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.
The Kachin Independence Army says that it attacked a police station in Kyaukgyi village-tract in Shwegu Township, Kachin State, injuring at least one officer. They claim that the police there are involved in killing civilians during the ongoing protests. (Irrawaddy)
PresidentEmmanuel Macron announces the extension of the "light lockdown" to the rest of the country, which includes a school closure from April 12 to April 26, a one-month domestic travel ban, and closure of non-essential businesses beginning April 3 in order to reduce the spread of COVID-19. (The Wall Street Journal)(BBC News)
Bangladesh reports a record 5,358 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 611,295. (Dhaka Tribune)
Sri Lanka receives 600,000 doses of the SinopharmBBIBP-CorVvaccine from China. Vaccination of Chinese nationals could commence first as the Medicines Regulatory Authority says that the vaccination of Sri Lankans will begin after a study by a committee of experts. (Lanka Business Online)
Restrictions temporarily increase in towns surrounding Byron Bay, New South Wales, after people linked to a recent outbreak of the UK variant in Brisbane spread the virus. Mask wearing is made mandatory indoors and private gatherings are limited to 30. (The Guardian)
For the second consecutive day, Brazil reports a record total of 3,950 deaths from COVID-19 in the last 24 hours, thereby bringing the number of deaths to 321,515. The total of 66,868 deaths in the past 31 days marked the most lethal month in the country for the duration of the pandemic. (G1)
The Philippines says that a Chinese maritime fleet "manned by militias" have now spread to wider areas inside its exclusive economic zone after occupying the disputed Whitsun Reef, and defying its demands for the flotilla to be withdrawn from its waters. Chinese diplomats say that the boats were sheltering from rough seas and denies the involvement of militias. (Reuters)
At least four people are killed and another injured during a mass shooting at an office building in Orange, California, United States. The attacker is shot and wounded by responding security forces. (CNN)
A young man, 16, from Newcastle, receives a non-custodial sentence after admitting to inviting support for banned neo-Nazi terror group National Action, plus multiple offences of inciting terrorism and stirring up racial hatred. The young man, who founded his own neo-Nazi cell at the age of 15, is the third-youngest UK terror convict. (BBC News)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support Albeit somewhat weakly since a lot of the depth of the article depends on multi-sentence quotes. But what's there is referenced and fine. SpencerT•C04:56, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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.
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.
Oppose Both bolded articles need work on referencing, and Ullman's has a "Controversies" section which is a concern. P-K3 (talk) 13:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
A report by the United Nations mission in Mali concludes that an airstrike conducted by France in Mopti on January 3 killed 19 civilians at a wedding. The French military maintains that it had killed rebel fighters identified by aerial surveillance, and denies that a wedding had taken place in Bounti. (Al Jazeera)
The death toll since the protests began officially surpasses 500. Pro-democracy activists launch a "garbage strike" in Yangon as rebel groups demand that the military stop the bloodshed or face retaliation. (DW)
A 65-year-old woman from the Philippines is critically wounded after being assaulted by a man during a racist attack in New York City. The perpetrator, a man in his 30s who was previously in prison for murdering his mother, is charged with hate crime assault. (Reuters)
The Government of Italy will impose a mandatory five-day quarantine for all travelers from other European Union member states until April 6. These travelers must also take a COVID-19 test at the end of the quarantine period. The only exceptions are for reasons of "proven necessity and urgency". (France 24)
German health authorities suspend the use of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine in people under the age of 60 after new data showing a rise in unusual blood clots in the head was released. (ABC News)
Greece reports a record 4,340 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 260,077. (Ekathimerini)
Turkey reports a record 37,303 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 3.27 million. (Anadolu Agency)
Pakistan reports 100 deaths from COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, the highest recorded in a single day of the year so far, thus bringing the nationwide death toll to 14,434. The number of patients in critical care with COVID-19 also reaches an all-time high of 3,749. (Dawn)
An investigation is opened into U.S. Rep.Matt Gaetz (R–FL) over whether he had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl and violated federal sex trafficking laws by allegedly paying her to travel with him. Gaetz denied the allegations. (The New York Times)
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.
Oppose Born in the early 1960s, nothing about his life before 2012. Too much focus on a couple of negative incidents for a BLP. P-K3 (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:BDP: "Generally, this policy does not apply to material concerning people who are confirmed dead by reliable sources. The only exception would be for people who have recently died, in which case the policy can extend for an indeterminate period beyond the date of death—six months, one year, two years at the outside." —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Chief figure in the Watergate break-in (other than Nixon). Sentenced to 20 years, which was later commuted to eight by President Carter in an act of goodwill. Later went on to be an actor. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 00:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have added a single CN tag but otherwise the article is vastly improved and IMO meets the customary standards. Marking as ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Three soldiers are killed and seven others are wounded when two military posts are attacked in Kafolo and Téhini, Ivory Coast. Two attackers are also killed and four more are arrested. (Reuters)
The United States suspends its diplomatic trade engagement with Myanmar, which sought to help integrate the country into the global economy, following an escalation in violence perpetrated by the Burmese military against anti-coup protesters, until what Katherine Tai says would be "the return of a democratically elected government." (CNN)
The grounded container shipEver Given is refloated and towed north, allowing the Suez Canal to reopen. At least 369 ships are now waiting to pass through the canal. (Reuters)
Lockdown restrictions in England are relaxed as new COVID-19 laws enter force, formally ending the government's "stay at home" order, allowing the resumption of outdoor sports, and allowing people to meet in groups of up to six outdoors. (Sky News)
PresidentRecep Tayyip Erdoğan announces that a full weekend lockdown will be put in place during Ramadan and that restaurants will only be able to offer delivery and takeout due to an increasing number of high-risk cities across the country. (Hurriyet Daily News)
Bangladesh reports a record 5,181 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 600,895. This forces the government to impose further restrictions across the country. (Dhaka Tribune)
Mongolia reports a record 575 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 7,589. (AKI Press)
The Philippines reports a record 10,016 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 731,894. (ABS-CBN News)
Brisbane enters a three-day lockdown after a reported outbreak of the Lineage B.1.1.7 variant, with some minor lockdown measures extending to the rest of Queensland. (News.com.au)
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: Master Restorer and academic who led the restoration works of the Sistine Chapel starting in the 1980's, personally working on some of the most influential and famous paintings in history. He seems to have kept a low-profile in his life, but I've extended it past a stub. Uses x (talk • contribs) 09:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Belgium-based architect. Seemed to be well cited, except for the "Realisations" section, where I could cite all but three items (and will choose have chosen to comment out the unsourced entries). Oceanh (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could not find information about place of death so far, having searched through obituaries. Added another source (RTBF) to the template. Oceanh (talk) 18:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
comment: i've placed the three entries that were commented out back into the text. also, someone possibly connected to the decedent changed the date of death without leaving a reliable source. how does wikipedia generally handle such edits? dying (talk) 06:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I re-phrased the cited sentence about his death, to be more strictly according to the (last added) source, to say, "On 28 March 2021 it was reported that Brodzki had died, at the age of 96." The first source we had (bx1.de, which is cited in Deaths in 2021), said he died on monday (which is 29 March), while the RTBF source which also reports his death, is dated 28 March. Oceanh (talk) 07:38, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
support. significant sections have been rewritten. a few relevant photos have also been added, including one of one of the houses he designed, which interestingly appears to have been uploaded by either his old client or a relation just a few days ago. dying (talk) 11:28, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: The wider Insurgency in Cabo Delgado has been going on for years but this seems to be a significant development. The battle for Palma started a few days ago but reporting has been limited due to accessibility - Dumelow (talk) 09:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support But may make sense to make clearer who the attackers are, maybe change it to islamist insurgents or islamist rebels rather than just islamist forces. Llewee (talk) 12:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not my work, I just nominated it. There were took many people in the article history for me to add to the template, but I'll go through and send credits to the major contributors - Dumelow (talk) 18:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have no opinion as to whether or not the article should be posted, but this was posted in the span of 3 hours. That's not enough time for consensus to form. I suggest undo the posting, it's too soon. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!]22:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed – I've seen articles with three support initial votes turn out to be no consensus, and articles with three initial oppose votes get posted. This is too soon. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 22:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Though I want to make it clear that I don't actually think this... given that it's all admins commenting and approving the article, if I haven't been on Wikipedia for 14 years, I'd think there's something suspicious about how quickly it was approved. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!]23:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Many admins watch this page. There’s no time requirement. We like to promote things from countries that aren’t often covered. This event is significant and it showcases the breadth of Wikipedia’s coverage. Many readers of mainstream media could be unaware of this event. JehochmanTalk23:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)][reply]
So, were you saying that ironically? Or were you trying to bait a reponse? Why would you say something like 'Oh, this is too short. Boo!' and then recant your statement? (Not mad at you, by the way. I was just wondering why you did it.) Fakescientist8000 (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What does that statement have to do with my statement that this was approved too quickly? I know there is no time requirement, but there was no time for anyone to contest the posting of the blurb, either. The time requirement should at least demonstrate the formation of consensus, right? -- Rockstone[Send me a message!]02:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, why are you saying that you think this article was posted too fast but then later stating that you don't actually think this?--WaltCip-(talk)13:01, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support Almost all of the sources are in English, which indicates the international importance of this event. Well cited. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael08:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting comment – Certainly ITN/significant, but I'm a bit uneasy with the beginning of the article, which says, "The Battle of Palma is an ongoing conflict." That raises the question, why isn't it in Ongoing? Perhaps change article to "a continuing conflict" – ?? — Sca (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Hong Kong supporting actor. Article looks well cited but needs more work in the Career section. Yeeno (talk) 🍁04:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I added some additional information here and there and a small paragraph on his awards; I'll add more to that one later on. Yeeno (talk) 🍁20:50, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Dutch para-snowboarding athlete and motivational speaker. Survived cancer 15 times.
Support All paragraphs and sentence referenced. All good. I have removed a reference from the lead which cites her death date because it is already mentioned in below. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael08:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Myanmar's security forces open fire on a funeral being held for a person killed in Yangon, with no casualties reported. The Kachin Independence Army also attacks a police station, prompting the military to conduct airstrikes. (Reuters)
Maharashtra reports a record 40,414 new cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours despite a nightly curfew, thereby bringing the total of confirmed cases to 2.71 million. (Hindustan Times)
The National Command and Operation Centre announces an immediate ban on all indoor and outdoor gatherings across Pakistan as well as weddings beginning April 5 due to an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases. (Tribune)
Prime MinisterJanez Jansa announces a circuit-breaker lockdown from April 1 to 12, which will close all non-essential businesses and in-person cultural and religious venues, ban gatherings of more than 10 people, and shift schools to remote learning. (STA)
A lockdown begins across the entirety of Chile, despite its successful vaccination programme, as the hospital occupancy rate reaches 95%. (The Guardian)
Mexico publishes revised figures, indicating that the number of deaths caused by COVID-19 is 60% higher than previously reported. The revised total is 321,000, thereby making it the country with the world's second-highest number of deaths. (BBC News)(Al Jazeera)
Thousands of protesters in Pakistan's Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province break through police barricades and attempt to march to Bannu, and eventually reach Islamabad, in order to demand a government probe into the deaths of four youths near Janikhel. The protesters allege that the youths were tortured and killed by security forces. (Reuters)
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.
Weak oppose for now - Long enough and well referenced, but I do see from his obits that his main claim to fame, and somethign that made him "revolutionary",[2] is being co-creator of TONTO, which as far as I can gather (including from our own article on the subject) was the first and to this day the largest analog synthesizer. TONTO is mentioned, but I don't get the sense from the article that what Cecil did was revolutionary. — Amakuru (talk) 10:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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.
Support and support blurb Majorly influential former world leader. Serving as president twice, he converted Madagascar to socialism and was the country's longest-serving president, only removed for the second time in a soft coup that has had effects on the nation's politics to this day. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait– I think we should clean up the article before heading straight into an ITN blurb. (e.g. add a new picture).Support now that the issues have been solved. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 23:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unless there's a better picture we can use (I'm not saying there isn't, but I couldn't find one on Commons at least), that issue can't be solved. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Heard his name often while reading books about History of Africa. Definitely deserves a blurb. Article condition is prime and passes hygiene checks. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael08:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am not seeing a justification in a blurb here for a former head of state. Good enough for RD but neither is the article too good to pass nor the subject notable enough for a blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 03:45, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pull blurb & RD only as he doesn't rise to the level of Mandela, Thatcher or even Vajpayee for that matter and wasn't a world transformative figure either. Depressed Desi (talk) 16:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Re-Instate Blurb, for Time Being Why was the blurb pulled after two comments when the majority remain supportive of a blurb? We kept the RBG blurb up even after much fiercer opposition; it feels like pulling the blurb before we can have a discussion about its merits is over-hasty. I misread the news box, apologies. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support blurb - just to be clear. Clearly a hugely significant figure for many years in that country. — Amakuru (talk) 10:20, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support Very significant, as was on death row for 7 murders. Article is in good shape, comprehensive, and well-referenced. You should clean up the intro, however. It's too long to navigate through. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 14:26, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the fourth day of a siege in Palma, Mozambique, several people are killed by ISIL-linked militants. Local civilians are killed in streets and buildings, with reports of beheadings. A South African man and a British citizen are murdered after a hotel and an evacuation convoy are attacked; other foreigners are also suspected to have been killed. At least 21 soldiers are shot dead while responding to the hotel attack. (The Times)(The Telegraph)
Islamist militants have taken control of Palma after outnumbered government forces withdraw from the town, according to security forces. (The Guardian)
More than 114 anti-coup protesters are killed by the military as junta leader Min Aung Hlaing celebrates Armed Forces Day and promises to "protect people and strive for democracy". The protests erupted across the country despite a warning by state television that protesters could be "shot in the head and back". (Reuters)(WGAU)
The government announces that the Greater Manila Area will be placed under enhanced community quarantine, which includes a curfew from 6:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. local time, for one week from March 29 to April 4. (Inquirer)
Cambodia reports a record 179 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 2,157. (Khmer Times)
Wales lifts their "stay local" rules that have been imposed since December, allowing people to travel freely within the country. They also allow up to six people from two different households to meet and exercise outdoors, as well as resumption of organised outdoor activities and sports for people under the age of 18. (The Independent)
Turkey reports 30,021 new cases in the past 24 hours, which is the highest single-day total this year, thereby bringing its cumulative case total to 3,179,115. (Arab News)
China and Iran sign a 25-year cooperation agreement at a live televised ceremony in Tehran, following a two-day state visit by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. The accord is expected to significantly increase Chinese investment in Iran, especially in the energy and infrastructure sectors. (Reuters)
A series of shootings occur on the oceanfront of Virginia Beach, Virginia, Friday night. They consist of a mass shooting that left eight people injured; a subsequent, fatal shooting by a police officer; and an unrelated fatal shooting that occurred nearby. (CNN)
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: Czech businessman, died in a helicopter crash. Mostly fine, some references need fixing. --Tone 11:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC) Tone11:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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: These types of clashes, lasting more than a day and causing forced displacement, are uncommon despite the current crisis, as well as after the Colombian peace process. There are also concerns that other five deaths consist in extrajudicial kilings; I've decided not to include in the blurb to keep it as neutral as possible, but the reported human right violations are noteworthy. NoonIcarus (talk) 00:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But there's nothing stopping someone from nominting it, is there? I would understand the rationale if the article had already been rejected, but this is not currently the case. Besides, context is also important: the bar for events that are commonplace is understandably higher, which is the case for insurgency in the Middle East (and taking a look at the Insurgency in Cabo Delgado article's timeline, the same appears to have here). On the other hand, these type of attacks from Colombia have been uncommon for years and some aspects are unprecedented, such as the use of landmines. --NoonIcarus (talk) 01:37, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support following expansion. Also, if we blurb this but the event continues for some time, I wouldn't be opposed to moving it to ongoing after it naturally rolls off. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 14:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Unless the events escalate to such a degree it begins a massive event (i.e. UN gets involved/NATO condemns it), then I will keep my neutral stance on this. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 20:28, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is this a major aberration from the usual turmoil at the border including those killed? Doesn't seem so with the current info and blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 03:49, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am only asking and putting a point forward here, because 8 killed in a major ongoing conflict probably can do without a blurb. Though if this escalates or tensions continue it can be added to Ongoing. Gotitbro (talk) 11:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gotitbro: Oh, gotcha. It isn't as major as unprecedented, this is the first type of conflict that undergoes for several days and cause thousands of displacements, let alone in Venezuelan territory. I don't have problems nominating this as an ongoing article, but I wanted to have a blurb first considering the estimates. I have updated the blurb as of this date. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:28, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Made world headlines today, significant record in death count. Previous uptick to 38 in a single day was posted. Osunpokeh (talk) 18:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is overly WP:DETAILed cherry picked POV proseline trash that's been festering in "Ongoing" for months. The death toll is utterly arbitrary. Article makes no mentioned of the 100s of prisoners released because it doesn't fit with the hysteria. Posting this would bump the first female president of Tanzania which is infinitely more consequential than this minor flare up in news coverage. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:17, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@LaserLegs if there's an issue, you're free to fix it. That's what Wikipedia is all about. When I've added information about an arrest and the person is later released, I add the release. And besides, I think coverage of someone being arrested is more important than them being released, especially if they weren't arrested for cause in the first place. Uses x (talk • contribs) 19:31, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm WP:NOTREQUIRED to fix that article, I try to avoid POV laden articles until long after the outrage has subsided, and I honestly don't care about the subject at all. What I do care about is the quality of what ITN features on the main page and while I know better than to try and crowbar this trash out of the Ongoing section, that doesn't mean it's in any state to be featured in a blurb especially for something as inconsequential as some death toll milestone. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:57, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We disagree on the article quality, and we're not going to change each other's minds on that, but "I honestly don't care about the subject at all" sounds like the reason for you thinking it's inconsequential. It's headline news in every newspaper and news site I can think of, so it's hardly just some "minor flare up", and a ten-fold death count to what's normally posted in ITN. It's also never received an ITN blurb, so it's not as if there's overexposure. Anyway, we won't change each other's minds so I'll leave it at that. Uses x (talk • contribs) 20:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I feel the article needs a bit of help on dates/timeline via headers as I was struggling to find where this event was addressed. I think this would be reasonable to have as ITN but I do think it needs to be clear to the reader what section is the news story. --Masem (t) 20:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: this is already, rightly, in "Ongoing", but this particular event does not fundamentally change the nature of the protests or government response, just the size/severity, so I don't support mentioning. — Bilorv (talk) 20:32, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bilorv Ethnic military groups are now involved, including a raid by one on a military outpost (killing ten) and a subsequent airstrike on that group's village. I've added an altblurb, and I'd like to hear your thought on this. Uses x (talk • contribs) 21:36, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I should have given examples of what a fundamental change might be (in general, not saying any of these make sense for Myanmar specifically): a government acceeding to a most major demand of protesters; an additional party joining the conflict (such as a state invading a region); protesters occupying a legislature or a legislature's suspension. A raid and an airstrike are not of that nature, and though I'm struggling to evaluate what change has occurred in the military group makeup, I don't see that it would count either. — Bilorv (talk) 21:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support since this is clearly a huge death toll and the highest since the protests have started. The article can be removed from the ongoing section and be replaced with a blurb, if that's an issue, without prejudice of returing to the previous version after the blurb is removed. --NoonIcarus (talk) 00:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support a notable development. It involves more deaths than the Rohingya refugee camp fire. Already being in ongoing isn't a big deal - it can be removed from ongoing while it is a blurb, and then reinserted to ongoing afterwards. Banedon (talk) 02:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Already in Ongoing. I considered nominating it for removal last Friday, because the updates were sparse (a few paras in the last week concerning events from weeks ago). This new development is merely fulfilling the continuously updated portion of the Ongoing criteria; there's no need to feature one update in two different places of the Front Page.130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Already in Ongoing. Cherry picked POV and indeed overly detailed. Hope we do not have to discuss this now every weekend. Death toll arbitrary, Myanmar Now as a final source...well. CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Four Ukrainian troops are killed and two others are wounded in a separatist rocket attack on a military position in the Donetsk Oblast. It is the worst loss of life in a single attack for Ukrainian forces since 2019. (Euronews)
At least 19 people are killed and 185 others are injured after two trains collide in Sohag, Egypt. Passengers triggered the emergency brakes on the first train; a second train following on the same track was not stopped. (Al Jazeera)
Mongolia reports a record 437 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 6,332. (AKIPress)
The Philippines reports a record 9,838 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, with the country surpassing 100,000 total active cases. This also brings the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 702,856. (Rappler)
Hungary reports a record 11,265 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 614,612. (Budapest Business Journal)
Ireland introduces a mandatory hotel quarantine for travellers from 33 high-risk countries, mostly in South America and Africa. Travellers from these countries will be required to quarantine for 14 days at a government-designated facility. (The Irish Times)
Poland reports a record for the third consecutive day of 35,143 new confirmed cases of COVID-19, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 2,189,966. (Polskie Radio)
Ukraine reports a record 18,132 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1,614,707. (Kyiv Post)
The Colombian National Institute for Drug and Food Surveillance grants emergency use authorization for the single-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine. (El Periódico)
Oppose for now. There appears to be a lot of bias in the article. For example, it says "This resulted in stone pelting from both sides", then when you go to the citation it only makes mention of protestors throwing stones at police. The selection of citations is also biased, with the sole citation on one part titled "Modi is not welcome in Dhaka: rally". You also need to state the police side of it since that information is out (accusations of vandalism, self-defence, etc); you don't need to believe it, you just need to state it. Uses x (talk • contribs) 16:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't personally feel qualified enough in the subject matter to assess whether or not the article is still biased; however, it's been a few days and some of the concerns highlighted by Uses x appear to have been resolved. The article is currently nearing 25,000 bytes, and something should be done with this. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The protests are over now according to the article, and the most recent articles I can find were posted 3 days ago, so it's stale. The tags I had placed on the 28th haven't been fixed anyway so I still wouldn't give my support, which is a shame since I agree it had potential. Uses x (talk • contribs) 23:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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: Will take some time and effort. Okay, I'm done; I don't think I can squeeze more out of the available sources. Would some one please take a look? Thanks! Usedtobecool☎️15:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but even if you did do what you could do, it doesn't meet the requirements. It's mostly just useless fluff. I mean, who *really* needs a quote of someone to say how 'heroic' someone was? This is supposed to be an encyclopedic article, not padded fluffing you got from 10 articles. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 16:56, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not seeing what Fakescientist8000's talking about here. This is pretty good; on the shorter side, but well-sourced and discusses the subject and what he did in office better than most politician RD noms. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 18:46, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Limited depth of coverage of subject's political career. Disagree that this article is better than most politician RD noms. SpencerT•C02:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Insufficient detail on what he did during his career, both as deputy mayor and as minister of industry. — Amakuru (talk) 10:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support It'd be good if his "Professional career" had a better citation than a data sheet, but you can't expect much on sportspeople who played before the internet. Otherwise, it's comprehensive enough for RD. Uses x (talk • contribs) 22:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose AP obit's title, "... boosted Cards at bat and as exec ...",[4] mentions his executive career, but there is no information on this part of his life in his bio currently.—Bagumba (talk) 07:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Posted My late !vote aside, no outstanding oppostion after two days (and another RD posted even while this was "ready").—Bagumba (talk) 12:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment Should this one be blurbed? She's a household name and a titan of children's literature, with 91 million book copies sold. Per the talk page, she's WP:VIT5. I'm not adding a blurb to the nom because I'm somewhat on the fence myself, but wanted to hear what other people think. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 00:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Blurb Her article got 270,000 views yesterday, and 153,000 views the day before that. I think she's popular enough for a blurb. In contrast, the individuals beside her are getting less than 8,000 views a day. Uses x (talk • contribs) 17:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll stress again: ITN is not driver by reader views - we would like to see pages features at ITN to get more reader views, but we don't let reader views determine what we feature at ITN, or otherwise this would become a popularity game. --Masem (t) 17:56, 28 March 2021 (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.
