't. --76.122.98.135 (talk) 17:42, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose State of Tripura has a population of 4 million - if California or Central Java (pop 39 and 33mn) flips from their traditional parties, while pretty safe to say will be more significant, it would still be a regional election and hence not ITN-worthy. Otherwise, every ITN would be regional elections. Juxlos (talk) 23:05, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is a state election, so isn't significant enough for a broad audience of readers. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:21, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose I'm not necessarily opposed to posting regional elections; in particular, I feel quite strongly that we should post the more significant domestic elections from countries with large populations. This particular one doesn't quite fit the bill, though. It's a very small state, which has frequently voted very differently from the country as a whole. The election to post was that of Uttar Pradesh, about a year ago; that state is more populour than all but a handful of countries, and the election made the news for the particularly strident views of the new chief minister. Vanamonde (talk) 14:03, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Sub-national entity, no wider implications, routine politics. If we posted this we would have to post a continual stream of state and mayoral elections. Modest Genius talk 14:35, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is too parochial. Lepricavark (talk) 22:26, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abottom

[Posted] RD: Davide Astori

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Posted] 2018 Baku fire

edit

Template:ITN candidate

March 3

edit

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2018 March 3 Template:Cob

[Posted] RD: Lin Hu (air force general)

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Closed] RD: David Ogden Stiers

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Abottom

[Closed] RD: Roger Bannister

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Most of the text appears to be verifiable from his 1955 autobiography, I can only do a spot-check on Google Books but if anyone's got a copy, that ought to be able to do most of it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:25, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The class of the article is not relevant; no admin would post this in its current state of referencing. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Done - Stormy clouds (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ab

[Posted] RD: Kenneth Gärdestad

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Closed] Video Assistant Referees in association football

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Instant replay been going on in Major League Baseball and the National Football League for a few years now, didn't get nominated here. I don't think it's significant enough – Muboshgu (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Association Football (AKA Soccer) is not first sport to utilize such measures. As Muboshgu notes, both The MLB and the NFL, as well as car racing in general has already implemented this technique well before association football has, and thus is nothing new. It will also most certainly not be the last sport to do so as well.SamaranEmerald (talk) 21:07, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it's already implemented in football, so this isn't that big a step. And in any case, I doubt it would ever rise to the level of the significance of events we normally post at ITN. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Relatively minor change in sporting rules. Maybe if keepers are no longer permitted to use their hands, that would be post-worthy. SpencerT♦C 21:53, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose - brilliant news for fans of some teams, and association football is the world's leading sport, but I don't feel that it rises to a significant enough level in terms of rule changes, particularly as financial constraints mean that it will not be implemented universally. Stormy clouds (talk) 22:15, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abottom

[Closed] RD: Billy Herrington

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Replyto - notability at recent deaths is not a concern, only article quality is. Stormy clouds (talk) 23:19, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - referencing issues abound, particularly in videography, unfortunately. Stormy clouds (talk) 23:19, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per TRM and Stormy. Referencing needs work. I have added a few tags. Also I'm not sure how "in the news" this is. I did a search and the only reference to his death came from the one Chinese site. We generally require some mainstream news coverage when considering RD nominations. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:27, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ab

[Closed] RD: Vanessa Goodwin

edit

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Ab

March 2

edit

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2018 March 2 Template:Cob

[Posted] RD: Brandon Jenkins (musician)

edit

Template:ITN candidate

[Posted] 2018 Ouagadougou attack

edit

Template:ITN candidate

update/comment Changed the blurb and also reorganized the article into sections. Certainly has more than a minmum update to go.Lihaas (talk) 02:51, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 1

edit

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2018 March 1 Template:Cob

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/March_2018&oldid=1145685563"