Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/October 2020
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.
October 31
edit
October 31, 2020
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Betty Dodson
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by AleatoryPonderings (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 23:33, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Plenty of CNs and Unreffed sections, incl. 'ography. Otherwise a straighforward and well-written BLP.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:31, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- I have removed some of the content that you flagged as unreferenced. Requiring citations for a bibliography strikes me as massive overkill when {{authority control}} is transcluded on this page. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 06:39, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 04:10, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Rudolf Zahradník
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): iRozhlas
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Czech chemist. I've added a little to the article but it seems in reasonably good condition - Dumelow (talk) 08:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Seems fine, well sourced enough and written well. Gex4pls (talk) 12:40, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well referenced article, suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 13:35, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article is in good shape, notable scientist. Also, tutor of Angela Merkel! Yakikaki (talk) 20:22, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Weak opposeLimited depth of coverage in his career as a chemist; unclear what it means by he "studied the relationship between theoretical and experimental characteristics" (characteristics of...?) SpencerT•C 22:14, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Spencer, I've tried to expand a little on this but my chemistry knowledge isn't up to much more - Dumelow (talk) 06:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- WO struck. Not a support, but there is consensus for this to be posted. SpencerT•C 18:40, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer, The lede requires to be trimmed down. Good amount of content from here should go into the body. Ktin (talk) 21:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer -- have taken a pass at streamlining the lede. Please have a look and reintroduce content if needed. Cheers.Ktin (talk) 22:07, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer, The lede requires to be trimmed down. Good amount of content from here should go into the body. Ktin (talk) 21:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- WO struck. Not a support, but there is consensus for this to be posted. SpencerT•C 18:40, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Spencer, I've tried to expand a little on this but my chemistry knowledge isn't up to much more - Dumelow (talk) 06:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support I find the professional coverage satisfactory. E.g. "He studied the relationship between chemical structure and biological activity as well as chemical reactivity and molecular spectroscopy" in the lede and others like it throughout. I find the coverage of his personal life a little lacking, but not so much that it stops being a BLP.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:57, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Acceptable quality. (t · c) buidhe 07:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 18:40, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Iba Der Thiam
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Senegalese historian and politician. I've updated it with his death and the rest of the article looks reasonable - Dumelow (talk) 08:31, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Small, but well referenced article.KittenKlub (talk) 10:38, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Article seems quite good. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:09, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Per above. SoloGaming (talk) 20:03, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Opening sentence states that the subject was a "writer, politician and historian", yet the article devotes 1 sentence to his work as a historian and none to his work as a writer. SpencerT•C 22:12, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Spencer:. Editing from my phone so can’t do too much at the moment but I’ve tried to add a bit more on his history work - Dumelow (talk) 22:48, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- SupportReference coverage is good. The "Select academic work" looks like it covers his publications as a historian. Joofjoof (talk) 22:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support per Joofjoof. Ҥ (talk) 23:20, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 05:01, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Arturo Lona Reyes
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Jornada
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: I've expanded it a little and think it meets the standard - Dumelow (talk) 08:18, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. I do not think this is far from being ITN-ready, but it certainly does need a cleanup first. The prose currently reads in a slightly unencyclopedic tone and does not fit well around the current section structure. There are a couple of areas where more citations might be helpful too. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Brigade Piron, I've hacked it around a bit so hopefully it makes more sense now. Let me know - Dumelow (talk) 19:19, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- That's much better. Many thanks for this, Dumelow! —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:17, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Brigade Piron, I've hacked it around a bit so hopefully it makes more sense now. Let me know - Dumelow (talk) 19:19, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: @Dumelow: Is there a citation for Lona Reyes' quote in the middle? It's unclear if it is from citation 1. Otherwise it's basically ready and give me a ping once that's worked out. SpencerT•C 22:09, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Spencer:. The quote was already there, I presumed it came from the book. I’ve found a source online and added it. Cheers - Dumelow (talk) 22:26, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 02:21, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Six Nations Championship
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: In rugby union, England wins the Six Nations Championship. (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
- Created by Steven a91 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Rugby.change (talk · give credit) and Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
- Going to need some prose on the matches and a tournament summary. Stephen 22:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose This is just regional sports and I haven't seen this at all in the newspapers. Is it really significant enough to be on the main page? Blah 22:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Blahwheel, This is a WP:ITN/R article so the significance is already established for each years event, we then judge this on the quality of the article, which as of now I would oppose per Stephens comment above JW 1961 Talk 22:45, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps it should be removed from the list. There are more important events than this that we can post..Blah 22:55, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Blahwheel, you'll need to start a discussion at WT:ITN if you want it removed. Stephen 03:32, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps it should be removed from the list. There are more important events than this that we can post..Blah 22:55, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Blahwheel, This is a WP:ITN/R article so the significance is already established for each years event, we then judge this on the quality of the article, which as of now I would oppose per Stephens comment above JW 1961 Talk 22:45, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – article is just tables/lists ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 04:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Not ready. Needs referenced prose describing the course of the tournament. See the 2016 article for an example. This seems to be a perennial problem with the Six Nations - every year since then has failed to be posted in ITN because no-one wrote a prose summary. Modest Genius talk 12:19, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose needs prose. A lot more prose. Thanks. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 19:04, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose & Maybe Stale Now Just a bunch of tables. SoloGaming (talk) 02:41, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Marius Žaliūkas
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Lithuanian footballer. I've added some missing refs, still a bit to do but it's headed the right way - Dumelow (talk) 07:55, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks good, more about his personal life would be nice as well. Gotitbro (talk) 15:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support decently referenced, suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 17:48, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support - sourced and ready. RD.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:00, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Posted – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:28, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Super Typhoon Goni
editBlurb: Typhoon Goni makes landfall in The Philippines as a super typhoon with winds of 195 miles per hour (314 km/h), killing at least 11 people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Typhoon Goni makes landfall in The Philippines as a super typhoon, killing at least 11 people.
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Destroyeraa (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Seems like very notable for ITN. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 20:26, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
WaitMaking landfall is not sufficient for posting, we'd want to know what type of damage it has done, which is expected to be known by Sunday (local time). --Masem (t) 20:35, 31 October 2020 (UTC)- Support now with confirmed significant impact on landfall. --Masem (t) 17:29, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Wait Almost certain that hundreds will die, unfortunately. At least given what Haiyan did to a populated area in 2013. Let's wait and post the impact. NoahTalk 21:06, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
WaitSupportPer aboveMade landfall only yesterday and major impacts are already being reported, as well as ten deaths confirmed. It also set the record for highest winds at landfall, which you could include in the blurb. Gex4pls (talk) 21:39, 31 October 2020 (UTC)- Comment why are we using 1-minute sustained winds in the blurb? Most reliable sources (e.g. AP, BBC, Reuters) use 10-minute winds from JMA/PAGASA. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:43, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- I believe it made the record for fastest one minute sustained winds at landfall, so that could be the reasoning Gex4pls (talk) 12:39, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Wait Per above, simply having record landfall is not ITN worthy. Gotitbro (talk) 15:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support now that the impact has been added to the blurb and article. Gotitbro (talk) 17:13, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Hurricane Noah, Masem, and Gotitbro: death toll now up to 10. Should be enough impact to post. Death toll will steadily rise throughout the day, which should be fixed by WP:ERRORS. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:48, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support posting now. What are we waiting for? 41 died and a million evacuated. We've been tripping ourselves to get this posted if this was two boats rowing on the Thames. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Howard the Duck: where's the 41 deaths coming from? NoahTalk 17:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Wait Per Above. SoloGaming (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support 170 kt landfaller and extremely catastrophic storm. Impacts are still coming out, but this is doubtless disastrous, at least comparable to Haiyan. Also, the name of the typhoon is just "Typhoon Goni" officially (the "super" moniker was attached by non-RSMCs like JTWC and PAGASA) so that may have to be fixed. JavaHurricane 01:52, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support – Destructive storm with widespread impact. Category 5 landfalls are generally posted from what I can remember. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:34, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support The typhoon had already caused significant damage. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 02:40, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support notable typhoon, among the strongest typhoons since 2013 Haiyan.--CyclonicallyDeranged (talk) 09:46, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support, notable typhoon with strong impact and a few deaths. Latest reports show 16 dead, so blurb should be changed. Also, lowercase "T" should be used in "The Philippines", since "The" is not a part of the name. Chlod (say hi!) 09:56, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment marked as ready but please don't post it with a redirect to super typhoon. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:57, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Posted — Amakuru (talk) 11:16, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment the ITN after this posting has two typhoons, this one and Molave. Is this too many typhoons? Molave was several days ago...--CyclonicallyDeranged (talk) 12:13, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Ordinarily I'd say this shouldn't matter. Each item rolls off the bottom in turn. However, since the World Series and the Typhoon are both labelled as October 27, I've used a bit of licence and flipped back to the sports event at the expense of Molave. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Better and more well-rounded ITN now.--CyclonicallyDeranged (talk) 13:50, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
- Ordinarily I'd say this shouldn't matter. Each item rolls off the bottom in turn. However, since the World Series and the Typhoon are both labelled as October 27, I've used a bit of licence and flipped back to the sports event at the expense of Molave. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 12:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Sean Connery
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Oscar winning Scottish actor Sir Sean Connery dies aged 90 (Post)
Alternative blurb: Scottish actor Sir Sean Connery dies aged 90
Alternative blurb II: Scottish actor Sean Connery dies aged 90
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Sherenk1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- Support The article is good shape already. I think that Sean Connery deserves a blurb as well ... KittenKlub (talk) 12:41, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Decent, well referenced article for RD JW 1961 Talk 12:43, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- also Support blurb in this case JW 1961 Talk 14:47, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article looks in good shape. Count me as support for a blurb too if one is proposed. P-K3 (talk) 12:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article in good shape and well referenced in general. RD for sure, not familiar enough with the industry to comment on blurb. Juxlos (talk) 12:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb or RD. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support once his filmography is restored, since I'm sure it was blanked in error in editing. rawmustard (talk) 13:15, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Disagree, I think it's fine for an actor with a prolific career to have the filmography spun off to a separate article. P-K3 (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- At the time I posted, the section had an empty filmography tag which would need to be resolved before the article could be posted to front page. Everything else appeared to have no issues. rawmustard (talk) 13:49, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, but what would go in such a filmography section? It can't include all of his films, because that would bloat the article and it's all covered in the sub-article. His most important films are already discussed in the Career section prose, so I don't think any separate Filmography is needed in the main article. — Amakuru (talk) 15:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- At the time I posted, the section had an empty filmography tag which would need to be resolved before the article could be posted to front page. Everything else appeared to have no issues. rawmustard (talk) 13:49, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per all the above. First Bobby, then Nobby, now Sean. Pretty shit week. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 13:16, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Blurb, per KittenKlub Yakikaki (talk) 13:56, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Academy Award winner and acting icon. Death reported globally. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:06, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- We'd not include mention of the award in a typical death blurb. Lots of people are Academy Award winners, that is not what makes this death blurbable. --Masem (t) 14:10, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support RD Mjroots (talk) 14:12, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support article is class B already. Blurb would be approparite given the less notable current list, maybe a picture as well. Assem Khidhr (talk) 14:16, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. --Tone 14:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Blurb.Global icon. RIP. Ktin (talk) 14:32, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb probably the most iconic/legendary/etc Scottish actor ever. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:36, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb. If anyone thinks I've applied false standards compared with others such as Kirk Douglas then holler, but for now I do think Connery is probably one of the few Thatchers/Mandelas in the acting world. Please just blurb as Sean Connery though (Alt 2). Per MOS:HONORIFIC the "Sir" isn't normally included in titles or other mentions except for the first mention in the lead. — Amakuru (talk) 14:51, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Our standard should be a Thatcher/Mandela/Connery standard, if anything. BD2412 T 14:58, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb. A Scottish legend. Alsoriano97 (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. I could name several entertainers of similar stature who have died this year and did not get a blurb, so I don't see why Connery should get one. We didn't give Chadwick Boseman a blurb despite him being half Connery's age and dying suddenly in the middle of his career. Kirk Douglas, who won three Oscars and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, didn't get a blurb. Olivia de Havilland, a two-time Oscar winner, didn't get a blurb. Regis Philbin, no blurb. Ditto for Little Richard and Helen Reddy. -- Calidum 15:18, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- If people keep on saying that people should not have blurbs because of what has happened in the past, then nothing is going to change. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- If this starts a new trend of actually posting blurbs, I'd be happy. But I doubt it. -- Calidum 15:39, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- The recent trend has been towards far fewer blurbs, which is a good thing. — Amakuru (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- If this starts a new trend of actually posting blurbs, I'd be happy. But I doubt it. -- Calidum 15:39, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- If people keep on saying that people should not have blurbs because of what has happened in the past, then nothing is going to change. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Most of those should have been blurbed, especially Boseman, and we shouldn't be bound by past mistakes. Davey2116 (talk) 21:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, it was ridiculous Douglas and Little Richard not being blurbed, and probably DeHavilland as well. I had (until 30 seconds ago) no clue who Regis Philbin was, though. Black Kite (talk) 23:38, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- I am fully in agreement... I would have supported a blurb for many of these if I had known they were nominated. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- No, absolutely not. You can make a case for Douglas, but Little Richard and DeHavilland are not even remotely of the calibre required. Blurbing is rare, and Connery is one of very few people in entertainment whose career and fame is so huge that they merit inclusion. In general you should assume only a handful of names in any given industry or profession would make the grade. — Amakuru (talk) 01:50, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- But why? -- Calidum 03:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- No, absolutely not. You can make a case for Douglas, but Little Richard and DeHavilland are not even remotely of the calibre required. Blurbing is rare, and Connery is one of very few people in entertainment whose career and fame is so huge that they merit inclusion. In general you should assume only a handful of names in any given industry or profession would make the grade. — Amakuru (talk) 01:50, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Most of those should have been blurbed, especially Boseman, and we shouldn't be bound by past mistakes. Davey2116 (talk) 21:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb I've given this a lot of thought. The one other actor who comes to mind that we posted as a blurb is Christopher Lee. Both him and Connery have highly prolific careers that stretched on well into their advanced age. It seems appropriate to post this.--WaltCip-(talk) 15:44, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Though arguably Connery formally retired in 2006 (give or take a few minor roles), whereas Lee was still working in acting up until his death. Lee's death was "surprising" (beyond his age) where this death was a matter of time. --Masem (t) 16:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb This is a no-brainer. He was a world-class actor, global icon and influence on many future generations of actors.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb How could we not post the star of such screen classics as Zardoz and Highlander? Only in death does duty end (talk) 16:55, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb A legend. RIP. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 17:32, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- I see enough support to post as a blurb. --Tone 17:35, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Tone, Thanks. Can we please bring back Cecilia Chiang on the WP:ITNRD carousel? Alternately, if there is an RD ready for publishing, we could publish that. Ktin (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb in retrospect as reliable sources such as the BBC are calling him one of the greatest actors of the 20th century. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:19, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Post-posting support blurb I can read, Trebek! Davey2116 (talk) 21:11, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Not egregious, but most of the "opposes" at wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/February_2020#(Posted_to_RD)_RD:_Kirk_Douglas apply. Doesn't have the sentimental impact of a Carrie Fisher death. Being James Bond and non-American probably pushed this over.—Bagumba (talk) 01:25, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for saying what I didn't want to say. -- Calidum 03:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb per Bagumba. I can't help but feel that we don't really have a coherent standard for recent death blurbs. -- Veggies (talk) 02:16, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support blurb Per the above. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
October 30
edit
October 30, 2020
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Nobby Stiles
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Metro)
Credits:
- Nominated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Egghead06 (talk · give credit) and PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: One of the 1966 England World Cup winning squad. Please indicat whether you support a blurb, or RD only. Mjroots (talk) 16:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality as the article is poorly referenced and outright oppose for a blurb as he was clearly not a top figure in the sport of the same stature as Puskás, Pele, Cruyff or Maradona.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose on referencing - the section on his playing career, which is what makes him notable, is entirely unreferenced. Oppose blurb - not a major figure in the game. --Bcp67 (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Nobby Stiles was one of the best English football players ever, but I don't think would be high enough on a list of the best international football players ever to merit a blurb. I suspect such a list would be limited to players on par with Pele and Maradona. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:31, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Not even close; not in the FIFA 100. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 18:15, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose based on quality of article, agree with all of the problems noted above. Oppose blurb when the article is improved because neither "the cause of death itself is a major story" nor do "the events surrounding the death merit additional explanation". RD is sufficient as nothing needs to be explained in a blurb. --Jayron32 18:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Converted to RD (non-admin closure). Consensus will not emerge to post with blurb. Changed nomination to RD alone. Conversations from below can focus on RD readiness. PS: Feel free to undo my change if there is a desire to drive to consensus. Also feel free to WP:TROUT Ktin (talk) 18:33, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Ktin: Good call, no need for a trout. Mjroots (talk) 20:08, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Oppose I know I'm piling on, but the lack of inline citations means this will need a lot of work to get ready.(And though Nobby was a beloved figure, he's not blurb material.)-- P-K3 (talk) 18:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)- Sadly Oppose RD until references are improved. RIP Nobby JW 1961 Talk 18:59, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Kiril Simeonovski, Bcp67, NorthernFalcon, Bzweebl, Jayron32, Ktin, Pawnkingthree, and Joseywales1961: I have addressed your quality concerns and the article is now sourced. If you could look over it again that'd be appreciated. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- PCN02WPS, It's reading way better, but since you pinged there have been 9 cn's added, I will look in on this again in nthe afternoon JW 1961 Talk 08:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Joseywales1961, PCN02WPS -- Hey folks. Agree, definitely getting there. I was the one who added the [citation needed] tags. Once these are filled the article should be good to go to homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 11:38, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- PCN02WPS, It's reading way better, but since you pinged there have been 9 cn's added, I will look in on this again in nthe afternoon JW 1961 Talk 08:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support for RD oppose for blurb RD blurbs should only be for people who the average reader (i.e. not a follower of the field) would know - e.g. Sean Connery. Also, can someone find a better picture? This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 00:33, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support for RD. I've fixed up the remaining cites needed, and tweaked a few things here and there, so I think this is now good to be posted. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 01:22, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Good job with the sourcing. P-K3 (talk) 11:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Stephen, Tone, Spencer, John M Wolfson, and Bagumba: apologies for the intrusion, but as it has become fashionable to ping admins these days, I'll join the party! Any chance someone could see if this is ready and post it if so? Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 12:36, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Posted – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 12:49, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Clearly RD but don't see blurb relevance per above. Gotitbro (talk) 15:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) 2020 Aegean Sea earthquake
editBlurb: An Earthquake in the Aegean Sea kills at least 8 people and injures 130 more (Post)
Alternative blurb: An Earthquake in the Aegean Sea results in at least 8 people getting killed and 130 more injured
News source(s): The Guardian, CNN, CNBC, Al Jazeera, Bloomberg, AP, BBC, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Solavirum (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Seems like very notable for ITN. 8 deaths and 130 injuries (likely to increase), plus major destruction Sincerely: SolaVirum 16:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Article looks good. In the news. Sherenk1 (talk) 16:36, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Eight deaths seems like a pretty small number. Is there precedent for posting natural disasters with so few deaths? If there is, then Support. If not, then Oppose. (And yes, I am aware that we don't make posting decisions based purely on precedent, but it would definitely inform my vote in this case.) Mlb96 (talk) 16:39, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Mlb96: Eight deaths is generally enough for large disasters, such as strong earthquakes or volcano eruptions. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 22:06, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wait – Although AP has put the toll up to 14, other RS sites say six or eight. Details seem likely to develop further. – Sca (talk) 17:24, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment death count reached 14, with 427 injuries. Most of which were reported in Turkey. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 17:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - For now, the article is good. Maybe we should wait until midnight local time and announce the number of victims at that time.--WEBDuB (talk) 18:13, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support High death toll and many details, though we should wait for an official death toll. Gex4pls (talk) 18:21, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support fixed template. Enough death toll and is headline news. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 19:15, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support An 7.0 earthquake near a big city, Izmir (the earthquake has crushed especially Bayraklı and Bornova according to Turkish Wikipedia sources - I will add it -, where consist at least 1/5 of the city per population). I think the article is deserving a location in "In the news" section.--Ahmetlii (talk) 20:02, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:11, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
(Removed) Ongoing removal: End SARS
editNominator's comments: The article's latest timeline entry is at End SARS § 22 October. There have been so substantive additions since 25 Oct, just copyedits. Per WP:ITN: Articles whose most recent update is older than the oldest blurb currently on ITN are usually not being updated frequently enough for ongoing status.
