Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/August 2021

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

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.

August 31

August 31, 2021 (2021-08-31) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Geronimo

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

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: I never thought id be nominating an alpaca but the article is well written and properly sourced and the deceased alpaca has been part of recent controversy. --Newsjunky12 (talk) 22:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Mahal (actress)

Article: Mahal (actress) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rappler, The Philippine Star
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: She was known for dwarfism nature and had starred in several TV series. Article newly created and is in a good shape. MeCurraz (talk) 04:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Ferhan Şensoy

Article: Ferhan Şensoy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/ferhan-sensoyun-cenaze-detaylari-belli-oldu-1864993
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: The deceased was one of the most prominent figures of Turkish theatre, and the previous holder of arguably the highest traditional merit of stage acting in Turkey. Saudekar (talk) 12:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • The article has been greatly improved, but the "Works" section is still unsourced. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 10:48, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article is badly sourced and written. Pyramids09 (talk) 22:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unfortunately the article is very barebones and contains almost no information on the deceased in it's current state. --Newsjunky12 (talk) 22:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This article has drastically transformed in September. Please re-evaluate it, folks. I hope the {Expand section} tag for the Works section can be addressed soon. --PFHLai (talk) 00:03, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - the prose looks good, but there's the usual long list of filmography entries that isn't cited.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 30

August 30, 2021 (2021-08-30) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

  • Armed gang members take hostages during their getaway following three bank robberies in Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil. Three people are killed during the incident, including two civilians and one of the robbers. Four other people are wounded, including one during an explosion. Three suspects have been arrested. (BBC News)
  • Kira Yarmysh, the official spokeswoman for incarcerated Russian activist Alexei Navalny, leaves Russia, reportedly travelling to Helsinki, Finland, after a court sentenced her to a restriction of movements for 18 months due to alleged breaches of COVID-19 restrictions. (Reuters)

Sports

(Closed) Leaded petrol phased out

No consensus to post. Stephen 02:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 
fuel additive, is phased out of use in land vehicles worldwide
News source(s): BBC United Nations press release CBC Guardian

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Seems like a major (though long anticipated) step. Article needs some work. Note that it is still in use for some light aviation - Dumelow (talk) 07:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: this doesn't point to an article. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 07:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose no article for this, and I don't see that target article being created. And it's also a speculation that it will be phased out. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, forgot to pipe the link to Tetraethyllead. Now done. It has been phased out for all land vehicles, not will be - Dumelow (talk) 08:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is not necessary to have a dedicated, event-type article, only that the article has "been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest". I actually argue that including updates into already-established articles is the better practice; it introduces readers to the topic without an UNDUE weight on very recent events. In this case, the article Tetraethyllead is a standout example. The phase-out and ban of this substance occupies a substantial portion of the article (and lede) without unnecessarily distracting from the other encyclopedic information about this substance. I think forking the ITN material into something like UNEP leaded fuel phase out would actually do readers a disservice. However, an orange tag and a few CNs prevent this from going up in the current state.130.233.213.141 (talk) 08:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EC & edit confusion.130.233.213.141 (talk) 08:13, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose What actually seems to have happened is that Algeria has stopped sales of leaded fuel for cars. This is not big news for the rest of the world. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, Algeria was the last country to sale it. When it stopped, the usage of leaded petrol indeed stopped worldwide, so the blurb is correct and reflects the UN press release. Brandmeistertalk 10:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is the final end of a decades-long eradication effort. The tetraethyllead article is informative and will help readers to understand the current news, which is exactly what ITN is for. I don't think a few un-cited entries in the long list of ban dates should hold up posting. The blurb is bit unsatisfactory but I'm struggling to think of a better one, given the continued niche use in some small aircraft. I've added an altblurb but it can probably be improved further (I deliberately avoided using either 'petrol' or 'gasoline' for ENGVAR neutrality). Modest Genius talk 11:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, not sure we have a really good target yet. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 11:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Article quality, especially referencing, is a big issue. Several CN tags, a tagged section. Needs some work to be main page ready. --Jayron32 12:09, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it generally has been across the globe outside a few countries. It would have been more newsworthy if major nations were still using it and then it was internationally banned. --Masem (t) 13:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I view this as not entirely dissimilar from the hypothetical eradication of polio or guinea worm. Regardless of where it occurs, its elimination is truly newsworthy. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 14:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's a vast difference between fighting off a contagious (even with low spread rate) disease which is not voluntary, and stopping the use of a specific chemical that has been for all purposes, voluntarily used and could have been stopped at any time before. --Masem (t) 15:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Agreed, I was speaking more in terms of both being examples of the culmination of a long-term, international public health campaign. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 22:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The eradication of this chemicals use in my opinion is a huge step forward for humanity. It has done a lot of harm to the world and to the previous few generations health. --Newsjunky12 (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are several tags in the article. Hanamanteo (talk) 09:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we should probably just link to the "In motor fuel" section if we do run this. But that section is woefully undersourced right now. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on article quality; story would merit posting if article was no longer orange-tagged. The "Controversy and phase-out" heading seems the most apt target if posted. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 10:17, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – In most places it was phased out decades ago. – Sca (talk) 12:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per arguments above and similarity to eradication of a disease. The oppose arguments above seem based on parochial concerns - the fact that leaded petrol has not been used in the US/EU for some years is not relevant IMO. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:00, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose nowhere near the level of disease eradication, leaded gasoline has been phased out of the US/EU – which use a disproportionate amount of the world's motor vehicles – for decades; I don't think we would post the last country to legalize gay marriage, so a single country banning a substance, even if it's the last in the world, isn't news to the good majority of people.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:40, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) End of the Afghanistan War