Strong oppose and suggest WP:SNOW closure. ITN doesn't post leadership changes of major national political parties, let alone a schism in a regional party. We won't publish the results of the Scottish election either, as it's sub-national. Modest Geniustalk17:34, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Don't think we'll be getting that article. "Public Prosecution calls on all parties not to issue any data about the train collision in Upper Egypt's Sohag." [1]Uses x (talk • {{reply to|Uses x}} • contribs) 14:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - only 1800 page views; I don't think this is of sufficient interest to readers to post at ITN. It's only been a day, though, so my !vote would change if the next day's page views spiked. Levivichharass/hound15:25, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We do not cater to reader views at ITN or WP in general - otherwise we'd transition to covering primarily celebrity news, Pokemon, and other more trivial nonsense. We're not a newspaper and not meant to be used as a news source, but instead ITN is meant to highlight stories that are in the news (that are otherwise not routine) and that we have quality articles for, ideally as to potentially to draw more readers to see that. --Masem (t) 15:28, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, we do cater to readers at ITN and Wikipedia in general. The purpose of ITN is to help readers find the articles about topics in the news that they're interested in; it says so right at WP:ITN. A lack of page views demonstrates a lack of reader interest. ITN is not for highlighting stories for the purpose of drawing more readers. It is not a tool to drive the news cycle, and editors shouldn't use it as such. "Wikipedia should follow, not lead." Levivichharass/hound15:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"The Egyptian government's statistics have recorded nearly 11,000 accidents on rail lines between 2008 and 2017, including a high of 1,793 in 2017." Yet no one is here shrieking that rail accidents are routine in Egypt. No one is making sarcastic comments like "The pope is Catholic. Trains crash in Egypt" and no one is posting snide French language "good jobs" after those sarcastic comments. It is 60% filler, very light on actual details, follows the template precisely, will be stagnant in a few weeks and unchanged for years just like all the rest and you can no more stop it from being posted than you can stop the sun from rising in the east. Just go with it, it's easier. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One of the ITN reasons is to help readers find news stories they may be searching for but it is not the only reason. And one reason for ITN is to highlight stories that may not be top-of-the-fold news stories but are still in the news that have quality articles to draw more readers. This is why we are very selective about what stories we post. --Masem (t) 20:01, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - it's notable enough & the article is sufficient. There's no minimum number of readers to qualify for posting. Had this happened in the West, it would have been posted.[citation needed]Jim Michael (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Rm ready. Per WP:ITN, In the case of a new, event-specific article, the traditional cut-off for what is enough has been around three complete, referenced and well-formed paragraphs. An example of the minimum required update for a new article is Fuzhou derailment at the time of its posting. This article does not have "three complete, referenced and well-formed paragraphs." SpencerT•C00:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In the last 3 days, the only new information added to the article is a statement by Egyptian PM. Seems to have disappeared from RSs. Stub appears unlikely to grow at the this point.130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Pakistani dramatist, playwright and scriptwriter. A few sections need inline citations, and a large filmography might be challenging regarding proper sourcing. Oceanh (talk) 06:44, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Several paragraphs in "Actors and actresses", "Later work", and "Awards and achievements" unsourced. "Filmography" is completely unsourced. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:41, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian Banker. News just breaking. Article requires some effort in building out. Not ready for homepage / RD as of yet. However, obituaries should start appearing soon with good amount of content to add to the article. Edits and content expansion done. Article has shaped to a decent C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 04:08, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Marking ready. Ktin, one comment: "During his time at the central bank, an off-the-record comment on the bank's inadequacy in controlling inflation resulted in him being relieved of many of his roles" should be shifted from passive to active voice. Did Chakrabarty make this off the record comment, or did someone else? At present that isn't clear. SpencerT•C00:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Bundestag approves a new mandate to let Germany continue to station up to 1,300 Bundeswehr soldiers in Afghanistan until January 31, 2022. (Reuters)
Arts and culture
The 2021 redesign of the £50 note, featuring British mathematician Alan Turing on the reverse, is officially unveiled by the Bank of England. It is slated to enter circulation on June 23, Turing's birthday. (ABC News)
The official death toll from the major winter storms that struck Texas and triggered statewide blackouts last month rises to at least 111, more than double the previous reported numbers. It is also believed that the storms could become the costliest weather disaster in the state's history. (NBC News)
The Philippines reports a record 8,773 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 693,048. (ABS-CBN)
The Thailand Food and Drug Administration grants emergency use authorization for the single-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine, thereby becoming the third vaccine to be made available for local use. (CNA)
Poland will close barbers, hairdressers, and beauty shops from March 27 until April 9, as well as kindergartens and nurseries, while restricting the capacity at essential shops, churches, public markets, and post offices amidst the rising number of the COVID-19 cases. (The First News)
Ukraine reports a record 16,669 new confirmed cases and 362 deaths in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1,596,575 and the nationwide death toll to 31,135. (Ukrinform)
Chile reports nearly 50,000 active cases of COVID-19, a new record for the country. The country also announces that the entire Santiago Metropolitan Region will be put under lockdown beginning next Saturday. (BíoBíoChile)
Peru reports a record 11,260 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1,492,519. (The Rio Times)
AstraZeneca announces that the efficacy rating of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate has been lowered to 76%, following new analyses of the trial run in the United States. Earlier in the week, the company had been criticized for advertising its vaccine with a 79% efficacy rating using what critics claimed was outdated data. (Forbes)
Pfizer and BioNTech begin a clinical trial testing of their COVID-19 vaccine on healthy children between the ages of six months and 11 years, which is considered a crucial step towards vaccinating children. (CNBC)
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.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment A nice article. Some CNs added to Post-war Career. What's the MOS for this? Can someone confirm that "WAG" is his actual COMMONNAME in Indian RSs, and how should acronyms-as-names be treated?130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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.
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.
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.
Conditional support Referenced, adequate depth of coverage; added 1 CN tag for information not supported by the following reference, when added, support no longer conditional. SpencerT•C16:26, 26 March 2021 (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.
Nominator's comments: Major tornado outbreak that is ongoing. Since it will end in a few hours, I did not nominate it for the on-going section. Blurb can be updated once it is officially over. Just about ever English news has this as a top headline. If you are concerned about the timing of the nomination do an !vote of wait. Don't say oppose unless you believe it isn't ITN worthy. Elijahandskip (talk) 01:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, the Georgia voting law is above the tornadoes on every American news outlet I've checked. So it's not exactly the "top headline." Mlb96 (talk) 03:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's tornado season in the US. There will be such outbreaks and small numbers of death with most of these, and this is thus "routine" in that sense. (that's assuming there's no further late-breaking storms that drastically increase that death toll) --Masem (t) 04:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Unless you're trying to doomcast a tornado to cause a ton of damage and kill a lot of people within the next couple of hours, I don't see why this article should be posted in this current state. Nova Crystallis(Talk)05:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually maybe. A major tornado just hit Newnan Alabama. Debris was hitting as far north as Atlanta, far enough away that the TV meteorologists were shocked by it. Outbreak not over yet. Elijahandskip (talk) 05:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you knew what you're sending to ITN, you would've known this was in Georgia, not Alabama. Anyway, the storm's over and it seems to not have caused no more fatalities than yesterday. Nova Crystallis(Talk)13:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not really a major outbreak. It seems to be a run-of-the-mill tornado outbreak at this point. Let's be thankful that more people weren't hurt. NoahTalk12:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Like many other things nominated here, these are becoming more and more common. It's sad, but these are normal. It's not really ITN-worthy at this point. CodingCyclone!🌀📘23:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German theologian, first female doctorate in Catholic theology, daughter of former German president Gustav Heinemann. Article updated, short but seems sufficiently sourced. SoWhy12:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
SupportOppose for now. I've checked out the citations and some statements are not referenced, I've added tags for these. I can't verify some citations myself. I'm not convinced beliefnet is RS either, and it hasn't been rated on the reliable sources noticeboard. Uses x (talk) 13:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC) 16:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda Arendt has addressed most of those and I added a couple of sources as well, hopefully not interfering too much in their work (had an edit conflict but I think I resolved it gracefully). Regards SoWhy14:58, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please give me some more time, later today ;) - I try to keep edits short. What we have right now is just bones. Her father became president after was the first woman in the world to be habilitated in Catholic theology. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's cute ;) - ok, I think it works now, - still not the greatest but major aspects covered. Perhaps we'll have more sources tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:45, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I concur with Joseywales1961 above. While the career section has gaps in coverage (e.g. 1954-1969), this article isn't a stub so I think what we have is sufficient for RD. TJMSmith (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pope Francis issues a decree that cuts the 10% of the cardinals' and other officials' salaries in view of the fact that the Vatican foresees a financial deficit of 50 million euros this year. (BBC News)
Belgium announces new strict lockdown measures, which will close schools and non-medical contact professions such as hairdressers, restrict operation of non-essential shops, and ban outdoor gatherings of more than four people. These measures will begin on March 26 and will last for at least four weeks. (The Brussels Times)
Bulgaria reports a record 4,851 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 312,741. (Bulgarian News Agency)
ChancellorAngela Merkel announces that yesterday's decision to impose a five-day nationwide shutdown has been reversed. She says that the plan was a "mistake" and apologizes for it. (ABC News)
Iceland will close schools, swimming pools, gyms, and bars at midnight and lower the limit on gatherings from 50 people to 10 people. These measures will be enforced for the next three weeks following an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases. (Iceland Review)
Poland reports a record 29,978 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 2,160,671. The country also surpasses 50,000 deaths from COVID-19. (TVN24 English)
Ukraine reports a new single-day record for the second consecutive day of 343 deaths from COVID-19, thereby bringing the nationwide death toll to 30,773. (Kyiv Post)
Mongolia reports a record 218 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 5,610. (Montsame)
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.
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.
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.
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: Best known as Lucille Bluth on Arrested Development. Usual problems in sourcing of mid-tier Hollywood actors. Masem (t) 19:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
comment: there are no longer any citation needed tags in the main body of the text, though i am not sure if the filmography needs to be thoroughly cited. dying (talk) 23:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
i couldn't find the removed citation needed tags that you were referring to, although my history search was admittedly not very thorough.[a] feel free to add them to where you think they'd be appropriate.[b] i also added some sources for the screen actors guild awards. also, while i was finding sources for the film credits, another editor moved the filmography to a separate article, so i suppose my earlier point regarding the filmography is now moot. dying (talk) 07:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Notes
^i removed some tags myself, but had replaced them with citations, so i'm assuming you weren't referring to those edits.
^i'm not sure what the standard for the tag is nowadays, and had only wished to state that at least the tags that were there when i came across the article had been replaced with citations, and not that the article did not need any more citations.
(Closed) Abolition of capital punishment in Virginia
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:Capital punishment in Virginia (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Virginia becomes the first southern state to abolish capital punishment. (Post) Alternative blurb: After executing over 1,700 people, Virginia becomes the 23rd state to abolish the death penalty, and the first Southern state to do so. Alternative blurb II: In the U.S., the state of Virginia becomes the first Southern state to abolish the death penalty, after making a record number 1,700 executions. News source(s):The Washington Post, BBC News, CNN Credits:
Nominator's comments: Big event for the USA; Virginia is the state with the most executions and the first southern state to abolish the death penalty, showing it's decline in the United States and changes in opinion. Inexpiable (talk) 22:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment good faith nom but it's almost certainly doomed. VA has been bluing for some time now it's hardly a surprise that the Democrats 86'd the death penalty. ITN has a certain aversion to "US-centric" stories, and I doubt the 23rd of anything is going to get posted around here. Good news for VA though. Just don't get discouraged when this is snow closed in an hour. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:17, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks for your interest in ITN but this has no chance of being posted. As LaserLegs says, Virginia is a rare Southern state that is now pretty solidly blue so it's not really a surprise. P-K3 (talk) 23:23, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose mostly because this is subnational news. On another note, how many of those thousands are post-1976? The most "modern" post-1976 executions, IIRC, is Texas (and Oklahoma per capita). – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I'm looking forward to the day that the death penalty is abolished nationwide. Until that day, I don't think this would qualify as ITN as it's not much of a change. But from here in Florida, I'm praying for the day that we join Virginia in ending this barbaric practice once and for all. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!]06:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment Early career section has some uncited information. I added one tag for now. I'm pretty busy right now so I don't have the time to look up any citations for Plager. INeedSupport😷00:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unprecedented and has the potential to affect the trade between many countries. You'd think today's technology would be able to prevent this from ever happening. (Also not a mass-shooting or a sports event, so should cause less squabbling here!) Martinevans123 (talk) 16:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Martinevans123 "While traffic has slowed down, there is little risk of shortages in goods.", "There are existing stocks. If you look at oil supply, it is only the one from the Middle East and we have other supply sources," [5]Uses x (talk) 08:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unless there is a new article about the specific incident (indicating its international impact/notability/etc.), this has limited lasting impact. Ship article is relatively new and would be eligible for DYK if it meets the other criteria. SpencerT•C16:13, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
SupportOppose for now. The update is too short (people clicking want to read into it), and until stated in the article I'm going to assume it has a limited impact.Uses x (talk) 17:10, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The update has been expanded, but it appears this won't have a major impact if it's resolved. Multiple sources are trying to WP:CRYSTALBALL this, while right now there appears to be very little impact. We can wait until then to see. Uses x (talk) 15:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's looking more likely that this will go on for weeks, so I've changed to support. It's a good story, it's certainly in the news, the article is fine, and even if a lot of the damage can be mitigated with existing stocks and sourcing goods from elsewhere, what damage there will be is still huge. Uses x (talk) 16:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Reading the CNN article, it is a matter if it takes too long to dislodge it that it might impact oil shipping which will impact prices. Otherwise, the way its being discussed, its an inconvenienced to a lot of people but no one's lives are threatened yet. --Masem (t) 17:12, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also there is an aspect of WP:BLP1E here to the ship article, even though its not a BLP. If the only thing it is really noted for is that it blocked the canal, it really doesn't need a separate article, it should be a section in the canal's article (and that's if this is a significant event in the first place per NEVENT). Again, NOT#NEWS and all that. --Masem (t) 17:14, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to Support in that it is clear this won't be done in a few days. They have to remove the cargo and whether that can be done in days or weeks is of a question, but its already starting to hit financial markets. But it was appropriate to wait to make sure it was a long-term problem. --Masem (t) 14:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes: "Although there is an older section of the canal which could have helped bypass an obstruction, this particular incident happened in a section of the canal with only one channel." Martinevans123 (talk) 18:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait I'd like to see the wider ramifications of this incident. If it gets resolved quickly with no issues other than some minor shipping delays, then I would oppose posting. Mlb96 (talk) 18:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)Post-posting support This clearly isn't going to be resolved soon and has already disrupted billions of dollars in commerce. Clearly notable enough to be posted. Mlb96 (talk) 18:12, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. (edit conflict) If the canal is blocked for long enough that ships start going the long way around Africa, this is a major event. If it's cleared in a few days it's a minor inconvenience to a few logistics companies. I suspect the latter is the more likely outcome, but let's wait a few days to see what happens (and to improve the article). Modest Geniustalk18:03, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"On Saturday, Adm Mameesh also revealed plans to build another canal near East Port Said on the Mediterranean Sea. It is expected to cost around $60m and will be 9.5km (6 miles) long, Reuters reports." [9] That might take a while? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:39, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support not the most interesting event since it's apparently already resolved (per Reuters source in nom) but it's an international incident and it's in the news. Banedon (talk) 01:25, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support pending article improvement. The incident is widely reported, and it links to a very nice article here. However, the Timeline section of the article is orange tagged, and must be resolved before appearing on the Front Page. The update is suitable a well referenced. I have edited the nomination to point to the proper section of the Suez Canal article.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:19, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support (Alt1) – No progress. Coverage indicates the gargantuan vessel may remain stuck for weeks, as it may not be refloated/moved until containers are unloaded and other things weighing it down removed. [11][12][13] Lloyds estimates $9B worth of delays daily. [14] In terms of news, it's a great story (and one that doesn't depend on fatalities). – Sca (talk) 13:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a lot of incorrect and uncited information being added, so it's not ready yet. I'm working through it. For example on 2021 Suez Canal obstruction it's stated it is "is also expected to send oil and gas prices soaring according to several experts", but when you click on the citation it's attributed to other reasons (i.e. investors overreacting), and that "a few days of slowdown in [oil] delivery is not critical to the market". Plenty of things like that Uses x (talk) 15:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: While it is making news right now, we don't know if this is just going to be like the MSC Fabiola (where, just like now, a container ship ran aground and the canal was basically closed off for a few days), where the incident is eventually deemed not notable to the point that it's just one line on the ship's article. Y'know what I'm saying? Like, yeah, the article's good, I think it's newsworthy, but at the same time, what if this thing's resolved by tomorrow morning, and everyone just drops it and forgets what an Ever Given is? If this thing takes a while, I'm moving to full support, but for now, I dunno, it might not be much. AdoTang (talk) 15:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Posted ALT1 Most of the opposition was like mine the other day, from the lack of a dedicated article. Now that that's sorted, let's get this news up. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Updated blurb. Okay, it looks like developments in the past hour or so have freed the ship, and the article has been properly updated. I have made some tweaks to the blurb per these new developments. --Jayron3215:21, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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.
Support list sections could use some work but the prose is decently-well sourced and honestly those lists are a bit of a mess to source anyway due to the nature of their information. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:41, 24 March 2021 (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:Cabinet of Joe Biden (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Cabinet of Joe Biden completed with the swearing in of Marty Walsh as Secretary of Labor. (Post) Alternative blurb: Marty Walsh sworn in as United States Secretary of Labor, completing the Cabinet of Joe Biden. News source(s):link1link2link3 Credits:
Oppose. Routine government activities. There is a small amount of significance in that Biden is the first president since Reagan to have all his cabinet positions filled on the first try(Neera Tanden was a cabinet-level nomination, not the cabinet itself), but that would only be significant if this was USApedia, which it isn't. 331dot (talk) 06:18, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dmoore5556 Your nominations are appreciated- I would gently suggest that you keep in mind that this is a global website and perhaps consider if you would make the nomination if it was related to a different country(like UK/French/Equatorial Guinea government ministries). Thanks 331dot (talk) 06:23, 24 March 2021 (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.
At least five security personnel and a driver are killed when Naxalites attack their bus with an IED as it crossed a bridge over a culvert in Chhattisgarh, India. This is the biggest Naxalite attack of the year so far in the region. (Times of India)
ChancellorAngela Merkel announces that the country imposes an "emergency brake" and extends their nationwide lockdown until April 18, which including the closure of shops from April 1 to April 5, amidst a spike of the COVID-19 cases. (DW)
Italy reports 551 new deaths in the past 24 hours, which is the highest single-day figure since January, thus bringing the nationwide death toll to 105,879. (Anadolu Agency)
PresidentVladimir Putin receives a dose of a domestically-produced COVID-19 vaccine; it is unknown which of Russia's current three vaccine candidates was administered. Earlier in the day, the government had announced this ambiguity was deliberate, before noting that "all three Russian-made vaccines are absolutely reliable and effective." (Reuters via MSN)
Brazil reports a record 3,251 deaths from COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide death toll to 298,843. It is the first time that Brazil has recorded more than 3,000 deaths from COVID-19 in a single day. (France 24)
The Senate of Colombia unanimously votes to approve a bill that prohibits corporal punishment, and any form of violence, as a form of correctional punishment for the upbringing of children and adolescents. (DW)
During a news conference in Naypyidaw, the Tatmadaw defended the reimposition of the junta and claimed that ousted national leaderAung San Suu Kyi was corrupt, tantamount to graft. No supporting evidence for these allegations was offered outside of the taped testimony of a former colleague of Aung San Suu Kyi, Phyo Min Thein, who has been detained by the military since the coup began. (AP)
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.