Oldest blurb is from 25 Oct (2020 Seychellois general election). —Bagumba (talk) 04:45, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support – Overplayed cause célèbre anyway. – Sca (talk) 12:37, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Remove When posted, it was an actively updated article. Seems to have fallen off. It's been over a week at this point. --Jayron32 12:59, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Support No longer in the news in the West This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 13:04, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak support probably still ongoing in Nigeria, though news coverage has died down considerably. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:26, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Support I agree with above. SoloGaming (talk) 14:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Removed. I know I voted. There's a consensus anyways, so commensurate with posting the below item, I also removed SARS. --Jayron32 15:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Ongoing: October 2020 Polish protests
editOngoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Bagumba (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Blurb was posted on 28 Oct and cycled off on the 29th. Still ongoing though per above sources. —Bagumba (talk) 03:09, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support, would nominate by myself. Still develops, new events planned for 10/30 and later --Andrei (talk) 09:46, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support, hmm... got pushed off. Still ongoing and active. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 12:03, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support That got pushed off fast. I guess it's a busy week, but this is perfect for ongoing. Gex4pls (talk) 12:08, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support – Still going on and likely to continue for some time. – Sca (talk) 12:39, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support There were 410,000 protesters recently. Albertaont (talk) 12:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Big news and still on-going. Almost textbook ITN/O material This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 13:03, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per all above. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 13:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per above. Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:34, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support We did push it off really fast, I agree with above. SoloGaming (talk) 14:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Overwhelming support, also removed SARS item above, per consensus. It was also getting a bit crowded. --Jayron32 15:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Amfilohije Radović
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press, The Washington Post, RFE/RL
Credits:
- Nominated by DragonFederal (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Cleric of the Serbian Orthodox Church. The Metropolitan Bishop of Montenegro and the Littoral from 1990 until his death. DragonFederal (talk) 08:45, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Support Article looks mostly OK This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 13:06, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support looks good to me. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 13:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- SupportJust from a quick skim, everything is sourced and whatnot. Gex4pls (talk) 14:31, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - The article looks good. A very notable person in the Balkans. --WEBDuB (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks good for RD JW 1961 Talk 20:36, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support A notable figure in the Balkans and Orthodoxy. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 22:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Bibliography still seems unsourced. Also one additional skim for sourcing might be needed. Ktin (talk) 23:08, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- I see the source now, a general one. Posting. --Tone 14:15, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Mesut Yılmaz
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Demoxica (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- Oppose On quality. Many unsourced statements and claims, even a paragraph that goes without sources. Gex4pls (talk) 14:35, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Many paragraphs uncited. I tagged the article for sourcing issues. Yoninah (talk) 17:26, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Basic referencing issues. Gotitbro (talk) 15:30, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - But ping me asap if the improvements are made.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- Stale SoloGaming (talk) 22:07, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
October 29
edit
October 29, 2020
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Sindika Dokolo
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): News24, Africanews
Credits:
- Nominated by Joofjoof (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Noel baran (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Son-in-law of Angola's previous president and husband of Africa's richest woman. Died at age 48 in a Dubai scuba/boating accident. Joofjoof (talk) 23:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support looks to be all sourced. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:01, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support on quality. A comprehensive well sourced article. BTW: His claim to fame is the art collection, but indeed it is based on a father who owned part of the economy of Zaire before Mobutu took it, and then married a woman who owns part of the economy of Angola.KittenKlub (talk) 11:07, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Looks good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 18:54, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posting. --Tone 19:05, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Alexander Vedernikov
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Music
Credits:
- Nominated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
- Created by In ictu oculi (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Russian conductor, died of COVID-19. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 13:22, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Article looks in good order. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Suitable for RD, well sourced JW 1961 Talk 20:38, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks good enough to me - Dumelow (talk) 20:49, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 22:59, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) 2020 Nice stabbing
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Three people have died in a knife attack at a church in Nice (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Sherenk1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Weak support I know these are rare in France and the situation around it, that's its being labeled as international terrorism, but at the same time, it was only 4 people involved (the 3 victims and the attacker). This is nowhere close to past attacks like the Charlie Hebdo shooting in terms of scale or rationale for the attack, hence why I only weakly support it. --Masem (t) 17:08, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. 3 people died. Big deal. This is not international news. COVID-19 killed more people in Nice that day, then this minor attack. We didn’t post Paty, so I don’t see any real reason to post this. The Image Editor (talk) 17:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose seems insignificant. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose A large loss of life, but not exactly ITN large. Gex4pls (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Strong support Important, if nothing else then simply by the virtue of being another sign of islamic terrorism overwhelming Europe. Remember, that all of this sh*tshow happened because a French politician dared to suggest that Islam was in crisis. CoronaOneLove (talk) 17:45, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose as per all the above comments. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose as per above. Also an article titled "2020 Nice stabbing" is not a good idea. How about "2020 Stabbing in Nice"? KittenKlub (talk) 17:52, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose death toll thankfully low. If a mass terrorism outbreak occurs in France, then yes. The article title is also very awkward. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Article title is fine, if we're going with our usual "<year> <place> <description>" template. I mean, it's just the same with how 2020 Peshawar school bombing is named. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Nice stabbing? What's nice about stabbing? power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Not as Nice as a truck attack, I guess? Howard the Duck (talk) 18:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Nice stabbing? What's nice about stabbing? power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose not notable enough. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Second such attack in France in short time span. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 18:29, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Then we can post the article "Attacks in France in short time span (2020)" to ITN. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – This gruesomely brutal deed of 'Islamo-fascism' is not worth Main Page promotion. – Sca (talk) 21:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Hurricane Zeta
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Hurricane Zeta makes landfall in Louisiana setting a new record for being the fifth named storm to make landfall in Louisiana in a single season. (Post)
News source(s): (National Hurricane Center), (Fox News), (CNN), (The New York Times)
Credits:
- Nominated by Elijahandskip (talk · give credit)
- Note Everything is a record if you make the criteria convoluted enough. That being said, I think the more notable thing is it is the 27th named storm, tying the record for a single year. If this were to be posted, the blurb should mention that. However however, I think a better target would be if we ever get a 28th named storm, for the actual absolute record. That would be a much more universal and well-defined record than simply "tying an old record" or "breaking the record for one U.S. state". Zeta itself is rather unremarkable excepting that it's the fifth in Louisiana in one year. --Jayron32 14:55, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose not interesting contrived "record", not particularly notable hurricane. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Pretty damaging, but we've seen bigger this year. However, I do support posting the 28th named storm, as that would be a major record broken. Gex4pls (talk) 15:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose ITN is really not a good place for superlative records like this. I know the storm is disrupting normal activities in the area, but its not as destructive as other hurricanes this seasons that made landfall, so this really isn't as much ITN appropriate. --Masem (t) 15:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose The fact that it was the 27th named storm of the 2020 AHS is not that notable when you look at the bigger picture. Firstly: The Pacific Typhoon Season each year has a rough average of about 26 named storms. Secondly, tropical cyclones are not the only weather system named in the Atlantic. For starters we have the US Weather Channel naming winter storms, we then have the UKMO, Meteo France, Met Eirrean and various other european warning centers naming significant weather systems over the Atlantic, Finally we have FU Berlin naming most areas of high and low pressure over Europe which shock horror includes the Atlantic.Jason Rees (talk) 15:38, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with you on the typhoon part, but the weather channel naming winter storms is not accepted by the NWS, and significant weather systems and lows never do as much damage as named tropical cyclones. Gex4pls (talk) 15:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment the most named storms in an Atlantic hurricane season is actually 28, as 2005 had an unnamed system. This year's still at 27. Getting to the 29th (if we do, and that's a big "if") may be worth posting, but that's a discussion for another time. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 15:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- I mean, the system is unnamed, so I don't see why it should count towards named storms. Gex4pls (talk) 15:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose, per The Rambling Man. ITN is really about events, not records, and the event here does not seem particularly significant. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not news that matters.--WaltCip-(talk) 16:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: JJ Wiliams
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by The Rambling Man (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Wales and British Lions rugby player, surprisingly weak article. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 11:56, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support short but decently referenced, OK for RD JW 1961 Talk 18:52, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support A bit stubby, yet just about every statement is sourced and well written. Gex4pls (talk) 21:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:43, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Keshubhai Patel
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian politician. I've had a bit of a tidy of the article - Dumelow (talk) 08:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Seems well sourced enough, a very important figure. Gex4pls (talk) 12:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Gave the article a quick read. Well referenced and meets hygiene requirements for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 14:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support well sourced, suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 18:56, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
October 28
edit
October 28, 2020
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
(Posted) RD: Robert Wells (Canadian politician)
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; The Chronicle Herald
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Would like to see a little more depth of coverage in legal career and/or political provincial career. Otherwise, well-referenced. SpencerT•C 22:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Spencer: done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Spencer, Stephen, and Amakuru: I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 14:24, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 15:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Leanza Cornett
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety; NBC News; The Independent
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 19:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Small, well sourced article. KittenKlub (talk) 19:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per KittenKlub JW 1961 Talk 21:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Bobby Ball
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Nominated by Comrade TruthTeller (talk · give credit)
- Updated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- Oppose Many uncited paragraphs, numerous citation-needed tags. Filmography is completely unreferenced. Yoninah (talk) 12:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
OpposeSupportEntire sections unsourced, such as the Cannon and Ball section, as well as numerous statements scattered throughout the article that remain source less or better source needed tagged.Article's been more or less cleaned up. Thanks to @PCN02WPS: for cleaning this mess up! Gex4pls (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)- Comment Yoninah and Gex4pls, I have sourced much of the prose in the article, and I will work on sourcing the filmography shortly. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 13:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - for the record, Comrade TruthTeller and I have already been given credit for this RD having been posted by an IP editor who describes himself as a "newbie" and has left some unflattering messages along with them. I am assuming the credit having been given was done in error. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:53, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- @PCN02WPS: It doesn't seem like the editor who uploaded the TV entries and sourced them to BFI was actually looking at the BFI web page. I updated all the entries and left "citation-needed" tags for the entries that do not appear on that web page. The Film section, meanwhile, is unsourced. Yoninah (talk) 17:49, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Entire filmography section is unreferenced otherwise fine. Gotitbro (talk) 15:41, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Cecilia Chiang
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Chinese-American restaurateur and chef; Well cited article. Did not require too many edits. Meets hygiene standards for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 03:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support: looks OK to me - Dumelow (talk) 06:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support: Well-referenced & updated article and a notable person. — MarkH21talk 07:17, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well-referenced and ready for the main page. Yoninah (talk) 12:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Checked and posted --Jayron32 14:51, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) 2020 Polish protests
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Constitutional court ends almost all legal abortion in Poland which causes protests across the country (Post)
Alternative blurb: Thousands of Poles protest against changes of abortion law in the country
Alternative blurb II: The outlawing of almost all abortions in Poland engenders widespread protests, including a nationwide women's strike.
Alternative blurb III: In Poland, protests break out following changes to abortion laws.
News source(s): Notes from Poland, NYT, CNN, AP, BBC, Der Spiegel (in German)
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ouro (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Boud (talk · give credit) and Natanieluz (talk · give credit)
- Oppose as of this moment. The protests are related in the article have been going on for only 3 days, are sporadic and thus far have only significantly disrupted a few roads and churches. The article is updated, in relatively good condition and the event has some level of RS coverage, but I would like to see a significant increase in both coverage and impact before Ongoing.130.233.213.199 (talk) 11:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Its been a week already, since the 22nd. It is nationwide, with a general strike announced on Wednesday - https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/cywd23g0q1mt/poland --Andrei (talk) 12:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Comment I would like to see this as a blurb first.~ Destroyeraa🌀 12:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)- Support alt3 ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment – A nationwide women's strike, with the right-wing Kaczyński-led govt. calling up the military police, shows the significant divisions in politically polarized Poland. (A blurb would be possible as the strike is current and developments seem likely.) – Sca (talk) 12:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I believe this article should be place a blurb first to have evidence the significance of the protests. If the blurb rolls down, it can be posted as ongoing. 36.76.229.22 (talk) 12:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
*Comment Instead of ongoing this should be placed in ITN. SoloGaming (talk) 13:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Corrected --Andrei (talk) 13:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Change to Support Ok this is much better, thank you. If these protests continue to happen at a large scale then sure we can put it in Ongoing, but as for now this is good. SoloGaming (talk) 14:09, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Important enough for ITN, major political decision and protests in Poland that could have ramifications on the rest of the world. Gex4pls (talk) 14:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support – Article shaping up. Prefer Alt2, offered above. – Sca (talk) 14:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. Offer up alt3 as an option. Short, concise, and neutral. --Jayron32 15:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - article looks good, important event. Alt2 sums it up best. --Ouro (blah blah) 15:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Alt3. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- PP comment – Rather shy on information. – Sca (talk) 18:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- PP comment - @John M Wolfson: I think the blurb should go on top of the other blurbs on the ITN box. It's currently at the bottom. Thanks. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- We don't order based on the nomination date. Protests began on 22nd and has been in the news for days.[2]—Bagumba (talk) 18:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- We should change our ways. – Sca (talk) 21:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Start a discussion on the talk page. See if consensus is with you. If it is, we can change our ways. --Jayron32 14:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- We should change our ways. – Sca (talk) 21:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
October 27
edit
October 27, 2020
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Don Mazankowski
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; Toronto Star / Canadian Press; National Post
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Deputy prime minister of Canada from 1986 to 1993. Bloom6132 (talk) 10:17, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Solid article, everything cited, no close paraphrasing seen. Yoninah (talk) 12:34, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support decently referenced article, suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 18:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:48, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) HS Kalisto collision
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Minesweeper HS Kallisto is cut in two in a collision with a container ship (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Hawkeye7 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose – This is nothing more than a traffic collision. No lasting significance shown. Greece–United Kingdom relations remain steadfast.--- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 06:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Any major casualties from the crash? Don't see the significance otherwise. Gotitbro (talk) 07:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- HS Kallisto certainly a hull loss. Two crew injured. Mjroots (talk) 08:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose thankfully, no one died. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 12:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – Dramatic maritime accident but only two injuries reported. – Sca (talk) 12:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose But would make a good did you know Gex4pls (talk) 13:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose The HMS Berkeley article is basically a stub. SoloGaming (talk) 13:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Certainly unusual, but a sinking of a small ship with two injuries will not have major impacts. The article is a stub, and the few news reports say little more about the event. Modest Genius talk 15:52, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment @John M Wolfson, Masem, Bagumba, Spencer, and Stephen: Sorry for the repetitiveness, suggest closure for this one based on WP:SNOW. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) 2020 World Series
editBlurb: In baseball, the Los Angeles Dodgers defeat the Tampa Bay Rays to win the World Series (MVP Corey Seager pictured). (Post)
News source(s): CBS, ESPN, CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
- Created by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Spanneraol (talk · give credit), Dmoore5556 (talk · give credit) and Eposty (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:38, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support: article quality looks good to me. Kevin Cash should be ashamed for pulling Snell. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 03:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support: Article in good shape. Best day for Los Angeles after 32 years.CoatCheck (talk) 04:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support: But add that it's their first title in 32 years. That's quite a long time. TomCat4680 (talk) 05:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Not really. There are 30 MLB teams, so ~30 years between championships is to be expected. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 06:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 06:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Typhoon Molave
editBlurb: 12 people are killed and 39 are missing after Typhoon Molave hits The Philippines and Vietnam. (Post)
News source(s): Insurance Journal
Credits:
- Nominated by Destroyeraa (talk · give credit)
- Created by Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Storm still active. Updates coming. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 21:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Large death toll already and the storm seems set to get worse. The Image Editor (talk) 22:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
WaitSupportuntil landfall in Vietnam, which is sure to cause more catastrophic damage.just made 2nd landfall in Vietnam, 2 deaths already confirmed, seems perfect for ITN Gex4pls (talk) 14:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC) Gex4pls (talk) 23:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)- Support Articles looks fine, major natural disaster in the area. Gotitbro (talk) 07:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Storm has likely killed dozens. NoahTalk 14:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted. I added an "At least to the blurb to avoid starting a sentence with a numeral, and per standard practice in reporting these things.--Jayron32 15:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) 2020 Peshawar school attack