No consensus to post. Stephen 02:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States completes its withdrawal from Afghanistan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The United States completes its withdrawal from Afghanistan, ending a 20-year war.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The participating countries in the Resolute Support Mission complete their withdrawal from Afghanistan.
News source(s): NYT, AP, BBC, Guardian, Reuters, Al Jazeera
Credits:
Nominator's comments: I'm proposing that we remove the Kabul airport blurb as its no longer the newest news out of Afghanistan, and the completion of the withdrawal seems significant. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt-blurb. Neutralitytalk 01:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The alt-blurb is US-centric and does not recognize the two decades of warfare that preceded the US invasion, nor any armed conflict that may continue in the immediate future. -LtNOWIS (talk) 03:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    LtNOWIS, this relates to the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021), not any previous conflict. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Still, the blurb only mentions the withdrawal of the US forces, not the Resolute Support Mission, which consists of several countries. That should be the key here. --Tone 05:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I totally agree that the proposed blurbs are US-centric, so I proposed another one that mentions it was a war mission with more countries participating.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The phrase "completes its withdrawal" seems tendentious – trying to present this as a US accomplishment. On the ground in Afghanistan, there are still lots of people wanting to get out and their exodus will continue; there are still warlords holding out in places like the Panjshir Valley; and the US still intends to continue bombing and drone-striking the country in its endless war on terror. As for the Resolute Support Mission, it appears that that was formally disbanded in early July. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Andrew. It seems like there are still people who want to leave the country, so this is clearly not the end of the story.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose framing this like some kind of "mission complete" and that this is the "end of the end" seems crazy to me. This may be the end of the beginning, nothing more. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 08:16, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The end of the 2001-21 war was when the Taliban captured Kabul and the government surrendered. We already posted that story as a blurb. The subsequent evacuations are a footnote to the war. The blurb inappropriately phrases it as a successful evacuation, when what actually happened was a Taliban victory. Modest Genius talk 11:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Prefer Alt1. Pervasive RS coverage (see sources above) of a(n) historic event. Far and away the No. 1 story internationally. Ignoring it would be sticking our collective head in the sand. Get real. ITN is the voice of Wikipedia. – Sca (talk) 12:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. As noted, this event is a direct and predictable corollary of the Taliban taking over Kabul, which we posted last week. We also have an Afghanistan story already in the blurb list, the significant attack and deaths outside the airport, which remains the newest noteworthy development, contrary to the nom's assertion that it's no longer relevant. At this point I don't think it even merits Ongoing when that drops off, this story is done and dusted for the time being.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the fact that the US was still technically at war with the country was one of those things that I don't think many people realized and thus, this is more of a trivial effect resulting from the more dominant story of the Taliban take-over. --Masem (t) 13:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Technically, they were never at war. The US hasn't declared war since the Second World War. See undeclared war. Modest Genius talk 14:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There's been Congressional authorization for ongoing military activities in Afg. since 9/11/2001. True, not a declaration of war, but effectively the same thing, and I know in legislation this year there has been language to actually terminate that authorization though whether that passed or not, I'm not sure. But still, US's presence in Afg. has been a authorized military situation for nearly 20 years. --Masem (t) 14:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Authorised under US law, but not international law. As far as I am aware there was no UN resolution approving the invasion, for example. But this is getting off topic... Modest Genius talk 17:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • News reports indicate that Afghanistan is hardly peaceful. The US has left, but local factions are still ready to fight each other. Instead of posting this, just add a note to the existing blurb that the US has completed its withdrawal. Jehochman Talk 14:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • But to that end, what about all the other countries that had troops in there like the UK? That's the issue with focusing on just the US engagement here. --Masem (t) 14:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Masem: - the UK already left, on Saturday. As for the others, France + Italy + Sweden by Friday, Canada + Germany + Belgium was done by Thursday ... and you can read the link for the rest, including Australia and New Zealand. starship.paint (exalt) 15:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All the news that fits into our preconceived, ossified format. – Sca (talk) 21:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

August 29

August 29, 2021 (2021-08-29) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

(Posted) RD: Edmond H. Fischer

Article: Edmond H. Fischer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Nobel prize winning biochemist. Death announced on this date. Article is almost ready for homepage / RD. I will work on a few edits. Edits done. C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Felt nice working on a science article after a long time. RIP Dr. Fischer. If someone wants to get some Friday evening YouTube viewing done -- here goes. Ktin (talk) 20:47, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I understand what you mean, Ktin. I'll let whichever fellow admin posting this on ITN decide how to handle the credit templates on their user talk pages. Neither PDH nor Duncan.Hull has edited on that wikipage for years. PDH may qualify as "article creator", though. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Thanks @PFHLai:. Ktin (talk) 22:45, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Muhammad Hamza

Article: Muhammad Hamza (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hindustan Times
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Pakistani Senator. This wikibio could use some pre-RD clean-up. --PFHLai (talk) 04:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Closed) Hurricane Ida

Despite the significant participation in this ITN/C, it is becoming clear that no consensus is going to emerge from this. Opposition was related to considering the landfall not being enough, and later opposition took into consideration the monetary value but deemed it irrelevant due to the current lack of fatalities. Supporters early on supported largely due to emotions, and later due to the monetary cost of the storm. Even though I was involved in this discussion, it is quite clear it isn't going anywhere and should be closed for the time being. If a significant number of fatalities emerge, a fresh nomination should be opened for it. NoahTalk 09:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: Hurricane Ida (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Hurricane Ida makes landfall in Louisiana. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Hurricane Ida strikes Louisiana as a strong Category 4 hurricane, killing at least one person and causing at least $15 billion in insured damage.
News source(s): CNN, NYT, Bloomberg_(damage), Guardian_death
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Category 3 hurricane. New Orleans is now without power (on the 16th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina); casualties likely to be high across Louisiana/Mississippi, whether from the storm or from hospitals already at capacity from coronavirus patients. Davey2116 (talk) 01:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until fatalities and damage amounts are reported. Ida currently does not meet the threshold for ITN for a tropical cyclone; we only post significant damage, many deaths, and/or significant records (ie not landfalls). NoahTalk 01:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb which details the impact that is coming in. NoahTalk 21:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment You're gonna need more than just that for a blurb. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 01:52, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. There are many causalities in areas where people ignored the advice to evacuate. There have been many 911 calls from people in those areas who were on the verge of drowning in chest deep waters inside their homes. They were told that they could not be helped. Count Iblis (talk) 02:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Count Iblis: Source? NoahTalk 02:48, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • See here: "St. John the Baptist Parish is being inundated with 911 calls for rescues because of flooding from Hurricane Ida, parish communications director Baileigh Helm told CNN. Helm says that first responders are still unable to go out and respond to rescue calls because weather conditions remain poor." Count Iblis (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • We need to know more before we make and post any blurb. It's too poor for anyone to go out right now to assess damage. I have heard there are levee failures and power towers collapsing into rivers. It is bad, but we don't know enough yet. NoahTalk 03:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • ... ignored the advice to evacuate: "Ignore" is a mischaracterization You need to account for the disabled and elderly, people without access to transportation, those with COVID, and some without enough money.[1]—Bagumba (talk) 08:28, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on just the basis of landfall and power outages. If there are significant death or damages, then we can talk about posting. --Masem (t) 02:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this is devastating. --Rockstone[Send me a message!] 03:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. If a category 4 major hurricane lands near population centers, the lack of mass deaths or destruction is even more newsworthy. I fear and suspect you may get your death toll in time, but I don't agree that this ought to be a criterion. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 05:01, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The lack of any significant death or damage from what otherwise would be a major natural disaster (particularly while we are in the middle of the season for these types of hurricanes) is for the purposes of ITN, the equivalent of "if a tree falls in a forest, and no one is around to hear it, would it still make a sound?" --Masem (t) 05:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    In All Quiet on the Western Front the army communique's "nothing new to report" ("nichts neues zu berichten") doesn't make headlines. – Sca (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the usual users will cry about needing to satisfy some arbitrary death toll number before they'll deem an event ITN-worthy, but this storm devastated a large portion of a US state and is undoubtedly worthy of posting. The blurb obviously needs to be better, though. --TorsodogTalk 07:03, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Until we know what its impact is, it’s not ITN worthy (which is how it works, for those of you who criticize those who oppose it). It’s also not unusual in Louisiana (and USA in general) nor is it the only one so far this season. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 07:46, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until impact is known(even if it's likely there is a significant impact). There is also a covid element to this in that hospitals in that area are full of covid patients, which will affect casualty numbers(either covid patients dying due to a lack of oxygen/electricity or others dying because the hospital is full). 331dot (talk) 07:55, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • wait till the hurricane sweeps over and we know of its aftermath. – robertsky (talk) 09:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Feels like the supports and opposes are saying the same thing. It's inconceivable that the impact will not warrant posting, but we must be able to articulate that impact in the blurb. 159.53.78.147 (talk) 12:15, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Destruction of New Orleans main transmission line pushes us into significant damage territory.©Geni (talk) 12:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – for now – Seems to be blowing itself out without dire effects compared to other hurricanes. [2] [3] – Sca (talk) 12:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: The storm is on the front page of most major news services. RS already cite the clearly significant impact of all of New Orleans losing power and also there is one confirmed death so far. But I think reliable sources clearly show that the loss of power to all of New Orleans makes this storm ITN-worthy and should be included in the blurb.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 14:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Storms knock out power all the time. This is nothing new. --Masem (t) 14:08, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    As said, nichts neues. – Sca (talk) 14:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - this is one of the most powerful hurricanes to hit the continental US on record. Hires an editor (talk) 14:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    But not the most consequential, so far. – Sca (talk) 14:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose For being the most powerful hurricane to hit Louisiana since Katrina, the impact is surprisingly limited. Be that as it may, that is the standard by which we judge hurricanes here. WaltCip-(talk) 15:15, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @WaltCip: I agree with you, but I think the issue here is that we simply don't know the impact yet as conditions have been too poor for people to assess damage. The storm is starting to move at a faster pace and will affect more of the country (mostly rainfall). Considering levees have failed and been overtopped in many areas, there are likely quite a few deaths we simply don't know about. Hopefully more information will come out today. NoahTalk 15:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support - I acknowledge the the "oppose" votes have some logic behind them, as the damage of this huricane is still unknown, but this is one of the most powerful hurricanes to ever hit the USA, as well as the fact that the significance of these events is only realized months to years after they happen. Inter&anthro (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - while casualities are low, the devastation is quite notable and large areas are heavily flooded. Elishop (talk) 19:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the blurb makes absolutely no mention of the "impact". Until then, this is an obvious no. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No, despite the negligible impact noted in the lead. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 08:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for the facts to become apparent, and then decide whether to post the news item. Jehochman Talk 19:55, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT: Working on a new alt blurb... Damage estimate came out... very preliminary and need time to add to the article as well. NoahTalk 21:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
$$$ ain't gonna make the cut. – Sca (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for scale of impact to become more clear. There are also an unreasonable number of Twitter citations in the article that need to be replaced... ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 21:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the Alt Blurb – This storm has caused a major disaster in Louisiana, which is still unfolding right now. New Orleans is likely to be without power for weeks, and the city is dealing with severe flooding threats. The death toll and damage estimates are almost guaranteed to rise significantly in the days to come. As such, this is definitely notable enough to warrant posting. While I would normally like to see more information in the blurb (perhaps we could wait another day or two for more updates), the alt blurb is good enough for now, IMO. It can be updated as needed. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 22:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, largely uninteresting. For most people the entire story is one sentence long; power out, one dead. Abductive (reasoning) 23:49, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Impact is thankfully minor in casualties compared to similar events, despite the worry beforehand.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD/Blurb: Jacques Rogge