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.
Oppose Limited depth of coverage at present: what did he accomplish in his various political roles? Most of the article covers his criticism of sexual harassment claimants, which is not balanced coverage of his political career. SpencerT•C16:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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.
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.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: LHCb announced the results today (with a "3 sigma" confidence). The results imply that there is only a 0.1% of probability that the data obtained are compatible with the Standard Model prediction. Alexcalamaro (talk) 20:11, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Three sigma is starting to be evidence, and far from the gold standard of 5-sigma required for things to be considered discovery. Headbomb {t · c · p · b}20:15, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be better than once the results are confirmed? The BBC article is full of calls for caution, confirmation, more analysis by scientists. The research also apparently hasn't been published in a peer-reviewed journal yet, only being submitted. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions20:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. It's very interesting, and I think it'd warrant a blurb if confirmed to 5-sigma and also had an article (or section of an article) explaining the impact so even non-physicists can read into it and see the importance. I don't think this is the end of it, so hopefully this can be re-nominated some day. Uses x (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This hasn't been peer-reviewed and the universal standard in particle physics is a 5 sigma detection; this is only 3 sigma. Maybe this will become an important measurement, but it's far too premature at this stage. It will probably take several years to collect the required additional data. Modest Geniustalk17:58, 24 March 2021 (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.
Using the unofficial rule that if a consensus cannot be reached and the discussion has now reached several lengths of the article in question, I am closing this. --Tone15:53, 24 March 2021 (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.
Wait -- we don't even know the name of the shooter, or indeed, anything about him. Details remain quite sparse. In the absence of any further evidence of motive or something which would lead us to believe that this shooting is notable in its own right, I do not think that we should post this. Should more information come out to indicate otherwise, I will change to support. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!]05:32, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Mass shootings like this in the US are far too common, and even here, this isn't even something the possibility of a targetted hate crime as with the Atlanta spa shootings which may have merited that. --Masem (t) 05:33, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Likely to change to oppose, unless there is something specific about motivations to attribute to. USA shootings are more common so should have a higher bar for notability. Albertaont (talk) 05:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, leaning oppose. Very unfortunate news, but the number of deaths isn't in the range that would be posted to ITN absent some ideological motive or something more. At this point in time there's nothing that suggests otherwise, but since the case is still developing, that might change.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions06:46, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To reiterate for a zillionth time, such shootings in the United States will happen on a routine basis as long as the authorities don't do anything to restrict acquisition of firearms and increase gun controls. When you know that something is likely to happen and no-one cares to prevent it, implicitly meaning that it's not considered a priority, then it's not really newsworthy.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:26, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Muboshgu: Canadian authorities did it as an immediate response to the Nova Scotia attacks last year. I don't believe that such scenario is impossible for the United States and that the 'big legislative struggle' is well justified when it's all about saving lives. There's surely a way to impose restrictions or push a law through an emergency procedure as such possibilty exists in virtually every country in the world.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:20, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. We're awaiting such law to be passed at least for a decade but still to no avail. This clearly implies that either there's no will to change anything or that the US legal system is highly dysfunctional.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:37, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In Canada (to my knowledge), there isn't an old piece of paper that the Founders said is supreme law, with a minor clause regarding "well-regulated militias" that suddenly a few decades ago archconservatives insisted read wildly differently. In the US, there is. That's the primary barrier to the (many) people aiming for progress. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until a motive is known. This likely wasn't domestic violence or a gang beef or any of the other things that haters label a "mass shooting" but it does appear to be "demented white man with a gun" and we have a far more consequential act of terrorism in the US in the box already. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Ahmad Alissa's identity had been known to the FBI" interesting angle, if this turns out to be terrorism it may pass the notability test --LaserLegs (talk) 20:44, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strange comment. What do you mean by "haters"? Are you suggesting we hate mass shootings? Because that wouldn't be terribly incorrect. --WaltCip-(talk)13:05, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose per Masem, shootings in the US are unfortunately commonplace in the nation. While the event is indeed tragic, these kind of events almost always have short-term impact and are quickly forgotten by the media and public after a week or so. Also, unlike the Atlanta shooting, it’s unlikely that the perpetrator motive was racially or sexually driven. 24.166.251.29 (talk) 11:13, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Showcase new dedicated article of sufficient quality on notable topic in the news. Dog biting incidents are unlikely to have standalone pages, let alone national or even international coverage. Mass deaths are mass deaths, whether by shooting, car ramming, train accident, etc.—Bagumba (talk)
Oppose ITN's attention span to U.S. mass shootings was already scraped raw with the prior event that took place in Atlanta not even a month ago. --WaltCip-(talk)13:10, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I get the feeling this is going to be a non-starter as far as ITN is concerned – but note that Boulder Police plan a news conf. at 8:30 a.m. MDT (14:30 UTC) which conceivably might offer significant new info. – Sca (talk) 13:29, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I didn't even realise this had happened for a while; it wasn't on the BBC news website at all this morning and is now in the small "other items" sidebar, next to an article about Cineworld. Ditto The Guardian. On Sky News it's down behind the Rohingya fire (which is clearly a far more important story than this - 400 people missing - does it have an article?), Germany's COVID lockdown and Australian parliament sex videos. In La Figaro it's about the 12th story, Die Welt I can't find it at all (presumably buried in the "World News" subpage. Clearly much of the international press is treating it as routine, which I suppose in the end is not surprising. Black Kite (talk)13:52, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think that this is totally deserving of a current event news. If a spa shooting killing 8 should be up here, so should a supermarket shooting killing 10. There are not a lot of coverage on news websites because it is fairly recent. there was not a lot of news coverage just after the spa shooting as well. I can guarantee that news websites will be pumping out info once they have enough time to write things about it and find out motives. EDIT- The police have released the identity of the shooter. KommanderChicken (talk) 15:03, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This is on the front page of multiple news websites, including CNN, NYT, LATimes, etc. Yes, unfortunately this is a common occurrence in this country, but this is the second mass shooting in a week after an entire year of no mass shootings. The Boulder PD is holding a press conference as I'm typing this where they announced the gunman was charged with 10 counts of murder and read the victims' names. [17]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppjj123 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Most of those hundreds are close to or at the minimum of 0 deaths 4 injuries and only 1 is above 8 deaths or 10+1 shot. Also a lot are gang fights that aren't scary to non-gangsters. Lots of American COVIDiots ignored social distancing, sure there was a lot of distancing but if you really wanted to mass shoot a crowd you could've found one. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:32, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't really change anything. It's a tragedy, sure, but already this month 47 people have been killed in unrelated mass shootings throughout the US, and just being the biggest so far doesn't mean much. It's a shame I have to say this, but 10 people being shot to death in the United States really isn't notable anymore. Gex4pls (talk) 18:11, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Update: Boulder police say the shooter is a 21-year-old man from Arvada, part of the Denver megalopolis, and identify him as Al Aliwi Alissa, who's been charged with 10 counts of first-degree muder. Developing. [18] – Sca (talk) 15:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A re-occuring local issue that's not in international news, and with only a short-term impact to those unaffected. This will just be pushing out another US terrorist attack. And as a side note we'd be better off not giving these shooters attention. Uses x (talk) 15:32, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Muboshgu I'm not opposing it because it only affects the US, I'm opposing it because it's routine in the US, is always forgotten by the next week in the US, and has a low and short-term impact when it happens in the US. Uses x (talk) 15:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And I hope you agree with me it's not appropriate to put every shooting on this list on ITN, else ITN will just be a list of "what US terrorist attack happened this week". I'd reconsider if there's something particularly notable about this, but that's not the case. Uses x (talk) 16:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Uses x, you may forget and move on, don't assume tht the rest of us do. How many of those shootings on that list have been nominated for ITN? Do you see them all getting nominated? No, they don't all have articles. The notable ones get articles, and some of them get nominated here. It's already filtered down. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's newsworthy, covered by the big publications, and the article quality is good. It was a stub last night but has been expanded substantially. We want to feature new quality content on the ITN template. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – in principle – Pending expansion and polishing of current article, which at 450 words is rather brief. It's not every day that someone is charged with 10 counts of premeditated murder. Given the suspect's name, something on possible motives would be appropriate, but that could take quite some time. – Sca (talk) 15:47, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: already a recent U.S. shooting featured on ITN (even if this story would bump it). The point is not that this is the first double-digit death count since 2019, but that these sorts of incidents (mass killings in the U.S.) are routine and there's not much pattern or semantic content to individual ones of them (unlike other routine events like elections, which reflect the current mood of a country). TRM's point about statistics, I think, is that if you have a hundred possible stats to pick from ("double-digit death count", "first by a perpetrator of age range X since", "first with this type of firearm since", "first in this type of location since", "first in this state since") then every event will have something unique about it. Black Kite does some excellent analysis of how this is not front-page world news with respect to high-quality sources. — Bilorv (talk) 15:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As pointed out by TRM, this is the 107th mass shooting in the US this year, making it on the average of at least one per day. That's the very definition of routine. --Masem (t) 16:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Masem, how many of those 107 have articles on Wikipedia? Differences in the shootings and their coverage are the reason some have articles and most don't. That shoots holes (pun intended) on the "definition of routine" argument. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:53, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A second question is: how many of those that have article should have articles on WP, given the weight of WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:NEVENT? We're looking at enduring coverage of these types of things, and with shootings particularly in the US, it is very iffy that many will have long-term significance. There may be something to be said for the Atlanta shootings as it is right in the middle of a large campaign fighting anti-Asian hate crimes and does appear racially motivated, but this one so far seems to have no odd motive. Sure it will be the subject of coverage for a while, but as others have pointed out, a week from now, it will likely be forgotten outside those in the local area. There is a reason we have Wikinews for people that are interested in writing on breaking news stories without worrying about notability or long term coverage. Just because something is reported in the mass media - which covers events 24/7 - doesn't mean WP has to cover it too, since we're meant to be trying to summarize history, not document it. --Masem (t) 17:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The same people saying this one will be forgotten in a week said that last one's would be forgotten in a week, too. WP:CRYSTAL balls don't work so well. Sadly, many of those 107 are routine and don't have articles because they don't meet NEVENT. This one does, clearly, and will endure. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Last week's major mass shooting has already disappeared off the news radar. There's no interest in it around the world at all. As for this one, it's not Covid so it's getting five minutes, but it definitely will not endure, it's of little encyclopedic value, nothing changes, the statistics testify to that, it literally is business as usual. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 19:34, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Already disappeared off the news radar"? Are you out of your mind? Racism against Asian-Americans is one of the biggest topics in American news right now, which is entirely due to the Atlanta shooting. I know that you hate the United States, but at least stop acting like nothing that happens in the U.S. matters. Mlb96 (talk) 04:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm sure it's being obsessed over in some parts of the US, but the rest of the world has moved on. I don't hate the United States (I've even been there several times, but avoided the redneck zones...), I just pity the ongoing slaughter of tens of thousands of people every year. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:46, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to oppose nearly every U.S.-related nomination. For example, you opposed the Texas winter storm which was known to have killed almost 50 people when it was nominated, but you're supporting the refugee fire in Myanmar which killed 15. Mlb96 (talk) 15:40, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Another routine shooting in the U.S. with little long-term significance (the Atlanta Spa shootings at least highlighted the anti-Asian sentiment in the United States). Edit: This might be an ideologically motivated shooting according to recent updates, so crossed out my oppose. Some1 (talk) 16:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC) Some1 (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support All knee-jerk "America bad" comments should be ignored by the closing admin. We consistently post bombings and other violent acts in the Middle East, provided that they have an article, so why would this be different? Nihlus16:26, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's the point really though, isn't it? People aren't opposing because it's "America bad", they're opposing because it's "America everyday normality". Black Kite (talk)16:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not fond of this callous take. The difference between everyday gun violence and mass shootings that should be posted are the extent of the coverage of the event and the availability of a well-sourced article. This article meets both. I am not sure why, but WP:ITNCRIT seems to be consistently ignored, especially when it comes to topics concerning America. Nihlus16:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Callous"? The take is accurate and relevant. Gun crime of this nature is prevalent in the US and in almost every case barely even encyclopedic. This is tabloid fodder right now, as nothing will change, no links to terrorism have been offered, and this is not a US mass shooting ticker. The bar is high now, this kind of article really needs to be significant rather than run-of-the-mill. And however "callous" that may be, it's the sad truth. The rest of the world (and half of the US it would appear) just switches channels with "yet another" mass killing, and this is in every sense, more of the same. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:59, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Nihlus The argument is against the significance, and under significance there are two rules, one of which is "There is consensus to post the event". "Any user may, of course, support or oppose a candidate for any reason", with the rest only being guidelines for typically unpopular reasons. If the concensus here is that it's not significant because it'll quickly be forgotten, is routine, etc, then people looking at the front page of Wikipedia would probably think the same; it's all about quality control. Uses x (talk) 17:07, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose After reading the article, I can conclude that the layout suggests this will be another mass shooting that will become forgotten in the near future, as with previous ones that have been nominated in the past, it has a standard play out: shooter opens fire on an area where a lot of people gather, killing/injuring several of them in the process; police arrive, killing or arresting the perpetrator; mass confusion, hysteria, and brief mourning occurs; several top government officials (both state and federal) offer condolences; and then the event is soon forgotten with little to no further impact. As several users have noted this is not the first nor will it be the last mass shooting (unfortunately) in America this year. It fails to garner significance, other than perhaps the fact the U.S.A has a serious problem with gun violence, which is obviously known worldwide, and thus is not new in any way, shape, or form. 2600:1015:B005:39AC:7888:F97B:33C1:39C1 (talk) 16:35, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – If it were to come out that this was an ideologically motivated crime, that would push it into the box. If that were the case, a confession might substantiate it fairly soon. Maybe. Again, still developing. – Sca (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mass shootings are, unfortunately, quite common in the United States, but the death toll in the Boulder shooting is especially high (10). As other users have noted, this was the deadliest mass shooting in the U.S. since 2019. The Atlanta spa shootings, which are currently in ITN, caused eight deaths. - Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 17:05, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment by routine, just saw "Around the time of the shooting, reports emerged of another armed individual in the city. Boulder Police later confirmed that this incident was unrelated." So not only is gun crime routine in the United States, it appears to be routine in Boulder on 22 March 2021. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 17:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Very, very unfortunately, there are millions of armed individuals in the U.S., and in some states, in rural areas it's even legal to carry a concealed handgun without a license. That doesn't mean all those packing heat are crazed killers. – Sca (talk) 19:03, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You can carry guns like cowboy without a license in Colorado (except Denver). The image of the article open carry used to be this Coloradoan If anyone gets worried of course they'll call the police and then the guy probably feels righteously indignanted at whoever called even though he probably secretly enjoys the rise he gets out of people from carrying visible guns in the most urban place he can (some states ban county or city gun laws stricter than the statewide one). The reports might've even been of someone who carried a visible gun because of the shooting, either to get a rise out of people or "for protection" (a mass shooter would probably just shoot Cowboy from behind, he'd be Victim 1) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:10, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speculation, and with 50% still GOP and a waffling fraction of Democrats, its unlikely to happen without more pressure. --Masem (t) 19:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This is just a usual waving that something might change but deliberately done with reservations to defend the rhetoric 'We did everything we could'. A worried head of state/government honestly working to counter the gun culture would have come up with concrete measures.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:18, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A triple-murder? Especially one which was indiscriminate vs domestic violence? Sure, if you got one and it's got a decent article then nominate it. This is about a posible terrorist attack in the United States though... --LaserLegs (talk) 20:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No. I'm afraid we continually get brow-beaten for somehow "hating on the US" or other such crap, yet it's pretty clear that posting this kind of routine shooting while other non-US attacks are just ignored demonstrates a total pro-US bias. I don't need to remind you that OTHERSTUFF is a deletion argument, not anything to do with establishing a reasonable common ground on notability for such attacks. Thanks for trying though. And please, how is it "personal"? You'll be removing that. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:37, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You completely miss the point I'm afraid. I'm not harbouring grudges. I asked a simple question based in statistics: 40,000 Americans are killed by firearms in the US every year, 250 Brits are killed by stabbings (we don't really have firearm deaths) so I wanted to understand the general vibe on the equivalence. I do not believe that either should be posted but if we're happy to post run-of-the-mill shootings like this which only account for (on average) 10% of one day's worth of shooting while we reject multiple stabbings (which account for 1% of the year's stabbings) in the UK with terror connections then the bias clearly isn't against US mass shootings in this context. There's nothing personal here, so you need to stop casting aspersions. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 22:03, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed, that's the whole bloody point, I don't support either, but... Either these are both way worthy (and Reading too, I wonder why no-one bothered nominating it then..... hmmmm....) or neither. How can one get blanket opposition and this one get even close to support? US bias. Anyway, we all knew that. Instead of wasting time here on another inconsequential US gun crime, take a look at a real tragic news story (2021 Rohingya refugee-camp fire), that's the kind of thing that warrants an article and being ITN. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 22:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, that fire is about as inconsequential as the Las Vegas country music festival shooting. The story we should be talking about but aren't is the bombing in China but the article is a 1 sentence stub and state media hasn't released enough info to expand it. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment by a straight !vote count the supports are +4 but there are three waits (a fourth converted to support) hinging on a motive being released. I sense that this one is going to come down to it being "routine" gun violence in the USA or being politically motivated and there is still no official word from the authorities. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sadly this kind of thing is just no longer notable, and just because it's the highest death toll this year doesn't make it notable. Just this month more people have been killed in other mass shooting incidents, and since this one already 2 have been killed in Cleveland and 1 has been killed in Detroit. Gex4pls (talk) 23:05, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support due to the significant number of deaths. (Also, the callousness in some of the comments above is frankly horrifying. Let's conduct ourselves better than this.) Ed[talk][majestic titan]00:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Real curious. A contrived anti-Asian terrorist angle to a shooting gets breathless nomination, slanted information in the article, and posted to the Front Page. An equally contrived Islamic terrorist angle to a shooting, gets shut down immediately, and the only time "terror" appears in the article is in reference to White Americans.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Find some sources to back it up (like the many sources that exist re anti-Asian motive on the Atlanta shooting page), and take it to the talk page for the Boulder shooting. Otherwise, this is WP:NOTAFORUM. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:26, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: While I am aware that mass shootings have been commonplace in the United States, the fact that it is the first major mass public shooting to reach ten deaths since August 2019 makes it quite notable. I understand their has been “mass shootings” per convention of “four deaths” even throughout the pandemic, but many of them have barely been in the news because mostly they are too small on a public scale or happen to be private. Many news outlets such as Los Angeles Times and New York Times have acknowledged that mass public shootings of this scale during the past several months have not happened. So, I feel based on these facts, this is worthy of placement on the Main Page.
Oppose got to love the blatant political use of statistics in support rationale's above. "First to hit double digits since 2019!11!#!!" sounds much better than "2 more dead than the mass shooting the previous week. 3 more than September 2020". You know when you intentially phrase stats in order to big up scores about hitting double digits it comes across as you are *proud* of reaching that number right? That may not be your intent, but that is the impression it gives. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. It's also interesting that censorship is being applied to the stats I provided relating to 40,000 gun deaths per annum in the US vs 250 knife deaths (and practically zero gun deaths) in the UK, and a consequential contextual significance. It's only gun crimes in the US which have this kind of fervent misguided "it's relevant" clamour and the usual rounds of record-breaking stats... The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why are we so fixated on numbers? Surely the surrounding circumstances are more important, as was the case with the Atlanta shootings.--WaltCip-(talk)12:59, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's just a blip amongst the other 39,990 people killed every year, or should we say it's just 10 out of 130 people killed that day in the US with firearms. I think you fail to see the picture we all see. And the "numbers" per se don't make it any more interesting or encyclopedic in value. Really, literally nothing has been done about these heinous crimes over the years, we should treat it like a world record and only post shootings that surpass the actual record. These shootings make headlines and fade to nothing very quickly because we all know nothing ever, ever, ever changes. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You know 2/3rds of those 40,000 are suicides, suicide is not a crime. Our suicide rate is apparently only (USA! USA!) twice yours ("age-adjusted") or 14/11ths (not adjusted for UK having more elderly or something (our healthcare sucks balls)), and our murder rate (all method) is a whopping 4 times yours. You should start whaling on Scotland too cause their suicide rate is above USA. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Second-day coverage portrays the suspect as a lone nutcase, albeit with some Islamicist leanings. That puts me on the fence re ITN. Suggest we resolve this nom. one way or the other soon. Everyone's had their say. We're already up to 6,000 words. – Sca (talk) 13:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that there is close to an even split between supports and opposes, there clearly is no consensus to post. Let's close the discussion and be done with this. Mlb96 (talk) 15:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
People, people... at ~6400 words, this discussion is literally five times as many words as the fucking article. Can this be closed, or posted, or anything but be a total quagmire? ——Serial15:05, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article:Kim Janey (talk·history·tag) Blurb: This week, Kim Janey became the first woman and first black person to serve as mayor of Boston. (Post) News source(s):link1link2link3link4 Credits:
Also (being extremely technical here), it does not appear as if she formally assumes office until March 24, per the article, and thus for the next 24 hours will be "acting mayor." AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeThis is probably more worthy for DYK. Being the first woman and black person mayor of Boston does bring some significance, but it's quite a localized significance. INeedSupport😷05:02, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The death toll from yesterday's raids in Tahoua, Niger, rises to at least 137. A security official blames ISIL for the attacks in a volatile region, which has seen an increase in these types of attacks in the past few months. (Reuters)(Al Jazeera)
India reports 46,951 new cases and 212 deaths in the past 24 hours, the highest daily case total since November and also the highest daily death total since January. (The Times of India)
The Philippines reports a record 8,019 new confirmed cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 671,792. (ABS-CBN News)
The Ministry of Health orders private sector doctors to assist public hospitals as the public health system becomes overwhelmed by an increase in COVID-19 hospitalizations. (AP)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Prominent Chinese nuclear engineer. His parents were killed for being Communists when he was 4; he was jailed at 8 for being their son. He got the last laugh, though, studying from the Soviets and running point on China's nuclear submarines under Mao. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Weak oppose, this doesn't seem to be significant enough. I didn't notice this from the news a lot even in Guangdong or Hong Kong. Sun8908Talk02:27, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Massive fire, tragically, the numbers seem only likely to increase in the near future. (Apologies for any technical errors with this nom, it's been a while.) Serial Number 54129 (talk)18:59, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support large event with a huge impact. I've checked all the citations and everything is properly referenced. Article is also of good enough length for now. Uses x (talk) 21:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral when you strip out the background and response filler, there isn't much there. Follows the standard template pretty well. For a fire that burned for 8 hours and destroyed "17,000 huts" a bit more analysis would be great. Still of course it's going to go up, even though nothing will change regarding the plight of the Rohingya people either in Myanmar or among their diaspora I guess it's good enough --LaserLegs (talk) 02:15, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
comment: the page has recently been moved to Balukhali fire as there was apparently another major fire in a rohingya refugee camp in january, so the link in the blurb might need to be updated at post time to conform with wp:mpnoredirect. dying (talk) 09:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
agreed. i wasn't sure if it was either (i didn't move it, though i understand why it was moved), which is why my comment didn't suggest updating the link to the current name. dying (talk) 10:14, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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.