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: At least eight people have died after an explosion during a class at a religious school in Pakistan (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Sherenk1 (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Comment I believe the death toll has been upped to 7 or 8 Gex4pls (talk) 11:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support In principle. Oppose right now on size and sources. When expanded consider this a support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BabbaQ (talk • contribs) 11:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose While it has only 50 words of prose - Stub JW 1961 Talk 12:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose It is a stub, if there is more context, could re-consider. Albertaont (talk) 12:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Only a stub. SoloGaming (talk) 18:33, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Very stubby stub. I add my vote because it's not a stub where another paragraph and a few more sources will make it post-able, it's so bare it probably shouldn't be an article. It's also been, what, 24 hours? And there doesn't appear to be any information on the bombing except that it happened? Nowhere near a state to post. Kingsif (talk) 01:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment @John M Wolfson, Spencer, Stephen, Bagumba, and Masem: suggest closure. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:52, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- I don't feel that a close is appropriate at this time, as the opposes are on quality, which can in theory be fixed within the time for consideration, and there is currently not much discussion one way or the other about significance. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
October 26
edit
October 26, 2020
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Peter Cardew
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Canadian architect. Language is a bit flowery in the career section. I'll see if I get time today to tone it down a bit - Dumelow (talk) 06:49, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support fully sourced. @Spencer: Ready? ~ Destroyeraa🌀 22:53, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted. SpencerT•C 23:01, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Stan Kesler
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Commercial Appeal
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American musician, songwriter and producer. Article needs a little TLC but probably OK - Dumelow (talk) 07:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Oppose ref 1 is dead, and I cannot easily find a replacement. Dealbreaker, due to the breadth of material it is supposed to support.130.233.213.199 (talk) 10:22, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, I found an archived version and replaced the ref - Dumelow (talk) 10:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks good now.130.233.213.199 (talk) 11:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, I found an archived version and replaced the ref - Dumelow (talk) 10:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Slight support some unsourced statements, but looks good enough. Gex4pls (talk) 14:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted --Jayron32 15:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Pedro Cervantes
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Jornada
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Mexican artist, article looks decent enough - Dumelow (talk) 07:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support All but 1 source is in Spanish, so I cannot check most things. Fixed some link rot. Assuming that the references are properly deployed, looks good. Established notability and gives a basic personal biography.130.233.213.199 (talk) 10:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Reuses 6 sources constantly and the entire opening statement is unsourced. Add some more references and this is RD worthy Gex4pls (talk) 14:34, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Gex4pls, which statement is uncited? I think six main sources is a fairly good mix for a non-major celebrity - Dumelow (talk) 17:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Mostly it was just the opener that was unsourced, but the sources 1 2 3 5 6 and 7 are used way to many times, and should be replaced with others. Gex4pls (talk) 18:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- The WP:LEAD does not need to be sourced provided everything is mentioned in the main text and sourced later on. There is no limit on the number of times a source can be used; the article has nine sources and not one parapgraph is drawn solely from one source - Dumelow (talk) 18:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, but reusing the same six sources many times makes an article look bad, and over reliance on certain sources could hinder the article. Gex4pls (talk) 23:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- The WP:LEAD does not need to be sourced provided everything is mentioned in the main text and sourced later on. There is no limit on the number of times a source can be used; the article has nine sources and not one parapgraph is drawn solely from one source - Dumelow (talk) 18:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Mostly it was just the opener that was unsourced, but the sources 1 2 3 5 6 and 7 are used way to many times, and should be replaced with others. Gex4pls (talk) 18:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Gex4pls, which statement is uncited? I think six main sources is a fairly good mix for a non-major celebrity - Dumelow (talk) 17:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks fine; article is adequately sourced.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 02:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lindy Hamilton-Temple-Blackwood, Marchioness of Dufferin and Ava
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: British patron of the arts. Article looks pretty good to me. Dumelow (talk) 07:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. There seems to be WP:OR wrt her husband: article unequivocally states that he was gay with two references, one of which says nothing on the subject; and the other calls him "basically homosexual". By virtue of his living his entire adult life in a heterosexual marriage, I would like a definitive statement to this. His relationship with the subject is definitely fourth cousin, per the article, but sources simply call him "distant cousin". I see no reason these two contentious statements could be omitted. They have only tangential relevance to the subject, but I'll leave it to someone else to do it.130.233.213.199 (talk) 10:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for commenting. I've quoted the Independent's "basically homosexual" in the article. Personally, I think both this and the distant cousin relationship are relevant to the article but happy to hear more opinions on this - Dumelow (talk) 10:14, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. The structure is a bit rambling but is well sourced. Seems adequate for RD. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - We seriously going to post the whole title up there? Are we just bumping off 2 or 3 other RDs to fit it in there for the sake of balance?--WaltCip-(talk) 16:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Most of the news reports go with "Lady Dufferin" - Dumelow (talk) 16:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Joey Moss
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; NHL; Toronto Star / Canadian Press; The Globe and Mail
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Connormah (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 04:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well-written and -referenced article, including awards and such.130.233.213.199 (talk) 09:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support plenty of references, interesting story, perfect for ITN Gex4pls (talk) 14:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Decently referenced article, suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 18:40, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 02:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by 2A00:23C5:5082:6101:67EF:803A:64B6:7102 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Egil (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sentbuddy02 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Number 2 to Saddam Hussein. Article appears in good shape with no citation tags. 2A00:23C5:5082:6101:67EF:803A:64B6:7102 (talk) 20:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Douri is subject of no less than 5 false-death announcements, and the current declaration lacks any specificity or corroboration. Guardian is simply relaying press releases from WP:INVOLVED and partisan sources. At the very least, we should make certain that RD is for subjects who are certainly dead on a certain date.130.233.213.199 (talk) 09:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wait for more major and reputable media outlets to publish on this, per above. Gex4pls (talk) 14:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment is he really dead? ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. The comments above are speculation and potentially WP:OR; what matters is that his death is attested in reliable sources not whether he is actually dead. Worst case scenario is that we end up posting it twice. The article itself seems adequate. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Stale Stephen 23:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Juan R. Torruella
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Bloomberg Law)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Dumelow (talk) 06:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support decent article, well referenced JW 1961 Talk 12:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Slight Support Pretty good, but still has some pretty bad problems. Mainly, the career as a lawyer section mainly relies on a single source. Gex4pls (talk) 18:48, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Article certainly adequate for RD. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:58, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 20:38, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Amy Coney Barrett
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court of the United States. (Post)
News source(s): NPR, CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)
Both articles updated
- Weak support we didn't post the rest of the confirmations Trump made, but this one seems extraordinary, being so close to the election. However, I'm sure this will get at least a handfull of opposes saying it's Americanism local politics.~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Support having said A (i.e. posting Brett Kavanaugh), we ought to say B. Banedon (talk) 00:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Given we pulled Kavanaugh, I'm switching to Oppose. Banedon (talk) 02:45, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose High level court nominations are not regularly posted at ITN, even if taking account of the implications here (creating a 6-3 balance just before the election). Let's not let partisan politics cloud judgement of potential US bias here. --Masem (t) 00:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Strong oppose. Outrageously US-centric. We don't post the appointments of supreme court justices (not even heads of the supreme courts) of any other countries. Not Russia, not China (a much larger country than the U.S.), not France, not Germany and not the U.K. We should treat the U.S. in the way we treat all other countries. Appointments in the U.S. should be limited to their head of state or government like it is for all other countries on the planet. The only time a Chinese appointment gets posted is when China gets a new president. While it is true that the politicization of the US supreme court is seen as troubling, the same could be said for many other countries, but we still don't post the individual appointments to the Polish supreme court either, despite the controversy over partisan attempts to politicize it. --Tataral (talk) 00:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
we still don't post the individual appointments to the Polish supreme court either
Perhaps we should. But that has no real bearing on this entry. PackMecEng (talk) 00:39, 27 October 2020 (UTC)- If there were a major development relating to the Polish supreme court as an institution it could potentially be ITN-worthy. For example, if the EU said it was illegitimate or something like that. Similarly, a major development relating to the US supreme court as an institution, for example if Congress declared it illegitimate due to Trump's politicization of it, it could potentially be ITN-worthy. But not the routine appointment of a judge. No judge appointments are regarded as ITN-worthy, the bar is usually election or appointment as head of state or government. We have, as far as I can tell, never ever posted the appointment of a judge from any other country on the entire planet. --Tataral (talk) 00:44, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment This nom is going to be highly controversial. Please be civil and on-topic, and not accuse each other of being partisan or supporting one party/side. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – We did not post Kagan or Gorsuch, and we pulled Kavanaugh. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 00:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Kagan was posted for a short time then pulled.[3] PackMecEng (talk) 03:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment This article was prevented from running (discussion) on DYK ostensibly because we cannot run US election related material on the main page with a US election approaching. What makes ITN different? I mean, won't it just get pulled? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- There's no such rule at ITN as far as I know, although I can see the logic in it. P-K3 (talk) 00:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose This is actually less significant than the Kavanagh nom, as it just makes a 5-4 conservative/liberal split into a 6-3 one. And I'm not comfortable promoting something as partisan as this so close to the election. P-K3 (talk) 01:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support and frankly, I'd be in favor of putting up other high court confirmations. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 01:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose No exceptional reason to overturn established precedent against posting SCOTUS confirmations to ITN. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 01:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak support I would say that given the extraordinary circumstances that surround her nomination, namely the first Supreme Court justice being elected with no cross-party support, and the extremely late nature of her nomination (a week prior to the national election) in national history I would vouch for its inclusion on the page. If I am incorrect in my statements please feel free to correct me and if they are irrelevant in the discussion that is acceptable as well, but I would find it important given the circumstances surrounding her nomination. --Ornithoptera (talk) 01:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per C&C This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Strong oppose – very U.S.-centric and partisan, especially just over a week before a major election. Goes against precedent that I see no reason to overturn. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: not exactly a 'routine' confirmation, but this doesn't have any irregularities other than 'Trump may try some shady stuff next week', and crystal-ing shouldn't be used to establish notability for a nom. Nixinova T C 02:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Too U.S.-centric. Basil the Bat Lord (talk) 02:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. If individual laws are enacted or struck down by legislatures or judiciaries, they can be considered on a case by case basis Bumbubookworm (talk) 03:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Routine court appointment that would not be posted if it related to any other country in the world. Chrisclear (talk) 04:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: David Braley
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News / Canadian Press; Toronto Star; The Province
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 23:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Neat little article, well referenced JW 1961 Talk 12:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Above average in quality, plenty of sources and fit for RD standards. Gex4pls (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 20:06, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Lunar water
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: NASA confirms liquid water has been spotted on the sunlit surface of the Moon. (Post)
News source(s): (Fox News) (CNN) (NASA)
Credits:
- Nominated by Elijahandskip (talk · give credit)
- Support was about to nominate this myself. Interesting and potentially helpful to humans. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 17:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Important discovery. Davey2116 (talk) 18:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. Article has orange tags for "updates needed" (because the results of several old missions are not reported) and also lots of cites missing. I'd also like to see an update and blurb which concisely describe what today's breakthrough is, because it's not the first ever water seen as far as I can gather? — Amakuru (talk) 18:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- The orange update tag was removed. A section just about the new discovery was added and is about equal in length to the other sections. Also to the point you made, it was the first water molecules (aka direct liquid water) discovered on the moon. Before today, scientists thought liquid water couldn't exist on the moon. Ice if different story...this was just about the liquid water found. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:47, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Meh I tried to actually add a meaningful update, and the discovery is more like "there is 10-20% more surface where water can get trapped, and this new stuff is not at the poles, and sometimes it melts to be a liquid". As much as I like scientific news, this is a bit on the incremental side for ITN. 2601:602:9200:1310:B1A9:7B41:8037:7B2F (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support New discovery, very mentionable. Also, @2601:602:9200:1310:B1A9:7B41:8037:7B2F, please put oppose or support, Wikipedia discourages using meh. SoloGaming (talk) 18:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose it was pretty well established that lunar water exists prior to the announcement. Banedon (talk) 00:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment What's the "sunlit surface"? Isn't the whole place sunlit? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- No. The moon has two sides, one is permanently facing the sun and is as such sunlit, the other is permanently dark. CoronaOneLove (talk) 02:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's why, seen from Earth, the moon has phases. Today's is a waxing gibbous moon. The full moon will appear on Oct. 31 – if the world lasts that long.
– Sca (talk) 13:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's why, seen from Earth, the moon has phases. Today's is a waxing gibbous moon. The full moon will appear on Oct. 31 – if the world lasts that long.
- Umm no, there is one side which is permanently facing the Earth, but that side is sometimes in sunlight (at full moon) and sometimes not (new moon). For an observer on the Moon, there would be day and night over a 28 day period as the Moon spins on its axis (plus or minus some correction due to the Earth going around the Sun). So every location is part of the "sunlit surface" at one time or another. — Amakuru (talk) 08:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Similar items previously nominated: Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/August_2018#(Closed)_Discovery_of_water_ice_on_Moon, Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/September_2009#Water_found_on_moon, Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/November_2009#Water_found_on_the_Moon. SpencerT•C 02:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Incremental step. We'd known for years, ever since the first soviet moon lander sent the data back to Earth, that there is water on the moon. This changes nothing. CoronaOneLove (talk) 02:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Not a new or major announcement, @Elijahandskip: also please link the article you nominated in the blurb and bold it. Gotitbro (talk) 04:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Btw, while this nomination might not go too far, the blurb should also include SOFIA that detected water molecules on the sunlit lunar surface. Too bad that the article was not recently created, else, there could have been a real interesting DYK. DYK ... that the SOFIA telescope that detected water molecules on the sunlit lunar surface is housed in a modified Boeing 747? Video: [5] Ktin (talk) 05:48, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose I like scientific nominations but this is not really a discovery. As noted above, the presence of water on the Moon has been known for more than 40 years.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support, as pointed out in this Nature publication this is a new result (and obviously a very significant scientific breakthrough, or else it would not merit publication in Nature) as it distinguishes molecular H2O from OH ions. In this accompanying Nature article, it is pointed out that the water resides in micro cold traps and is then present in a far wider region than large cold traps where it was already known that ice resides in. Count Iblis (talk) 12:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Count Iblis a moot point at this stage, but neither of those papers are in Nature. They're in Nature Astronomy, a different journal that happens to be owned by the same publisher (Springer Nature) so has a similar name. Modest Genius talk 13:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose It is an important discovery for establishing a colony on the moon but needs more fleshing out before it can be realized, but itself is not really that new of a discovery (water on the dark side was known, this is water on the lit side). --Masem (t) 13:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose this literally isn't news. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Chilean constitutional referendum
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: In a nationwide referendum, Chileans vote to convene an assembly to write a new constitution (Post)
News source(s): https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20201025-from-protest-to-ballot-box-chile-votes-in-referendum-for-change
Credits:
- Nominated by OrbitalBuzzsaw (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Would be news when the constitution is actually implemented, simply voting for a new constituent assembly does not seem significant enough at this point for ITN to me. Gotitbro (talk) 03:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support We do routinely post referendums per accepted practice and the mere fact that people approved the need for a new constitution is quite historical. The completion of a new constituion should take some time and can be posted separately. Brandmeistertalk 08:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support A follow up on the protests (it's pretty unusual seeing uprisings being effective) in a major power, definitely ITN worthy. Gex4pls (talk) 11:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support This can be seen as the culmination of a year of protests and chaos in Chile; the referrendum itself is frontpage news across major international news groups like the BBC. --Droodkin (talk) 11:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support First referendum in Chile during democracy and since 1989, when it saw Pinochet step down from power. Definitely newsworthy. --NoonIcarus (talk) 14:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Per NoonIcarus. SoloGaming (talk) 14:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Needs prose on the "Results" section. Howard the Duck (talk) 14:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support as a historic event with generational implications. Would be nice to get a bit more context in the article though; any other articles we can CC-BY-SA from in a pinch? AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support, although more context should be included in the blurb (2019–20 Chilean protests?). Ironically, this is probably more significant news that the future constitution's actual adoption. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Both this and the adoption of a new constitution would be worthy of ITN. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 17:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 18:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- This was tagged as "Ready" but is obviously isn't, so I removed the tag. Prose still needed on "Results" section, to explain what the results of the vote mean. Howard the Duck (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. This is basically a stub - there's barely any prose. There needs to be more than one line saying it's in response to the protests - a background section is a must.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:47, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose for now on quality - I don't question the notability at all, this is a historic event and the culmination of the protests. My only criticism is that the article has little text at the moment. As soon as this is addressed and the article is no longer a stub, consider this a support !vote. Vanilla Wizard 💙 20:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I still have no idea what a "mixed constitutional convention" is as opposed to a constitutional convention. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support in principle, oppose on quality. The article is just a massive data table, with most of the prose in the lead! There needs to be some actual encyclopaedic content for us to feature, not just tables of numbers. Modest Genius talk 17:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
October 25
edit
October 25, 2020
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Closed) RD: Diane di Prima
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by AleatoryPonderings (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs some citation work but would be great to get this on the main page. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 00:51, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) NRL Grand Final
editBlurb: In rugby league, the Melbourne Storm defeat the Penrith Panthers to win the NRL Grand Final. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, NRL
Credits:
- Nominated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
- Created by WDM10 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Maybe change the source to an Australian one, like nrl.com. WDM10 (talk) 18:47, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality. There are multiple unreferenced sections, and a section on a completely separate match which belongs elsewhere. Modest Genius talk 14:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Modest Genius: I have added a lot more citations. As for the NRLW GF, that was a curtain raiser so is still relevant to the overall article. Also, the logo states "Grand Finals" implying that match as well. Could you please take another look at the article? WDM10 (talk) 19:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) 2020 Seychellois general election
editBlurb: Wavel Ramkalawan (pictured) is elected President of Seychelles in the first peaceful transfer of power since independence in 1976. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Wavel Ramkalawan (pictured) becomes the first opposition candidate to be elected President of Seychelles since independence in 1976.