Article: 
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Does anyone want to work on this wikibio? --PFHLai (talk) 22:01, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • What's the rationale for a blurb? 331dot (talk) 07:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb once the article is improved. I think IOC presidents should automatically qualify for a blurb and the rationale is simple. Firstly, the office-holder governs perhaps the largest international organisation with 206 NOCs, which is even more than the UN with 193 member states. Secondly, the IOC president coordinates programmes and activities that impact millions of sportspeople worldwide and support the development of many sports. Thirdly, the IOC president administers the authority that is responsible for the Olympic Games as one of the most important and significant recurrent events in the world. Fourthly, the office is usually held for a long period of time and the incumbent president Thomas Bach is the only one living. Apart from the general significance of the office, it was during Rogge's 12-year presidency when the Youth Olympic Games were created. We posted a blurb for Samaranch back in 2010, so there's no reason to omit Rogge.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:07, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per now I didn't see the reason for the blurb very clearly, but Kiril's explanation has convinced me. Maybe today's meal was too good for me and I'm in a good mood. Anyway, the article is not in condition yet, so I will change my vote when it is. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 13:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Is being president of the IOC prima facie evidence of being 'transformative' – ?? — Sca (talk) 14:29, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. I don't think having led the IOC automatically merits an individual a blurb upon death. Rogge did not originate the idea of the youth Olympics. 331dot (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Simply leading the IOC is not as significant as government or international governing bodies (UN) officeholders. If the person had done something more significant in the position of IOC president, then maybe, but the state of the article indicates little rationale for why he was significant beyond just holding office. --Masem (t) 19:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb – Per previous two. – Sca (talk) 22:19, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Not remotely of the transformative nature to warrant a blurb.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps we should focus on just RD without a blurb. --PFHLai (talk) 04:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post to RD. It seems that no consensus to post will emerge on a blurb, and the story is already aging. Let's post out on RD. —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:58, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb as not transformative enough for a blurb. Oppose RD for now, as the article is orange tagged, which needs to be resolved. Also honours section needs way better sourcing. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The {{Criticism section}} tag disqualifies this wikibio for ITN/RD. The article issue should be addressed before this nomination can proceed. --PFHLai (talk) 21:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Lee "Scratch" Perry

Article: Lee "Scratch" Perry (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Legendary producer and singer. Black Kite (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Ed Asner

Article: Ed Asner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): THR
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: :'-( – Muboshgu (talk) 18:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

August 28

August 28, 2021 (2021-08-28) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections

  • Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan–United States relations
    • Following the
      Zabiullah Mujahid condemned the attack saying they consider the airstrike a "clear attack on Afghan territory". (Reuters)

(Posted) RD: Sam Oji

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

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Footballer passed at just 35. Well sourced throughout. 2A00:23C5:E187:5F00:7C7A:7D05:EFAC:E9AB (talk) 20:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Teresa Żylis-Gara

Article: Teresa Żylis-Gara (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gramophone, some Polish, probably more to come, but to show a great singer the day she died would be nice.
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Polish soprano of international fame, for 1970 to 1980 based in Germany, then a performer at the Metropolitan Opera in more than 200 performances of exclusively leading roles. She said in an interview that she'd never intentionally produce an ugly sound. I'm biased - she was the second soprano who made a lasting impression on me on stage - but try not to show ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

2021 Madagascar food crisis

Article: 
food crisis in southern Madagascar is the first famine caused primarily by anthropogenic climate change.
News source(s): (TRT News) (BBC)

Credits:

Nominator's comments: I don't know if it's blurb-worthy but I found it rather interesting. Whatever the result is, at least I tried. Kindest regards. CoryGlee (talk) 13:17, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Seeing how this is the first famine caused by climate change is pretty significant. If there's opposition to a blurb, I'd support adding this to ongoing seeing how this has been an ongoing event in Madagascar. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose that seems like a claim that she be supported by peer-reviewed publications. In any case, the article is contradictory, e.g. says that Madagascar is on the verge of famine, and the blurb claims that this is the first famine...well, so what now? 93.240.192.26 (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the article and RS says this is the worst drought in 40 years. If past droughts, more severe, didn't cause a famine it seems more likely that this is a culmination of complex factors. Agriculture in Madagascar makes clear that there have been decades long systemic issues with monoculture farming and deforestation, among others. There is no doubt that anthropomorphic climate change is real and impacts the entire globe, but I agree with the IP above that to suggest that the current famine in Madagascar is exclusively due to climate change is dubious and requires peer review. I'd have no problem with a blurb if both it and the article were improved to reduce focus on the climate hysteria. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Anthropogenic climate change is real. Anthropomorphic climate change is only real in "universes" like Madagascar. Not that it matters much if we're all doomed...but still! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:10, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support & added altblurb. I disagree with proposals to reduce the focus on "the climate hysteria" given that secondary sources on the subject (news results on duckduckgo), (news results on google) very often do prominently feature the fact that this famine is caused primarily by climate change. You'd be hard-pressed to find an article about the topic that doesn't. A few examples: "the climate-led famine worsens [...] they are bearing the brunt of climate change" "Madagascar on the brink of climate change-induced famine", "Madagascar on the brink of experiencing the world's first climate-changed induced famine", and a few probably less-reliable ones: [4][5],[6],[7]. I agree that the blurb could use some minor tweaks, my understanding is that it's the world's first famine caused [primarily] by climate change, not the world's first famine caused [solely] by climate change. With respect to LL, who was correct in mentioning that Madagascar has had its issues, there's just so many sources emphasizing the role of climate change that it would effectively be original research to override them based on our own hunch that this crisis could actually be caused by mono-cropping etc. I may just be pedantic here, but I disagree with the nom that the sources say it's exclusively caused by climate change, but it is still caused by climate change nonetheless. It's a notable fact that shouldn't be cleansed from the blurb or the article without additional sources to contradict the multitude of sources affirming it.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 06:05, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As others have noted, the article is confusing and contradictory. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 15:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: IMO this non-admin closure was premature since there was considerable support for the nomination and concerns by the opposition could potentially be resolved by article updates and improvements. In cases such as this, there is no benefit by prematurely closing the nomination. SpencerT•C 01:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The problem is nobody is fixing the issues and the opposition stands. There hasn't been any activity either here or on the article for over a day. NoahTalk 01:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be that as it may, it's not an indication for closing the nomination, especially when there are 4-5 days remaining. SpencerT•C 18:11, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – "Climate change famine" must be seen as very significant in this day and age. STSC (talk) 19:01, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Harry Kent (cyclist)

Article: Harry Kent (cyclist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff; The Dominion Post
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: First reported today (August 28); died on August 24. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

2021 Nigerian doctors strike

Article: 
talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Nigerian resident doctors (accounting for about 40% of doctors) commenced an indefinite strike on 2 August 2021 due to unpaid salaries and poor welfare (Post)
News source(s): The Punch CNN Vanguard Cable Nigeria

Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The doctors strike has led to the shut down of teaching hospitals nationwide in the midst of the 3rd wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and a cholera outbreak. Princess of Ara 10:50, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Looks like in the "Course of the Strike" section, doesn't appear to be updates from September from what I can see? SpencerT•C 17:40, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The last sentence is an update from September. Princess of Ara 17:57, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This seems both stale (started in early August), and even if considering ongoing, not getting the type of coverage/ongoing updates for meeting an ongoing story. --Masem (t) 18:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 27

August 27, 2021 (2021-08-27) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Siegfried Matthus

Article: Siegfried Matthus (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDR and others
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Leading composer in the East when Germany was divided, but successful still after unification, founder of a chamber opera festival promoting young singers, - his music played again and again and recorded - not often in contemporary music. There was some article, but Grimes2 did miracles again expanding. There could be more, much more detail in the sources added. Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Akis Tsochatzopoulos

Article: Akis Tsochatzopoulos (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ekathimerini.com/news/1166960/akis-tsochatzopoulos-once-prominent-pasok-politician-dies/
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: former interior and defence minister of Greece. His wikibio looks ready for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 11:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Hae Un Lee

Article: Hae Un Lee (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/lees-discount-liquor-founder-hae-un-lee-dies-at-79-2429072/
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Wikibio looks ready already. PFHLai (talk) 10:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

US airstrike in Afghanistan

CLOSED
Consensus will not develop to post. - Fuzheado | Talk 17:38, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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


Article: 
Islamic State members who planned the bombings.
News source(s): (AP News), (NY Times)
,
Credits:
Nominator's comments: I know we already have an ITN about the bombings themselves, but it seems significant enough for maybe a second ITN nomination just because the planner died. 
talk) 02:10, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Are you saying the airstrike isn't important enough for ITN, or that it shouldn't be posted because we don't know enough about it? Jim Michael (talk) 09:23, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not certain a single airstrike warrants an update. 331dot (talk) 11:42, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It (allegedly) took two. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Now it (allegedly) took one. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The suicide bombing blurb already pipes to 2021 Kabul airport attack, so there is no need for another blurb with the same article. If it's deemed notable, incorporate the airstrike into the existing blurb.—Bagumba (talk) 12:03, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Per TRM. Though widely covered Saturday, [8] [9] [10] this drone strike targeted one individual whose demise hasn't yet been confirmed by sources on the ground. Lacks broad significance. – Sca (talk) 12:27, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Existing blurb is enough. Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sources are clear about not knowing who this target was or why he was killed, same as his alleged driver, same as the alleged other victims. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - New Info The pentagon confirmed that two of the planners of the attack were killed in the airstrike. (CNN)
    talk) 17:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Alt-blurb 1 started for new info.
talk) 17:23, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
I think we can safely say both blurbs turned out to be honest misreadings. No pressure to redact or strike anything, though! Every war has its lingering rumours, after all. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Even with two 'ISKP' jihadists killed, [11] [12] this drone strike remains part of the larger Afghanistan story, and a separate blurb wouldn't be appropriate. – Sca (talk) 18:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Sca. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

August 26

August 26, 2021 (2021-08-26) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Michael Nader

Article: Michael Nader (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, USA Today
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
Dimmi!!! 00:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

(Posted) RD: Stephen B. Oates

Article: Stephen B. Oates (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press; The Springfield Republican
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: First reported today (August 26); died on August 20. —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:59, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Closed) 2021 evacuation of Afghanistan

Merged with the current blurb, it will take a while before it rolls off. Renominate again later depending on the situation. --Tone 07:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 
talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes, BBC, Straits Times, Japan

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Efforts to evacuate is still ongoing and set to end on 31 August. The
suicide bombings are an immediate event of the evaucation. Nations are also sending military planes to help with evacuations. – robertsky (talk) 18:01, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Kabul airport attacks

Article: 
Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, killing at least 72 people. (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times, NBC

Credits:

Nominator's comments: Current/breaking news event. Article will be expanded as more information comes in --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support The withdrawal from Afghanistan is a major ongoing (not WP:ITN/ONGOING, yet anyway) story and the bombing is a notable development of it. It's long enough as it is and will expand. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:43, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Afghan evacuations are currently top-of-news, and a cursory look at Reuters, Al Jazeera and BBC puts this story at headline. Juxlos (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Reports of over a hundred casualties (wounded and killed) as well as American servicemembers injured is notable enough to warrant a blurb. Lyrim (talk) 17:11, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has gotten massive media coverage (even local news sources are reporting on it) and the involvement with American troops makes this article notable.
    talk) 17:37, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Query Should
    2021 evacuation of Afghanistan be an ongoing item instead, given that though Kabul has been taken over, the airport and/or certain routes to the airport are still being controlled by US/Brits? – robertsky (talk) 17:44, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

August 25

August 25, 2021 (2021-08-25) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