Conditional support for RD, oppose blurb. There's one uncited paragraph, which shouldn't be hard to source but it otherwise looks fine for RD. Since the death isn't suspicious, it definitely can't stand on its own, and the election results (which would be ITN/R), still haven't rolled in. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions04:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD only Assuming that the reason for posting it as a blurb is unnecessary because Guy Brice Parfait Kolélas contribution is unknown overseas. 36.77.93.112 (talk) 09:19, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support Have added references. Not sure how we've done NBA player articles before with regards to sourcing stats: while the sections themselves don't have references, the first external links are to NBA/Basketball Reference pages for his career and coaching statistics. SpencerT•C21:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The government places the provinces of Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, and Rizal under the "general community quarantine" and bans all mass gatherings and cross-border travel in those provinces from tomorrow until April 4. (Rappler)
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: Many thanks to everyone who made and updated the page! I think it should be ready for ITN and subject matter is clearly notable. DantheAnimator21:37, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article seems to be more broadly about all attacks in Niger that have occurred this year. The relevant portion is only two sentences long. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:41, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a one line update is not adequate, and the article being a list of shootings really sums it up: Routine incident. Dog bites man, the Pope is a Catholic, Nigeriens shoot each other up. Hilarious right? --LaserLegs (talk) 15:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The update isn't long enough for ITN, as people clicking onto it want to read into it. I'll reconsider if it's expanded. Uses x (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - not enough of an update per others above, and it's only getting a couple hundred page views per day, which suggests to me it's not of sufficient interest to our readers to merit an ITN blurb. Levivichharass/hound15:28, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
It appears your edits had been reverted as they didn't include a summary, but you've sorted those problems out so I've retracted the oppose. I can't verify the citations myself as most appear to be subscriber-only, so I can't give my support right now. Uses x (talk) 14:37, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Weak support Would like to see some more depth of coverage about her writing career (e.g. common themes), but article hits main points and is fully referenced. SpencerT•C16:32, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment – He seems to have been quite well known. Perhaps a Polish-speaking ed. could glean from this article in the Warsaw daily Wyborcza. – Sca (talk) 12:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of the most important contemporary poets (and a great essayist), certainly not only in Poland. Article in acceptable condition. Yakikaki (talk) 21:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support overall the article seems fine. It would be great if someone can cite the rest of the prizes that she got in the "Selected awards and honors" section. Vacant0 (talk) 20:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Selected sources (outside of the works published online) is blanket-referenced by myAfrica. That page says, "myAfrica is an open resource. Most profiles, such as this one, are editable by logged in users" and thus doesn't look like a reliable source. Otherwise article has good depth of coverage. SpencerT•C23:53, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
India reports 40,953 new cases in the past 24 hours, the highest single-day total since November 29, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11,555,284. (Hindustan Times)
The Philippines reports a new record for the second consecutive day of 7,999 confirmed cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 656,056. (The Straits Times)
Chile reports a record 7,084 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 925,089. (Globe Live Media)
Voters head to the polls to vote on who will represent Louisiana's 2nd and 5th congressional districts. (The Washington Post)
Julia Letlow, the wife of late Representative-elect Luke Letlow, wins the special election to the 5th congressional district, thereby becoming Louisiana's first female Republican Representative. The special election to the 2nd congressional district will head to an April 24 runoff between the top two finishers Troy Carter and Karen Carter Peterson. (CNN)
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: Danish politician, member of the European Parliament for ten years. One problematic url (citing 4 sentences, the url links to a subpage which apparantly no longer exists but redirects to an irrelevant "homepage"). Article is a bit short and could need some expansion.Oceanh (talk) 08:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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: Great Spanish medical oncologist, current head of research and development in oncology of AstraZeneca. The article seems pretty ready. Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Limited coverage of his research career; article at present has disproportionate weight on his financial disclosure controversies. Possible sources for more information include, with a paragraph of information about his breast cancer research, this should be pretty fixable: StatNews obit and AACR biography, AACR bio 2. SpencerT•C23:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose CV as BLP. Only a single sentence relates any non-professional information. Given popular media coverage, there must be something more to add. Even if the professional aspects were fleshed out, the article could still reasonably be moved to Career of José Baselga.130.233.213.199 (talk) 07:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Spencer and IP editor: - Have done a reasonable rewrite of the article. Rater.js says B-class biography, but, I think it is atleast a C-class biography. Article can further be expanded with actual research, but, given that we have ~6 hours before this nomination becomes stale, I would say this is ready for homepage / RD. Please see as appropriate. Ktin (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Great Russian operatic bass at his time, international known and performing, especially as Boris Godunov. Most of the article was there, but no inline citations. - I need a break now. Help? Someone who reads Russian? Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:13, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
comment: i lack the experience to determine the seriousness of this, but significant sections of the first edit of this article, dated 2008, appear to closely paraphrase or outright copy sections of either its listed english.pravda.ru reference, dated 2003, or its listed vor.ru reference, dated 2002. although the intervening edits do not appear to be similarly problematic, much of the structure and diction of the two older sources still appear to remain in the current version of the page. Gerda Arendt, unfortunately, this may explain the lack of inline citations, as the sections that lack them appear to be surviving passages from the first edit, which contained no inline citations, but simply listed the two references used at the end. dying (talk) 01:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
understood. back then, it seemed like everyone had varying standards regarding what was considered acceptable paraphrasing, and as a result, many editors effectively turned a blind eye to things that were clearly taken from other sources and had only minimal paraphrasing.[a] this article, created in 2008, was probably a decent article back then since it actually listed two sources, and i can't claim that i always cited sources myself back then.[b]
i discovered the close paraphrasing when i was working on this article and was trying to add the proper inline citations, per your request.[c] because, in the intervening years since the article was first created, we appear to have developed some ideas about close paraphrasing, and because i don't have much experience on where our (possibly vague) line is drawn nowadays, i did not think it was appropriate for me to just slap on some inline citations and consider the job done. however, in the case that the wording is unacceptably close to the original, i also don't know how we currently deal with unacceptably close paraphrasing. if standard operating procedure is to wipe the offending sections and start anew, i didn't want my efforts to be wasted if they would be deleted shortly anyway, and was hoping for guidance regarding this issue.
to be clear, i support the eventual posting of this article, if we can get the quality of the article up to standard. if we are going to link to this article from the front page, i am assuming that it should follow our current viewpoints regarding plagiarism, and if i were to be the one adding the inline citations, i am assuming that it would be my implicit responsibility to make sure that the sections i am adding a citation to are properly vetted.
post-posting comment: as guidance regarding wikipedia's current stance on copyrights doesn't seem to be forthcoming anytime soon, i've taken the liberty of doing a complete rewrite of the main text of the article, in order to leave no doubt as to the provenance of the wording used.[d] i've turned some of the prose into lists in order to make it even more clear that the original structure of the sources is no longer being used. by adhering to wp:factsonly when rewriting the questionable passages, i hope copyright issues will no longer be in play. i also added some information about nesterenko's life before his career so that the article would read less like a curriculum vitae, which the original two sources essentially were. if anyone feels that the article was in a better state before, or that the rewrite was perhaps a move too bold, feel free to revert it or replace sections that you feel were of a better quality before.
i apologize in advance to anyone whose contributions may have been misinterpreted by me when i was rewriting the text, and to anyone who believes that their pertinent contributions have been dropped. feel free to correct the text or to add your contributions back in. also, apologies for not posting the rewrite sooner; i was still working on it when the article was posted to rd. dying (talk) 08:28, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
^actually, here is a clearly embarrassing example of me not understanding the current standards for sources as recently as last year, in the creation of an article coincidentally also dealing with east slavic musicians.
^i took an interest in this article because i happened to catch eugene onegin my first time attending an opera in vienna (though not when nesterenko performed there), and have also been lucky enough to attend a session of the international tchaikovsky competition while i was living in saint petersburg (though not when nesterenko won the gold medal).
^the lead and infobox have been left intact, as they are not similarly problematic.
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.
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.
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.
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.
No, as it is not in a populated area, although there is a risk of sulfur dioxide pollution which could affect health in other areas. 331dot (talk) 10:25, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. So far the only impact is to close the main airport, but that seems to happen every time there's an eruption, so nothing special and ITN-worthy so far. Joseph2302 (talk)11:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The Philippines reports a record 7,103 new confirmed cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 648,066. (ABS-CBN News)
India reports 39,670 new cases in the past 24 hours, the highest single-day total since November 28, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11.5 million. (The Times of India)
The French National Authority for Health limits the use of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine to those aged over 55 years old after it was discovered that three patients who suffered blood clots are younger than 55 years old. (The New York Times)
Hungary reports a record 213 deaths and 10,759 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide death toll to 17,841 and the nationwide case total to 549,839. (Hungary Today)
Brazil reports a record 90,570 new confirmed cases from COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11,871,390. (The Rio Times)
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.
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.
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.
Support - I am biased as I wrote most of the article, but agree that he was one of the most important people in the US space program! I have cleared up the uncited text. MLilburne (talk) 14:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Have added some more citations, and removed uncited claims. After this, the article apparently looks fine. But when checking all the (old) links, I found that at least seven of the urls were "dead", plus two give me trouble (one is "unsecure", one does not support my browser). Next step, maybe find/search for archived urls (or alternative links for citation), or is that too much trouble? Any archive expert with access to proper tools that can help? How is the ITN practice for treating dead links? Oceanh (talk) 13:40, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Oceanh: There are a few ways, which WP:404 says best. Archive.org seems to be having problems right now, but I'll deal with the dead links when it's working again. Uses x (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Death of an incumbent head of state would, I believe, almost certainly qualify for a blurb over RD. Sceptre (talk) 21:05, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this should be a blurb; the article quality is close but isn't good enough yet. Depending on how the succession works, we may want to include the new President in the blurb. 力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 21:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any sources that say that Suluhu has been sworn in; the only sourcing in the Wiki article is the constitution of Tanzania. If we're going for a merged blurb, we need to wait (hopefully only an hour or two) for coverage of the succession. 力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 21:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The death of an incumbent head of state is not ITN/R. The succession of a new head of state is ITN/R. So, I oppose any blurb that doesn't include Suluhu. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We generally post the deaths of heads of state while in office anyway though, no? A recurring scenario doesn't have to be ITN/R to get posted. Mlb96 (talk) 21:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do we? The death of an incumbent head of state means a change in head of state. So, what are we actually posting? The death, or the succession? – Muboshgu (talk) 22:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, the deaths of incumbent heads of state (and heads of government) are almost always posted on ITN. The only head of state in the past ten years to not have his death posted was Trần Đại Quang, and that was entirely due to the fact the article was a WP:COPYVIO. It might be worth formalising it at ITN/D or ITN/R. Sceptre (talk) 22:28, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb it feels like yesterday when I last read his wiki page. Rest in peace Magufuli and good luck to the incoming Suluhu administration. Thanks Sceptre for nominating this so quickly. DantheAnimator22:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt 1 - Magufuli's article is in pretty good shape, but Suluhu's could use more sources. Alt blurb 1 includes all the relevant details without being too long. Poydoocan talkand edit23:35, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt 1 Regardless of whether succession is ITN/R, Magufuli's death is the bigger story here. His death should be the first thing in the blurb imo. Mlb96 (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt1. Both articles look in on condition to me, and we can bold Samia Suluhu as a second target article, but I think the bigger story probably is the death at the moment. Marking as ready, unless there's anything I'm missing, an admin can pick some formulation to go with. — Amakuru (talk) 00:50, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I orange tagged early life there is one ref that doesn't support section, and some content without refs. Maybe more in other sections, it's late here I won't be checking the rest of the refs tonight. Neutral once the ref issues are fixed --LaserLegs (talk) 02:32, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently massive content edits are automatically approved but adding an orange tag gets "pending review"? shrugs good night y'all --LaserLegs (talk) 02:43, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt1. The death of a siting head of state, especially of a relatively large country like Tanzania, is certainly worthy of a mention. The Samia Suluhu article could and should be improved I admit, but references about her should be more available now that she is the country's president, and the first woman at that. Inter&anthro (talk) 02:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support either alt No notability concerns. It's not ready on quality yet, but the article's not in terrible shape by any means, so it shouldn't take too long to address the orange tag. Vanilla Wizard 💙05:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt-1 the main focus should be on his death, to me blurb 2 makes it seem like his death is a positive thing (maybe it's worth rephrasing). Certainly blurb-worthy as it's the death of a national leader. Uses x (talk) 11:59, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support alt1. Article seems good enough on a quick look. I'm not convinced he was transformative of politics in the same way Mandela or Thatcher were, but being a sitting head of government (so there's now a new one) tips it over the edge for me. Modest Geniustalk12:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Interesting case, partly due to RS-reported Covid rumors. (Not that we would want to go there.) Prefer Alt2 but Alt1 would be OK. (In both, "the age of" is unnec. as that will be understood.) – Sca (talk) 13:26, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Posted - the orange tag issue has now been resolved, and although I !voted above, there's plenty of support here anyway so I'll strike my vote and posted. There is somewhat more support for Alt1 than Alt2. Hopefully this isn't controversial! — Amakuru (talk) 13:56, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - After Magufuli was up for more than 24 hours, I've now flipped the ordering of this hook to more like ALT2, and switched the pic to Suluhu to reflect the fact that she was sworn in today. If this is controversial at all, then please let me know. — Amakuru (talk) 15:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Bulgarian Ministry of Health announces that it will ban gatherings of more than 15 people and will close theatres, cinemas, and gyms on March 22 as well as kindergartens, schools, and most non-essential shopping malls due to an increase in deaths from COVID-19. (Bulgarian News Agency)
Kyiv MayorVitali Klitschko announces a three-week lockdown in the city beginning on March 20 which will close all cultural institutions and many non-essential shopping and entertainment malls due to an increase in COVID-19 cases. (Ukrinform)
Chile reports a record 6,200 cases in the past 24 hours, which is the largest single-day total since June. (T13)
Due to the large number of cases, several cities are put under lockdown, including downtown Santiago. Almost 9 million people will be under quarantine as of March 27. (La Tercera)
North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son-hu says his country will continue to reject talks with the United States until the latter stops "its hostile policy". (Yonhap News Agency)
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.
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.
SupportOppose The characters he had created constitute a sort of 'ography, and should be referenced. Death is not noted in article text, as such updated set to no in the nom.130.233.213.199 (talk) 08:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose death is mentioned in article now, and so marked it as updated. But characters need sourcing, and I cannot find source for them- most obits only mention [[Ot el bruixot]. Joseph2302 (talk)10:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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.
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.
Comment It'd need a larger section in the 'Legality of euthanasia' article, or another article, before it's worth considering since people clicking on it would want to read into it. It's getting attention in international news, so it's notable. As for the blurbs I don't think there's any point adding how the votes went as it's just confusing - people who want that information should be able to click on an article. Uses x (talk) 17:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "4th EU country..." says it all. While the legalization of euthanasia is a major issue, we don't track "latecomers" to pass legislation to that. --Masem (t) 17:21, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good-faith nomination, but we tend not to post the 4th (or sometimes even 2nd) country to legalize something. Perhaps if they were the first in the region to do it, then it would be more significant. Vanilla Wizard 💙18:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The Government of Poland announces a new national lockdown, which will close all cultural venues and non-essential shops for three weeks beginning on March 20 as the number of COVID-19 cases continues to increase. (Politico.eu)
UNESCO Director General Audrey Azoulay is expected to be reelected as head of the agency after no other candidates were nominated. (Reuters)
Pope Francis expresses his concerns over the tense situation in Paraguay due to a deepening health and political crisis in the South American nation which have led to protests and instances of violence in recent days. In his message, the Pope appeals for dialogue to prevail over violence. (Vatican News)
PresidentJohn Magufuli dies of heart complications, which are believed to have resulted from COVID-19. Vice President Samia Suluhu is expected to succeed him and become Tanzania's first female president. (Al Jazeera)
Post updated I tweaked the posted blurb per WP:ITN: Blurbs should generally avoid comparison to any previous event, such as "Largest in the region since [year]".—Bagumba (talk) 03:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting weak oppose Does one “support” is enough for posting directly to ITN? Surely not. May be a once-in-a-century floodings, but only 3 confirmed deaths doesn’t seems its a big disaster ITN-worthy. Alsoriano97 (talk) 11:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support I was meaning to support the other day but forgot. Seems significant enough and article is good.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Oppose the article is under 1200 characters, so only a stub. I hope there's more that can be found, but I couldn't find much on a quick search. Joseph2302 (talk)10:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose agreed that it needs to be expanded. I looked into the charity matches, but I can only find one mention and he's not even the focus of the article. Uses x (talk) 11:53, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The only media that mentioned his disappearance was the Tabloid Magazine which actually discovered his death a few days ago. In this article from 2019, they claimed that he was a protected witness in the United States. No other media ever mentioned his dissaperance or possibility of him being dead until a few days ago when it was discovered that he died in 2018 under suspicious circumstances.
Per WP:ITN/RD: "Individuals who disappear are eligible for a recent deaths entry for the day they are declared dead in absentia, subject to the standard criteria above if there is no concurrent blurb about the disappearance." That policy also says RDs can be from the "date of announcement". AllegedlyHuman (talk) 02:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand, but I won't oppose the nom in any case. I just think an actual blurb would be merited, and the ITNRD blurb requirements prevent it here. There's a few things under Works which need references, but the B(elated)BLP is otherwise in good order.130.233.213.199 (talk) 07:31, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD. It's an odd case certainly, but I'm not aware of a time limit on the "use the date the death was announced" clause. It also closely parallels the declared death in absentia case, which is explicitly permitted. Yesterday he was not officially dead. Today he is. That's it. Quality looks OK too, so good to go. — Amakuru (talk) 08:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD his death was announced yesterday, and so is eligible for RD. We couldn't have had him at RD in 2018, as he was presumed alive. Joseph2302 (talk)09:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Nominator's comments: 2021 award of the Abel Prize, "regarded as the [mathematics] equivalent of the Nobel" (NYT). The first blurb uses the more specific fields given by the Quanta article while the altblurb mirrors the official Abel Prize citation. — MarkH21talk21:05, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Both articles now look good (per above comment lines). I'm going to crop down the current image on Wigderson and will make this a composite image for posting (likely giving 24h to the Pritzker winners). --Masem (t) 22:25, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The articles are shortish (hopefully to be expanded), but they are long enough and in good shape otherwise. Nsk92 (talk) 22:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Note: not sure about the nomination credits: JG4236 seems to have indef blocked, and Zuzazu777 seems to have only made one minor edit. Will leave to the poster to decide though. Joseph2302 (talk)18:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support added a couple of citation needed tags, but that shouldn't stop it from running. A good quality article, that focuses appropriately on the allegations (i.e. not too much focus on them). Joseph2302 (talk)18:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Multiple citation needed tags, and an unreferenced section. Under Honours, 'His biography says' isn't a correct reference, it needs a citation tag. Uses x (talk) 07:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And his discography goes far beyond the one piece listed, which he's only one of many pianists for. Surely if he's famous enough for NYT, Associated Press, The Guardian, etc, obituaries surely he has a few more notable works. Uses x (talk) 07:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The subject's notability should not be a basis for supporting or opposing; all people with Wikipedia articles are presumed important enough to post to RD. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there's a couple of uses of The Sun newspaper, which need replacing, as per WP:THESUN. Also, mentions she joined Top Gear, but did she leave Top Gear? And the "Race results" section is unsourced. Minor issues, and once fixed, will be happy to support. Still remember when she drove a van round the Nürburgring- possibly the best Top Gear episode ever. Joseph2302 (talk)13:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support; of note however she was never intended to front the Top Gear crew post Clarkson; other than be in a similar role to the Stig. I haven't found any sources that say otherwise Nightfury14:52, 17 March 2021 (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.