News source(s): BBC, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Joofjoof (talk · give credit)
- Created by Number 57 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Number 57 (talk · give credit) and Joofjoof (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: The election results were announced on October 25 - it was his seventh sixth presidential run. I found a higher res version of the image here, but I am not sure about the licensing. Joofjoof (talk) 08:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Comment The biography of Wavel Ramkalawan is in a pretty bad shape, so that has to be fixed first.KittenKlub (talk) 12:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC) Support. The articles are short, but sufficiently sourced. Also it's a neglected and forgotten country which has finally elected a new President after all these years. KittenKlub (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC)- Thanks KittenKlub for your help! Joofjoof (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb because I think the first blurb is somewhat misleading. There have been peaceful transfers of power within the same political party before, just not to a different political party. Mlb96 (talk) 00:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's not really a "transfer" of power if the same guys (for the most part) are in charge. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Tagged as ready. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Alt. Short but meets minimum standards. SpencerT•C 19:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Rosanna Carteri
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): connessiallopera.it
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: An international soprano during her short career, world premieres at La Scala, recordings, admirers, - listen. It was not hard to find sources for a so far mostly unreferenced article. There may be more tomorrow, but that could be too late ... Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Short career. Well referenced. Grimes2 (talk) 16:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Taut but well referenced. Gotitbro (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:48, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Thomas Oppermann
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Die Welt
Credits:
- Nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Olaf Kosinsky (talk · give credit) and Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Vice president of the German Bundestag, member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) Grimes2 (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support The article is of adequate size, and well referenced. KittenKlub (talk) 12:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks good to me This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 13:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support looks goot to me, and I'm happy I didn't have to do the work (on top of the above). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Robert E. Murray
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (The Intelligencer)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs some additional references which I am working on Dumelow (talk) 07:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- I've reffed everything that was obviously missing- Dumelow (talk) 13:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article looks fine to me. Rest in pieces, Bob, you will not be missed. 2606:A000:1120:EA9:7D09:7910:380:F969 (talk) 15:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support (Eat s***, Bob.) Davey2116 (talk) 18:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Frank Bough
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Black Kite (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Legendary British news and sports presenter. Article isn't bad but has some unsourced parts and needs a tidy up. Died on October 21, news released tonight. Black Kite (talk) 22:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Some minor referencing required otherwise generally OK. Gotitbro (talk) 03:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support As per above needs some improvement - Legendary presenter throughout the 70s and 80s until his rather eventful fall from grace which is also very notable.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 08:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose If referencing is needed, don't vote support. That means it's good now. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Seems sourced well enough, good enough for RD standards. Gex4pls (talk) 14:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose It's not quite there, I see a few unsourced statements.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Stale Stephen 22:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Lewis Hamilton
editBlurb: Lewis Hamilton breaks the record for the most race wins in Formula 1 history. (Post)
News source(s): CBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Kobalt22 (talk · give credit)
Kobalt22 (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support prominent record and article of sufficient quality. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - new record. And article looks ready.BabbaQ (talk) 20:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Nice article, suitable for ITN JW 1961 Talk 20:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per above. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 21:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Despacito. I'm sure I can find some sports records upon scorn was heaped as well (but not soccer or cricket those are "important") but not before this is expressed to the main page. We should re-nominate this every time Hamilton wins a race going forward... --LaserLegs (talk) 22:34, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Surely it's just breaking someone else's long-standing record, and if each race win is nommed here the comments will SNOW say that. Kingsif (talk) 22:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Winning some kind of YouTube contest for clicks is a little different from being the "winningest" F1 driver in history. I'll take the chance here and suggest that this story is more notable that the clickbait and go on to add we don't need to re-nominate it as the story is him becoming the best ever driver. But (appropriately) YMMV LaserLegs!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Shouldn't the list article for the achievement - the news item - be the bold link? Kingsif (talk) 22:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Major achievement breaking the great Michael Schumacher's record. P-K3 (talk) 22:51, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support long-standing record in a top-tier global sport broken and unlikely to be broken again for quite some time. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Do we at least have a different picture of him? He's becoming the Lula of sports blurbs.... --LaserLegs (talk) 00:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- I don't know, do we? Can you propose a better one? Stephen 00:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Here are a few to choose from -- commons. PS: Shared this only because asked above. I have no preference on a picture. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 00:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- The current image is fine. To whine about it seems pointed and unhelpful. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 00:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- I don't know, do we? Can you propose a better one? Stephen 00:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Do we at least have a different picture of him? He's becoming the Lula of sports blurbs.... --LaserLegs (talk) 00:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support New world record and unlikely to be beaten again - though we said that about Schumachers!Davidstewartharvey (talk) 08:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Unilkely to be unlikely, Hamilton himself can probably do it. Gotitbro (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lee Kun-hee
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by AleatoryPonderings (talk · give credit) and Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former Samsung chairperson; South Korean business executive. Article requires some work including copy-edits and references. Edits done. Ktin (talk) 01:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Conditional oppose on quality issues alone, specifically copyvio. Earwig identifies a few substantial chunks that could be reverse copyvios but they're from reputable publications so I imagine it's just regular copyvio. My suspicions were aroused when I went searching for a source for the {{cn}}–tagged statementForeign employees were brought in and local employees were shipped out as Lee tried to foster a more international attitude to doing business
and found [6], which is exactly the same. Will remove that bit for now, but quite a lot of other potential copyvio remains. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 04:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)- Have cut a fair amount of it, but I think this deserves a good looking-over by others and potentially some revdels. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 04:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- AleatoryPonderings, Thanks for the edits. Gave it a quick look here. Seems like the first one is a Wiki mirror of some form. The other ones seem reasonably alright. Ktin (talk) 08:10, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support now. May still be worth deleting some old revisions but the live version looks good from a copyvio and citation perspective now. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- AleatoryPonderings, Thanks for the edits. Gave it a quick look here. Seems like the first one is a Wiki mirror of some form. The other ones seem reasonably alright. Ktin (talk) 08:10, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Have cut a fair amount of it, but I think this deserves a good looking-over by others and potentially some revdels. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 04:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Made a few additional edits. Seems to meet hygiene requirements for homepage / RD. If there are any additional edits that need to be done including notes from above, and someone can tag them - I can have that checked. Ktin (talk) 08:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Ran Earwig's Copyvio again, the largest highlights left in the article are from the BBC and are two direct quotes in quotation marks (15%) so that should be ok JW 1961 Talk 10:45, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - per JW 1961s rationale.BabbaQ (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Tagging our newest Admin @John M Wolfson: to check on this one and promote this to homepage / RD, and in the process be the first article that they promote to WP:ITNRD in their new role. :) PS: Only if they are convinced that this is good to go. Ktin (talk) 22:51, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Congrats John M Wolfson! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:37, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- All checks out, duly posted. Thanks, everyone! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- John M Wolfson, wonderful. Thanks much and congrats again. Looking forward to your work here in your new role :) PS: When convenient, please feel free to click on 'give credit' to both AleatoryPonderings and me, I believe that will send that ITN box-thingie to users' talk page. :D Ktin (talk) 00:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support should be all sourced. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:37, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Well sourced article about someone who surprisingly isn't well known. Gotitbro (talk) 04:08, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
October 24
edit
October 24, 2020
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Prince Azim of Brunei
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (The Star)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Prince of Brunei Dumelow (talk) 08:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Although the article isn't brilliant, it is probably adequate. It would be nice to have a citation for his education. I also think "the prince's meddling with the Hollywood crowd" should be rephrased to something less colloquial. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:55, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks Brigade Piron, think I have sorted both parts you mention - Dumelow (talk) 10:06, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks good for RD, well sourced article JW 1961 Talk 13:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Article meets hygiene requirements for RD. However, reads like WP:PROSELINE. E.g. In 19xx, the subject did this. In 19xy, the subject did this. In 200x, the subject did this. Please can we make an attempt to fix this? One clean pass with pen to paper will get this article good, and ready for homepage / RD, imo. Ktin (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Rafique Ul Huq
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Daily Star)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Bangladeshi barrister Dumelow (talk) 08:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. A fairly stubby article, but probably adequate for RD. More about his professional career would be good. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support
Comment.Agree with the above comment. Should expand the article (professional career section) before we move this to homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 22:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Ktin, I've now added more detail - Dumelow (talk) 06:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Dumelow, Thanks. Can be expanded further (including social work) [7] [8], but, meets homepage / RD requirements in its current state. I am aware that the ITNRD carousel is moving quite rapidly and we might miss the window of opportunity. So, I would say, lets go with this and send this article to homepage. Ktin (talk) 06:37, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Ktin, I've now added more detail - Dumelow (talk) 06:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Joel Molina Ramírez
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Spring Tribune)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Mexican senator, died from Covid-19 Dumelow (talk) 08:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Article could use a cleanup to improve the prose and structure but is otherwise fine. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Well referenced article. Falls short of the 'Spencer test' -- Article lists all his positions, but, not much depth into what he did in each of those positions. Please can we expand on that bit? Seems like we should be able to do that before getting the article to homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 22:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Stale Stephen 22:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Israel–Sudan normalization agreement
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Israel and Sudan normalize their relations for the first time. (Post)
News source(s): NYT WaPo BBC Fox AP Reuters NBC WH Guardian NPR Bloomberg CNN
- Comment The source given is behind a paywall. Not much use. Surely there's a non-paywalled one available. In addition, the little bit of it I am allowed begins with the words "Trump announces..." Sorry, but at this stage of the Presidential election campaign, that's of no value at all. So, a better, more independent source please. HiLo48 (talk) 01:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Further comment Since I posted the above comment, the nominator has added seven more sources. So thank you. However, every single one of them place massive emphasis on the fact that this announcement came from Trump. The worst is the headline from the WaPo, saying "Trump asked Israel’s leader if ‘Sleepy Joe’ could have made Israel-Sudan deal." This is very problematic. It makes the announcement more about Trump and the US election than about the Middle East. HiLo48 (talk) 01:50, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- The same rationale was presented when Bahrein came in after UAE, and when the Abraham Accords were fully signed in front of cameras, it was rejected on ITN as "old news" and as part of political moves, even though this stuff is the basics of geopolitics, rarely allowed through by regular ITN activists outside of progressivist causes. 2601:602:9200:1310:E988:4346:3E73:1A14 (talk) 02:25, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- "The same rationale was presented when Bahrein came in after UAE..." Really? Was that announcement made by a poorly polling US Presidential candidate a week and a half out from the election? You will have to work very hard to convince me this ISN'T "part of (US) political moves". And please have a read of Wikipedia:Assume good faith before you write more negative comments about other editors. HiLo48 (talk) 02:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Your rationale implies that had he been polling better, these accords would have been signed at a later point. But since he is running out of time, ITN should take a political stance and remove political developments and pretend these developments don't happen. Last current item on ITN is 7+ days old. 2601:602:9200:1310:E988:4346:3E73:1A14 (talk) 02:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- "Your rationale implies..." You have no idea what my rationale implies apart from the words I have written. I choose them carefully. You are NOT assuming good faith on my part. You began this nomination with a pre-emptive attack on other editors. Not a good look for a new editor. I submit that the one person displaying a bias in this matter is yourself. HiLo48 (talk) 03:03, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- The last item to be added to ITN is from October 21. It is 3 or 4 days old. But in any case, ITN works only on how important any given event is. And in any case, we do not aim to remove events from the table in just one week. 45.251.33.147 (talk) 03:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC) Last edited at 03:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Your rationale implies that had he been polling better, these accords would have been signed at a later point. But since he is running out of time, ITN should take a political stance and remove political developments and pretend these developments don't happen. Last current item on ITN is 7+ days old. 2601:602:9200:1310:E988:4346:3E73:1A14 (talk) 02:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- "The same rationale was presented when Bahrein came in after UAE..." Really? Was that announcement made by a poorly polling US Presidential candidate a week and a half out from the election? You will have to work very hard to convince me this ISN'T "part of (US) political moves". And please have a read of Wikipedia:Assume good faith before you write more negative comments about other editors. HiLo48 (talk) 02:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- The same rationale was presented when Bahrein came in after UAE, and when the Abraham Accords were fully signed in front of cameras, it was rejected on ITN as "old news" and as part of political moves, even though this stuff is the basics of geopolitics, rarely allowed through by regular ITN activists outside of progressivist causes. 2601:602:9200:1310:E988:4346:3E73:1A14 (talk) 02:25, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Strong support Impressive, given that just a little over a year ago Sudan (under Omar Bashir) was one of the most rabidly anti-Semitic states in the world CoronaOneLove (talk) 02:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose We posted the UAE one, but the subsequent one with Bahrain was not posted. The precedent ought to hold This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Boiling frog with everything we dislike in our progressive ITN corner. 2601:602:9200:1310:E988:4346:3E73:1A14 (talk) 02:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is an example of a boiling frog. This just isn't that significant, as these countries haven't had any direct conflict with Israel (It's kind of like if Myanmar suddenly announced support for Taiwan. Would it be significant? Yes. Would it be important enough for ITN? No. Gex4pls (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- About as significant as the eye of newt or the toe of a frog, IMO – Sca (talk) 17:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is an example of a boiling frog. This just isn't that significant, as these countries haven't had any direct conflict with Israel (It's kind of like if Myanmar suddenly announced support for Taiwan. Would it be significant? Yes. Would it be important enough for ITN? No. Gex4pls (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Boiling frog with everything we dislike in our progressive ITN corner. 2601:602:9200:1310:E988:4346:3E73:1A14 (talk) 02:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose on only one reason - this is the third Arab country to normalize relations with Israel in the past 4 months. We can't have blurbs for each country that normalises relations at this pace. But if the KSA or Iraq does so then it will probably be blurb-worthy. 45.251.33.147 (talk) 02:59, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Slight oppose important, but we've had quite a few countries open relations with Israel as of late, If a more vocal country (Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia etc.) were to do so, would definitely get my support. Gex4pls (talk) 03:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Leaning support, given the novelty of this particular pairing. For the record, however, as I have noted before, Saudi Arabia and Israel have already tacitly been allied since at least as early as 2014; a publicity event for this longstanding arrangement would not be newsworthy. A peace accord between Israel and Iran would certainly be. BD2412 T 03:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Support while Sudan is third Arabian country that normalize relations with Israel, this is major events, as Israel seeks to have normalizing relations with Arab country that has been enemy since 1948. 36.65.38.17 (talk) 05:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose We cannot post one of these for every single Muslim country. Oman is almost certainly going to normalize relations with Israel very soon, and I wouldn't be surprised if Kuwait does as well. Unless it's Iran, I oppose posting any more of these. Also, you very blatantly have a political agenda here. Yes, I am assuming bad faith, but your rhetoric makes your bad faith readily apparent. Mlb96 (talk) 06:26, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support The agreement is no less important than the UAE agreement two months ago, because the two countries have fought military conflicts, and Israel bombed it several times because of its alliance with Iran and Hamas.--Sakiv (talk) 06:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support There were actually in war. So its a big step toward peace in region --Shrike (talk) 07:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Important news, but the possibility was already announced during the Abraham Accords. It is actually part of a broader trend and this should not be seen as a single independent event.--WEBDuB (talk) 09:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – Per Mlb96. Smacks of the political bandwagon syndrome. – Sca (talk) 12:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose There is no agreement to establish embassies, which is what "normalization" is usually being taken to mean and it is in the future, whatever it is; https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/head-of-sudans-largest-party-slams-recognizing-israel/2020/10/24/ec7735e6-15f5-11eb-a258-614acf2b906d_story.html does not bode well. We should wait for concrete developments.Selfstudier (talk) 14:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose This is neither a Trump nor Israel ticker. There is no actual conflict. Albertaont (talk) 15:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Suspiciously timed October surprise that is essentially meaningless. WaltCip-(talk) 16:03, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- That is not unmeaningless. – Sca (talk) 17:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: IMO, the removal of Sudan from the US's State Sponsors of Terrorism list (Sudan–United_States_relations#Post-al-Bashir) is arguably the bigger story here. SpencerT•C 16:46, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose we didn’t post the last two, this is no difference. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 16:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Sudan is barely a state, shares no border with Israel and is no threat to them. This is a typically cynical attempt by Trumpists to make a meal out of a nothingburger. Let me know when Syria gets the Golan Heights back or Israel returns to the pre-1967 borders. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose It's less remarkable when it's part of a streak of members of the Arab world recognizing Israel. Quite a lot of countries have done so recently, and as others have pointed out, this trend isn't ending any time soon as Oman is reportedly about to join the list. Vanilla Wizard 💙 19:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose We can't post every country that normalizes relations. P-K3 (talk) 22:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Kabul suicide bombing
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A suicide bombing outside an educational center outside Kabul, Afghanistan, kills at least 30 and injures 70. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by NoonIcarus (talk · give credit)
- Oppose sorry, but it's a stub. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose It is a stub... SoloGaming (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
October 23
edit
October 23, 2020
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
|
(Posted) RD: Jerry Jeff Walker
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Singer/songwriter. Article needs significant sourcing before posting. Masem (t) 20:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Entire biography section mostly relies on only 2 sources, and other sections need more and better sources. Gex4pls (talk) 20:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Gex4pls: entire article sourced now. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Spencer, Stephen, and Amakuru: I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:47, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
October 22
edit
October 22, 2020
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: J. Michael Lane
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by KittenKlub (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: We have a peculiar situation where the article page doesn't exist. But, surely, one would have thought he would have had a page. Let's see if we can get something going. Article page created. Article has shaped up as a nice start-class biography. Meets hygiene standards for RD. Ktin (talk) 07:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Small, well referenced article built like grease lightning. Also important in this day and age. KittenKlub (talk) 08:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Looks ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 09:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well sourced, all the ISBN's there, looks good for RD JW 1961 Talk 11:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 16:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Nice and interesting nom. Gotitbro (talk) 03:48, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Joel Daly
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune; Chicago Sun-Times; WLS-TV (ABC)
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 01:06, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Article is well sourced. The career section is in-depth. TJMSmith (talk) 02:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Suitable for RD, well sourced JW 1961 Talk 14:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 18:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Lebanon PM
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Saad Hariri becomes Prime Minister of Lebanon. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by 195.250.80.226 (talk · give credit)
- Wait It seems that he is not officially PM again yet, as he has only been appointed by parliament to try and form a new coalition. It remains to be seen whether he will succeed, and I'm not enough of an expert in Lebanese politics to know how likely that is. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Thanks for your consideration. It will happen, I just don't know when.195.250.80.226 (talk) 01:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Not confirmed as of now though probably likely. Gotitbro (talk) 03:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Ongoing: Thai protests
editOngoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Destroyeraa (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: So the Thai protests were pushed off. Still ongoing very much, as this just happened. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment – See also: AP, BBC, Reuters. – Sca (talk) 13:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article is in good shape, and I can see significant updates regarding events that occurred on 20, 21, and 22 October. Meets all of the criteria for ongoing. --Jayron32 14:22, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support I was going to do this, so apperciate the work by 🌀 to keep on top of this! Albertaont (talk) 14:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Albertaont: Thank you! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support protesters have given the prime minister until 24 Oct to step down, so figures to be in the news for at least a bit more.—Bagumba (talk) 14:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Protests aren't over, so i don't see why they shouldn't go to ongoing. Gex4pls (talk) 15:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - oingoing is correct.BabbaQ (talk) 15:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose the number of participants has been steadily declining and according to the article "The following day, Prayuth revoked the severe emergency declaration on Bangkok that was declared a week earlier, citing that the violent situation had ended". ... "situation had ended". Seems the exact opposite of ongoing to me? Unless we just want to use the box as a coatrack to complain about the Thai royal family in which case post away. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment do make a good point, depending on direction, we could do a vote on removal soon. It is clear that its more "analysis" than event at this point. Albertaont (talk) 15:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Post-posting support While not in the news as much now, the protests and their updates are still ongoing. Gotitbro (talk) 03:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Lekki massacre
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: The Nigerian army shoots at peaceful protesters, killing 12 according to Amnesty International. (Post)
News source(s): https://apnews.com/article/police-violence-police-brutality-lagos-nigeria-98ee3550fb576d561d84b372a65cc95f
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Eostrix (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Emmanuel okon269 (talk · give credit), Comatmebro (talk · give credit) and ChuksJD (talk · give credit)
- Comment This and the recently added Ongoing entry need to be dovetailed somehow. I would prefer this blurb and the removal of the Ongoing entry, because I believe our article on this subject colors the situation. But it has to be either blurb or Ongoing.130.233.213.55 (talk) 07:06, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose This is already covered by (and is just part of) the protests article, which is already in `ongoing` section. The article itself should have been a section in the main protests article as it's not distinct from that root cause. I am also leery of titling such fork article "...massacre", of course no credible international media call it a such. Not even the local ones, except in scare quotes or in opinion pieces. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- When created, it was at Lekki shooting, which is supported by sources like Nigeria Sars protests: Horror over shootings in Lagos, BBC. It was moved to massacre. Amnesty Intentional did give a double-digit death toll, so it's not without reason. It could be moved back to shooting or shootings, or we could wait to see where the media stabilizes.--Eostrix (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 10:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose new blurb. We just posted this to Ongoing, and these sorts of situations where multiple important events tied to a single topic (end SARS) is the reason we have "ongoing". There are likely to be events daily similar to this one, and instead of posting each one, we have the Ongoing link for a reason. --Jayron32 11:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – No need for Wiki to jump on the bandwagon again. – Sca (talk) 12:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - already on ongoing. Nothing more than the missile strike, which wasn't posted. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 12:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: We just put SARS in ongoing, which means that the ongoing includes everything that is related to SARS, so there is no need to add this at all. SoloGaming (talk) 12:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose SARS tickingThis post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 16:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