  • OnlyFans reverses its decision to ban pornographic content, saying in part that the ban is "no longer required due to banking partners’ assurances that OnlyFans can support all genres of creators". (WABI-TV)

Disasters and accidents

  • Twenty people are killed and 17 others are reported missing in
    Mocotíes river overflowed its banks. (Al Jazeera)

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Gunilla Bergström

Article: Gunilla Bergström (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Teller Report and others in Swedish and German
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Children's books author, character Alfie Atkins - different names in different languages, translations into 35. The article was basically there, we just referenced a bit. More welcome, - I have to go right now. Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:12, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: B. V. Nimbkar

Article: B. V. Nimbkar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Noted Indian agriculural scientist. Founder of Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute. His bibliography needs fixing. R.I.P. --PFHLai (talk) 11:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Ted Dexter

Article: Ted Dexter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Needs work on refs The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 07:07, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Milan Gutović

Article: Milan Gutović (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): N1, BBC
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: A well-known Serbian actor --Vacant0 (talk) 21:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Robin Miller

Article: Robin Miller (journalist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indianapolis Star, NBC Sports
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Longtime motorsports journalist; article looks reasonably referenced throughout. rawmustard (talk) 20:54, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Gail Omvedt

Article: Gail Omvedt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/mumbai/researcher-author-gail-omvedt-passes-away/article36091934.ece
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article requires some work before it can be ready for homepage / RD. If someone wants to get to it before me, please do so. Else, I will update the article shortly. Ktin (talk) 18:35, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

August 24

August 24, 2021 (2021-08-24) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

(Posted) RD: Jerry Harkness

Article: Jerry Harkness (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Basketball player in the Game of Change, member of 1963 national championship team. —Bagumba (talk) 09:37, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Charlie Watts

Article: Charlie Watts (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 16:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

That's a good point. It looks like he did nothing from 1989 onwards, unless you include not attending an event as something! Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 20:50, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD/Blurb: Hissène Habré

Article: Hissène Habré (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Former Chadian president Hissène Habré dies from COVID-19. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Hissène Habré, a former president of Chad and convicted war criminal, dies at the age of 79
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Very important figure in the utter chaos that was the Chadian Civl War and the Libyan invasion. Scaramouche33 (talk) 12:16, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support - Don’t see anything special that needs to be done. Ready to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:11, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Mjroots (talk) 16:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support I've added three cn tags and there's a tag to clarify a line that needs to be fixed. The article overall has fantastic in depth coverage of his career and conviction. Neutral on the blurb, although not a bad idea. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb While it is uncommon for a former head of state to die in prison, we already posted his jailing and sentencing to life in prison, so this isn't exactly a surprise.Jackattack1597 (talk) 23:21, 24 August 2021 (UTC) Jackattack1597 (talk) 23:21, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb We posted his jailing and sentencing which already shows how important Habré's conviction was for Chad. His death in jail from COVID is not any different. Habré was an important and notorious figure in Chadian history. Merits blurb. Perhaps his blurb should mention his war criminal status. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb as TDKR Chicago 101 said, he's clearly important enough for a blurb. I would prefer the original, simpler blurb. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD only Doesn't require a blurb.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have marked this as ready for RD, as there seems to be consensus that it meets the requirement for that. But debate can still continue about blurb or not. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:31, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • How many former presidents have died from covid during the pandemic? Is he the first? 2A02:2F0E:D620:E000:74D2:26DA:22AE:ECDF (talk) 19:34, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD Stephen 23:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Ongoing/Blurb:2020 Summer Paralympics

Proposed image
Article: 2020 Summer Paralympics (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2020 Summer Paralympics open in Tokyo. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The opening ceremony of the 2020 Summer Paralympics takes place in the Olympic Stadium (pictured) in Tokyo.
News source(s): [13], [14]
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: 2020 Summer Paralympics starts today. The worlds biggest summer sports event for the disabled. Even if blurb is not approved, this should go to Ongoing. Feel free to change blurb. BabbaQ (talk) 09:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Added an image of the national stadium. We may hopefully get freely licenced images of the opening ceremony in time. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb We blurbed the Olympics, so we should also blurb the Paralympics. The opening ceremony has occurred (though I haven't seen it yet b/c US replay primetime hasn't happened yet as of posting this comment). -TenorTwelve (talk) 18:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 00:24, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Kyle Anderson (darts player)

Article: Kyle Anderson (darts player) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [15], [16]
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article looks in decent shape Joseph2302 (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Mangala Samaraweera

Article: Mangala Samaraweera (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Daily Mirror, EconomyNext
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: served as a politician for over 30 years. Abishe (talk) 07:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

August 23

August 23, 2021 (2021-08-23) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: William J. Boarman

Article: William J. Boarman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USGPO, WaPo
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
Public Printer of the United States. Died on August 22nd. Death announced by the United States Government Publishing Office on August 23rd. Obituary in the Washington Post on August 27th. This wikibio needs quite a bit of work to get its referencing cleaned up. Not sure if this can be done while this nom is still eligible. Oh, well,... please feel free to jump in and fix things as you see fit. --PFHLai (talk) 11:07, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

RD: Rosita Quintana

Article: Rosita Quintana (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN En Español, LA Times (In Spanish)
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
Dimmi!!! 04:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

(Posted) RD: Jimmy Hayes (ice hockey)

Article: Jimmy Hayes (ice hockey) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Boston Globe
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

August 22

August 22, 2021 (2021-08-22) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Kay Bullitt

Article: Kay Bullitt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Seattle Times
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: R.I.P. --PFHLai (talk) 02:10, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support Solid coverage of subject's life and career, referenced. SpencerT•C 22:16, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A couple of unsourced, semi-trivial details about her family members. Otherwise well cited.—Bagumba (talk) 10:56, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for pointing this out, Bagumba. I thought I had already fixed this line (apparently from her daughter a few year back). All her kids, including Benjamin who had died earlier, were listed in her obituary in the Seattle Times. I meant to put a footnote there but forgot. I have simplified that sentence a bit and inserted the requisite footnote just now. Hope this helps. --PFHLai (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 09:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lloyd Dobyns

Article: Lloyd Dobyns (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press; Deadline Hollywood
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 09:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Rod Gilbert

Article: Rod Gilbert (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; Associated Press; NHL.com
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 08:40, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Closed) Tennessee floods