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.
Comment - the sections on Venue, Boats and Nationality are too short. Merging them maybe needed. Otherwise, the article's fine... I can't think of any sailing puns... 45.251.33.203 (talk) 06:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Timeline section needs sourcing. Also should the blurb be "wins" or "win"- in British English, I would say "Team New Zealand win", but not sure if that grammar is correct in New Zealand. Once timeline is sourced, then I will support, as ITNR. Joseph2302 (talk)09:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sailing is a niche sport for the elite. The optics of posting this, and not the Atlanta shootings (among other things mentioned above), would be terrible. Zagalejo (talk) 15:19, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not really a notable event and has little significance outside a small group of individuals. I agree that we shouldn't be posting stories like this if events with more significance are opposed. Front-page news stories about disasters and shootings being denied a blurb here considering they are "in the news" is ridiculous and just shows our bias. Making the excuse of that's just the way life in the United States is is a poor one. NoahTalk15:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes me and several editors have tried to work with you guys and work out some criteria and figure out whats notable enough for WP;ITN and Wikipedia as a whole including here & here. However, we don't get anywhere for various reasons.Jason Rees (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah well, clearly the community doesn't place as much value on the weather as you guys. If you don't want to see sailing or boat races or whatever else on ITNR, start as many delist discussions as you see fit. I don't see you doing that, just throwing some toys out that your weather didn't get posted. It won't stop this being posted either, it'll just have a negative impact on any future weather nominations. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 17:26, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why it would have an effect on future weather nominations. We are all here to build an encyclopedia, not hold personal grudges, after all. – atomic𓅊773201:52, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although I cringe at the grammatically dubious phrase "the America's cup", even though that's apparently what it's called. Other editors' objections are worthy of consideration even if they contradict ITN/R. There is a big disclaimer at the top of that page reminding people to apply common sense and consider exceptions. Einsof (talk) 16:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's not an explanation. I can't think of a single construction of the form "the [proper noun]'s [other noun]" that sounds grammatical. It should be "America's cup" or "the America cup". Einsof (talk) 19:57, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The only way that could pass as an explanation is if the ship were named The America (hence "the" would be part of the proper noun), but it's not—the name was just America. So it's either "the America cup" or "America's cup" (no definite article). Not sure what the explanation for this weirdness is. Einsof (talk) 20:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok, I think you misunderstood the objection. "America's cup" is fine. "The America's cup" isn't because that kind of proper noun construction doesn't take the definite article in English. Einsof (talk) 21:00, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - as noted, the Timeline section needs sourcing, as do the two tables used in the article. The first table also has some entries struck out, which should be accompanied by an explanation as to why. After that it's good to go. The above opposes will not be considered, as consensus is clear that ITN/R entries can only be opposed on quality grounds. If you want to remove this from ITN/R then go and propose the change at WT:ITN. — Amakuru (talk) 16:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Amakuru: As i said in my oppose consensus can change and sometimes its good to challenge the norm especially when disasters that are causing major disaster declarations to be issued are opposed and not posted.Jason Rees (talk) 16:41, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, consensus can change. But if that's the case, the place to bring that up is on the ITN talk page which is where we discuss additions and removals from the ITN/R list. The whole purpose of ITN/R is to avoid having to pointlessly regurgitate the same arguments year after year. As Einsof notes, WP:IAR (a.k.a. common sense) may occasionally apply, but there's nothing here to suggest that's necessary. Admins considering ITN entries routinely discount opposes of ITN/R and RD nominations on notability grounds and this is no exception. — Amakuru (talk) 16:50, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Amakuru: I think the fact that five editors have decided to come here and oppose this nomination, means that it is worth discussing why the America's cup is so notable to go up on the main page.Jason Rees (talk) 16:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I havent co-ordinated anything but at the end of the day, you object all the time with silly comments, so its about time someone challenged the norm.Jason Rees (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"it is worth discussing why the America's cup is so notable to go up on the main page" - of course, you're entitled to have such a discussion but this is simply the wrong venue for that discussion, and it's almost certainly too late to effect a change in the recurring items list for this year. If you do start such a discussion, I advise you to come up with some better reasons than "Cyclone X, Y and Z were not listed". Those nominations were decided on their own merits, and have no bearing on the suitability or otherwise of the America's cup. — Amakuru (talk) 17:22, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of the day @The Rambling Man: things have to change around here and why the America's cup is so notable to go up on the main page when several major disasters arent notable enough is rather confusing.Jason Rees (talk) 16:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid this is rather pathetic. The objections given i.e. "oppose because we didn't get our weather posted" are all invalid and will simply be overlooked. By all means gather your troops for every news story, eventually they will all be TBAN-ed from ITNC. It's really sad to see this kind of unconstructive, disruptive and unhelpful co-ordinated terror attack on ITNC. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Its rather pathetic, unconstructive, disruptive and unhelpful to see you constantly oppose weather events for stupid reasons such as it snows every year or a lack of deaths.Jason Rees (talk) 17:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't coordinated an attack on WP:ITN/C - if I had I would have had a lot more editors, it just goes to show how people feel about the pathetic opposes that get put down about weather articles.Jason Rees (talk) 17:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - THIS IS ITN/R. Stop opposing on notability, as those opposes will be summarily ignored. If you have arguments about notability, take it up on the talk page and not here.--WaltCip-(talk)17:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Imagine how these discussions look to people who aren’t knee deep in Wiki culture. ITNR is not a mandate sent down from heaven. We can talk about this article here. Zagalejo (talk) 17:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Luckily, it's nowhere near close to a mandate from heaven. It's just a process that we all follow to establish consensus, the same way that we don't choose Presidents in the U.S. by mobbing the Capitol and declaring the previous election null and void. Consensus is not established via a bunch of aggrieved people showing up on a nom just because their favorite hurricane didn't get posted. --WaltCip-(talk)17:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@WaltCip: I would strongly suggest that you take a step back and look at what's been going on with WP:ITN recently, our opposes arent because our so-called favourite hurricane didn't get posted. Its because we are fed up with seeing significant disasters being opposed, closed within an hour and laughed at because it snows every year in the United States.Jason Rees (talk) 17:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you want the process changed, do it on the talk page and not on an ITNR item, which when sufficiently updated, should be posted, will be posted, and indeed has been posted (though briefly pulled for article quality concerns). Your argument is one that has been brought up many times over the many years ITN has been around, and the answer is always the same each time. --WaltCip-(talk)18:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And so far I haven't seen you or any of the other "oppose" !votes comment on the newly-formulated Remove ITN/R item on the talk page. Whenever you want to make your voice heard in the proper venue, please do. --WaltCip-(talk)18:05, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"our opposes arent because our so-called favourite hurricane didn't get posted". Of course not. You all just pressed "Random Page" and ended up here simultaneously. Black Kite (talk)18:11, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of the day @Black Kite and WaltCip: there is something wrong if a typhoon whose name is later retired for causing significant damage can't be posted but some random boat race can. Also, I would strongly suggest that you take a good step back if you think we are nominating hurricanes just because we like them, as I can guarantee you that we would rather not see the damage or deaths associated with them.Jason Rees (talk) 21:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now on quality grounds (obviously - since that's the only valid reason for opposing!!). Urggh so I've looked at it again, and unfortunately I can see the usual issue with this sort of nomination - there's no prose covering the actual event despite there being some on the qualifiers. As with golf and tennis tournaments, we need at least a paragraph or two to summarise what went down and who the winners and losers were in prose form. Removing "ready" for the time being, hopefully that can be added soon and we can move on with our lives. — Amakuru (talk) 17:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and snow close Completely unnotable, not found in any of the major news sources as a story right now. Seems more like a timely distraction from real events in America. That this was even considered for ITN/R is laughable. Albertaont (talk) 18:00, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. Albertaont (1) It is automatically eligible for ITN, as it is included on WP:ITN/R (2) Snow closes are for unanimous or otherwise obvious consensuses, and any oppose here that does not address quality issues rather than notability ones is automatically invalid anyway - see (1). Black Kite (talk)18:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm starting to think this is a concentrated effort to make a WP:POINT. Like Jesus Christ, how many times do people have to say ITNR EVENTS AUTOMATICALLY PASS THE NOTABILITY CRITERIA. NixinovaTC18:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Small nit: an individual event normally of an ITNR may be of so little importance as to be deemed not appropriate for ITNC even if it passed the quality mark. (For example, we used that with Chang'e 5, holding off posting when it successfully completed its sample-and-return from the moon rather than other ITNR points for space missions) This is a IAR-type rule however, and depends on the situation greatly. That said, I certainly don't see this iteration of the America's Cup - nothing unusual about this iteration of the race to not have it featured on the main page after quality improvements. It is definitely wrong for editors to be !voting and arguing about the notability of the Cup event in broad terms, particularly as it is one of the top events in competitive sailing in the world. If they want to argue about removing that ITNR, WT:ITN is thataway. --Masem (t) 22:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Marked Ready. I've added a piece of prose to the Cup Match section (there's probably more that can be added, but the table gives you the results of each race and they all looked fairly straightforwrd apart from the 8th, which I've mentioned). Black Kite (talk)01:14, 18 March 2021 (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.
England reports their first two cases of the new P.3. variant, which was originally detected in the Philippines and has been designated as a "variant of investigation". (The Independent)
San Marino surpasses 5,000 people vaccinated and becomes the fifth country in the world in terms of vaccine administrations in proportion to its population. (San Marino RTV)
Serbianprime ministerAna Brnabić announces a five-day nationwide lockdown from tomorrow until March 21, which will close all non-essential shops. Students in the lower grades of primary schools will most likely switch to online classes from March 22 for at least one week. (See News)
Cambodia reports a record 105 new confirmed cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1,430. (Khmer Times)
Delhi reports its first two cases of the 501.V2 variant, which was originally detected in South Africa. The patient is a 33-year old man from Kerala. (Hindustan Times)
Thailand resumes their vaccination rollout using the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine after it was temporarily suspended due to safety concerns. Prime MinisterPrayut Chan-o-cha is one of the first people to receive the AstraZeneca vaccine. (CNBC)
Guinea-Bissau suspends the use of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine until May amid safety concerns regarding the vaccine, including fears about blood clots. (Urdu Point)
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.
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.
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.
Nominator's comments: Architecture's highest award, on ITNR. Unusually this year's winners are a duo famous for low-cost renovations of existing structures, not flashy new builds. Lacaton's article has a few uncited paragraphs; I'll get on those. Vassal's article was only created yesterday; it's short but adequately referenced. Modest Geniustalk14:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Posted following after a reasonable consensus. It will roll off with the next update. I don't think there is a further discussion necessary. --Tone19:37, 19 March 2021 (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.
Also the guy went to three different massage parlors and killed six Asian women. There was nothing random about this, this was a targetted killing. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per UNDUE. The racial angle to this is tenuous and circumstantial, yet it is inappropriately and strongly inferred in the article. 6 Asians, 2 Whites and 1 Hispanic sounds about right for a random mix of people in a massage parlor. While the crime itself is I think notable, the article must be toned down significantly unless and until there is some sort of unambiguous statement (from the perpetrator or victim) otherwise.130.233.213.199 (talk) 10:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whats with the racist angle behind "6 Asians, 2 Whites and 1 Hispanic sounds about right for a random mix of people in a massage parlor." Do you have any evidence to back up this statement? Its clear this is a racial attack, did we ever get an unambiguous statement from death of George Floyd (hint: he was dead) or from the cops (hint: admitting culpability) about it being a racially motivated? Albertaont (talk) 13:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So you think the event itself is notable, but your problem is that the article accurately follows the sources by mentioning the significance of most victims being Asian? I hope that whoever determines the consensus isn't counting this utterly bizarre !vote... Vanilla Wizard 💙03:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(to both above) Well, it's certainly good that we at least gave this a day to develop, because if we're "following sources" then the original slant of the article and the nomination has fallen apart. There's a preponderance of evidence that this was sexual frustration or addiction or revenge, including statements by the perpetrator and hospital logs and others. You're zealousness on this issue is COATRACKing a tragedy.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:21, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This !vote is dated. The article clearly says no motive has been established. The discussion of the race of the victims, their gender, and possible motivations is well supported by WP:WEIGHT.—Bagumba (talk) 11:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In general, a series of mass shootings in the United States is not news that merits inclusion mainly because of the extremely loose policies on possession and acquisition of firearms. The real news to post would be a policy response that would restrict access to guns or impose stricter gun control, thereby reducing the likelihood that similar events might happen in the near future, as was the case with the Nova Scotia attacks last year when the Canadian government promptly responded (see that discussion).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Except the merits of the blurb as stated by most supporters after the early breaking news phase is that the signficance is the gender and race of the victims, not the mode of death.—Bagumba (talk) 11:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per all of the above; Shootings in the US are very common in the nation due to lax gun laws, also the low death toll in the single digits doesn’t help either. 24.166.251.29 (talk) 11:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there have been 4 notable (i.e. they have Wikipedia articles) shootings in the US this year. Whilst this one has the most deaths, that still doesn't make it ITN worthy when unfortunately mass shootings in the US are common. Joseph2302 (talk)11:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clearly a targeted hate crime/domestic terrorism and not "just another shooting". It took a while to piece together the separate attacks, but more R/S like CNN and BBC are now saying this was racially motivated. That IP "users" are downplaying the nature of the attacks should also be noted. Albertaont (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Comment – Widely hyped due to disreputable connotations of the crime scene, but notions of race/hate significance are sketchy. Unfortunately for the U.S., significance is slight. – Sca (talk) 13:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose even if this ends up being a racially-motivated domestic terrorism attack, that would be far too commonplace for the U.S. for this to be posted. --Masem (t) 14:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If one only saw all non-white races as the same, I guess. Most the victims were women too. And the male suspect had a sex addiction. "Commonplace".—Bagumba (talk) 11:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very much in the news, probably the biggest story in the U.S., on the front pages of all the national outlets I just checked (CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, etc.), and it's very much relevant in the moment as we need to Stop AAPI Hate (I know, I know, WP:RGW, but this is why this shooting has become big news and those "others" we've had this year haven't). Also the article is in good shape. I nearly nominated this last night but I knew that the typical brigade that doesn't want to post any U.S. gun shootings would shoot it down. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's ninth on the BBC homepage I see, really not of interest, but the article highlights the overwhelming crass stupidity: Hate crimes against Asian-Americans spiked in recent months, fuelled by rhetoric that blames them for the spread of Covid-19. I'd like to say "unbelievable" but sadly it's not. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:32, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Shoot it down" pun was not intended. You non-Americans really do not understand American gun culture or the problems that we have with it. Not understanding it does not make it not newsworthy per ITN standards. And this is tied in with the results of Trump calling it the "China Virus" for a full year. We have a problem with violence against AAPI in our country right now, and it is newsworthy outside of the gun violence issue. "Unpredictable" is not an ITN judgment criteria. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You non-Americans really do not understand American gun culture or the problems that we have with it. ooookkkkk. I think my "being patronising" jar just started to overflow. The death of Sabine Schmitz is far more important and longer-lasting than this story. And yes, we do understand and who said anything about "unpredictable"? This shooting is altogether predictable much like all the other shootings. The fourth so far this year to get its own article. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:43, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That came off stronger than I wanted, but so many of these dismissive comments are ridiculous. The widespread AAPI violence in the U.S. is a bigger deal with greater impact than the death of a racecar driver dying of cancer, what a ridiculous comparison. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Stop feeding the troll. Nobody thinks a hate crime by a sex-deprived white supremacist resulting in the deaths of innocent asian women is less impactful than the passing of an amateur racecar driver from natural causes. Or maybe they do, but that says more about them than anything else. Albertaont (talk) 18:26, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
At least we've avoided the Meghan & Harry show. So far. And sports is/are always consequential – somebody wins, somebody loses! – Sca (talk) 15:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support as a murder spree with significant deaths and global coverage. Would hold back on connecting with anti-Asian attacks until non-speculative reports published, but otherwise should be clear. Kingsif (talk) 16:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question this is the 98th mass shooting of 2021 in the United States (according to Wikipedia). Is it just the number killed that makes this more notable than the others? Another mass shooting on the same day in Houston killed four but doesn't even get a mention. Or is it the lurid nature of a sex addict going rogue that makes this tabloid enough for people to write more about it (on top of the race hate speculation which seems to be going away)...? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 19:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are 98 mass shootings listed, only 5 or so have an article. This is one of the ones that generated enough news coverage to deserve an article, and consideration here. The "why" is likely the AAPI angle, as the nonsense about his libido didn't come out until today, after coverage was already significant. Plus it was a spree killer going to three different places to shoot people, who apparently was planning on crossing state lines to kill more. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:04, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just because he says it was because of his "sexual addiction" doesn't make it so. We need to wait and see to determine if there was racism at play. Even if it wasn't, it gets into a whole 'nother issue with these "spas" if that is the case. We do not have checkpoints on state borders. The point there is that it's noteworthy that his spree wasn't over. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's a big discussion on the talk page about Nick Fuentes being labeled a white supremacist, because Fuentes denies it. The point, I believe, is that racists often claim to not be racist, and they are not reliable in their statements. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support article is a bit short, but with the suspects motive disclosed it provides an answer for "why". I don't think either rationale (MAGA or incel) belongs in the blurb. The fact is, Asian massage parlors were deliberately targeted, and six of the eight victims were Asian. This was not random, nor was it the consequence of some other crime, it was a deliberate attack. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The proposed blurb is appropriate. I note the event received limited coverage in the initial hours after the attack, but has since exploded and is all over the news currently. Satellizer el Bridget(Talk)00:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support and I sincerely hope that the blurb mentions that six of the victims were Asian. I would add an altblurb myself, but I'm not sure how to word it. (edit: Support Altblurb now that it exists) With all due respect to TRM, I don't care what the shooter himself says. It's pretty hard to find a source that doesn't explicitly and prominently mention that most of the victims are Asian, and it is the secondary sources that decide what aspects of the story are most notable. I'm not saying that we need to use Wikipedia's voice to term it a hate crime (yet), as I'm going to wait for more sources to call it one, but it would be incredibly silly to exclude something that pretty much every existing source puts in the headline or subheading just because the perpetrator says that he totally doesn't have anything against Asian people. Vanilla Wizard 💙02:33, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not seeing much news coverage on this. The top US news currently trending appears to be how Biden called Putin a killer and is going to retaliate for the election meddling. Banedon (talk) 03:36, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it's not going to be on the CNN world tab, because the CNN world tab excludes all United States news... you could just go to the cnn.com webpage and see that the top story displayed in the largest font is the one we're talking about here. Your method of seeing if a story is getting "much news coverage" (or even seeing what the "top US news" currently is) seems to be flawed, to say the least. Vanilla Wizard 💙04:20, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean the CNN world tab excludes all US news? I'm seeing this headline there: "Biden says he believes Putin is a killer and Moscow 'will pay a price' for meddling in the 2020 election". Banedon (talk) 05:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see it now and I apologize for the inaccuracy: they appear to exclude domestic US news. That particular story made it into the world tab because it's also about Russia & international relations. All of that said, I fail to see the relevancy. Of course the Biden-Putin drama isn't the #1 US news story right now, because to find out what the top US news is, you don't need to add /world to the URL... not to mention that the world tab of an American website isn't a good way to figure out how relevant an American story is around the world. For that, you'd want to go to a non-American website entirely, such as the BBC (where this is currently the #1 story). Vanilla Wizard 💙05:34, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure that the CNN world tab did not feature, e.g., Biden's election victory? That piece of domestic US news was in the world tabs I looked at. Right now BBC also has the death of Tanzania's president as the top piece of news, although this is second (if one reads left to right). Banedon (talk) 08:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Top news in CNN International for me is "White supremacy and hate haunt Asian Americans", followed by Megxit and Biden calling Putin a killer. To deny this is reported outside the States is delusional. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Top news in CNN World for me right now is "Covid-19 drove hundreds of Africans out of Guangzhou. A generation of mixed-race children is their legacy" followed by "Taiwan urges citizens not to change their name to 'salmon' to get free sushi", "President who urged citizens to 'pray coronavirus away' dies", "China's ambassador to US doesn't have 'high expectations' for Alaska summit" and "Dead Sea Scroll fragments found in desert cave". So nope, still opposed. Banedon (talk) 19:36, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is still fourth story on CNN International, still above the fold; pushing down Africans in Guangzhou story. Checked out their Spanish edition, and it is the #2 story. People here have filibustered long enough though so the opportunity for this item has passed. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:26, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have an explicit link for this? As I said, I am simply not seeing this story on CNN World. Hell, it isn't even in the Americas section, where the top story is "Exclusive: Former Brazilian leader Lula leaves door open for return as he slams leaders' pandemic response". Banedon (talk) 23:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ongoing Someone smarter than me made a good point, this is not notable at all as an individual event as AAPI violence is the norm in the US. Ongoing seems more appropriate given that mass shootings recur with fair regularity in the United States over the past year. Albertaont (talk) 04:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's been both a Support and a Support ongoing from this user. Might lead to a double counting if votes were tallied to check consensus. 202.8.114.174 (talk) 11:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not to sound callous, but we haven't posted many American mass shootings in a while, and this one is all over international news. In addition, this story has an added layer of relevance as it fits into a broader surge in anti-Asian American violence and racism. Davey2116 (talk) 07:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We have not posted other similar mass shootings and this is no different from them other than the presumed race angle, which shouldn't count towards a blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 08:57, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree this is getting a lot of coverage because of the victims chosen, but we are not obligated and usually do not follow the media's cue in such matters. Mass shooters are typically aggrieved by something (real or imagined); the motivations here do not rise above the ordinary. I doubt it will be of ongoing historical interest (like Columbine, Parkland or Sandy Hook). GreatCaesarsGhost12:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I added ALT II: Georgia probably doesn't need to be included and certainly does not need to be linked—Atlanta is a major city. The women victims were of Asian descent; it's unsourced that they were Americans. The number injured is less significant, and was removed.—Bagumba (talk) 13:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt 2. This is not your "typical" US shooting, it's still getting a lot of coverage two days after the event. The article quality is fine and posting it will be a service to our readers. The Asian angle should be mentioned in the blurb.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Withdrew my oppose in view of second-day RS coverage of assertions of anti-Asian motives [21][22][23], which I don't necessarily buy. Still in the news, whatever opinions we may have. – Sca (talk) 13:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not headline news outside of the United States, aside from news organizations that already have an international focus. Really, just another US mass shooting that'll quickly be forgotten. Uses x (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt or alt2. Article is of sufficient quality, and 40k page views on the first day means readers are interested. Some editors may not think this is a significant news story, but the readers do, and that's whose opinion matters. Also not for nothing but as an American I get really offended by the "oh it's just another shooting in the US" line of opposition. We post kidnappings in Africa and landslides in Asia. There is no rule that common tragedies are not ITN-worthy, nor is any such rule applied outside the US, and I'd ask some of my colleagues to try harder to hide their anti-American bias. Levivichharass/hound16:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mass fatality incidents from shootings are uncommon in the U.S., despite what non-American Wikipedia editors may assume. Given that this appears to be a hate crime, or at least a crime involving "incels", it should be posted. We included the Isla Vista killings in 2014, didn't we? -- Rockstone[Send me a message!]22:25, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this is now a stale nomination: everything on the ITN blurb now happened since this event (as they all happened on 17 March, the shooting was on 16 March). So would be illogical to add this and remove a newer ITN blurb. Joseph2302 (talk)22:31, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that's the problem with lumping all shootings into this "mass shooting" category. It's true that there are a lot of incidents in the US where multiple people get shot. They're not all the same. This one is unique, which is why it's getting so much media coverage. Levivichharass/hound23:42, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What is with rightists and Chicago derangement syndrome? Every time a triggered incel MAGAt goes off the rails and kills innocent people in some racially motivated attack we get this endless parade of "What about Chicago" and "What about black on black violence" while the whole sad gang just parrots the inane nonsense from Faux Noise. He later updated that statement, saying there was a disturbance “among several patrons and gunfire erupted striking multiple people.” -- if you wait literally a day or two you find out that the violence in Chicago is almost always due to domestic violence or organized crime not at all the white nationalist terrorism sweeping the country but oh no whenever this happens we can't consider context instead the rightists have to shriek about Chicago and the foreigners cluck their tongues and insist "well what do you expect this sort of thing happens all the time in America". #sad. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:09, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support getting a lot of coverage/attention and the article looks decent. I was a bit surprised this wasn't already on the main page. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ready by a straight !vote count the supports outweigh the opposes by 7. Some of the opposes complain about WP:OTHERSTUFF which is invalid and contrary to the WP:ITN guidelines. The rationale really boils down to the opposes "just another mass shooting" vs the supports "this time it's different" (of which I'm one). Good discussion, the ayes have it. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This nomination is older than every single thing on ITN already, so is stale. It would therefore be ridiculous to replace ITN blurbs with less relevant, older content. It would be a really poor precedent to be set to remove an event that happened on 17 March from ITN blurb to replace it with an event from 16 March. Therefore, I have marked this as stale, instead of ready. Joseph2302 (talk)01:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The relevant guideline is Wikipedia:In the news#Procedure for posting point 3: " Singular events that took place more than seven days prior to their nomination are considered stale, as well as any event that is older than the oldest entry in the current "In the News" box." All events on the current ITN blurb happened on 17 March UTC time, whereas this happened on 16 March UTC time (17:00 Atlanta time = 22:00 UTC). Joseph2302 (talk)01:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose-- We don't even discuss similarly devastating incidents of violence from those parts of the world where they have become common and expected. Well, gun violence in America has become common and is not News news anymore. The story is not moving in the direction to make it of larger or long-term significance. Usedtobecool☎️15:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose / Pull - I don't see any consensus to post here. Just because something's marked as "ready" doesn't mean that it actually is ready. Regretfully, as per above comments, shootings are so common in the US that this one isn't really that unusual or newsworthy. — Amakuru (talk) 15:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Most shooting in the US don't prompt visits from the President and Vice President. The apparent targeting of the Asian American community means this is unusual and newsworthy.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Before I posted, I did a read through and agreed with LaserLegs' assessment of the consensus, otherwise I wouldn't have posted it. One more oppose did come in after LaserLegs' summary, however it wasn't enough to change the balance of the narrow consensus that had developed.~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving18:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting comment – A reasonable move given the third-day coverage and and high-profile involvement, even though the event itself is getting old fast. Any move to pull it now would raise awkward questions. – Sca (talk) 17:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was arguably justifiable to dismiss it as just another US mass shooting after just the first day or two, but developments since then (US federal government half-masting flags for multiple days, presidential attention, vigils, international commentary) show that this is more similar to the relatively low-fatality US shootings that still get posted on ITN because of something else that elevates its importance above just the crime itself (see my !vote above). ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions17:56, 19 March 2021 (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.