October 21
edit
October 21, 2020
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
|
(Closed) Pope endorses same-sex civil unions
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Pope Francis is the first Pope to publicly endorse same-sex civil unions. (Post)
News source(s): The Associated Press, The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Comment. This seems to be his personal view and not official Church policy, unless I am missing something. 331dot (talk) 17:25, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose In addition to this being a personal view , this was before he was Pope, the news coming from found footage cut from a previous work and not a Papal declaration. --Masem (t) 17:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wait Until we get an idea of what the Catholic church as a whole thinks about homosexuality. While certainly a win for LGBT, we can't be certain if the rest of the church will back this opinion Gex4pls (talk) 01:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Leaning oppose. This is actually not new, and was his position when he was a Cardinal, basically in order to preserve marriage as a heterosexual institution. The wording may seem out of step with doctrine, but the intent is the same. BD2412 T 01:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Video footage of his personal comments for a documentary. SpencerT•C 02:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – a documentary interview ≠ papal teaching. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Misleading nom, clearly not an official position. Gotitbro (talk) 03:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Frank Horvat
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian; Swissinfo
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 00:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: This is close but needs a little bit of work: still very much like WP:PROSELINE; lede mentions information that does not appear later in the article or duplicates finer details that should just appear in the body; would like to see body a little more fleshed out. SpencerT•C 16:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
Spencer, streamlined the lede. Will give the rest of the article a scrub and this should be ready soon. Ktin (talk) 21:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)- Spencer, these edits are done. Meets hygiene requirements for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 22:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. per above edits and comment. A short clip if someone wants to see [10] Ktin (talk) 22:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 02:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Viola Smith
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 22:03, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well referenced and a small, but comprehensive article. KittenKlub (talk) 06:52, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 16:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Marge Champion
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; The Guardian; The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 02:42, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Looks good. Well referenced and good structure too. I am not a fan of bullet list being used in the 'legacy and honors' section, but, then prose being written there rather than a list. Should be an easy fix. Good to go post that. PS: Nice job on the filmography! Ktin (talk) 03:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Ktin: done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:01, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready for RD JW 1961 Talk 14:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 18:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) New pair of salivary glands
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Scientists discover a new pair of salivary glands in humans. (Post)
News source(s): Radiotherapy & Oncology CNN, The Scientist, The Hindu
Credits:
- Nominated by Brandmeister (talk · give credit)
- Unsure I had read about this a few days ago. The reason I didn't think of this for ITN, the sources were giving the sense that it was just a claim from one group of researchers, and is yet to be confirmed independently, for one, and for another, there was uncertainty as to how it should be categorised (a new organ, a new part of a previously known organ, ..., ...). I would like clarification on what exactly the finding is that we would be hailing as a significant leap and what the confidence is with which we can claim it. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment is this verified? ~ Destroyeraa🌀 19:33, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- After scans the researchers reportedly dissected two cadavers, one male and one female. They all had a set. But, per CNN, "the study concentrated on a small number of patients who were mostly male and used specific rather than standard tests [...] examination of more women and healthier patients would allow for better data". Still, I don't think it would be disproven. Brandmeistertalk 20:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I don't how notable Radiotherapy & Oncology is within it's field, but I find it an odd venue for reporting new findings in anatomy. Target article has been orange tagged for expansion since 2018, which is unsuitable for a non-event article. This seems a little too close to primary sources for the Front Page.130.233.2.222 (talk) 05:59, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Apparently knowing about a new organ(?) that should be missed during radiotherapy is likely to increase the patient's quality of life significantly. Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wait Until more accurate results come out; and see how the medical community responds. Gex4pls (talk) 14:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Vijayalakshmi Ramanan
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deccan Herald Indian Express
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Created by Naushervan (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: First woman Indian Air Force officer. Article is shaping up as a start-class biography. Should be ready soon. Edits done. Article looks good and ready for homepage / RD. RIP. And if someone has some time for a clip. RIP Dr. Ramanan. Ktin (talk) 05:08, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well sourced and a interesting story. KittenKlub (talk) 08:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well sourced article, suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 11:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Per above. Gex4pls (talk) 14:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted with a 21 October date, as that appears to be when the death was publicised. Black Kite (talk) 22:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) ORISIS-Rex makes touchdown with asteroid
editBlurb: The OSIRIS-REx probe successfully makes brief touchdown and collects a sample from the asteroid Bennu. (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: First: yes, OSIRIS has been ITN twice before: at launch, and when it achieved near orbit of the asteroid. Yesterday, NASA has it manuerver to briefly land and collect a sample from the asteroid, which they confirmed actually happened today via video and on-board sensors. Technically, that's arrival at the destination per ITNR, but even if that's not the case, it is the first for mankind to collect a sample known to be from an asteroid well outside of Earth's atmosphere. Masem (t) 23:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Interesting, notable and on TV This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 00:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Should we not wait until it returns as that would be clearly more significant/relevant than just its touchdown. Its return is going to be posted and I don't see the point of posting this twice. Gotitbro (talk) 00:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- A lot of the article is in the future tense as well, clearly marking it out that the return is the important part. Gotitbro (talk) 00:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- As I pointed out, we have posted its launch and when it achieved orbit around the asteroid before. Yes, bringing back the sample will be important too, but that's probably the less unknown part at this point. --Masem (t) 02:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- A lot of the article is in the future tense as well, clearly marking it out that the return is the important part. Gotitbro (talk) 00:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Interesting and quite significant. I'd suggest the wikilink be changed to "Bennu" instead of "the asteroid Bennu". Ovinus (talk) 00:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Fixed. --Masem (t) 02:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support very interesting and in the news. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Notable even without ITN/R and very interesting; article is well-sourced. Nixinova T C 01:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. New that goes beyond any one country or culture. BD2412 T 02:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support in principle. Article is pretty impressive. I added a few missing citations, but there are a few sections that need more intext citations. TJMSmith (talk) 04:13, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - As above. Sherenk1 (talk) 11:21, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted. I don't have time at the moment to work on adding the image, and I felt the current image could use a little more time, but I have no objection to its being changed. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- I missed this one and am happy that was posted. However Masem's nomination comment is incorrect: both Hayabusa and Hayabusa2 have collected samples from asteroids before. Modest Genius talk 16:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- My bad, glad I didn't push that into the blurb. --Masem (t) 16:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Issues- I don't know what happened but there are currently 11 cn tags on the article. The sample acquisition procedure (isn't that having happened the news that's been posted?) is in the future tense, some other things too (like #Instruments). And I don't understand what the "Mission duration" parameter of the infobox is saying. I have seen articles on more high profile news held up from the main page for a lot less. Pull? Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: James Randi
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Randi Foundation NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by 174.89.48.182 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Perhaps the most notable debunker (although that wasn't the term he liked) of claims of the paranormal 174.89.48.182 (talk) 21:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment – No article linked. – Sca (talk) 22:03, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Done Article linked. Yoninah (talk) 22:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Meta-comment: The template says "do not wikilink" the article. I didn't understand why, but I complied. (A moment later.) Oh, I see, it means to only state the title and not put double square brackets around it. I didn't think of that. --174.89.48.182 (talk) 22:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Done Article linked. Yoninah (talk) 22:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. A very thorough article. BD2412 T 22:13, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
CommentSupport: I support this in principle, but I would like to wait a little bit for some reliable, secondary news sources to report on this. KConWiki (talk) 22:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)- The Randi Foundation isn't reliable enough? P-K3 (talk) 22:34, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's his official website, most news sources will probably get their info from here, unless his family gives a separate statement to the media. Gotitbro (talk) 22:35, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Right, but I wanted to wait for news articles to start coming in so that we wouldn't have people worrying about the Randi Foundation not being secondary. The Washington Post has this now, so I say let's post this as a recent death. KConWiki (talk) 00:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's his official website, most news sources will probably get their info from here, unless his family gives a separate statement to the media. Gotitbro (talk) 22:35, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good, well known in the skeptical community along with his organization CSICOP. Gotitbro (talk) 22:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks well referenced, I don't see any significant gaps. P-K3 (talk) 22:34, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article looks great. No errors that I can see. SoloGaming (talk) 00:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Notable person and good article. -Abhishikt (talk) 00:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose some places still need citations. There is a cn tag in Personal life. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Unfortunately, the number of [citation needed] tags on the article has increased. Currently at 8. If someone can fix those, this article is all set to go to homepage. Ktin (talk) 06:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Decent article, and a very significant death - father of the modern scientific skeptical movement. Guy (help! - typo?) 09:10, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support A father of modern scientific skepticism and highly important figure in the skeptical movement. JanderVK (talk) 15:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks Ready. There were two cn tags. I commented out both. Doc James has referenced and uncommented one already (good tidings!). I don't see any reason why this should be kept out of the main page any longer. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:10, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
October 20
edit
October 20, 2020
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
(Closed) RD: Lea Vergine
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Il Fatto Quotidiano
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jmanlucas (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Inter&anthro (talk · give credit) and Ser Amantio di Nicolao (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Italian art historian. COVID-19 related. Died one day after her husband, Enzo Mari. Short but well-sourced article. TJMSmith (talk) 04:45, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose At 160 words, it is technically still a stub. It needs at least one more paragraph and
*cough* publications are unsourced (as usual).KittenKlub (talk) 07:34, 22 October 2020 (UTC) - Comment – All the sources on Lea Vergine herself (as opposed to her husband Enzo Mari) are in Italian. – Sca (talk) 12:32, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Which is allowed, per WP:NONENG. P-K3 (talk) 01:28, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Realistically, I doubt the article could be much expanded. Seems adequate for RD, if not yet stale. —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Stale Stephen 22:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Derryl Cousins
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 07:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support well sourced, looks fine for RD JW 1961 Talk 13:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Interesting and well sourced throughout. Ready for RD. Yoninah (talk) 22:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Ongoing: End SARS
editOngoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, BBC, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by GreatCaesarsGhost (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: We blurbed the protests, but looks like it rolled off. Today government forces opened fire on unarmed protesters (apparently after removing cameras in the area), killing at least 7. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support In the news, definitely an ongoing situation. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support so it got pushed off. We’ll definitely still ongoing and as Muboshgu said, in the news. People were just shot at today ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Been in the news a lot lately. I also agree with Muboshgu. SoloGaming (talk) 00:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support following the standard pattern for protests, still ITN to one degree or another. Gex4pls (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support if orange tags are resolved. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 01:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Article is not currently of sufficient quality for the main page. Stephen 04:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- It was before This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's not anymore. Stephen 04:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- It was before This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Neutral Most of the article is reasonably neutral reporting the occurrences of protests. The voluntary donations section needs to be scrapped though, that definitely has poor standing to be in the article. Juxlos (talk) 06:35, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- 'Question' - the article is tagged for external links, but there is no external links section. Is this appropriate? Mjroots (talk) 10:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- It uses direct links rather than embedding the URLs in references. Stephen 10:41, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Four out of 162 references affected. I think that tag can go. Mjroots (talk) 14:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support A few minor issues with small sections and proseline writing, but those are easily overcome and I don't see any major issues that should keep it off the main page. --Jayron32 13:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Sad that it was there for such a short time, deserved longer attention (anyway it can be re-blurbed?). Gotitbro (talk) 16:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. I personally think it would be better to have a blurb on the shooting rather than go to ongoing. At the moment, the shooting itself is arguably more important than the protesters' actual cause. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree, but given the premeditation and reaction (the governor has indicated no one was killed), I'd expect more to follow. Also, the government had previously sent in thugs to attack the crowd, then complained that the protests were getting violent. One wonders where they found the inspiration for this strategy. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted. 331dot (talk) 23:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
October 19
edit
October 19, 2020
(Monday)
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Closed) RD: Enzo Mari
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Architect's Newspaper
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Updated by DhruvMehta97 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Italian furniture designer. COVID-19 related. Wife, Lea Vergine, died one day later (also COVID-19). Article is close but needs few more citations. TJMSmith (talk) 04:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Aside from sourcing concerns, the article at present has limited depth of coverage of the subject. SpencerT•C 18:33, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Consider this a neutral, well sourced, but needs a tonal shift (I don't believe a quotes section is standard wikipedia fare) Gex4pls (talk) 18:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Stale Stephen 22:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Spencer Davis
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Variety
Credits:
- Nominated by A lad insane (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ritchie333 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: From The Spencer Davis Group. Article is pitifully sourced, unfortunately. -- a lad insane (channel two) 18:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Support - I have cleaned the article up; it is a bit sparse but at least in suitable shape for the main page. For those who aren't aware, the Spencer Davis Group is more famous for launching Steve Winwood's career. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support: I was just about to nominate this until I saw this. Well-referenced, notable, and updated. — MarkH21talk 22:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Nicley cleaned up by Ritchie333, now suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 22:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Ready for the main page. Yoninah (talk) 00:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Looks good. Marking ready. Given the namesake, I am tagging Spencer for next steps. Ktin (talk) 00:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Spencer to RD. SpencerT•C 03:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Tony Lewis (musician)
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SPIN, USA Today
Credits:
- Nominated by CoatCheck (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: English singer-songwriter/musician of The Outfield. CoatCheck (talk) 18:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
*Comment a couple of cn's added, it should be fine if those are fixed and I will then add support JW 1961 Talk 19:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support as concerns have been fixed JW 1961 Talk 13:24, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
ConditionalsupportThere are some open points left.Overall the article appears to be in good order. (And luckily there are no large discographies and chart tables...) KittenKlub (talk) 19:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)- Support some tonal issues, but overall seems fine. Gex4pls (talk) 14:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support article now looks referenced. TJMSmith (talk) 04:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:56, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Hiroh Kikai
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tokyo Shimbun, Chunichi Shimbun
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Saw this nomination on the Deaths in 2020 page. I have not been able to find any news sources talking about Mr Kikai's death, and that might just be me not searching the right places. However if someone is familiar about this topic, and can give the article a read (and invest in any edits as required), it might be worth working on and getting to homepage. Ktin (talk) 05:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support, Well-developed article, GA status implicates ITN pass. Added sources from the Tokyo Shimbun and Chunichi Shimbun to nomination. Morgan695 (talk) 06:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Here's an English-language source. https://cphmag.com/hiroh-kikai-1945-2020/. Personally, I hate modern black-and-white photography (it was fine when it was more economical than color, but now it's a purely aesthetic decision), but with the English source I'll weak support. 1779Days (talk) 08:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Plenty of paragraphs that haven’t a single reference. GA is no fast track to posting, a lot can degrade an article since it’s assessment. Stephen 08:40, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose some place still need sourced. I'm honestly surprised this is a GA. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Destroyeraa, Agree. Seems like it was last assessed in 2009, and might have deteriorated in the time since then. That said, seems like the references can be fixed if someone can go in with a few [citation needed] tags. Unfortunately, I am a tad buried today. But, can take a look later in the night. Ktin (talk) 19:11, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Destroyeraa, went in and added a few references, seems like all references have been handled. Do you mind giving it a look? Cheers. Ktin (talk) 00:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
WeakSupport most of the article seems fine. A few more english language sources couldn't hurt though.but the publications and exhibitions sections could do with quite a few more sources.Gex4pls (talk) 13:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)- Oppose Numerous uncited paragraphs. Someone should send this back for a GA reassessment. Yoninah (talk) 15:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Support Some of the article is fine, but there is not really a lot of description. You could improve on it and renominate again. OptXSolo (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Went in and gave the references a shot. Seems like the article is fully referenced now. If I have missed out any, let me know and I will try filling.
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 03:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) 2020 Belarus Protests
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Gex4pls (talk · give credit)
- Support The situation has recently re-escalated and the article is up to date. Vanilla Wizard 💙 17:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose terrible article is still terrible. "Symbols" section is still orange tagged and still the subject of a low grade edit war. Protests are still a weekend outing with dwindling participation and insignificant mid-week events (like some driller complaining) elevated to undue status to fluff out the article. It had it's time in the box. Move on. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's true that the Symbols section is orange tagged, but I can't say that I understand why. I don't see the edit war you talk about anywhere in the revision history. This section was last edited on October 1 (which appears to be a minor expansion of existing content), before that last edited on September 24 (which seemed to just be the removal of a typo), and before that just a minor grammar fix on September 22. If there's an edit war going on in the article, it must be in a different section. I think it would be perfectly fine to remove that orange tag because it's very unclear why it's there. Vanilla Wizard 💙 18:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Coment – Is this supposed to be a blurb nom.? If so, where's the blurb? Not to mention sources.... Here's two [11] [12] from Sunday, but it appears not much is happening today. – Sca (talk) 18:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- No, this was supposed to be ongoing, and i do have the associated press source in my comment, but thanks for the extra sources. Sorry if I messed something up, as this is my first time nominating something. Gex4pls (talk) 18:42, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Sensationalistic. We also don't re-nominate George Floyd protests every time an African-American is shot. More NPOV would have helped nom. Albertaont (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- This is a very strange !vote. It was renominated for ongoing because the protests are ongoing and the article is up to date. This is the criteria for an item to be in ongoing. 50,000+ protesters and several hundred arrests isn't nothing. Vanilla Wizard 💙 18:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose There are many marches of similar size every year that we don't post. I don't see any notability beyond the fact that 50,000 people went out.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose The ongoing for this was just removed, this is getting tiring now, people asking for removal/addition again and again. There should be something in place to stop these noms. Gotitbro (talk) 19:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- IMHO that would be avoided if we didn't remove items from ongoing so hastily, necessitating renominations shortly after. Please comment on whether or not this nomination meets the guidelines. An item should go in ongoing if it is being continuously updated with new news. I feel like I'm replying to every comment here, which I don't intend to do, but I think it's important to remind editors that these sorts of !votes that don't mention whether or not an item meets the criteria should be avoided. Vanilla Wizard 💙 19:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Vanilla Wizard: We made a lot of concessions and kept these protests on the main page for two months — more time than for any other developing story in the last couple of years — but we had to stop somewhere as it has become clear that they won't lead to any major changes. And frankly, the story will hardly be re-posted because of a march with no immediate effect like this one.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I was under the impression that we simply follow the guidelines rather than make crystal ball predictions about what the protests will lead to. It's a currently up-to-date article about a currently in-the-news ongoing event. That's a pretty open-and-shut explanation of how it checks all the boxes that it's supposed to. Not every update needs to be notable enough for a blurb, it simply needs to be a substantial update; the criteria makes that clear. ITN/C isn't the place to discuss proposed changes to the guidelines, but if you and the rest of the oppose voters think this shouldn't be posted over non-guideline-based reasons, then Wikipedia talk:In the news would be the place to go. Vanilla Wizard 💙 21:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Vanilla Wizard: I get your point but that's not how ITN works. Notability is the principal criterion for inclusion no matter how good the updates and the key articles are. People are usually biased by quality only in cases of borderline notability and that's when we typically err on the side of inclusion. However, notice that people here also complain about article's quality, so I think you should easily get where the opposition comes from. And when the majority doesn't agree with you, so be it and move on from the discussion. Your replies to every single opposer and argumentation with rules-lawyering won't make your opinion more valuable and may only invite a new wave of opposers who initially didn't intend to vote on this nomination. That's something from my personal experience.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- The merits of inclusion/exclusion have already been discussed in a discussion that was just a few days ago, so we needn't debate that again and again. My point was that this is a WP:SNOW close considering the just concluded discussion on its removal. Gotitbro (talk) 07:48, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Seems fine by me, it appears that the general consensus is that this should not return to ongoing. Gex4pls (talk) 12:11, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) 2020 Bolivian general election
editBlurb: The Movement for Socialism under Luis Arce (pictured) wins a majority of the vote in the Bolivian general election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Luis Arce (pictured) is elected President of Bolivia in a snap general election.
Alternative blurb II: Luis Arce (pictured) of the Movement for Socialism is elected President of Bolivia in the general election.
News source(s): AFP
Credits:
- Nominated by Morgan695 (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Jeanine Añez has also conceded. Morgan695 (talk) 05:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose for now – I guess the Bolivian people still want socialism of the 21st century. Hmm... For ITN, we need a results section with at least some prose description of preliminary results. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Not at all, he's looking to lose in the second tour of voting --CoronaOneLove (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? 70.166.106.46 (talk) 00:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- I'd ignore those two previous posts. Both pretty silly. HiLo48 (talk) 01:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? 70.166.106.46 (talk) 00:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Only concludes the first round of voting, and this guy will almost certainly lose in the second round. --CoronaOneLove (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- It was a landslide. The second round is cancelled in such cases. Either of the possible conditions for victory has been met:
a candidate is declared the winner if they receive more than 50% of the vote, or over 40% of the vote and are 10 percentage points ahead of their closest rival.