No consensus to post. Stephen 04:58, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 2021 Tennessee floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Flash flooding in the U.S. state of Tennessee kills at least 22 people. (Post)
News source(s): AP, NY Times, Guardian, WaPo
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Several dozen people currently missing; broke rainfall records originally set in 2010. Ionmars10 (talk) 21:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- floods rarely are this devastating in the developed world. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 22:08, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose some uncited text in article and is one of the less impactful/noteworthy weather events occurring in the U.S. right now. Would support a blurb explicitly about Henri tho but without mentioning each state. 98.116.81.179 (talk) 22:14, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Tennessee floods regularly. This is a bad one, but trivial in the big scheme of things. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:15, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They broke the state record for rain in a day by 25% and 22 deaths is over the 11-17 where even US mass shootings get in. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:56, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Well, not exactly trivial, but parochial and probably lacking broader signficance. It's a weather story, after all. – Sca (talk) 22:31, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this isn't "In the American (local) news", not ITN worthy. And article is way short on quality too. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's a snark in your lordship's remark. – Sca (talk) 22:58, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't understand your logic; you're not supposed to oppose because it's local news. That's one of the criteria. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 03:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All news is local somewhere, or so they say. – Sca (talk) 13:32, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I have only seen floods in Asia than the U.S., because in the U.S. floods appears regularly while in Asia floods can be unexpected despite the regularity. 36.77.93.99 (talk) 23:10, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: Are those images on the wikipage really in PD? Wikiarticles with images that are potentially copyvio should not get on ITN as the bold link.--PFHLai (talk) 01:37, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it seems exhaustingly futile to bring this up, but we posted three different floods in July (one twice) [17] [18] [19] and not a single one was dismissed as "parochial" (which is listed in please-do-not above anyway). Floods in Tennessee are actually not as common as monsoons in SE Asia. The article is already more detailed than the posted 2021 Maharashtra floods. Honestly, if commentators would just "Oppose I do not want to see stories about the United States posted" I'd at least respect the honestly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaserLegs (talk • contribs) 01:48, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • While I agree with your sentiment, there were a lot more deaths from floods in those countries. Also, I have no idea what the IP above is saying, does anyone know? -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 03:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A reminder of context: it looks like a baby flood to most of the world but Tennessee and presumably wherever else about to get hit are woefully under-prepared. Let's see if it sustains past this news cycle before a newsworthy vote, and by then I assume the weather project will have improved the article. Kingsif (talk) 05:55, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment In the last two days, 42% of nominations have been of the Tennessee death variety. That's not a good thing or a bad thing. Just plain remarkable. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:11, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'd consider posting natural disasters that are 1) rare occurrence (e.g. summer floods in dry areas such as Southern Europe, North Africa, Southwestern Untied States), 2) cause unprecedented damage (e.g. high number of casualties, severe destruction of buildings and infrastructure, and also labelled as the worst floods in a long period of time such as 2021 European floods) or 3) severely impact large areas (e.g. tropical cyclones in southeastern North America and typhoons in Southeast Asia that are regular but result in mass evacuations every year). This one fails to meet all three. I see that we posted 2010 Tennessee floods but this doesn't seem to be of the same scale.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:36, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Reserving judgment for now, as several reports say dozens missing. – Sca (talk) 12:16, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    That's nothing new. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Could reach a tipping p†. – Sca (talk) 13:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:44, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a broad general comment - we should avoid posting "small" death tolls from natural disasters that themselves are routine/annual (tornados in spring-summer in the US, floods in spring in Asia, wildfires in nearly all places in spring-summer, etc.), where "small" is going to be for debate. But flooding is rather unusual in the US when not tied to hurricanes, and 20-some is generally not considered small. --Masem (t) 14:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Summer floods in the US may be unusual in San Francisco, Phoenix or Las Vegas and I'd probably support a blurb if these cities get flooded whatever the damage or casualties. But for places with even distribution of precipitation throughout the year where every third summer day experiences rain on average, it's definitely not unusual.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I modestly suggest that it's not the amount of rain involved that may be significant, it's the number of people who lost their lives. – Sca (talk) 18:51, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They broke the state record for rain in a day by over 25%. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:21, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Unusual flash flood event. It led to deaths precisely because the amount of rainfall is unusual and was not predicted. If this sort of weather event were a normal thing, then people would have been warned and evacuated as a precaution. Count Iblis (talk) 18:29, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – That the victims presumably are (mostly) U.S.-Americans should have nothing to do with assessing the significance of this event. – Sca (talk) 18:46, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

LeMans 24 race

Article: 
Team WRT win LMP2 and AF Corse win GTEAm and GTEPro series (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In motorsport, Mike Conway, Kamui Kobayashi and José María López of Toyota Gazoo Racing win the 24 Hours of Le Mans
.
Credits:

Article needs updating
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Article needs major update and work to reflect the race results Abcmaxx (talk) 15:23, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Oppose lacking citations and lacking prose. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why in the world would you use language like "takes the chequered flag" when you know there's a 0% chance we would use anything besides "wins"? Also, I can't imagine we would post the winner of every class- that'd be like also posting the winner of a weekend's NASCAR Truck Series race. Additionally, oppose because the article is incredibly weak. -- Kicking222 (talk) 19:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Response Because there's 3 rotating drivers, so he is 1 of winners just happens to be the one that went last. No idea what NASCAR Trucks series looks like but this very different Abcmaxx (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the case, I feel like either mention all 3 drivers or none of them.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 21:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the article doesn't even have the race results, yet alone adequate prose for an article wanting to be on the front page. And blurb should be the three drivers and team name that won, rather than every class. Reliable sources headline just ghe winners, not every class, and so should we. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:28, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Comment – Impactfulness nonapparent. – Sca (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's ITNR, so only consideration is article quality not importance. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment altblurb added- if someone could fix template so it actually shows, would be good. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:35, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready, not even close. At minimum there needs to be a couple of paragraphs of referenced prose describing what happened at the race. The contrast with the level of coverage in the 2020 article is immense. If/when the article is substantially expanded, the altblurb is the way to go. Modest Genius talk 12:13, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: the article is still just tables with no prose. Modest Genius talk 13:04, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Joe Grech (snooker player)

Article: Joe Grech (snooker player) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Joe Grech
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: 1997 World Amateur Billiards champion and 21 times Maltese English Billiards Championship winner. Abishe (talk) 12:02, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Jeanne Robertson

Article: Jeanne Robertson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [20], [21]
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Jeanne Robertson, a highly accomplished woman (former Miss North Carolina, Toastmaster, humorist, Motivational Speaker, Athlete, list goes on) passed away recently, and I think she is accomplished enough to deserve a mention. EEBuchanan (talk) 05:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I think User:Joseph2302 was referring to Ref.#2 (the deadlink) and #14 being used 10+ times each in the wikibio, and #14 used to link to an article archived at the subject's own website. I have found that original article and have changed the link back to its original site. I have also added a few extra refs. Ref.#2 is rarely used alone in the wikibio now. Hope this helps. --PFHLai (talk) 01:56, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am now too involved with this article and therefore should recuse myself from further review. Another admin, please, will have to review this nom and post this on ITN as they see fit. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 02:18, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 21

August 21, 2021 (2021-08-21) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

  • 2020–21 Malaysian political crisis
    • prime minister of Malaysia. (CNA)

Science and technology

RD: Don Everly

Article: The Everly Brothers (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone, Deadline Hollywood
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Half of the legendary duo. Article is not currently up to snuff, but posting here in hopes that someone will take it on. Teemu08 (talk) 13:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Phil Valentine

Article: Phil Valentine (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Anti-vaxxer dies from complications of .... guess what – Muboshgu (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Kalyan Singh

Article: Kalyan Singh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NTDV, Times of India
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Noted Indian Politician . Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:33, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

August 20

August 20, 2021 (2021-08-20) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

Wrestling News

(Posted) RD: David Roberts (climber)

Article: David Roberts (climber) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Boston Globe
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 01:38, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Igor Vovkovinskiy

Article: Igor Vovkovinskiy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC NEWS
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Count Iblis (talk) 03:59, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Tom T. Hall

Article: Tom T. Hall (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, Tennessean
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Standard disclaimer of some claims needing references. rawmustard (talk) 06:34, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Chuck Close

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

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American photorealist painter. Article looks in good shape and well referenced. 2A00:23C5:5082:6101:5168:6B97:2327:A0C6 (talk) 17:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) New Malaysian Prime Minister appointed