To any passing admin: I do not believe credit to this article's editors has been given yet. If you could do that when you have a chance before this (posted) nom rolls off, that would be very much appreciated. Thanks. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 19:19, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: RIP. Article still needs some ongoing work. A Mar 15 satellite photo may be added from zoom.earth where Mongolia and half of China is in soil color, if NASA's photo is in public domain. 173.68.165.114 (talk) 08:05, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The content was mentioned in that article, but my edits was reverted and I was threatened not to edit that article. So please someone else add the casuality data into the article. The article is currently very China-centric. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 08:23, 16 March 2021 (UTC) (I undid that revert. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 08:36, 16 March 2021 (UTC))[reply]
Oppose on quality the article is still a stub, and has a neutrality template on it. Therefore, not currently good enough to be on the front page. Joseph2302 (talk)09:09, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article is too short, has referencing problems, is tagged with several "dubious" tags, and has other issues. Once this has been fixed, I will re-assess. --Jayron3212:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sca: It is. Mongolia doesn't lose lots of nomads every spring due to sands. Sandstorms were common in the North China Plain in the late 20th century or even early 2000s, but people haven't seen it for decades; even for the city Yinchuan on the Loess Plateau this is the strongest sandstorm for the past 19 years. North China may not be that green during the winter but rarely turned into this color (checking just earlier images in zoom.earth we can see Hebei Province was turning green from a dry-grass/tree-bark color). Facilities in Inner Mongolia are built to be sandproof so simply some cities shut down their public transport system is an unusual thing. The only reason we have here is the article quality. I put the POV tag for a strong Sinocentric tendency in the article. Now it reappears, with a NASA disinformation diagram arrow. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 22:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Globalise isn’t the same as POV. And we can only write what the sources say, and the Western sources focus on China. If other sources exist, add information, but there’s no reason to add maintenance tags as a badge of shame or something. Yes, articles are a work in progress. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 01:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that "in a decade" means for 10 years i.e. since 2011. If people meant since 2020, I would expect it to say "this decade". Joseph2302 (talk)14:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, for now – The subject is clearly worthy of an ITN posting. However, the article quality is currently rather lackluster, and thus, I cannot support this nomination right now. I'll change my vote if the article is brought up to standard. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 15:11, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality, support on notability The article looks well-sourced, but it's still very thin. There's currently only one sentence about how it affected South Korea. Vanilla Wizard 💙03:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, ProcrastinatingReader! Storm is still happening in Western Inner Mongolia. I added some recent progress of the storm, but since Chinese sources are generally considered perennial sources in English Wikipedia, I doubt if there's much we can do. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 10:19, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Announced today (March 15). Not known outside of his field, but a giant in environmental physiology. BD2412T00:48, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Please do not get me wrong. Legacy.com is not a WP:RS. Given the sensitivity of WP:ITNRD, you would agree with me that we should not be discussing nominations that are pending a mention in WP:RS. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 01:42, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I agree with the above closure. While that might not be a RS in way of confirming biographical info, one would think a family-placed obituary is good enough to at least confirm a death date. Perhaps this will become moot at some point with some other website picking up on his death, but there is always a chance that this is the best we'll get, especially for some academics, and people long retired and out of the spotlight (another example is Bill O'Connor (American football)). Connormah (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we can post it on RD with that level of sourcing, but I do agree with you that it shouldn't have been closed. Closure is for items that stand no chance of being posted, not for things where just one person has input into the process. — Amakuru (talk) 16:22, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi folks. I was the one who closed this one, because I believed that we should not be discussing nominations (and definitely not posting), specially WP:ITNRD ones, that do not have a mention in WP:RS. But, if others disagree, please do revert the closure. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 16:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, perhaps it is a discussion for elsewhere, but I think there is some nuance in whether that is a RS or not. I think it should suffice for the simple fact that someone has died, though, of course, we'd prefer something better if available (though sometimes it is not). Connormah (talk) 16:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am quite confident that he has in fact died as reported. This is now also reported on the Legacy.com subpage for The Daily Memphian, which is a published source, but which hosts its obituaries on the website. How do we handle things when published newspapers use another website in this way? BD2412T21:22, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Legacy.com page was taken from that of a funeral director's site. The concensus (note: with very little discussion) on the reliable sources noticeboard is that they're not RS for specifics such as date of death as they're essentially self-published sources. [1][2] I personally consider them reliable enough to add a date of death on an article as a placeholder, but I wouldn't say it's reliable enough to then link to the article on the front page, so I agree with the closure. Uses x (talk) 13:01, 18 March 2021 (UTC)\[reply]
I think WP:COMMONSENSE applies here. With less local news outlets as before, there are bound to be notable people by WP's standards that do not get news obituaries in bigger publications. I can see the argument against using these for sourcing biographical information as it is obviously written by the families, but for something as simple as a death date, the sole purpose of publishing an obituary, it's hard not to see why this cannot be used. It's not like newspapers just publish obituaries without any form of oversight confirming that a person has died. Connormah (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have reopened the discussion since the Daily Memphian obituaries are available from its front page, even though the link leads to Legacy.com. @Ktin: let me know if you agree that this is sufficient. Cheers! BD2412T21:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Needs more coverage of his research; right now the article only states that he investigated the "physiologic mechanism that initiates fever and its associated reactions to infectious pathogens." Fortunately the Quan reference has thorough detail of his research, and a paragraph in the article based on that (particularly the final sentences for paragraphs in the Quan article) would make this a relatively quick fix. SpencerT•C03:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very glad that an RS obit came out before this got stale. The description of his work is suitable, I think, and any more detailed would run afoul of JARGON. Refs spot checked.130.233.213.199 (talk) 10:04, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
*Oppose on source. I'd like for this to be posted before becoming stale, but just because a newspaper is syndicated with Legacy.com doesn't make it a RS. It's all coming from the obituary on the funeral director site which isn't RS for specifics as it's WP:SELFPUB ("The family of Dr. Clark Martin Blatteis created this Life Tributes page"). It's probably fine enough to update his article since it's not an exceptional claim, but in my view not good enough to post to the front page of Wikipedia.Uses x (talk) 13:30, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support With some Facebook searching I'm not going to link out of respect for privacy, it seems his colleagues and family members are confirming his death, so I'm now confident that it's reliable. Uses x (talk) 15:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Is there any mechanism for keeping this from slipping through the cracks before the clock is run out on it? Would there be any objection to my posting it now? BD2412T22:03, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I understand that it is often harder to confirm the death of non-celebrities, but I think representation of notable research scientists matters! BD2412T22:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The militaryjunta expands the provisions of Myanmar's martial law, which is perceived as an attempt to legitimize their violent pushback against anti-coup protesters. (AP)
British chocolate maker Thorntons announces it will be permanently closing down all of its stores, with the loss of about 600 jobs, thereby ending its 110-year presence on the high street. The company says it has been massively hit by the pandemic lockdowns and adds that high street conditions are too severe to continue. The company will continue sales online and through supermarkets. (BBC News)
Cyprus suspends the use of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine until March 18 pending review from the European Medicines Agency following reports of possible serious side effects among vaccinated people in other EU countries. (Cyprus Mail)
Nine of the 20 regions, as well as the autonomous province of Trentino, enter a strict state of lockdown, in the government's latest attempt to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Two other regions are also currently in lockdown. (Euronews)
Latvian health authorities temporarily suspend the use of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine as a precaution following reports of blood clot issues among vaccinated people. (Barron's)
The Directorate-General of Health temporarily suspends the use of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine as a precaution following reports of "rare, but severe" suspected side-effects among vaccinated people in other countries. (CNA)
Slovenia suspends the use of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine as a precaution following reports of cases of blood clots in vaccinated people in other countries. (MedicalXpress)
Turkey reports 15,503 new cases in the past 24 hours, which is the highest single-day total this year, and brings the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 2,894,893. (U.S. News and World Report)
The Ministry of Health temporarily suspends the use of the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine while awaiting a WHO review amidst reports of cases of blood clots in vaccinated people from several European countries. (Nikkei Asia)
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.
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.
Weal oppose for now, not in a horrible state, but several things (early roles in Career text, his religion in Personal Life section) need additional cites. --Jayron3212:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support If there were issues at the time of Jayron32's comment, I'm not seeing it now, we actually have a fully completely sourced filmography section here. --Masem (t) 16:42, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A pass should be taken on the article to de-puff the article. e.g. "noted for being a striking businessperson while eschewing media publicity". Furthermore, other than the album cover narrative there is not sufficient depth on her career. Noting her contributions that made her a "striking businessperson" will be good. Happy to change my vote once these have been addressed. Ktin (talk) 20:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Re Well, this isn't the first time this editor has attempted to pick apart one of my noms for frivolous reasons (he decided not to less than 30 minutes later). So I'm a bit skeptical over whether this is indeed a "legit oppose". The common denominator is we're both competing in the WikiCup. Unlike him, I don't vote on any of his noms to avoid the appearance of impropriety. But hey, to each their own. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:19, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:ReAGF ≠ be deaf, dumb, and blind. You have a track record – this isn't your first time making a spurious nitpick; I'm certain it won't your last (for the record, the Robert Dean nom mentioned above was promoted without me having to make additional changes, demonstrating that your comment was indeed bogus and contrived, much like your oppose here). —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please be polite and kind to your fellow editors. Calling someone's views spurious, bogus, and contrived, just because you do not agree with them, is not in keeping with a behavior that we would ever want to condone. Ktin (talk) 22:13, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all. I'm calling a spade a spade based on evidence (not, as you like to smokescreen it, Template:Tq). Yes, your views can be disagreeable, but that's not the reason why they are spurious, bogus, and contrived. —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let me get this straight -- my views are spurious, bogus, and contrived because I once opposed this i.e. Robert Dean nomination of yours with the rationale of Template:Tq and then later decided against that comment? And, hence, you believe that my views here are in bad faith? Ktin (talk) 01:31, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Support Hits on what the subject was notable for-- while it might be just be an album cover, it is appropriate. Conditional since I would like to see the sentence stating that she was noted to be an "imposing businessperson" with a ref after it. Otherwise, good to go IMO. SpencerT•C03:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also tagging both the song and album as bolded targeted. "Everything I Wanted" is a GA and looks in good shape, and while Folklore is not yet a GA, it looks fairly complete as well. --Masem (t) 03:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Articles on Billie and Tay Tay are in great shape, as well as the song and album. Grammy article looks fine too; we might even want to link to the individual awards in the blurbs, so long as those articles are OK. ITN/R, so not much else to say, except great work from the community to get these to such a high quality. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 03:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Usually the split image is when we have a mens/womans sport and thus we don't want to prioritize one winner over the other. It's not that we can't here, but given that we have two female winners, and this is just two among many winners, I don't think we need to. At worst, in a few days if this is posted, we can swap a Swift image for Eilish's. --Masem (t) 03:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. I did notice something else, though: if this article happens to go to ITN today, then the Main Page will have the same photo of Billie Eilish twice. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support All 3 articles look fine on a superficial review. One point: Credits and personnel for Everything I Wanted is both unexpectedly short, and sourced to Tidal. I'm not certain that a music streaming service is actually authoritative or exhaustive, and I'm certain that more than 4 people contributed to the album. See Folklore's personnel listing, which includes a much more complete list and is sourced to the artwork itself. Would it be better to just incorporate the few credited individuals into the text and get rid of the section?130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Posting the blurb above. Feel free to change. Not sure how to mention Beyoncé and keep the blurb short. --Tone09:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think that's probably correct. The ITN/R entry covers Record of the Year and Album of the Year. Beyonce's record breaking is interesting, but perhaps not fully ITN-worthy and would need a full consensus in any case. I'd lean oppose on that one myself... — Amakuru (talk) 10:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unless it was a record within the scope of the current awards, we would generally not add those types of "overall" records. --Masem (t) 13:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beyonce Knowles she didn't win album of the year, or record of the year, so we don't need to include her in the blurb at all. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:32, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - After seeing the Grammys languish without ITN updates for several years, seeing this one go up so quickly is certainly a pleasant surprise. That said, I'm not pleased about the racially biased blurb.--WaltCip-(talk)12:19, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Standard blurb format, yes. But this is not a standard award show, and the broken record is notable, just as a broken record during a top sporting event is occasionally mentioned on ITN.--WaltCip-(talk)13:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we're trying to racially swing anything, just that these types of records (career-spanning, not event-spanning) don't work well in posting the blurb in the context of a single award show; but I agree it is one of those records I'm seeing in headlines now from the show. We could add, as briefly as I could see it "and Beyonce becomes the most awarded female artist." to the end of the current blurb, which would make it three lines long and push the Zamfara kidnapping off. --Masem (t) 13:51, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very strange comment. Billie Eilish and Taylor Swift won the most important awards. If there really was racism at play here, it's by the Grammys, as Zayn Malik and others claim (without evidence, FWIW). It's not our fault in reporting the news. But moreover, they're just two people – it's hard to force diversity with a group that small. If you randomly selected two people from the U.S., there's a good chance you'd get two white people pretty often. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I'd support making this blurb extra-long and adding Beyonce to it, mostly because (a) as Masem says, that aspect is widely in the news, and (b) it would push off a stale item that's been on the main page for more than 2 weeks. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Avatar had a Chinese release last week and reclaimed it's spot as the highest grossing film of all time. We gonna post that too? Or maybe we should leave arbitrary milestones for another section and stick with the awards. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:15, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I initially brought it up, retracted it, retired in shame and went to bed. But now that it's out there, yes. Selecting two pop stars from a widely-reported four major winners who just happen to not be H.E.R. and Megan Thee Stallion looks a bit...lopsided. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:13, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did some research I believe that the now WP:RENAMED user ixgysjijel is actually a time-traveling racist who deliberately selected which awards would be featured when the grammys were added in 2008, to prevent Beyonce from having a sliver of the front page of Wikipedia in addition to the relentless drumbeat of media coverage she gets. The username was likely scrambled by Nazi skynet to mask the identity of their agent and ensure their lasting damage to the Space time continueum. It can't possibly be that past discussions later found that album of the year and record of the year were most significant. This is a big deal, we can't be certain what other damage was done, and it might be best to scrap ITN/R all together. --LaserLegs (talk) 02:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think we already understood that you're opposed to Beyoncé being added to the ITN, per your two prior comments. The above comment is indeed well-researched, but a slight exaggeration and probably unnecessary... ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 03:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it was intentionally racist, I said it looks a bit lopsided. A rap or R&B fan might see it as a slight to the genre, too. In any case, we could just as easily list all four actual winners (two songs, an artist, an album) next year, instead of arbitrarily excluding any just to attach singers to half. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the article is sourced and in decent shape. There is room for some formatting and sourcing improvements (i.e. self-published source), but I didn't see anything glaring enough to bar posting this RD. TJMSmith (talk) 03:16, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding WaltCip's claim that "This is not something we do here": in fact I was directed to this page by the template at the top of WT:ITN, which says "Nominating a current item for removal? Go to Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates (WP:ITN/C)." So clearly it is something we do here. Einsof (talk) 16:04, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are no instructions on this page for what is or is not an acceptable reason to nominate an entry for removal, so I inferred from the general criteria set out in WP:ITN (specifically the obvious-sounding requirement that Template:Tq). If instructions about removal nominations exist somewhere else, where can I find them? Einsof (talk) 16:26, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U — The longstanding problem is, many readers don't understand that In the News is not a source for news per se. Instead, it is a listing of Wikipedia articles about topics that are (or recently have been) in the news. To be listed in ITN, these topics must judged important or significant to a reasonably large share of readers or potential readers, and the articles must be up to date. If you're looking for actual news sources that have proven to be reliable, try news agencies such as AP, BBC, Reuters – or try large newspapers in or near anyplace you're interested in. Does that help? – Sca (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't just a routine regional election - it's one of the largest landslide victories in the history of such elections in Australia, with far more significant consequences than a regular regional election. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Landslide, sure. But for the incumbent party. Fewer people oppose business as usual in more populous states across the world every day. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:06, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose use of vigil as headline this case is dominating the headlines in the UK (can't avouch for anywhere else) but the only consequence would be resignation/dismissal of nobody policemen, or at most the resignation of the Chief of the Met, whose authority is over one city. Unknown Temptation (talk) 13:39, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Change blurb to Metropolitan Police officer remanded in custody, having been charged with the kidnapping and murder of Sarah Everard. A policeman being prosecuted for this high-profile crime is the most notable part of this event. We particularly shouldn't use blurb 1, because we don't know how she died & we don't want to be seen as prejudicing the suspect's trial. Jim Michael (talk) 14:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as the 'blurb' is not supported by the known facts of the event covered by the article. We do not know what happened yet, there has not even been a trial, let lone a conviction for murder. And the arrests were unrelated to the topic of the article, they were apparently because of the danger being caused to the public resulting from hundreds of people breaking the Covid lockdown rules, and not for holding a vigil, many of which occurred peacefully across the rest of the UK without incident. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:04, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose current blurb, but support in principle This IS getting international news – I'm from the US personally and this has gotten on my radar some through what we all recognize has been a very slow time for news. However, I have to agree that the story here is Everard's death; if the vigil arrests were significant enough, they should have their own article. Also, we should be very careful about terminology when right now the accused perpetrator is only a suspect. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 17:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle per AllegedlyHuman. This is getting a fair amount of press on the other side of the pond, but I agree the blurb should be closer to Jim Michael's suggestion. --Tavix(talk)18:14, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for uncertainty over whether this is pro-woman, anti-cop or COVID-related, but support all of our rights to walk the streets together or alone safely, in general. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:40, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Anti-male & anti-police placards were held by protesters. This is a major event for the police & public. Major politicians - including Boris Johnson, Priti Patel & Sadiq Khan - have commented on this case. Jim Michael (talk) 23:14, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Politicians always talk. No blurb mentions anti-male motivation at the protest or vigil, even implicitly, nor the article. Still seems uncertain to me. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:47, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – This article seems favored by users who have adopted the death of Ms. Everard as a cause célèbre. That a police officer has been charged in the case is not proof of significance by ITN standards. – Sca (talk) 18:43, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb III per AllegedlyHuman. This is getting a lot of attention in international news, and the article looks good. Uses x (talk) 19:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You don't mind that the allegedly good-looking article only mentions one protest of unspecified mass "outside Scotland Yard", contrary to Blurb III/IV? InedibleHulk (talk) 20:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you think a virtual protest is real enough to be called a protest, I'm not going to tell you you're wrong on the Internet. Maybe it is more than mundane keyboard warring, I'm not hip anymore. But it seems less substantial to me than what "sparking", "mass" or "protests" suggest actually happened in the physical realm. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, and keep the nomination open for a few days. It's too hard to assess the significance of this episode right now but it certainly has the potential of developing into a transformative metoo type moment for the UK. If the protests and the political fallout grow in the next couple of days, a blurb may become appropriate then. Nsk92 (talk) 20:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait we shouldn't post about non-notable people being arrested/charged per WP:BLP. And it's unclear whether this is going to attract lots of news or not. Also, it was one main vigil, and I virtual one, so protests seems the incorrect terminology. Joseph2302 (talk)20:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The arrestee's name is stated prominently by many media sources. The case has already received a great deal of media coverage. There were vigils yesterday & today, as well as a protest today - each with hundreds of people illegally gathered in very close proximity. Jim Michael (talk) 21:16, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is very much ITN, although why this case and not others draw more attention is puzzling. We shouldn't be debating whether or not something "should be news", but rather only evaluating if it is "in the news". Albertaont (talk) 04:01, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know how the news cycle and spring works, not complaining. Just concerned that the blurbs don't accurately reflect the news or the article. The general theme of this digital uprising is also getting a bit lost, the problem seems to used to be more about systemic sex predator inequality, like Home Alive, not cops again. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not aware of there being a rule/guideline against high-profile (apparent) serious crimes being posted to ITN. I think it notable enough even before the trial. Jim Michael (talk) 11:11, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Crimes, yes, depending on significance. Charges being filed against suspects, no – innocent until proven guilty. Convictions of suspects, yes, depending on significance. – Sca (talk) 12:38, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Arrested, but not convicted (at least yet). Precedent is for mere arrests to only be posted when it's headline international news, which this is not. The section about it should also be more comprehensive than it is now; beyond "terrorism, sedition, and conspiracy", if that information is available the reasoning behind those claims needs to be stated. Uses x (talk) 04:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as written Eight other people were swept up in the same raid, all formerly high-ranking, two with English Wikipedia articles. This is more political than personal. Should be linked to a notable event article first. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:20, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It appears I nominated this independently around the same time without noticing (this OP was first, however). I clearly support, and I've added the blurbs I wrote as altblurbs to the nomination for the community's consideration. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Former interim leader. Bigger for the country's current military leaders. Just as big for the other two notable named and known ministers of government and presidency, inexplicably ignored in favour of singling out one untried BLP subject for the hotseat. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:19, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support this kind of event isn't common - how often does it happen a year worldwide, five times or fewer? - so I'm supporting, especially since it's dominating local news. Banedon (talk) 22:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even if she is not convicted, the arrest would have been equally or more notable.--TZubiri (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC) alt IV preferred, no picture due to relevance concerns proposed by editors, and mentioning other arrests.--TZubiri (talk) 23:05, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support and prefer alt IV. It's notable enough that the government had its predecessors detained on the highest charges possible; no need to wait for a conviction. Vanilla Wizard 💙06:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's been more than 24 hours and still no admin response. I have little hope this will still be posted, because apparently no admin has noticed the READY notice or maybe they simply can't be bothered. If no action is undertaken within 24 hours I'm withdrawing the nomination since it will have been a full week since the arrest--Civciv5 (talk) 11:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Suppport while the article's development seems mired in wiki-argument, there's a bedrock, and it behooves you to recognise one of the significant athletes of the 20th century.