Exit polls show 52% to 31%. Even if they slide below 50% on the final count that is still a more than 10% lead from the next opposition party. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 12:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)- Let's wait for official results then. If they officially call it with more than 50% of votes in favour of that guy then I 'support' posting this, otherwise I believe we should wait for the results of the second round. --CoronaOneLove (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- It was a landslide. The second round is cancelled in such cases. Either of the possible conditions for victory has been met:
Wait It seems all done but I don't truly trust the Bolivian exit polls.ETA: the Áñez "concession" means nothing since she dropped out ages ago, it's just her properly stepping down since there was no cessation of government from what I've seen. Kingsif (talk) 12:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)- Wait – for clarity, RS confirmation. – Sca (talk) 13:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support and/or Wait I'm fine with waiting a little while longer for more reporting on this, but available sources (including the incumbent interim president) already confirmed that Luis Arce won it outright with a simple majority of the vote, meaning that he will be the president and there is not going to be a second round. Vanilla Wizard 💙 17:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support
and okay with WaitThis is a clearcut victory, baseless to suggest otherwise. Although considering who won not surprising there are those who would rather "hold off" the news. Albertaont (talk) 18:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Like most countries that aren't the United States, votes aren't declared before they're counted and counting doesn't take weeks/months. Exit polls are treated as unofficial, not like accurate predictions. And since a 5 point shift - well within margin of error for some pollsters - would have taken it to a run-off, it would have been jumping the gun far too much to have posted earlier. That's why people wanted to wait while none of the candidates were conceding, and the only reason, it's disingenuous for you to insinuate otherwise. Kingsif (talk) 19:15, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wait for official results. Candido (talk) 19:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support when the official results come out This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support posting now Not sure about Bolivia, but in my country official results can come out several weeks after clear results are known and already being acted on by newly elected governments. We should not wait that long. It will no longer be news then. 22:59, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- In the Bolivian election last year, the results took less than 2 days. Sure, that didn't end well, but it's not a ballache of a system like in the US. Kingsif (talk) 01:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wait Despite the fact that Mesa conceded defeat we should wait until the official results come out. Also, this blurb is not appropriate. Bolivia is a presidential regime and not a parlamentarism one.--SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 23:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- SirEdimon - Do you have any idea how long it will take for official results to come out? I don't. Without knowing, there is really no point in waiting. HiLo48 (talk) 03:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- HiLo48 The results are expected for the end of this week. Alsoriano97 (talk) 11:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Alsoriano97 - So you say. Even if they are available then, this item will be stale by then. Delaying posting is insanity. Would this happen with a US election? HiLo48 (talk) 22:11, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- HiLo48 The results are expected for the end of this week. Alsoriano97 (talk) 11:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- SirEdimon - Do you have any idea how long it will take for official results to come out? I don't. Without knowing, there is really no point in waiting. HiLo48 (talk) 03:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good, in the news and all but confirmed. Gotitbro (talk) 13:01, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Agree with Gotitbro. OptXSolo (talk) 16:40, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Results still not returned completely, but with only real opposition conceding, Arce has it. Added alt blurb that is more accurate to the situation. Kingsif (talk) 19:15, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Ready We appear to be waiting for something whose timing we cannot predict with any certainty. This is in the news globally right now. The chances of any posting being incorrect are minuscule. Let's not wait until it's NOT in the news. HiLo48 (talk) 22:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per above. Results are out. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 06:10, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Official results isn't out yet, but it seems that reasonably reliable counts have called a single round landslide and the loser have conceded. No reason to hold. Juxlos (talk) 06:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment as of now, with 54.41% for MAS (Arce), 29.34% for CC (Mesa) and 87.96% of votes counted (according to the official website), the mathematical possibility for a second round no longer exists because even if CC gets all the remaining votes, the difference will be more than 10% and MAS will have more than 40% of votes. 193.198.162.14 (talk) 15:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Now around 20 hours this has been marked ready for... PotentPotables (talk) 18:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per Juxlos and many others. Consensus is clear. No good reason not to post this now. Jusdafax (talk) 18:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posting alt blurb – Muboshgu (talk) 20:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment It seems inconsistent that we have two election-related news items where one specifies the candidate's party while the other does not. Added a potential alt blurb. Morgan695 (talk) 22:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hold - Don't use alt blurb. This election will mark an end to the political crisis, so I assumed the crisis should be one of the main topic. Also, one major candidate still threatened not accepting the result, so I assume it should be posted after peace is back and one whole year of turmoil ends in Bolivia.[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.68.165.114 (talk) 08:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Morgan695: Would you revise the blurb to reflect the current reconciliation process in Bolivia? Thanks! --173.68.165.114 (talk) 08:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
October 18
edit
October 18, 2020
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Alan Stephenson Boyd
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: I think this should be moved to Alan S. Boyd per WP:COMMONNAME. Bloom6132 (talk) 21:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Article looks clean and meets hygiene requirements for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 05:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per above
though the awards section seems redundant, and im tempted to combine it with the above section.Gex4pls (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC) - Support Article looks fine, all paragraphs cited and image is pd. Yoninah (talk) 15:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Spencer, Stephen, and Amakuru: I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted. SpencerT•C 03:03, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
(Needs attention) Northern Cyprus presidential election
editBlurb: Ersin Tatar (pictured) is elected President of Northern Cyprus. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by GGT (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Number 57 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Northern Cyprus elections are not ITNR, but we have posted the most recent presidential and parliamentary ones, in 2015 and 2018 respectively. This is basically as high profile as these elections get, the President is the only internationally recognised representative of Turkish Cypriots, the election campaign was marked by developments that drew international reactions (including from the UN security council) and the election of the Ankara-backed right-wing candidate (in lieu of the pro-reunification incumbent opposed by Ankara) comes at a time of raised tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean, with significant short- and long-term ramifications. GGT (talk) 21:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- P.S. I had started this as a non-ITNR, regular nomination, but the template above was changed to ITNR by GreatCaesarsGhost later. --GGT (talk) 00:32, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment – Reluctant to open the door to reporting the politics of entities that are not recognized, de jure, states. That would be a dubious precedent, as there are countless regionalisms around the world. Yes, I know we posted items on Catalonia a couple years ago, but that situation was dynamic and posed broader ramifications for Europe. – Sca (talk) 21:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- This would not be opening the door, Sca, as we have precedents, having previously posted 2015 Northern Cypriot presidential election and 2018 Northern Cypriot parliamentary election (not to mention elections in Taiwan or Kosovo), and we are yet to witness a deluge of regionalist politics on ITN. It is not true that there are countless regionalisms around the world comparable to this. Per the list of states with limited recognition, there are nine other states in a similar situation. Out of these partially recognised states, Northern Cyprus is the only one, besides Taiwan, to have been classified as "free" by Freedom House. And we still judge each election based on the circumstances, this one clearly has international ramifications - I don't know of many election campaigns recently that have sparked UN Security Council statements! --GGT (talk) 21:53, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Just because it was posted earlier does not mean it 'should' be now. Taiwan is not really comparable and is not dependent on another major country (Kosovo also has wider recognition and is not substantially dependent on other states, though I would've opposed that nom). This is more akin to posting about elections in Artsakh/Nagorno Karabakh (which we haven't ever done AFAIK). I just don't see this being notable enough, there isn't a major leadership change and if anything the election only highlights Turkey's dominance over Northern Cyprus. Gotitbro (talk) 22:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Of course it doesn't, but the fact that it was posted earlier means that the precedent is already there and that we aren't setting it now. The initial argument that I was countering was that we'd be setting a precedent by posting this. This is a major change of leadership re. the longest-running diplomatic dispute in the west as well as the recent Eastern Mediterranean dispute. That Turkey has been able to reassert its dominance with the failure of the pro-reunification leader to be re-elected is newsworthy IMO. At this point, however, I will redirect users to the the Guardian article. That basically puts this into good perspective, and one can of course make differing conclusions about the significance based on that. --GGT (talk) 22:31, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Just because it was posted earlier does not mean it 'should' be now. Taiwan is not really comparable and is not dependent on another major country (Kosovo also has wider recognition and is not substantially dependent on other states, though I would've opposed that nom). This is more akin to posting about elections in Artsakh/Nagorno Karabakh (which we haven't ever done AFAIK). I just don't see this being notable enough, there isn't a major leadership change and if anything the election only highlights Turkey's dominance over Northern Cyprus. Gotitbro (talk) 22:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Not ITNR nor am I convinced by the nom of its "ramifications" per Sca's arguments out above. Gotitbro (talk) 22:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- "Not ITNR" is not a reason to oppose a nomination. 331dot (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- What I meant was this is not usual election stuff (being an unrecognized state et all and hence different from the generally accepted election results on ITN), perhaps should've worded better. Gotitbro (talk) 04:17, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- "Not ITNR" is not a reason to oppose a nomination. 331dot (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak support Turns out it was a sovereign state after all. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 22:21, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support in principle. Actually this is ITN/R, because the criteria for elections covers "all states on the List of sovereign states". That list is divided into UN member states and other states, but the Northern Cyprus is certainly on the list in the latter section, so the above Opposes are not permissible. Also, as noted we posted it before and that precedent should be followed in any case, for a story which is featured in the mainstream western press too. There are a couple of cites needed, but after that it's good to go. — Amakuru (talk) 22:27, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Northern Cyprus is not a sovereign state and is only recognized as such by the country with troops there. 331dot (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well it's on the list mentioned in the criteria, so either fight to get it removed from that, or change the rule here at ITN/R. But as of now, this is unambiguously covered, an opposes based on notability are not permitted. — Amakuru (talk) 22:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- At one point disputed states were given their own section of the page IIRC. The list states that only a single country recognizes them as a state and the TRNC is not recognized by any international body. It's not me that needs to fight, it's you, providing sources that refer to this entity as a sovereign state. 331dot (talk) 22:40, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- ITNR states "Disputed states and dependent territories should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits." That's what we are doing here. 331dot (talk) 22:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I have provided a link to the rules of ITN/R. It says in black and white that any state on the list is covered. Not only UN states, or states in the top half of the list. We defer to that list and the careful consideration that goes into it for validity,so we don't have to have pointless arguments like this one. — Amakuru (talk) 22:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- You seem to be disregarding the sentence from what you cite above. 331dot (talk) 22:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- The "disputed states" link also includes Israel and China. Should we start discussing those "on their merits" too? Presumably the purpose of that clause is to cover cases like Crimea or the Donbass, which aren't on the sovereign States list. The fact is that Northern Cyprus functions as a sovereign state in all practical ways, and satisfies the "declarative theory of statehood", which is why it's included on our list of sovereign states. Sure, it lacks recognition but its election is just as impactful for people living there as those elsewhere. So even if you're right about it not being ITN/R, it's a notable story in its own right. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 23:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- You seem to be disregarding the sentence from what you cite above. 331dot (talk) 22:56, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I have provided a link to the rules of ITN/R. It says in black and white that any state on the list is covered. Not only UN states, or states in the top half of the list. We defer to that list and the careful consideration that goes into it for validity,so we don't have to have pointless arguments like this one. — Amakuru (talk) 22:51, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well it's on the list mentioned in the criteria, so either fight to get it removed from that, or change the rule here at ITN/R. But as of now, this is unambiguously covered, an opposes based on notability are not permitted. — Amakuru (talk) 22:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Northern Cyprus is not a sovereign state and is only recognized as such by the country with troops there. 331dot (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
By that sense, Sealand and Conch Republic (if they even do have elections) elections are also ITN-worthy and ITN/R because they declare themselves a sovereign state. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- No, the determining factor would be whether they are on the said list, which they are not, but Northern Cyprus is. —GGT (talk) 23:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Israel and China are UN members and each recognized by more than one state. The TRNC is only recognized by the country that has troops there to protect it(or occupy it depending on your point of view). The disputed states listing does not say it only covers entities not on the sovereign states list. The fact remains that no one except Turkey recognizes the TRNC as a state, unless you can produce reliable sources saying otherwise. 331dot (talk) 23:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- (re: Destroyeraa) The list of entities with limited recognition (currently 10, including entities such as Northern Cyprus, Kosovo, Taiwan, Artsakh, Palestine, etc) excludes micronations and is decided through rigorous discussion, much like the List of sovereign states that Amakuru has linked to. I can assure you that you won't have to worry about us posting about the Principality of Sealand if we change the ITN/R rules to explicitly include entities at the list of states with limited recognition, or set a precedent that such entities can be included. Vanilla Wizard 💙 00:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- No, the determining factor would be whether they are on the said list, which they are not, but Northern Cyprus is. —GGT (talk) 23:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - I believe we can discuss it on its own merits and ignore the conversation about whether or not Northern Cyprus is truly sovereign enough to be ITN/R; what we know is that it is a state that de facto does exist and has limited international recognition. Whether or not this nom is ITN/R seems to be debatable, so I won't focus on that, but - as 331dot said - just because the nom may not be ITN/R doesn't automatically mean it's not notable, either. Going off of precedent, this election seems to be no less notable than the last couple of Northern Cypriot elections we posted. The article's quality appears to be fine, as it's lengthy enough and well-sourced. Vanilla Wizard 💙 23:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose A state that is recognized by only one other sets the bar far too low. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 00:59, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per Amakuru. The TRNC is listed on the list of sovereign states and qualifies under ITN/R. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 03:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose The line between a self-governing region and a separate country is blurred at best, but I think it needs to be recognized by more than just a single other country to count. And given that I don't think Northern Cyprus qualifies as a country, I also don't think its elections are notable enough for ITN. Mlb96 (talk) 03:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Reliable sources have considered it a sovereign state for decades now, but you set your own standard as to what does and doesn't qualify as a country? There's a reason why there's a harsh criteria for inclusion over at List of sovereign states, and Northern Cyprus passes it. Nice4What (talk ·contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 05:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Nice4What Please offer the reliable sources that you state consider an entity recognized by one state(with troops there) and not a member of any international body as a sovereign state. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @331dot:
Stop canvassing,realize that the TRNC does participate in international organizations, and there are plenty of results but I figure this will spiral into a conversation about every source's legitimacy rather than how obvious it is that this currently qualifies under ITN/R. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 14:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC); Edited 05:37, 20 October 2020 (UTC)- Nice4What I have not canvassed anyone to this discussion for any purpose, either on or off Wiki. 331dot (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @331dot:
- Nice4What Please offer the reliable sources that you state consider an entity recognized by one state(with troops there) and not a member of any international body as a sovereign state. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Reliable sources have considered it a sovereign state for decades now, but you set your own standard as to what does and doesn't qualify as a country? There's a reason why there's a harsh criteria for inclusion over at List of sovereign states, and Northern Cyprus passes it. Nice4What (talk ·contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 05:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Many of the comments here are general statements about the suitability of Northern Cyprus election for ITN. I don’t think that’s a valid reason for an oppose !vote, since the ITN rules clearly state that even for disputed states, each election should be considered on its own merits, which by implication allows posting elections in disputed states. It is certainly not the case that no political developments in unrecognised entities can be posted, and generalised statements miss the nuance here. We have clearly posted Northern Cyprus elections before, so any oppose !votes should be explaining why this election lacks significance on its own merits (an example is Gotitbro’s comment), and not just stating the obvious that the election took place in a disputed state. —GGT (talk) 05:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per Amakuru. This is technically an ITN/R item or the description for disputed states is ambiguous at the very least, although mentioning Israel and China as examples makes a very strong argument in support. But even if it's not, this is sufficiently newsworthy (not to mention the precedent of posting).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- There is nothing ambiguous about an entity recognized only by a country with troops there and not a member of any international body not being considered a sovereign state while Israel and the PRC, both recognized by a majority of states and members of international bodies, as sovereign states. 331dot (talk) 07:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
FFS 331dot, you have been shown to be incorrect and yet you're still arguing about troops and international bodies and other irrelevances like that. This is verging on WP:IDHT territory now. The criteria for inclusion are crystal clear, they do not mention anything about troops, they simply say to follow the List of sovereign states. Which our list considers TRNC to be. If you want to change that, then you know what to do. — Amakuru (talk) 08:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)- Withdrawn, this looks a bit too harsh on further reading, although it is still frustrating that so many people are still ignoring the rules of ITN/R based on their own opinions, that's all I'll say for now. — Amakuru (talk) 08:41, 19 October 2020 (UTC)- That's interesting because I feel the same frustration as "Disputed states and dependent territories should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits" being disregarded, as clearly an entity recognized only by the country with troops there is a disputed state, which does not apply to entities recognized by a majority of sovereign states(Israel and the PRC). 331dot (talk) 08:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @331dot: I said technically, not absolutely, and it's clear that those two bullets that you're re-iterating in the discussion above are not completely disjoint (the first should be re-worded to "All universally recognised states on the List of sovereign states" to make them disjoint but that's off-topic here). Vastly more important is that the black-and-white discussion on the ITN/R status has impact on other people's votes so that they come and oppose simply on the grounds that it's not an ITN/R item or it's a state recognised by only one other without paying attention that this state is de jure part of the European Union but de facto out of it and the election loss of the incumbent president supporting unionism to a person who supports a two-state solution is a major backstep in the process of solving the problem. The latter is not only an internal political matter but of the European Union as a whole because the division practically tailors the borders of the Schengen area.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's interesting because I feel the same frustration as "Disputed states and dependent territories should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits" being disregarded, as clearly an entity recognized only by the country with troops there is a disputed state, which does not apply to entities recognized by a majority of sovereign states(Israel and the PRC). 331dot (talk) 08:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- There is nothing ambiguous about an entity recognized only by a country with troops there and not a member of any international body not being considered a sovereign state while Israel and the PRC, both recognized by a majority of states and members of international bodies, as sovereign states. 331dot (talk) 07:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose With all respect for Turkey. Our own article cites Council of Europe "that despite the fact that it has not been recognised de iure by any other State than Turkey, the TRNC exist de facto as an independent State exercising all branches of State power on its territory". The same can be said about many unrecognized breakaway states, like Republic of Artsakh (which is also on the List of sovereign states) or Republic of Donetsk that also exist as de facto independent states exercising all branches of state power. With that in mind, this is ultimately a WP:NPOV issue and I don't recall posting Northern Cyprus before. Brandmeistertalk 08:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Brandmeister We did post their last presidential election and parlimentary election. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I think it was a mistake. Perhaps some amendment should be made to ITNR for cases like this or the Republic of Artsakh (the latter, I'm sure, will never be posted despite being currently on the List of sovereign states). Brandmeistertalk 08:56, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Brandmeister We did post their last presidential election and parlimentary election. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose If we are setting the bar as low as a country that is recognised by only one other, that is such a low bar that you are going to end up with all sorts of edge cases such as those mentioned above. Personal opinion, regardless of ITNR or previous postings. Black Kite (talk) 08:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- This really is quite frustrating. ITNR clearly states, even with disputed states: “The results of general elections in [...] Disputed states and dependent territories should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits.” Note how the discussion should be about the merits of the results of the elections, NOT the state itself. That means that elections in partially recognised states like Northern Cyprus can be featured IF the community agrees on the election’s significance, so it’s the election’s significance that we should be debating, not some fuzzy sense of whether we’re “setting the bar too low” (whatever that slippery slope argument is meant to mean). The bar is already set. That is the playbook we have had up until now, and we have already posted two of these. That is what the guideline for this says and that is what I had in mind when I was working towards the nomination and arguing for the significance in my nominating statement. If the result of this discussion is no consensus due to arguments opposing it by the virtue of the election being in Northern Cyprus, rather than arguments relating to the election’s significance per se, then I suggest we edit ITNR per this precedent so that people in the future won’t actually be misled into bothering. I for one certainly won’t bother. —GGT (talk) 11:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I raised a suggestion recently on the talk page that if ITNR qualification was in doubt, we should treat the item as not qualifying. This was rejected, with the basic logic of ITNR: we're trying to avoid those discussions. This item is unquestionably ITNR, but clearly some wish that it would not be. It is on the list of sovereign states and not on the list of disputed states. I personally hate ITNR because it mandates that we cannot discuss the (plainly questionable) merits of something because of a prior (often VERY specious) consensus. But we can't toss it out whenever it doesn't suit our purposes. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's not a disputed state? I don't think you could get one more disputed than a state which the entire international community, bar one, considers to be part of another country but currently under illegal occupation ... Black Kite (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I made no such assertion. My point is only that 1) this state is explicitly as on that qualifies under ITNR, and 2) consensus is we do not re-arbitrate ITNR consensus here. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Fully agree with GreatCaesarsGhost. The whole point of ITNR is to avoid these arguments. The "disputed states" clause at WP:ITN/R does actually cause confusion, because it links to List of states with limited recognition, which as well as Northern Cyprus also includes states which are almost universally recognised, such as China, South Korea and Israel. I think it would be useful to just remove the "disputed states" qualification altogether, because it doesn't add anything new. We are always free to discuss things on their merits anyway. And the third bullet point does not say that it supersedes the first bullet point, which says "The results of general elections in All states on the List of sovereign states". This is unambiguous, it doesn't qualify it as only the UN states, or only those with more than X% of countries recognising. Anyway, I've said my piece on this. It probably needs to be clarified with a discussion and clearer wording, once the dust settles on this one. — Amakuru (talk) 18:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I made no such assertion. My point is only that 1) this state is explicitly as on that qualifies under ITNR, and 2) consensus is we do not re-arbitrate ITNR consensus here. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – Beyond the fact that Northern Cyprus is not a widely recognized sovereign state, and is in effect occupied by the only country that does recognize it, I don't see where the election result portends a particularly significant change. – Sca (talk) 13:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Sca: The president-elect is supportive of a two-state solution and he won the election in a race with the incumbent president who has unionist ideology. So, the result is a major backstep in the peace process to resolve the dispute.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Despite the fact that Northern Cyprus isn't well recognized, a new president could affect the status of the area. Gex4pls (talk) 14:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Northern Cyprus isn't really a recognized country, so why even put it in there? OptXSolo (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I don't envy whoever ends up sifting through the comments here to determine the consensus, but I would like to respectfully ask that the oppose !voters above mention more than just the fact that Northern Cyprus has limited recognition. That alone does not mean that it's not notable. Vanilla Wizard 💙 18:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Vanilla Wizard At least some (like me) are responding to the assertion this should be an ITNR nomination, and not a regular nomination, only. I take the latter view that ITNR makes it clear that the TRNC is not a sovereign state and should be discussed on its own merits. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I appreciate that you are one of only a handful of editors to mention that not being ITN/R does not automatically mean it's not notable, though I also believe that this thread has been derailed by the debate over if it's sovereign or not, and determining the consensus would likely require the closer to manually discount several !votes based on their own judgment of whether or not they are congruent with ITN's notability guidelines. Vanilla Wizard 💙 19:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Vanilla Wizard At least some (like me) are responding to the assertion this should be an ITNR nomination, and not a regular nomination, only. I take the latter view that ITNR makes it clear that the TRNC is not a sovereign state and should be discussed on its own merits. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Personally I think it's a bit of a stretch to give this an automatic ITN/R pass, but it seems a newsworthy enough story and the article quality is fine.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:54, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, this is the main point that should be considered here really. Leaving aside the ITN/R dispute, the story has enough legs on its own merits anyway. It's in the news, the elected individual is the de facto leader of the territory in question, whatever the international legality of the situation, and it also has potential knock-on geopolitical effects in the region. It's worthy of posting on those grounds. — Amakuru (talk) 23:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Why has this been changed to ITNR? That is contentious at best and I don't see any consensus here of this being an ITNR nom, most people are considering it on its own merits and not its article quality. Gotitbro (talk) 07:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose with all respect to the Turkish Cypriots, but Northern Cyprus is a partially recognized non-UN country. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 09:57, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Marked as ready - It's ITNR, article quality is good to go.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- FALSEHOOD, n. A truth to which the facts are loosely adjusted to an imperfect conformity. – Ambrose Bierce — Sca (talk) 22:22, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- That this is ITNR is in dispute. ITNR states that "Disputed states and dependent territories should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits". An entity recognized only by one country and supported militarily by that same country is clearly a "Disputed state and dependent territory". 331dot (talk) 13:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's a sovereign state, so it qualifies. This is not the place to litigate the wording of ITN/R. That should be done on the talk page.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:36, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- It is not a sovereign state, it is clearly disputed. I am not litigating the wording of ITNR, it is very clear about this and it concerns me that this is being disregarded. 331dot (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- You are exactly litigating the wording of ITN/R. The criteria give a list of states to follow, and we're following it. There seems to be consensus that the article has sufficient quality, so agree that this is ready and hopefully this can be posted soon. Then we can consider and discuss whether the ITN/R rules are fit for purpose, or need some amendment, at our leisure. — Amakuru (talk) 13:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's almost as if whoever wrote the wording didn't realize that disputed states are included on List of sovereign states. This has to be cleared up, although the ITN talk page would be the proper place.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Certainly agree it needs sorting out. We should lay out the various alternatives and !vote on them, then amend the wording so it's watertight either way. In the mean time, this one is stuck in limbo though. Many people think it's ITN/R, while many others don't. I also think the Oppose !votes are rather weak, even disregarding the ITN/R question, as they mostly just say "NC is not a state", without offering a rationale as to why its election is therefore unimportant. But then I'm biased, of course as I support the story's promotion. How do you resolve all that? — Amakuru (talk) 15:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's almost as if whoever wrote the wording didn't realize that disputed states are included on List of sovereign states. This has to be cleared up, although the ITN talk page would be the proper place.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- You are exactly litigating the wording of ITN/R. The criteria give a list of states to follow, and we're following it. There seems to be consensus that the article has sufficient quality, so agree that this is ready and hopefully this can be posted soon. Then we can consider and discuss whether the ITN/R rules are fit for purpose, or need some amendment, at our leisure. — Amakuru (talk) 13:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- It is not a sovereign state, it is clearly disputed. I am not litigating the wording of ITNR, it is very clear about this and it concerns me that this is being disregarded. 331dot (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's a sovereign state, so it qualifies. This is not the place to litigate the wording of ITN/R. That should be done on the talk page.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:36, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per Pawnkingthree. Given the above discussion, I don't think this should be a quick "ITN/R + post", but at the same time, it shouldn't be a quick "not a sovreign state + oppose" either IMO. The article is better fleshed out than many that appear here at ITN/C; we have posted elections for this state previously; there are worthwhile geopolitical implications and these are described in the article. SpencerT•C 18:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. I do think this merits posting(just not as ITNR), as this man's election would seem to forestall the possibility of a settlement of the Cyprus issue. 331dot (talk) 09:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- This has been marked as ready for two days now. It would be nice to have a final decision before it goes stale. —GGT (talk) 11:32, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- I'm involved and cannot post. 331dot (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per reasons that explained by other editors. It's definitely significant.Ahmetlii (talk) 11:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose The ITN/R criteria are clearly spelled out, and elections in North Cyprus cannot meet them. Explicitly, "Disputed states [...] should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits.." North Cyprus is on that list, and "discussed on their own merits" means exactly NOT ITN/R. There is precious little arguments in these votes on the notability or impact of this new election as such; rather we are supposed to believe that simply-worded guidelines are somehow mistaken, or to engage in whataboutism wrt other disputed states.130.233.213.199 (talk) 12:36, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Pinging @Stephen, Muboshgu, Ritchie333, Masem, and MSGJ: - apologies for disturbing you, but as admins who have posted ITNs recently but haven't commented here, please could one of you assess this discussion and either post the story or close this thread? With recent supports I think it may have enough consensus to post on its own merits, ignoring the ITN/R issue, but obviously needs an uninvolved admin to assess. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- I did look earlier at posting this, but I honestly can't see a firm consensus at this point. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- I don't see one either. And this is not ITN/R:
Disputed states and dependent territories should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits.
– Muboshgu (talk) 16:34, 22 October 2020 (UTC)- That bullet-point seemingly contradicts an earlier one that gives an explicit list of states to use, on which TRNC is included. Anyway, water under the bridge now. I'll probably initiate a request to clarify the wording in the next couple of days, but thanks Ritchie and Muboshgu for the assessment here, even though it's not the outcome I wanted to see! Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- I don't see one either. And this is not ITN/R:
- I did look earlier at posting this, but I honestly can't see a firm consensus at this point. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the final statements. Obviously I do think that !votes that opposed this purely because the election took place in an unrecognised state should have been discounted as explained above. This comes just in time for me to be able to get this one on DYK, so I've just started a nom there. For future reference, ITNR definitely needs to be modified - I thought the election would have been assessed on its own merits and thus I argued for its significance, so people just going "oh we can't set the bar so low" has definitely been frustrating, so we might as well set the bar more definitively, or else advise against such !votes in the future. --GGT (talk) 23:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment – Stale. Suggest close. – Sca (talk) 12:53, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: James A. Johnson (businessman)
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post; The Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by KittenKlub (talk · give credit) and Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 20:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Also a well referenced and complete article, and he is major power broker. (better put it on watchlist now) KittenKlub (talk) 21:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 02:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Sid Hartman
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Star Tribune; WCCO-TV (CBS)
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 20:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support The article is well referenced and comprehensive enough. KittenKlub (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 02:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) Royal pardon for London Bridge civilian
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A royal pardon is granted to murderer Steven Gallant for his efforts in apprehending the perpetrator of the 2019 London Bridge stabbing, the first such pardon since 1996. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Kingsif (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pigsonthewing (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose Pardons are WP:MILL,
The Ministry of Justice said the Queen was advised to grant this pardon
(per the Guardian source above) means that this is the standard situation where the Queen acts on the advice of the government. power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Pardons may be common as air for Trump's friends, but even if the government told the Queen to do it, she still did, the first invocation of such (controversial) authority since 1996. Not run of the mill by any stretch of the imagination. Kingsif (talk) 07:21, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Royal prerogative of mercy links to [13], giving an example of a pardon from 2001 (well, not for MURDER), and claiming that
about six on average are granted special remission in a year
. power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:27, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Royal prerogative of mercy links to [13], giving an example of a pardon from 2001 (well, not for MURDER), and claiming that
- Yes. Oh, do you think that helps an oppose vote? Not in my eyes... Kingsif (talk) 07:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Pardons may be common as air for Trump's friends, but even if the government told the Queen to do it, she still did, the first invocation of such (controversial) authority since 1996. Not run of the mill by any stretch of the imagination. Kingsif (talk) 07:21, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. This isn't run of the mill, the first one since 1996(even if the Queen is only doing what she's told). It's also unusual for a murderer anywhere to be pardoned(in the US we would say the sentence was commuted) for actions in apprehending or stopping another murderer, or where the family of the victim does not object. 331dot (talk) 07:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Duterte of the Philippines pardoned a murderer in September [14]. Trump did in May [15]. power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:25, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- And were they a figurehead who is not supposed to intervene or actually elected to that theoretical mandate? Can you see the difference? This needs to be looked at within British judiciary context; if every nom relating to legal precedents were considered globally it is likely none would ever get posted as "not unique enough when compared to this thing that happened in some place with a completely different system and history". Kingsif (talk) 07:26, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's not a figurehead issue, it's the queen acting on the advice of the government like she does all the f***ing time!!! power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:28, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Glad you can keep a level head about this... Kingsif (talk) 07:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Are you going to disagree with my claim this is on the advice of government, or not? power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:31, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Were the examples you cite of murderers who help stop other murders or terrorists? The Queen does not pardon people all the time. A US president typically pardons a few dozen or maybe more in a term.(and can only pardon federal crimes, not state crimes) 331dot (talk) 07:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I guess I meant "give a reason that's not you apparently disliking the Queen to the point of expletives after three comments and we might be able to talk". It is on the advice of the Lord Chancellor, who ranks above the government, and is an advisor to the Queen. And, as said, she still actually did it. The Queen doesn't intervene, especially to pardon murder, unless she chooses to. It's actually exercising her powers rather than just nodding at every elected PM to go ahead. Kingsif (talk) 07:36, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- You didn't answer my question. I gave two examples (from other countries) of murderers being pardoned this year. I don't know or care if the details match up with this case; I suppose none of them were juggling while they did it either, but that detail wouldn't make a case ITN worthy. And as I linked above, there were royal pardons in 2001, and that article claims they occur regularly for some cases (also presumably not murder). And if you fucking think that my use or non-use of fucking makes a fucking difference I will fucking say the word fucking as fucking much as I fucking want. power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I will block you from editing this page if you cannot be more civil. 331dot (talk) 07:41, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- You mean you'll let an uninvolved admin make that decision.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
The Lord Chancellor is appointed by the Sovereign on the advice of the Prime Minister.
andThe Lord Chancellor is a member of the Cabinet
, hence, part of the government. This isn't Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II going rogue to grant mercy. This is standard behavior of the UK government. Any claims otherwise are foolish, and any claims of notability based on a claim of the royal prerogative being unusually invoked are factually incorrect. This is my final reply on the topic; certain editors seem to have a strong opinion on this matter that isn't backed up by the reliable sources they cite, I will let other editors discuss this. power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:43, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- It is, in fact, your claims that are foolish. In your quotations from the Lord Chancellor article you seem to have artfully skipped that he
is the highest-ranking among the Great Officers of State who are appointed regularly in the United Kingdom, nominally outranking the Prime Minister. The Lord Chancellor is outranked only by the Lord High Steward, another Great Officer of State, who is appointed only for the day of coronations.
He is not an elected member of the Cabinet, nor does he sit in either of the Houses of Parliament, hence, not part of the government. Not that it really matters because even if it was Boris who made the suggestion, and for the last time, the Queen does not regularly pardon murder - even the one in 1996 was for murder as part of foreign militia group actions during a time of pseudo-war by a man who acted as an informant then handed himself in after living free in the UK for years, someone you might say seems much more "pardonable". Kingsif (talk) 07:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: No stake in this argument, but I do want to point out that the current Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland, is in fact a member of the House of Commons, and is the Secretary of State for Justice in the cabinet. He is decidedly part of the government, and the role of Lord Chancellor is appointed on the advice of the Prime Minister. 209.196.99.182 (talk) 09:07, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I think it's clear I was pointing out that Power was misguided in claiming the position confers a role in government, and that it's moot anyway because why would that matter. Kingsif (talk) 09:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- It is, in fact, your claims that are foolish. In your quotations from the Lord Chancellor article you seem to have artfully skipped that he
- Oppose – Certainly not significant and notable enough for the ITN. --WEBDuB (talk) 09:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- @WEBDuB: Can I ask why you think that? Kingsif (talk) 09:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I think it's not an event that has attracted the enough attention of international media and Wikipedia editors.--WEBDuB (talk) 09:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- It just happened (3 hours), wait for other users and countries to notice before saying nobody's interested. Which isn't the only metric, by the way. Kingsif (talk) 10:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I think it's not an event that has attracted the enough attention of international media and Wikipedia editors.--WEBDuB (talk) 09:57, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose, limited significance even in the UK. Most European countries have some form of process of pardoning by the head of state. —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:32, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose, limited press coverage. Even the Guardian did not put the story on their youtube channel, A normal pardon which as said above was on the advice of the government and not a unilateral decision. KittenKlub (talk) 11:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose While of interest for law enforcement in the UK, don't see its wider significance even domestically. Gotitbro (talk) 12:15, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose I just don't feel that it's that newsworthy for ITN. WaltCip-(talk) 12:25, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – Parochial, lacking broad significance. – Sca (talk) 13:40, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose good faith nom, but this is just a sidenote in an article which did not even make it into ITN. Juxlos (talk) 15:03, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Am I reading this correctly: he's getting 10 months off a 17 year sentence? If so, this seems quite symbolic. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:40, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Hyderabad floods
editBlurb: Floods in Hyderabad, India, kill more than 81 people and cause $680 million in damage. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Floods (pictured) in Hyderabad, India, kill at least 81 people.
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:
- Nominated by Destroyeraa (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Floods article that is updated and not too stubby. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:22, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Article looks good. Copy edit would be required Sherenk1 (talk) 06:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment The blurb looks a bit weird, maybe remove the local currency or the damage costs altogether. Gotitbro (talk) 12:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment anyone else supporting/opposing. C'mon people, look down here or else things'll get stale! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support A major loss of life in one of the largest cities in the world, what more needs to be said? Gex4pls (talk) 14:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Spencer: Ready? Don't want this to get stale. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:19, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Leaning towards Opposing on article length - would like some more information about the disaster (the article is definitely shorter than usual). The floods also don't seem to be covered by foreign press as much as the 2020 Visakhapatnam gas leak. The article also has a few grammar issues. Will Support if foreign coverage can be shown and if grammar issues are solved. 45.251.33.12 (talk) 05:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Al jazeera[3] has reported on it, but thats about it. It seems that many media outlets dont really care about a disaster far from home. However, that is no reason for not including it. The article should definetly be cleaned up though. Gex4pls (talk) 15:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- A reference for a key paragraph did not support the detail. Stephen 05:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Stephen: Done. I also expanded and added international sources, such as one from BBC. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 17:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted. SpencerT•C 17:50, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer, please can we add the picture as well? Ktin (talk) 23:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer, was this missed out? Too late now. Ktin (talk) 06:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, sorry. I had to add the pic to the protection page, but wasn't able to check back before subsequent items were posted. My apologies, SpencerT•C 03:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer, no worries. cheers. Ktin (talk) 04:11, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, sorry. I had to add the pic to the protection page, but wasn't able to check back before subsequent items were posted. My apologies, SpencerT•C 03:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer, was this missed out? Too late now. Ktin (talk) 06:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Spencer, please can we add the picture as well? Ktin (talk) 23:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Post Comment Whoops sorry I thought you posted it already SoloGaming (talk) 20:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
October 17
edit
October 17, 2020
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Johnny Bush
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Houston Chronicle; Rolling Stone; KTRK-TV (ABC)
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 20:36, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Bloom6132, I was holding off on this nomination since the discography seemed difficult to source / cite. Does that Allmusic link cover all of the entries in discography? Ktin (talk) 20:43, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Ktin: Yup, all the albums are cited by AllMusic. Two are under the "Compilations" filter (i.e. Undo the Right and The Absolute Johnny Bush). —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:51, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Ktin: And the singles that weren't covered by AllMusic have now all been sourced. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Bloom6132, Perfect thanks. Can you give the article one end-to-end read for copy-edits, including perhaps removing the last line of the current lede and replacing it with some of his works or honors? I think this looks very close to being ready for homepage / RD. PS: I would selfishly hope that John Reid stays on the carousel for some more time before falling off. :) But, if this article is ready, I support it going onto homepage / RD. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 21:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support I was coming over here to nominate this, the article looks good and well sourced, ready for RD JW 1961 Talk 20:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Spencer, Stephen, and Amakuru: ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 16:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
European Rugby Champions Cup
editBlurb: In rugby union, Exeter Chiefs defeat Racing 92 in the final to win the European Rugby Champions Cup. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In rugby union, Exeter Chiefs defeat Racing 92 in the European Rugby Champions Cup Final.