Article: 
King of Malaysia as its 9th Prime Minister.
News source(s): Reuters, AP, DW, The Straits Times

Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: I'm a people that does not fluently speak and write English, but Ismail Sabri Yaakob has been appointed as Malaysian Prime Minister. Anyone can adding a new information about him, but the change of government is ITN/R. 36.77.95.182 (talk) 10:43, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Bloody hell, they removed the video. --180.244.175.3 (talk) 11:07, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there any particular reason why the PMs article is not the target one? At a quick glance, it has less tags and other issues than the lenghty crisis one. --Tone 11:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb II New PM is already sworn in, so it may be necessary to posted. 116.206.35.10 (talk) 13:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support World leaders are already making calls to this leader. We hope we are not late in posting the news--Exec8 (talk) 06:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]
  • Comments: The story is ITN material, but which link should be bolded in the blurb? The proposed bolded link leads to
    2020–2021 Malaysian political crisis, an article with three orange tags. We can't use it on ITN like that. Is there any SUPPORT for the article Ismail Sabri Yaakob instead? Please focus on article quality and its readiness for an appearance on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 13:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I think
2020–2021 Malaysian political crisis is an correct bolded link because there were a chronology resulting from resignations and appointments of Malaysian Prine Ministers. Feel free if you want to bolded Ismail Sabri Yaakob or Prime Minister of Malaysia instead in the main page because regardless of that, the story can be posted. 114.125.249.235 (talk) 18:37, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
2020–2021 Malaysian political crisis is not eligible for ITN purposes till the orange-tagged issues are resolved. It has three such tags. --PFHLai (talk) 19:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
I think the 3rd blurb would be a good compromise. -- Exec8 (talk) 02:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt III. – robertsky (talk) 08:36, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. But I will bold the PMs article, as it makes more sense. --Tone 09:40, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Shouldn't there at least be a bit of mention towards the political crisis that precipitated this. Gotitbro (talk) 14:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment yes, I agree it needs to be mentioned. I wish to suggest alt blurb: "
    political crisis." It's worth noting the article for Ismail Sabri is currently only considered "start-class" by WikiProject Malaysia, and still has multiple language issues. It was in even worse shape just a few days before his appointment. The article for the political crisis has a few tags to improve certain sections, but is much more well developed, sourced and written than that of Ismail Sabri. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 22:05, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

August 19

August 19, 2021 (2021-08-19) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

  • 2020–2021 global chip shortage
    • Toyota reduces its production quota for next month by 40% due to the resurgence of COVID-19 in Asia severely impacting the company's supply chains, especially those involved in chip production. Up to this point, the company was one of the only major car manufacturers to avoid scaling back production during the pandemic. Volkswagen warns that it might also have to reduce its production quotas for similar reasons. (BBC News)
  • Content subscription service OnlyFans announces that it will ban sexually explicit material beginning in October. The policy changes, according to UK-based company, are "to comply with the requests of the banking partners and payout providers". (Variety)

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

  • Rain falls on the summit of Greenland for the first time in recorded history. The rain shower dumped more than 7 billion tonnes of water on the ice sheet. (CNN)

Sports

(Posted) RD: Peter Harding (RAF officer, born 1933)

Article: Peter Harding (RAF officer, born 1933) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: R.I.P. --PFHLai (talk) 06:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Junaid Babunagari

Article: Junaid Babunagari (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (GulfNews), (DhakaTribune)
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Help with referencing is needed. --PFHLai (talk) 05:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: James W. Loewen

Article: James W. Loewen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; Associated Press
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 01:30, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support Article is in good shape. A tragic loss. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:17, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a number of footnoted refs that need to be reformatted, otherwise this wikibio is READY for RD. I am dressing up some of the bare URL, but need to get offline for a little bit. Please feel free to beat me to reformat the rest. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 21:41, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think we expect well formatted references as long as references are there (Though there is one dead link). Obviously, if it was only using all bare refs, that would be an issue, but the lack of normalization of refs isn't really a ITN quality issue. --Masem (t) 21:44, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      I have clothed the bare naked URLs, and raised the dead link from archive. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 13:00, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Michael Cullen

Article: Michael Cullen (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former deputy prime minister of NZ, three decades in politics. Article in good shape.  Nixinova   T   C   05:33, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

I have improved the referencing based on this. Kiwichris (talk) 03:50, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted There are no more bare URLs left and only 1 {{
    cn}} tag, which is not controversial at all. (More like a minor/trivial POV issue.) --PFHLai (talk) 13:07, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

(Posted) RD: Arthur J. Ammann

Article: Arthur J. Ammann (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Global Strategies (the AIDS organisation he founded)
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
ping}} me in replies) 20:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

RD: Sonny Chiba

Article: Sonny Chiba (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Prolific Japanese actor with more recent notable roles in Kill Bill and F&F: Tokyo Drift. COVID-related death. Article needs a lot of sourcing TLC to post. Masem (t) 17:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Bill Freehan

Article: Bill Freehan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Detroit Free Press; The Detroit News; MLB.com
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 16:51, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Volodymyr Holubnychy

Article: Volodymyr Holubnychy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): World Athletics
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: 5 time Olympian and 2 time Olympic champion. Abishe (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

August 18

August 18, 2021 (2021-08-18) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Sports

(Posted) RD: B. Wayne Hughes

Article: B. Wayne Hughes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Los Angeles Times; Associated Press
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 10:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Olav Akselsen

Article: Olav Akselsen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NRK, Dagsavisen (both in Norwegian)
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Death announced on 18 August, looks like a decent article. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Franz Josef Altenburg

Article: Franz Josef Altenburg (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ots and many in German
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Notable Austrian ceramicist who just received the highest Austrian decoration for arts on the occasion of his 80th birthday, had no article yet, - thanks all who changed that. Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Joseph L. Galloway

Article: Joseph L. Galloway (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post; Associated Press; United Press International
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 10:12, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Austin Mitchell

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

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Veteran British Member of Parliament. Article is pretty good. Black Kite (talk) 23:28, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Closed) Russia to test nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed cruise missile

The usual time waster. Stephen 00:04, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 9M730 Burevestnik (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russia to test the 9M730 Burevestnik nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed cruise missile (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:
 Count Iblis (talk) 20:33, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No reason given why it is eligible to be posted. It is a
    WP:CRYSTAL. 36.77.94.84 (talk) 20:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Sean Lock

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

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: British comedian, refs need improvement improved Mjroots (talk) 10:24, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Added a lot of refs. Will try and find more later. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 11:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Referencing seems to have improved, article looks good now.--Jayron32 12:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting support Note: date of death not yet determined now reported today as 16th August. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 17

August 17, 2021 (2021-08-17) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Rock Demers

Article: Rock Demers (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV News (Canadian Press); Le Journal de Montréal
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Carolyn S. Shoemaker

Article: Carolyn S. Shoemaker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Planetary News
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced. Her death happened on the 13th but was confirmed by Lisa Gaddis, Director of the Lunar and Planetary Institute today. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Maki Kaji

Article: Maki Kaji (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Person credited with popularizing sudoku puzzles. Died on the 10th but only seeing mass coverage of it today. Article is far too short right now to post, but obits today may help. Masem (t) 13:48, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