I came here from the talk page. I think Hagler is probably more famous than say, Sabine Schmitz, rip, so what we are waiting for and why is this debate is still being had.
Template:ArchivetopTemplate:ITN candidateSupport And I interrupt yourself to bring you this ..... unless I'm very much mistaken ... I am very much mistaken .... with half the race to gone, there's still half the race to go. One of my most favourite sporting commentators of all time. On a spot check, article looks in okay enough shape. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)18:25, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I assume the worst on some people at ITN. Pushing for blurbs on American state politcians, but opposing blurbs on much more notable non-Americans. Joseph2302 (talk)20:26, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I'd be okay with posting a guy who is THE voice of a major sport in a large English-speaking country. But then that qualifier could create quite a list. I'll note we didn't even consider Keith Jackson, who was THE guy for college football for decades. I'd like to think Al Michaels will get in. Reading the obits and our article, Walker seems a bit closer to the former than the latter. Like all borderline cases, it would be no tragedy to post or omit. GreatCaesarsGhost21:47, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb The British systemic bias is back in action I see. There's nothing in this article that suggests he was "transformative in his field". "97 year old announcer dies" is not a blurb. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:43, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The widespread conflation of announcers and commentators also remains strong, it would seem. Combined with the gathering dark cloud of sentences that start with numerals, and society's increasing aversion to hyphenation, you're absolutely correct. Oppose these blurbs!InedibleHulk (talk) 03:34, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose altblurb 1, neutral on altblurb 2 The article motorsport is not in good shape, but Formula One looks fine. However, this currently isn't even front page news on the BBC – though I acknowledge the Main Page right now is very stale. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 02:42, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Having only just seen this, as the nominator I would support a blurb for the most recognisable commentator in English speaking motorsport. ITN could do with a new blurb after all, especially after complaints on the MP talk page of lack of new news and the fact the most recent blurb is a week old. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk)13:04, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per being some bloke with a funny voice who lived a long time. More power to him! Lovely bloke and all, I remember he told me about his dog on the 17:30 to Norwich. But Σ!=MP. ——Serial
Support RD but oppose blurb I'm having a hard time using what is on his page to assign a level of importance to a blurb. May be a household name in terms of sports broadcasting in the UK, but there's a lack of being a tranformative figure in the field here. --Masem (t) 13:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:AllegedlyHuman Frankly, I am perplexed. I don't see anything that fits this criticism. If I did I would remove it. If you don't like whatever, perhaps you could remove the offending passage(s)? Thank you 7&6=thirteen (☎)18:20, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here's just a handful of the many that are there:
"Simon travelled solo globally for the show, searching for hidden clues to some of history's most nightmarish myths."
"From a very young age, Cliff aspired to be the first South African swimmer to win an Olympic Gold medal."
"His mother, a swimming teacher, taught him from a very young age, and at age 6 he began to show talent as a gymnast."
"After his military service, he danced and performed in cabaret and stage shows in South Africa before he was offered a coveted spot in the chorus at Paris's Moulin Rouge, becoming a principal dancer after six months."
This is now about as well sourced as I think possible. I also believe it is fully updated and in good and proper form. I would note that the page has gotten 75,000 views in the last three days. There seems to be reader interest. 7&6=thirteen (☎)16:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Really User:Sunshineisles2 tagged as "problem sentences" due to "excessive citations" and you chose not to fix it. This article is fine. The citations are all fine, other than their number. They are real citations to real articles. The decision apparently is that you don't want this "in the news" and that it will become stale and evaporate. Problem will then be resolved. 7&6=thirteen (☎)17:51, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've already explained to you on my talk page why I tagged it. It wasn't practicable for me to go through the sources and pare them down at that time. That's all. I don't know where you're getting this idea that anyone is trying to purposefully trying to slow down this nomination or that somebody doesn't want this article on the main page.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 17:54, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, While not much, I just added more details. Maybe there are sources in her native languages that could be used to expand this. I was hoping more details on her medical career may turn up also. TJMSmith (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I added a couple more sentences too, but it looks like we've reached the limit of the coverage there is online for her life. Good enough for RD. Joseph2302 (talk)22:01, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, the National Assembly website identifies her as independent. I added that to the article. I still wish we had the spelling of her name in her native language, Dari. TJMSmith (talk) 12:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If true, this discovery is very cool, and there's a lot of great info in the article about the device generally – but there's currently only one line about this event in text. Sending this article to the Main Page in its current form would leave readers wanting more. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:11, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, although very nice research, this is an incremental update to the knowledge about the device. In such cases, only the discovery would be an ITN story, I think. Also, the update is short. --Tone09:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure what you mean. If you're talking about for a source, you could use even a copyrighted work; however, images have to be under CC or similar license. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article is very nice, and the topic is in the BBC and Guardian, as well as scientific journals from Science and AAS. While the update is incremental, it does relate to the world's first known computer, which gives it a superlative appeal.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is a fascinating object but the new research is incremental. They're making an improved/updated proposal for what the missing bits were (only about a third of the mechanism survived), which is fine but essentially informed guesswork. There have been multiple proposals by several competing teams, some of which have constructed working reproductions of their proposals, so it's misleading to call this the 'first complete model'. The new work is nowhere near as big an advance as the 2008 study, which performed the first CT scan of the fragments. Modest Geniustalk12:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Isn't this more geared towards Did You Know? The fact that Christie's sold an NFT for the first time seems more trivial than groundbreaking news. rawmustard (talk) 15:02, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's several "records" here, and while the sale of NFT at Christie's is one and that better suited at DYK, we're talking the price of a work of art, which we have posted as blurbs before when they are noted as record-setting. --Masem (t) 15:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support article based on quality and coverage of event in news sources, oppose blurb for now given that it seems to be burying the lead here. The newsworthiness of the event doesn't seem to be that it is the "third most-expensive piece of art sold by a living artist", which is far too many qualifiers on a superlative to be interesting, but rather that this seems to represent a watershed in the sale of digital artworks; the fact that this was a sale of a non-fungible token rather than a physical piece of canvas is what makes it stand out. I'm afraid I don't know enough about the technical aspects here to be of much help, but it would be nice to have a blurb that highlights this and ios able to explain it for a lay person like myself. --Jayron3217:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think this is important enough for ITN - there's no stand-alone article either for the work or the auction, and there probably shouldn't be. I also think this is crypto-hype - the buyer was someone in the business of selling NFTs and they have a vested interest in inflating the price beyond its actual value. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:05, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the nomination has potential and the news seems to be good ITN material but I can't support it when there's no article about the work of art. And no, bolding the artist's article can't compensate as it's the work of art that sells for a record price.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support article, oppose blurb. Again, the big story is the NFT angle. Maybe something like "The first non-fungible token to be sold by a legacy auction house, Everydays: the First 5000 Days by Beeple, is sold for $69 million at Christie's." If anyone can make that snappier, it would be better. Mcrsftdog (talk) 00:16, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose One of my person rules is "If you're having trouble making a blurb that sounds noteworthy, that should tell you something." What you have here is two stories: the rapid emergence of NFTs and the explosion in art prices. The convergence here hints at something both we and the RS are not allowed to say (lets call them "creative financial instruments"), which leaves us with a story we want to broadcast but cannot frame. GreatCaesarsGhost13:55, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, per above, but with a different blurb. Apart from the usual considerations, we also really need new stories to refresh a rather tired ITN box at the moment. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:59, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Agree that the NFT angle is required to give this significance. Although I think this is just a re-imagining of Bowie bonds, it is the only actual novel angle to an otherwise routine auction.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've added an altblurb but I can't say that it's much snappier than what was suggested above. Removing the sale amount or venue might improve, and it would be good to improve "legacy auction house".130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - a few sections are a tad brief, but overall, the article addresses most of Kleppe's career. Statements have inline citations. TJMSmith (talk) 02:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I remember, RD noms have been placed on the date the death was announced, rather than the actual date of death. SpencerT•C04:43, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Might have been a bigger deal in the past when posted RDs were sorted by death date, and a posting admin might have blindly used that date and not the one in the bio.—Bagumba (talk) 05:49, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Really needs expansion beyond stub category as almost half of the article is about his illness and death at the moment, will re-visit tomorrow JW 1961Talk22:54, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have added some more content based on French sources. There looks to be quite a lot more to be added from the French article's sources, but article is now long enough for RD. Joseph2302 (talk)09:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Insufficient depth of coverage. For example, in his role as defense minister, there's one sentence about what he did in the role (versus a whole section on fr.wiki). SpencerT•C18:43, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Of the sources on that section on fr.wiki, [26] is an interview that doesn't say much, [27] is a blog, [28] is probably good source but too technical/specific for mine and Google Translate's understanding, and [29] and [30] don't even mention him. We shouldn't therefore be comparing the content with porr sourcing on French Wikipedia. Joseph2302 (talk)21:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb - Ivory Coast is a country where the President holds all the power, so we would not blurb a Prime Minister. Furthermore, this guy was Prime Minister for less than a year. NorthernFalcon (talk) 01:39, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Moved nomination to March 9, since that's when it looks like the earliest the death was announced in the press. SpencerT•C04:28, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems to have been expanded somewhat since I last looked at it. Welcome of course, but there is now a bit more work to do with the citations. P-K3 (talk) 22:34, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It looks like the article is doing the common thing of having several sentences followed by a citation at the end for all of it. Every line that introduces new information (in other words, most lines) should have citations themselves. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Developments in the past day (infection of government agencies, software companies, and critical infrastructure) make this impactful. Comment certainly notable, but the impact isn't clear enough yet to warrant a blurb. "Every possible victim that hadn't patched by mid-to-end of last week has already been hit by at least one or several actors" [1], and this is a widely used product even in critical infrastructure, so this isn't going away. Uses x (talk) 00:35, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article has issues, and will be until some decent article about the mechanism of the attack is written. Was it a targeted thing? Bulk scanning script kiddies? There is no such thing as an "individual" exchange server I don't know what that even means. "giving them access to victims' entire networks" needs clarification since DMZ networks and internal firewalls have been a thing for 15 years it's fairly unlikely that's true. Software isn't "especially susceptible" either it's a binary thing either the vulnerability exists or it doesn't. The story is interesting, we could probably post it, but the article needs work. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:45, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Re The adjectival form is probably a poor choice. I originally meant to refer to Exchange Servers "belonging to" both individuals and enterprises. With that being in the negative in the CNN's coverage, however, I'll change it in the lede and maybe do with a brief mention in the prose with the financial times affirming it. The relativized statement is also on my end. It was to emphasize the obscurity of the mechanism. But your concerns are valid. See Template:Diff2. Assem Khidhr (talk) 10:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Another week, another security breach. What makes this special? Article states that this was reported on March 5th, a US government task force was planned for March 7th, and this vulnerability was recognized even earlier by Microsoft back in January. What actually happened on the nomination date (March 9)?130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:ITNCRIT; it happening recently isn't part of the critera, the requirement is that it's 'in the news' because of recent developments. Time since it was originally reported is only critera for RD. Uses x (talk) 07:51, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is well written from the information currently available. This is one of the biggest companies in the world, and 250k people is quite a lot to be affected. Combined with the fact that ITN really needs to be refreshed (we have an item on there from 19 February), this article is good enough for ITN IMO. Joseph2302 (talk)13:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose The scope of this is the issue - this isn't like the past cyberattacks (like the Ukraine ransomware) and it has been a slowly developing story because it requires more effort by those attacking to actually get in and compromise and maintain the compromised system. There are fallouts from it, but for example, there haven't been private information breaches yet (or discussed in the article), loss of data, etc; the only thing that we have documented is the ability to spy and monitor affected systems and potential to run cryptomininig software on them. Its clearly an IT concern, but its far from being a major problem and the fact that this isn't a frequent headline story shows that this isn't really a major story. But I do appreciate that we are looking to add a blurb since we haven't added one for a while; we just can't force one. --Masem (t) 14:10, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Reply to I agree that not enough info is out to warrant a blurb yet. The attack is actually very straightforward (I've updated the article to reflect this) and it's been implicated in downloading every email and email address + password combination from undisclosed companies, being used by hackers in social engineering attacks, as well as silently installing backdoors with admin privileges, so personally I'm expecting a lot more to come out about this in the next few days. Uses x (talk) 21:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Limited long-term impact (it's not as if all of these organizations are being shut down), but "weak" due to the good quality of the article. SpencerT•C19:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Reply to A lot of developments have happened over the past day, which I've added to the article; this is looking like it'll have long-term impact, especially since it's targeting small and medium businesses without large IT budgets. Coverage has also improved in the media, entering mainstream news. Uses x (talk) 23:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can't agree here - the breach didn't take down the servers. In fact, the hackers didn't even want the machines to go down. The admins took them down, for fear of having to explain to their superiors why they didn't heed blunt messages from Microsoft and the US government to update their software for the past 3 months. Buck passing. A more accurate blurb could be "Enterprise IT consultants neglect their jobs, blame China".130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose script kiddies bulk scanned a 0-day to install coin miners, nothing coordinated or significant here. State sponsored cyber terrorists maybe. If there article described the technical details of the mechanism of the attack it might be worth posting like the heartbleed thing that team Linux had a few years ago. Currently it's branded as either a "cyber attack" or a "data breach" but we've used those labels in the past for deliberate, coordinated events which isn't what happened here. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Reply to It's now being used to deploy ransomware starting from today, as predicted, so it goes beyond crypto mining (which only one of the at least 10 APT groups is known to do). I don't think the simplicity of the attack is reason to understate it, I think the volume of the attack is what's important. Uses x (talk) 13:18, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
20 years ago they'd install toolbars and botnets, 10 years ago it was coin miners and today it's ransomware. This is the IT equivalent of running through a parking lot checking for unlocked vehicles. I'm interested in the attack vector (seems there was a long running issue in OWA?) if that is unusual, the targets (if it were a deliberate targeted attack) or the perpetrators (state actors for example). The vector is interesting from an IT perspective arbitrary code execution exploits are rarer and rarer but otherwise there is no indication that this is anything other than mass vandalism. That's my #twocents anyway but I'm wrong a lot. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support (Alt Blurb III) – This event is clearly notable enough for an ITN posting. This is a GLOBAL cyberattack that affected numerous servers. (Oh, and anyone who opposes this because it started in the United States is out of their damn mind. For you folks, I suppose that anything that happens in the US is business as usual? What utter nonsense! And the US is a Superpower, mind you, so anything of great significance in the US is significant on the global stage.) This cyberattack affected numerous national governments as well – definitely a significant event. Also, the article appears to be in good shape. Alt Blurb III is clearly the best option out of them all, so I say that we should go with that one. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comprehensive article. Seemed to rely a lot on his own autobiography, but everything checks out compared to the AP and Washington Post obituaries I've added as citations. Uses x (talk) 04:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The blurry, 40-year-old pic is an insult to the memory of Roger Mudd, a widely known TV personality. It should be delisted forthwith and replaced with something presentable. – Sca (talk) 15:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Oppose We'll post the Olympics if and when they actually happen - announcements about spectators are not ITN-worthy.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose That they are still planned means we'll still post the event, and this is a minor story relative to that. --Masem (t) 14:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now as the decision hasn't been finalized and/or announced. I might be open to posting it at that point, given how stale the other items on ITN are at the moment. -- Calidum15:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if the event had been cancelled it would have been newsworthy, but a country having its borders closed during a pandemic is not ITN-worthy. Joseph2302 (talk)16:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Doesn't it know that decision regarding foreign spectators will be happen on next week? I don't believe any speculation regarding event before the official announcement by the committee. In addition, all Olympics should be regarded in Ongoing section rather than blurb when the Olympic helds. 36.77.94.238 (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support once official. It is unprecedented that an Olympics is held without foreign spectators, and the Olympics are the world's largest sporting event. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this is too soon. I'd consider it once this is official, but "expected to hold a remote meeting ... possibly next week to make a formal decision" is too tenuous to post. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is probably tedious, but I'd consider people watching on TV to be 'spectators' too so the phrasing should be changed. Otherwise, not notable enough for a blurb. Uses x (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Saw the obit on NYT, checked the article and it looked good, and saw it hadn't been nominated here. I was going to nominate, but I decided to check the history first and see that the reason that it looked alright was because Template:U had been putting in the work on it. SpencerT•C03:56, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty good quality article, plus Cormier was a pretty notable player, particularly for the Phillies, during his MLB career. GoPhightins!10:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I wasn't quite done, but thank you for nominating already. This articles had more about his relatives than him (especially his son who may have written that), and only two composers, both German, instead of at least one Russian. Poor. It's better, but he still deserves moar. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I think while more would be great, it's presentable now. One of the two German composers was the wrong one. Really sad ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Almooosttt..... corrected some spelling errors, now the Quote from the FAZ needs to be quoted in its original state (=German I guess) - then: Support. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:29, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article is way too short right now. Also, I'm getting a little tired of every mass casualty event getting posted to ITN. Mlb96 (talk) 06:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose due to the article being far too short. However, it's notable enough for ITN; if the article is greatly expanded it should be posted. Jim Michael (talk) 10:31, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Article is short, but covers the bases and is well referenced. Could still use some expansion, however. --Jayron3211:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Limited depth of coverage at present. 2 of the paragraphs have just 3 sentences, and the third paragraph has 4. SpencerT•C20:27, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. High death toll, article is basic but meets our minimum requirements. Surprisingly little coverage in the mainstream media but that's probably their bias. Modest Geniustalk12:10, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The lack of media coverage isn't surprising; it happened in a little-known country in C Africa. Most of the media are biased, but we shouldn't be. Jim Michael (talk) 16:18, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with the previous two commenters that it needs some expansion and quite a bit more sourcing; the French version of the article should be a good basis for that. I also note (as it's not obvious in the article) that he made his billions the old-fashioned way; he inherited them. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:08, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose almost all readers won't understand what this is, and it's not covered in mainstream media. Also, the article would need significant updates to explain why it doesn't exist. Joseph2302 (talk)16:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can't find major news sources giving this significant time or column space. Does not appear to be well covered. --Jayron3218:59, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now more refs needed in "Michigan Attorney General", no references in "Term Limits" and "Later Career" sections, ping if fixed then I could support JW 1961Talk22:38, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are multiple paragraphs without citations. Also I don't think a state official is blurb-worthy. P-K3 (talk) 22:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are citations for every paragraph. I expect that the NY Times will carry his obituary, which should reinforce it. I recognize we are in 'fly over country,' but it does not diminish his contribution, which I will continue to expand upon. His record is worthwhile and merits a blurb... IMO 7&6=thirteen (☎)01:05, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be the first person in line to call out anti-Midwest bias where I see it... but the fact is, nothing about this person merits a blurb. Per WP:ITNRD, Template:Tq. Kelley was neither a world leader nor transformative. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 03:13, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb, support RD No sub-national political official is significant enough to post as a blurb death, barring significance that comes from outside of their political office. It appears that everything is now cited, so this is perfectly fine for RD. NorthernFalcon (talk) 02:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb this isn't even close to the standard for blurbs; most US governors and senators don't get blurbs, a row officer (even one who served for 30 years) certainly will not have a death blurb due to their political career. Weak Oppose RD for now as well - I've cleared up two obvious mistakes in the article but there's still some peacock language in there. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:power~enwiki You may not like the 'peacock language' but all of the sources and their notable contributors use it. It is a Verifiable fact; not something I made up. On an ad hoc basis, the Alt blurb would make the posting understandable and interesting. 7&6=thirteen (☎)19:11, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't think you understand what "blurb" means. Blurbs are the news items posted on In the News as shown on the main page (current example: Template:Tq). Recent deaths are the section under that, and only the name is mentioned – no additional text. On rare occasions where an individual is notable enough that their death is itself a news event, they can have a line on their death posted in the news section, but the vast majority are just listed as Recent Deaths. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 00:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You must be new here; "RD" stands for "Recent Deaths" and not "Redirect" on this page. As you seem to agree that it's not a suitable candidate for a blurb, I've removed it from the header. And I said that there's "peacock language" (Template:Tq - which is only really true about the state of Michigan), which is about the state of the article. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral on RD - re the above comment if you're going to propose a blurb for an obscure person (I mean, is he really Thatcher/Mandela ballpark when it comes to being transformative?) then don't complain if people oppose (or indeed support) that blurb request. Anyway, looking at the quality I think it's almost OK. My main reservation is that for a 38-year career as attorney general, that section is extremely light on anything he achieved. The stuff about "consumer protection and environmental protection", and the tobacco thing are maybe enough for me not to oppose, but I really think a few more achievements from his time in office should be added for this to be considered a properly representative article. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 13:08, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've rewritten the whole article. IMO, I've addressed the problems noted. He was transformative and noteable. I do think he merits a blurb (see Alternate blurb), but I also know he merits a redirect. 7&6=thirteen (☎)16:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support for RD only. Mostly appears to be sourced now, though I'm not a big fan of the bullet-pointed "achievements" or what appears to be some overly flowery language ("He successfully became a beacon to the state, and an advisor, inspiration and highly-valued mentor", "He was a consistent and effective opponent of highway advertising billboards", "Famously, he fought..."). That sort of thing is fine when attributed, but these are in Wikipedia's voice. No blurb obviously, far too obscure for that. Black Kite (talk)19:20, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All of the quoted material is in/from the sources. Much of it is directly quoted in the footnotes. There was a demand for a list of achievements. It was done to satisfy the criticism. 7&6=thirteen (☎)19:36, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, but you need to attribute it. We don't say "X was a brilliant person" in Wikipedia's voice, we say "The Daily Paper described X as "a brilliant person"". Black Kite (talk)00:17, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was all attributed to persons, not just generic 'newspaper' and extensively quoted in the notes section, all of which is sourced It would help if you read that. But I've said all there is to say. It is being covered nationally.