News source(s): The Guardian, San Diego Union-Trubune
Credits:
- Nominated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
- Created by Paddyreilly (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk · give credit)
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.
PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment should the blurb point to the final article rather than the whole competition? JW 1961 Talk 21:02, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Joseywales1961, good point. I wasn't quite sure, alt1 added. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- I think the final would be better so I Support with alt blurb JW 1961 Talk 12:39, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Joseywales1961, good point. I wasn't quite sure, alt1 added. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Needs prose summary of final match. SpencerT•C 03:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Pinging Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel, PCN02WPS to see if this can be fixed before nomination goes stale JW 1961 Talk 15:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Joseywales1961, rugby is not my sport of expertise but I will add a prose summary later today. Hopefully someone that is more familiar with the sport (like Mikey) can give it a once-over and perhaps some copy-edits. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Pinging Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel, PCN02WPS to see if this can be fixed before nomination goes stale JW 1961 Talk 15:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment needs more prose in the bottom half of the article. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Joseywales1961, Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel, Destroyeraa, and Spencer, a prose summary of the match has been added. I'm hoping that this is good to go so we can get it up before it is stale. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:27, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment PCN02WPS, Joseywales1961, Destroyeraa, and Spencer I have made adjustments to the summary mainly in cleaning up and mentioning of events other than scoring. However, I believe it should be further finalised before it should go up. User:Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk | contribs) 09:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) 2020 Ganja bombings
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Missile strike at a densely populated district of Ganja, Azerbaijan's second-largest city, leaves 13 civilians killed, and 52 more injured. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Ganja, the second-largest city of Azerbaijan, was struck by a ballistic missile, resulting in 13 people getting killed, and 52 more injured.
Alternative blurb II: Azerbaijan's second-largest city, Ganja, was struck by a ballistic missile, resulting in 13 people getting killed, and 52 more injured.
News source(s): Reuters, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, Voice of America
Credits:
- Nominated by Solavirum (talk · give credit)
- Weak support the article isn't stubby and is updated. Not ITN/R. Though the war itself if already posted in the ongoing section, attacks in the past week have killed 23 civilians. It is sad how many civilians get killed in these wars. Due to the high casualty count, I'm supporting. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment You think Armenia'll legalize weed now? CoronaOneLove (talk) 15:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- complete nonsense. Why was the Shusha church attack or civilian hospital not posted? This is partisan nonsense 195.250.80.226 (talk) 16:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose updates in an ongoing conflict is why this conflict is in ongoing. No need for a blurb unless you're gonna pull the OG item --LaserLegs (talk) 16:36, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - We already have the NK conflict in 'Ongoing'. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 17:59, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – We have the conflict in ongoing. We should not bump up into a blurb unless some other major escalation, such as open war being declared. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 18:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- The two sides are technically at open war, though no side wants to declare it. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 21:07, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose The start of hostilities was already posted on ITN and the conflict is already there on ongoing. ITN is not news ticker, unless something major happens (as suggested by C&C above), this is not going to be posted. Gotitbro (talk) 22:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – There is no reason to list every single incident, the conflict is already in the ongoing events. --WEBDuB (talk) 09:14, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose – Another of many brutal episodes in this ongoing conflict, which indeed belongs in Ongoing. – Sca (talk) 13:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose for the reasons cited above. The "ongoing" listing already creates a high bar to inclusion and this appears to have had little strategic or political significance. Tragic, naturally. —Brigade Piron (talk) 14:46, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose considering the conflict is some 20 days old with casualties in what appears to be the low to mid thousands, this is unfortunately just another day. Juxlos (talk) 15:04, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) New Zealand general election
editBlurb: Jacinda Ardern is re-elected as Prime Minister of New Zealand after the Labour Party wins a majority of seats in the general election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The New Zealand Labour Party, led by incumbent prime minister Jacinda Ardern, wins a majority of seats in the general election.
Alternative blurb II: The New Zealand Labour Party, led by incumbent prime minister Jacinda Ardern, wins the most seats in the general election.
News source(s): Reuters, NYT, AP, BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kingsif (talk · give credit)
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: Preliminary results show a landslide for Jacinda Ardern. Davey2116 (talk) 08:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
WaitSupport ALT blurb 2 until the result is confirmed. — Amakuru (talk) 08:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC).- Update: Per discussion below, I'm happy to post now if it's unlikely we'll get much more news soon, as the "result" is fairly clear, but we should avoid saying she definitively has a majority if that's not actually certain yet. ALT blurb 2 looks good and is uncontroversial. — Amakuru (talk) 15:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Amakuru, 64 to 56 is a pretty clear majority of seats. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Sources say that's just a "projection" though. I'm not entirely sure of the system there, because in UK elections, once all votes are tallied there's no doubt remaining about majorities. We could qualify it with "a likely majority" or similar, if people want to run with that line. — Amakuru (talk) 18:09, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Amakuru, 64 to 56 is a pretty clear majority of seats. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Update: Per discussion below, I'm happy to post now if it's unlikely we'll get much more news soon, as the "result" is fairly clear, but we should avoid saying she definitively has a majority if that's not actually certain yet. ALT blurb 2 looks good and is uncontroversial. — Amakuru (talk) 15:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support if the result is confirmed. The current count is 81% and still counted. 110.137.170.83 (talk) 09:39, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Judith Collins has [conceded defeat]. I agree with Jayron that the altblurb is better. Chrisclear (talk) 10:17, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Altblurb is better as it reflects the electoral system in New Zealand better. --Jayron32 10:15, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Altblurb. New Zealanders do not elect their PM. HiLo48 (talk) 10:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - as of 11:32 UTC, it is still not certain whether Labour will have a majority or not. So in principle, ALTblurb is fine, but we should still wait until it is confirmed exactly what has happened. "Conceding defeat" does not constitute that. CHeers — Amakuru (talk) 11:33, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- 'Comment Genuine question - what do you mean by "confirmed"? The votes will take several weeks to count, as they do for elections in many countries around the world. Precedent and common sense would suggest that the appropriate time to post this item would be now, when the item is in the news, and not when 100% of the votes have been counted. Chrisclear (talk) 11:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well, the main point is that the question of whether or not they'd secured a majority seemed to be unanswered. Even now, the news is saying "Labour was expected to win 64 of the 120 seats in parliament, and National, 35". Is that question really not going to be answered for several weeks? If so, then I'd be happy to post now, but we need to nuance the blurb with words to the effect that it's not certain if a majority has been obtained or not. — Amakuru (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Special votes only change the seat counts by, maybe, one seat, so this majority will definitely remain intact. Nixinova T C 20:02, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well, the main point is that the question of whether or not they'd secured a majority seemed to be unanswered. Even now, the news is saying "Labour was expected to win 64 of the 120 seats in parliament, and National, 35". Is that question really not going to be answered for several weeks? If so, then I'd be happy to post now, but we need to nuance the blurb with words to the effect that it's not certain if a majority has been obtained or not. — Amakuru (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, it's entirely possible it could take weeks to count the votes. In which case something like altblurb2 might be a safer choice. Chrisclear (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- 'Comment Genuine question - what do you mean by "confirmed"? The votes will take several weeks to count, as they do for elections in many countries around the world. Precedent and common sense would suggest that the appropriate time to post this item would be now, when the item is in the news, and not when 100% of the votes have been counted. Chrisclear (talk) 11:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Significant results for political trends. The difference in votes is clear enough, even if the results have not been officially confirmed.--WEBDuB (talk) 13:39, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support – All major Eng.-lang. RS sites report Labour (Adern) as "landslide" [16] [17] winner. – Sca (talk) 13:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- "Landslide" is a journalese term, which doesn't really mean that much. We are an encyclopedia, and we must be precise. As noted above, I'm not in principle averse to posting this now, but we need to get the wording right. — Amakuru (talk) 14:39, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Amakuru: It's a commonly used metaphorical term in the English language. But I wasn't trying to get it inserted into a blurb, just noting that all the sites use it as a descriptive term. – Sca (talk) 15:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Sca: fair enough. — Amakuru (talk) 15:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Amakuru: It's a commonly used metaphorical term in the English language. But I wasn't trying to get it inserted into a blurb, just noting that all the sites use it as a descriptive term. – Sca (talk) 15:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- If you're "not in principle adverse to posting this now", then would you be able to change your earlier "wait" comment to "support"? Chrisclear (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Chrisclear: OK, done. Although as I said, let's not say she has a majority if that's not certain yet. Cheers. — Amakuru (talk) 15:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support And it was a substantial win. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support per above. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support it is pretty much confirmed they have won at this point. However, as said above I'd go with the Altblurb as New-Zealanders were voting for the Labour Party not her directly. CreativeNorth (talk) 14:55, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- To veer off-topic, I do wonder just how many of the votes cast for Labour were really just to keep Ardern as PM, given NZ's relative lack of divisional party politics. Kingsif (talk) 16:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support It should probably be mentioned it's the biggest landslide in NZ, and the first time under their current system a party will lead without a coalition. Kingsif (talk) 16:00, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Oppose for now – The #Results section prose is written in future tense and does not indicate anything being basically a done deal. It does not indicate that Ardern is the accepted winner and that the opposition has given a concession speech. It can be updated later with final results, but should indicate some highlights from the preliminary results.--- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 16:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- I added a paragraph and updated the tense. The separate results article needs work, but the election article is the one to be blurbed. Kingsif (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:43, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- I added a paragraph and updated the tense. The separate results article needs work, but the election article is the one to be blurbed. Kingsif (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb 1. At least this time we don't need discussions about whether 'plurality' is a word in NZ English (spoiler: it is). Nixinova T C 19:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted Alt 1. Unbolded Ardern's article, as there is just a 1-sentence update under the 2020 elections section. SpencerT•C 20:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
October 16
edit
October 16, 2020
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
|
(Posted) RD: Tom Maschler
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Booker Prize Founder. Noted publisher. Article has not been updated and requires updates before being ready. Edits are done. Content expanded. Article is ready for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 06:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support. Looks good, although it would be nice to have more on the Booker Prize itself. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:46, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Brigade Piron, Agree.
The article needs to be fleshed out further. Will give it a good scrub around lunchtime.Edits are done. Article looks good. Ktin (talk) 19:52, 17 October 2020 (UTC)- Big improvement! —Brigade Piron (talk) 14:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Brigade Piron, Agree.
- Comment. Edits are done per above comments. Before [18]. Current [19]. Article looks good for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 20:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 20:21, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wow! That was quick. Thanks Spencer! RIP Mr Maschler. Ktin (talk) 20:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Post-posting support well-sourced article. I made a few minor improvements mostly to the categorization and infobox. TJMSmith (talk) 23:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ed Benguiat
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American Graphic Designer and Typographer. Article requires some work. Edits are done. Looks good to go to homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 01:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Fine and interesting nom. Good work. Gotitbro (talk) 04:43, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. Edits are done! Good to go to homepage / RD. If someone has a Friday night to kill, start here. RIP Mr. Benguiat. Ktin (talk) 05:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Well referenced, and it's nice to see something completely different. KittenKlub (talk) 09:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted — Amakuru (talk) 14:32, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Ana Paula Scheffer
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): UOL, Globo, Correio Braziliense (all sources in Portuguese)
Credits:
- Nominated by SirEdimon (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Brazilian rhythmic gymnast. The article is very stub, but I'll work on it later. --SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 00:35, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Tragic young death and would like to see this on RD but the article is too short. Needs expansions and a few English sources about the death would be nice as well. Gotitbro (talk) 04:45, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Way too short; a sketch of her life with no details. Yoninah (talk) 21:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment stale. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Thai protests
editBlurb: Police use water cannon (pictured) to disperse youth-led protests in Bangkok, in the largest use of force in a conflict that has been ongoing since July. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Thai authorities declare a state of emergency and begin a crackdown against youth-led protests for government reform (pictured) in Bangkok.
Alternative blurb II: Thai authorities declare a "severe" state of emergency and begin a crackdown against youth-led protests for government reform (pictured) in Bangkok.
News source(s): BBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Paul_012 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Chainwit. (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Horus (talk · give credit) and Johncdraper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: This is probably a major turning point in what has so far been a peaceful but long-simmering conflict. Article in good shape; never been featured on ITN. Paul_012 (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Seems fine enough, though this seems more fitting for ongoing. Also, maybe change the blurb for something like "protests escalate in thailand, leading officials to declare a state of emergency". Just a suggestion, the water cannon thing seems horrible, but a bit tame for itn standards. Gex4pls (talk) 19:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- The prevailing view seems to be that government declared the state of emergency in order to escalate use of force against the protesters, so that doesn't quite work, but maybe others will have better suggestions? --Paul_012 (talk) 20:39, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- I've modified the original blurb to say use of force instead of escalation, which should be clearer. ---Paul_012 (talk) 20:41, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: I suggest the protest should be identified as "unarmed" or "peaceful." And maybe include the fact that the disperse came only after two hour of protest. This will show how unusual the event is. --Horus (talk) 19:03, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Significant and in news but a better blurb is needed here. The significance stems from the protests not the use of water canons and explain what the protests are about in the blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 23:43, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- The tone and POV of the current blurb needs adjustment. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 04:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Article needs a copyedit for grammar, the whole thing, it cannot be featured like this. The update is buried in "Severe State of emergency" and it looks like the main event was 4 days ago. Usual POV garbage like "received as a tyrannical death threat". --LaserLegs (talk) 10:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's paraphrased from the source. Feel free to correct that. --Horus (talk) 14:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Alt1 Article is in very good shape, a few minor wording changes here and there not withstanding, it is well referenced and generally well written. The blurb was a bit problematic, but the article looked good, so I updated it with a more neutrally worded blurb.--Jayron32 10:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support – Large-scale protests continue. (No blurb pref.) – Sca (talk) 14:29, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support Alt2 the first blurb is just plain silly. Support altblurb 2, as that blurb is much more well written. Protests are large-scale and are worthy for ITN. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Explanation for alt2 The state of emergency was enforced in the country since March. To say it was declared a few days ago is factually incorrect. But feel free to edit "severe state of emergency" as it was only found in Thai law. --Horus (talk) 14:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support alt2 per Horus, but do not wikilink Thai per current standard. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 17:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support alt2 - per Horus, as it gives differentiation vs. existing state of emergency. Jr8825 • Talk 11:06, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
- Update: Thai govt. acts to suppress dissemination of information about the continuing protests. – Sca (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Needs to be added soon, it will become stale in two days. Gex4pls (talk) 14:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Posted ALT2. SpencerT•C 15:21, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
October 15
edit
October 15, 2020
(Thursday)
(Closed) RD: Antonio Ángel Algora Hernandoedit
(Removed) Ongoing removal: Belarusian protestsedit
(Closed) RD: Nguyễn Văn Manedit
(Closed) RD: Jole SantellieditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Posted) RD: Bhanu Athaiyaedit
(Posted) President of Kyrgyzstan resignsedit
According to the basic law, the speaker is acting prez. Protests are still going on today calling for dissolution of parliament and his resignation though.195.250.80.226 (talk) 11:44, 15 October 2020 (UTC) Perhaps post it "amidst protests" with the protest link below.195.250.80.226 (talk) 11:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Akkithamedit
October 14editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 14 Template:Cob (Closed) RD: Rhonda Flemingedit
(Posted) RD: Fred Deanedit
(Posted) RD: John Reidedit
(Posted) RD: Herbert Kretzmeredit
(Posted) Blurb/Ongoing: End SARS protestsedit
October 13editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 13 Template:Cob (Posted) RD: Conchata Ferrelledit
(Closed) Tropical Storm Linfa and NangkaeditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Posted) RD: Carlton Chapmanedit
October 12editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 12 Template:Cob (Posted) RD: Jacinda Barclayedit
Gex4pls (talk) 12:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jon Gibsonedit
(Posted) RD: Roberta McCainedit
(Closed) Ongoing removal: Kyrgyzstan protestseditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Economicsedit
(Posted) 2020 NBA Finalsedit
October 11editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 11 Template:Cob (Stale) RD: Thomas Atcittyedit
(Posted) RD: Joe Morganedit
(Stale) RD: Margaret Nolanedit
(Stale) RD: Tom Kennedy (television host)edit
October 10editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 10 Template:Cob (Posted) RD: Muhammad Adil Khanedit
(Posted) French Openedit
October 9editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 9 Template:Cob (Posted) RD: Vijayedit
(Posted) RD: Jim Dwyeredit
(Closed) Hurricane DeltaeditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Posted) RD: Jimmie Lee Solomonedit
(Posted) RD: Whitey Fordedit
(Posted) Nobel Peace Prizeedit
October 8editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 8 Template:Cob (Closed) Ghazanchetsots CathedraleditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
RD: Mohammad-Reza Shajarianedit
(Posted) RD: Monica Robertsedit
(Closed) Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping ploteditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate Elijahandskip (talk) 18:06, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ram Vilas Paswanedit
Ongoing:Indonesia omnibus bill protestsedit
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Literatureedit
October 7editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 7 Template:Cob (Closed) Two world records in athleticseditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Posted) RD: Ray Penningtonedit
(Posted) RD: Mario Molinaedit
(Closed) Hurricane DeltaeditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Closed) Golden Dawn verdicteditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
-- Sorry if I don't edit in the correct way, please do it for me. Although I don't agree with this point, I should correct the facts, they actually have 1 EMP who is found guilty today, even if he dissociated himself from the party recently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foivos87 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Chemistryedit
October 6editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 6 Template:Cob (Closed) RD: Folker Bohnetedit
(Posted) RD: Herbert Feuersteinedit
(Posted) RD: Johnny Nashedit
(Posted RD) RD/Blurb: Eddie Van HaleneditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Physicsedit
(Posted) RD: Najeeb Tarakaiedit
October 5editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 5 Template:Cob (Posted) Blurb/Ongoing: 2020 Kyrgyzstan protestsedit
(Closed) Tropical Storm GammaeditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Closed) RD: Bob Wilsonedit
(Posted) RD: K. K. Ushaedit
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Medicineedit
October 4editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 4 Template:Cob (Closed) RD: Jan des Bouvrieedit
(Closed) RD: Carla Federica Nespoloedit
(Posted) RD: Richard Schifteredit
(Posted) RD: Mordechai Yissachar Ber Leiferedit
(Posted) New Caledonia independence referendumedit
(Posted) RD: Kenzō Takadaedit
(Posted) 2020 London Marathonedit
(Closed) Fratelli tuttieditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
October 3editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 3 Template:Cob (Posted) RD: Charlie Haegeredit
(Closed) RD: Thomas Jefferson Byrdedit
(Removed) Ongoing removal: Wildfiresedit
(Closed) White House outbreak of COVID-19editTemplate:Archivetop Template:ITN candidate
October 2editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 2 Template:Cob (Posted) RD: Bob Gibsonedit
(Closed) Alexander De Crooedit
(Closed) Asda saleeditTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
(Posted to Ongoing) 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflictedit
(Posted) RD: Lou Johnsonedit
(Closed) Donald Trump tests positive for COVID-19editTemplate:Atop Template:ITN candidate
October 1editTemplate:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 October 1 Template:Cob (Closed) RD: Murray Schisgaledit
(Closed) RD: Zef Eisenbergedit
|