Then site the source: "According to the Michigan State University College of Law, Kelley was named by all 50 state attorneys general in 2018 who most furthered the cause of justice..." or however that needs to be worded. The claim "Kelley was named by all 50 state attorneys general..." alone without some pointer to where and when they stated that or who compiled that is a violation of BLP/NPOV, but can be attributed in-line to fix it. --Masem (t) 17:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly appreciate the time and effort put into this article in recent days and while it might technically be well-sourced enough to post to RD, I also echo the concerns of Template:U and Template:U about the tone and structure of the article, which seems to go against our MOS guidelines. Connormah (talk) 18:56, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've copy edited it. Someone once said that the definition of insanity is repeatedly doing the same acts, and expecting a different result. Die Entführung aus dem Serail. If the edits are not satisfactory, I presume some enterprising editor could contribute. But I am guessing that is a vain hope, and I am not insane. Sorry to have wasted your time. 7&6=thirteen (☎)20:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Posted to RD Not thrilled about the structure of the career section in the article (e.g. bullet points with unclear dates rather than prose), but consensus to post and meets minimum standards. SpencerT•C23:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now because the article consists of two sentences. Also, I'm skeptical of frontpage coverage of routine events (sports victories, natural disasters, prime ministerial appointments, or sadly suicide bombings). Sandstein 19:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose based purely on article length - at the moment it is a two sentence stub that isn't really ready to be posted on the main page. If the article is expanded a bit the event is probably notable enough to post. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 03:53, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless it's greatly expanded. It's the most deadly attack of the 2020s in Somalia & easily notable enough to be posted. However, it's far too short for ITN. Jim Michael (talk) 14:14, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: there is no point in nominating a three-sentence stub that contains no more information than the blurb does. Come back where there's something for us to assess. Modest Geniustalk12:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We generally do not post military craft disasters that involve military personnel include high-ranking ones, as that's usually considered part of their duty. --Masem (t) 18:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, leaning oppose I struggle to want to post this as it did gain attention internationally with AP & Reuters creating articles which are sourced in the Wiki article, but at the same time, I don't know if this qualifies for ITN. I know 2020 ROCAF UH-60M crash wasn't ITN worthy, which was a military helicopter crash that killed 7. That 2020 crash also has a reuters article sourced. (Also for editors wondering why I keep using AP/Reuters, it is because a large scale survey years ago found them to be the most trustworthy and neutral English news outlets). Elijahandskip (talk) 03:11, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose per above. Military air accidents are fairly common, even those involving multiple fatalities. Unless this has some kind of further impact (e.g. leading to a diplomatic crisis or the grounding of aircraft) I don't think this qualifies for posting. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 10:35, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Military work is dangerous and they assume risks like this when taking the job(unlike passenger aircraft). If the general who tragically perished had an article, it could be posted to RD, but that's probably the only way something about this tragedy would make it. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U I wouldn't even agree for "just a general" with an article. I would really only see it be posted if it was the top headline in a lot of RS (aka it would have to be a better story for the media than politics) or if a countries top brass had a member die (For America, like one of the 6 members of the General staff, aka the top from each branch). Elijahandskip (talk) 11:39, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant that an article about the general would be posted as an RD, not that it would merit this crash posting. 331dot (talk) 11:41, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose due to it not being notable enough for ITN. It's notable enough for an article, but there's nothing that makes it of interest to ITN. An ordinary military crash with a low death toll is nothing remarkable, unless the crash is caused deliberately, or civilians are also killed - neither of which is the case in this instance. Jim Michael (talk) 13:44, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Per previous and others. Not noticeably in the news either. (Also, pic shows German chopper, not a Turkish-owned one.) – Sca (talk) 14:05, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The caption on image says "A AS532 Cougar, similar to the helicopter that crashed"- I'm guessing we don't have an image of a Turkish one, but the German one is the same model? Joseph2302 (talk)16:45, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The same model in different national markings doesn't illustrate the article. (BTW, the AS532 is a French-made helicopter, not German.) – Sca (talk) 23:28, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not afraid, but there is some support here. I was planning on something similar to what Black Kite indicated. 331dot (talk) 23:11, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A state election is not notable enough for ITN, even if that state has 91 million people. Also, the actual election hasn't taken place yet- if we were to post the election, it would be after the election has happened, and the results announced. Although we only post for nationwide elections. Joseph2302 (talk)17:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (for now) - sources are barely reliable for the amount of Deaths (currently they are all based on statements by HR groups), there is a lot of NPOV Editing ongoing. I see the need and the good faith and I agree but we need more and better sourcing, there is a lot of political activism ongoing. Many recently registered Users adding stuff barely sourced. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:28, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Advise a revision to Support the United Nations can probably be cited as a reliable source.[3] Moreover, a massacre of this scale probably should be ITNed based on significance. Osunpokeh (talk) 16:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Reply to Advise a revision to Support; I've sorted out the remaining tags, added citations, and removed unverifiable text where needed. I believe I've made a good compromise in terms of the infobox fatalities, which there's plenty of precedence for. Uses x (talk) 02:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - certainly meets significance for ITN and the article is well referenced and updated. NPOV problems appear to be over. Uses x (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, NPOV problems seem to be over? The article is everything but not well referenced, almost all sources provided do cite third HR organizations, Page has also been requested from several Editors for Protection. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U As long as the information the HR organizations provide is correct (that's the question) they're valid sources, bias or not, as long as the bias doesn't enter the article; see WP:BIASEDSOURCES. I've added a current event template to confirm the changing information. The requests for page protection have been denied so that's moot, and I don't see enough recent vandalism for that to change. Uses x (talk) 16:27, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, Regarding the page protection: This is not wholesome correct, the first one (different than mine) had been denied, the second one (SPP) only received a bot notification of the first denial, I will bring this eventually to attention tomorrow. Regarding of WP:BIASEDSOURCES are we of the same opinion. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. First of all, the sources [35] say 38 people died on 3 March, not 50. Secondly, there is only a few lines of text about these 38 deaths in that article- most of the article text is related to the ongoing protests, which are already in the ITN Ongoing section. I don't see enough coverage and article updates to justify an ITN blurb in addition to the mention in ITN Ongoing section. Joseph2302 (talk)13:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The only way I would switch to support is if enough content about it emerges that it warrant multiple paragraphs in the general 2021 Myanmar protests article, or it becomes notable enough for an independent article that is more than just a stub. Neither of which looks remotely like happening right now. Joseph2302 (talk)13:14, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Reply to The fatality count has been updated in the article, with a number verified by the United Nations Human Rights chief. I've expanded the fatalities to list 3 people (all I could find info on), one of whom is a politician from the opposition party which is notable. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has announced sanctions specifically over the deaths (added to the article), and the deaths are fueling further protests, so the deaths themselves are notable. Uses x (talk) 04:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, Citation of your previously mentioned AP source: "...though accounts are difficult to confirm inside the country." Furthermore the number of fatalities does not bring an article automatically into ITN - significance AND article quality are essential WP:ITN. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I know, but it's prominently in the news and given the sudden (Wed.) increase in mortality the topic is timely and significant enough to remove from the obscurity of Ongoing and feature on the Main Page again. – Sca (talk) 16:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The increase in mortality overnight clearly makes this blurbable rather than leaving in ongoing. I see about 3 tagged sources needing improved reliability but that's a drop in the bucket in terms of overall sourcing quality. --Masem (t) 17:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, I do not read the main page but I am wondering why to discuss this thread here when somewhere else it is posted without obviously asking the community. So I asked for the policy who decides how and when is something posted to Twitter. CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:48, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now The English is still `non-native' in many places. The lead has "who emerged from the musical contest", for starters. The personal section should be arranged in chronological order. And so on. 73.81.124.183 (talk) 15:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
NOM. COMMENT Personal life is updated. I know he's not an American or British guy, but his page has been very close or fully ready for hours. If people can improve its grammar, please do it. Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, looks fine, was surprised how short it is. I believe OBE doesn't belong under Private life, would specify partnerships as musical, and don't think time is "leading up", but that's peanuts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Needs citations. Don't know exactly why nom removed the citations template I placed; I have added it back again and marked the text needing citations. Lettlerhello • contribs01:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's quite unfortunate that the article is very short without much verification, Wailer was a very influential person in his field. Hopefully, the article will soon be improved. User talk:reallylazy • 12:29, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Barring massive car accidents (multivehicle), we generally do not post accidents involving private vehicles. Also, we'd probably not even have an article on such an accident in the first place per NOT#NEWS (it is not the type of thing that would get investigated by a gov't board like planes, trains, or even commercial boats). --Masem (t) 00:09, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:PingJust in case your watchlist shows a different view of the encyclopedia than mine does, a great deal of editing activity on this site is wasted on mindlessly parroting today's or yesterday's headlines with little regard for the big picture. For example, I get tired of being told that people who have been notable for decades aren't actually notable simply because the mainstream media quit writing about them by the time Wikipedia came along, then they die and all of a sudden they're notable if their death resulted in a headline, leading to a turd of an article reflecting that coverage of their death but laughable when judged as a biography. Maybe the overall problem needs to be addressed instead of pooh-poohing every little example. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 02:04, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm one of the first people in line that WP has a problem with how most handle NOT#NEWS. We can keep articles up-to-date with breaking news that we know is of encyclopedic value (such major corporate mergers or a movie winning a major award) and include breaking events that we know will have long-term impacts (eg like the Jan 6 Capitol riots or a major aircraft disaster). But we have a problem that people see the minute in the news and feel the need to write about it, leading to articles that are filled with proseline and timelines and non-encyclopedic coverage of events at the end of the day. Traffic accidents involving private vehicles rarely are of encyclopedic nature because there won't be any long-tail coverage of the event. It may make the news but its not encyclopedic. --Masem (t) 02:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They crammed 27 people into a vehicle built for 8, and crashed it. This is probably the most notable vehicle crash to be nominated in a decade. Also, while CalTrans isn't releasing details, the Mexican Consulate has been contacted which means the victims were more than likely illegals. I'll forgive you for assuming bad faith on my part. Also, I'm working on adding a map, I just struggle with that template. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:38, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a tragedy, and a story I saw in the US news. However, apart from MINIMUMDEATHS argument, there's no claim of impact yet. The article is definitely a stub. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose—I'm not even sure that the article would survive AfD at this juncture. Without some lasting impact, the situation isn't that noteworthy. (It's still a tragedy though.) Imzadi 1979→01:37, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A dreadful tragedy but long term impact is highly doubtful. I concur with Imzadi1979 in questioning whether it would pass WP:EVENT. Basically it's a bad traffic accident. Sorry, those happen every day all over the world. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Given the number of passengers and the size of the vehicle, it seems likely that some, if not most, would have been children. This has obvious tie-ins with illegal immigration and child trafficking. So, not really a "routine traffic accident". There may be more to this story, and I'd ask that we leave it open for the time being. No one would describe the Essex lorry deaths being confined to accidents or vehicles.130.233.213.199 (talk) 11:40, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is important enough to post & easily important enough for an article - regardless of its location. It was a serious crime as well as an accident. Had the SUV driver survived, he'd have very likely been sent to prison for years. He squeezed 25 people (including himself) into a vehicle made for 8, in which most of the seats had been removed to cram more people in. Even if the victims were neither illegal immigrants nor working illegally, the circumstances make this an unusual crash. Jim Michael (talk) 13:09, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. It's an overloaded vehicle and some people died. If this had happened anywhere but the US it would just be dismissed as "meh, another road traffic accident because people were being stupidly negligent". The article is flimsy "an accident happened, the road was closed, someone said it was sad, people are being informed". This has practically no encyclopedic value: it wouldn't make the top 50,000 news stories of the year. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I know we desperately need blurbs to post, but this stub might not even pass WP:EVENT, let alone have enough significance to justify posting in ITN. If we had a blurb for every car crash with ~a dozen deaths, ITN would be a continual stream of bus and coach crashes from around the world. Modest Geniustalk14:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – A somewhat fading household name in the U.S., but perhaps not widely known enough elsewhere for a blurb. – Sca (talk) 18:12, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One small bone I have to pick is with the sentence Template:Tq Helped her with what? If my memory of 1998 is correct, he helped her find a job, but given the nature of that situation, we should be spelling it out more clearly. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting comment There are two unreferenced awards. One of which which was sneakily linked to a reference statement, but which was not mentioned in the reference, and another which had no reference at all at time of posting.130.233.2.122 (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping There are still some sentences that need to be sourced such as the ones under "Club career and Early years". Rest of the article seems perfectly fine. If this gets fixed I'll be changing my vote to Support. Vacant0 (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping I've had a good go at trying to find sources for Early years section, but seem to be failing there for some reason, and struggling with the language barrier, the club career, I've added a few more sources. I feel the article is good enough for ITN RD. But that's my opinion. I really have tried hard to make the article better today. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are some problems still; what JW noted and the fact that chunks of the prose are still uncited. Will also support if these issues are fixed, and maybe the lead could be expanded. Lettlerhello • contribs13:53, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ReplyTemplate:Ping, Template:Ping I've expanded the lead paragraph and added more citations, have sourced most of the honours section. Hope that helps. The article still probably needs work on, but surely it must be good enough now for ITN RD, Cheers. Govvy (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. Added a bunch of refs so awards and gaps in the coaching sections are addressed. Would like there to be more depth about his 10-year playing career at Dinamo Zagreb instead of an overall stats summary, but his coaching career seems fully fleshed out. SpencerT•C16:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. He's been sentenced to jail, but the sentence is suspended and experts don't think he'll spend any time behind bars, so it seems a bit misleading at present — Amakuru (talk) 13:56, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, I might support posting the conviction of a former head of state, especially for conduct while in office, but as Jayron ably notes below, there are other issues. 331dot (talk) 14:56, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: There are two bolded articles. One (on the trial) is insufficiently short, and the other (Sarkozy's bio itself) barely mentions the most recent developments, and has almost no coverage of the trial itself. There's nothing as yet worth posting on the main page. If either or both of these problems are fixed, I will re-assess the quality of the articles. Right now, we don't have anything worth posting. --Jayron3214:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's an oppose vote, because we should not post articles which are not up to quality. I have not ever opposed a "topic" on ITN, and I don't plan to any time in the future. Article quality and coverage by reliable sources are the only criteria I use when assessing the appropriateness for the main page. This one does not have quality articles, so I will oppose it until such time as it does have quality articles. --Jayron3214:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on the quality issues of the articles above. The trial article is far too short as standalone and feels it belongs inside one of the Sarkozy's main articles, but Sarkozy's article is woefully undersourced too. In principal, the conviction and sentencing of a former world leader - even if that sentence is likely to be commuted - is still ITN worthy material but this has a ways to go to get there. --Masem (t) 15:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – pending article improvement — Widely covered as the significant conviction of the former head of govt. of a major state on criminal charges stemming from events while he was in office. Two former associates also convicted. That Sarkozy probably won't serve actual jail time is beside the point. – Sca (talk) 16:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support on principle, oppose on quality It is extremely rare for a former G8 head of state to be sentenced to a jail term, so I believe this is significant enough for ITN. Regrettably, the trial article is not sufficient quality, and Sarkozy's article is lacking a ton of citations in the political career section. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support if blurb is revised. I will eat my chapeau if he does a single day in prison; I don’t want the casual reader to come away with the recollection that Sarko went to jail when we don’t know that. However I do find the conviction itself noteworthy regardless of what happens next and pending referencing, strongly support a blurb that just mentions the conviction. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:16, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, oppose on quality. Sarkozy's article has one short paragraph on this topic, and the stand-alone article is a stub with barely any more information. Given the reams of sources on this high-profile case and trial, there really should be more substantive content before posting. If that can be fixed, the conviction of a recent ex-President seems highly significant and worthy of posting. Modest Geniustalk14:09, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They're meant to follow UTC but many people, even admins it seems, sometimes forget and revert to putting them under local time. NixinovaTC03:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose He had an 8 year NFL playing career including 2 Pro Bowl appearances, but the prose section on his playing career has no information about that. Instead, it only covers times he was traded. Insufficient depth of coverage. SpencerT•C05:34, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ullman sourcing is complete. Joofjoof (talk) 01:19, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Posted My late !vote aside, no outstanding oppostion after two days (and another RD posted even while this was "ready").—Bagumba (talk) 12:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg)
Done thanks Muboshgu, it should be good now. Dan the Animator 22:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