August 16

August 16, 2021 (2021-08-16) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

  • The Speaker of the Tongan Parliament, Lord Fakafanua, introduces the Illicit Drugs Control (Amendment) Bill 2021 for debate in the legislative assembly. The Speaker wants a mandatory death sentence for serious drug offenses. Tonga has a moratorium on the death penalty and has not used it in more than four decades. (RNZ International)
  • The last living Khmer Rouge leader, Khieu Samphan, appears before a court in Phnom Penh in order to appeal his conviction and attempt to overturn it. The 90-year-old's hearing is expected to last for only a few days as analysts say that it is very unlikely that he will succeed in his appeal. (Deutsche Welle)
  • In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Uganda strikes down a 2014 law outlawing the distribution of pornography and wearing of "indecent" clothes as unconstitutional. Women's rights groups in the country campaigned against the law since its inception, saying it unfairly singled out women for discrimination. (BBC News)

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Anandha Kannan

Article: Anandha Kannan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Indian Express
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Tamil VJ Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:24, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) 2021 Zambian general election

Article: 2021 Zambian general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Hakainde Hichilema (pictured) is elected President of Zambia. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Africanews
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 Joofjoof (talk) 08:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support, though the domestic reaction could be a bit longer, given the fact that the incumbent president called it unfair. But most of the content is there. --Tone 09:25, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose for now - some more prose needed on the results, particularly as it seems the electoral commission has confirmed the result this morning. Looks good otherwise though, and this is quite a momentous result, as the incumbent Lungu is seen as quite a "strong man" and he might yet attempt to overturn the results.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. Outcome now confirmed in the article, along with Lungu's concession, and looks good otherwise. Good to go.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:31, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not a big fan of the Twitter refs, but the article is OK.
    talk) 18:37, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Posting. --Tone 09:49, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I've raised a query with Icem4k regarding the image above, to check if it is appropriately licensed for use on the main page. It has an author of "National Archives of Zambia" so not sure if it's Icem4k's own work or not. We should probably hold off posting the image until that's confirmed. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Update. Icem4k has now confirmed to me that the image is their own, so I've swapped it in. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 11:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Malaysia government collapses

Consensus is to wait. Stephen 00:10, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 
resigns following the withdrawal of support by one of the government coalition's parties (Post)
News source(s): [22] [23]

Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Currently I'm seeing much more coverage of the regime change in Afghanistan. Article is also orange tagged. Banedon (talk) 08:27, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment In addition to the multiple orange tags, this appears to be a mundane hand-off of power. I'm struggling to discover what makes this a "crisis" when it is routine politics elsewhere.130.233.213.61 (talk) 08:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we usually wait until someone else is appointed, as that is ITNR. And the article has multiple orange and yellow tags that would need fixing before it could even be considered. If someone takes over, fix their article and then that can run. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support if Muhyiddin's replacement announced For me, it should not be posted because there is unknown who is successor of Muhyiddin and usually the change of government be posted as ITNR. 36.77.110.10 (talk) 11:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support... kinda. Yes, normally we wait for a successor to be at least named and for their successorship to be accepted by a decent enough size group to "count" before we post. This is unique, however - it's not so much "government that had support at one point collapses, successor unknown", it's more of "yet another attempt at having a government fails in Malaysia". To many, my view may seem like it should lead to an oppose - and in a vacuum, it would - however I feel it is also useful to consider the fact that another government has collapsed - the Afghan elected government. I think the mere fact that the elected government of one country and the "status quo" government of another have fallen within hours of each other is significant enough to warrant both being posted in ITN - but I'm not sure that a blurb for each is warranted. I do think the situation in Malaysia should be covered in the ITN section of the main page somehow... but I'm not sure how is best. My suggestion is to have a combined blurb such as In Afghanistan, the government collapses as
    its leaders resign. To me the mere fact that two governments have collapsed in such close succession is itself a fact that is "in the news" - but this is just my opinion really. I would not be surprised to see news stories dedicated to the temporal concurrence soon. The collapse of the Malaysian government doesn't really qualify for ongoing (for reasons I don't think need explaining), but this is another option - post the crisis there to ongoing until a new government is formed (or something else happens that would blurb-qualify), then give it a blurb. TLDR: I think Malaysia should be somehow referenced in the ITN section, but with regards to how and where exactly, I'm flummoxed. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 14:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • I don't think that combining this with the Kabul blurb is a good idea. Let's simply post when the new PM is appointed. --Tone 17:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree that we should not combine this with the Afghanistan blurb. The two events have absolutely nothing to do with each other, and combining them would be bizarre to say the least. We don't combine election blurbs when elections in multiple countries occur at around the same time; the same principle applies here. Mlb96 (talk) 20:14, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, and I'm combining that with opposition to the Canadian government's collapse; no prejudice against posting either next PM in good time. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:09, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. We could post the result of the new government formation, but not the end of an old one. Kabul was different because that was a military conquest, not standard politics. Re-nominate if/when there is a new prime minister. Modest Genius talk 11:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Change of government is ITN/R, so we'll surely post something, but it's best to wait for some more developments. His resignation can be part of a blurb about his successor whenever they're named.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 22:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

August 15

August 15, 2021 (2021-08-15) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: Joe Walton

Article: Joe Walton (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
talk) 00:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

(Posted) RD: Paul Mitchell (politician)

Article: Paul Mitchell (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Detroit News
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 16:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Cary M. Maguire

Article: Cary M. Maguire (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Dallas Morning News
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: First reported today (August 15); died on August 10 —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

@Bloom6132: The stub template is still present at the bottom of the page. Also a lot of Citation overkill, red links, and references not cited correctly such as these sources: [24], [25] Inexpiable (talk) 17:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as above. If you remove personal life etc, the main body about the activities that would make him notable are 5 lines. Secondly, the sourcing is not appropriate, out of the 11 sources, 1-4, 7 and 9-11 are not independent as they are either profiles from his company's page, or from organisations that he sponsors, so obviously they would be very friendly Bumbubookworm (talk) 02:42, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Michael M. Thomas

Article: Michael M. Thomas (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: First reported today (August 15); died on August 7 —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Ernie Sigley

Article: Ernie Sigley (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Highly awarded Australian TV and radio host HiLo48 (talk) 02:26, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

There weren't yesterday. I do wish people would put the effort into finding sources, rather than just finding fault. I'll probably just delete that content, even though it's in no way controversial, just to get this posted. Is that how we want ITN to work? HiLo48 (talk) 22:15, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2020–21 Formula E World Championship

Consensus for posting is unlikely to develop.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:30, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: 2020–21 Formula E World Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In autosport, Nyck de Vries wins the Formula E World Championship. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In autosport, Nyck de Vries wins the Formula E World Championship, while Mercedes-EQ claim the teams' title.
News source(s): motorsport.com
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Not an ITNR item but could be since it has became a world championship. Unnamelessness (talk) 15:29, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose target is weak, and doesn't really describe in detail the events of the season. It appears that the Nyck de Vries article isn't even updated, unless you consider one unreferenced sentence a suitable improvement. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:00, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Motorsport is already well represented at ITN. The argument to add more would be either that the event is very popular (such as the EPL), or distinct enough form existing codes/formats to be treated as it's own (Grey Cup). Formula E has too weak argument on both fronts at this stage. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:16, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The physical football can start in a wider range of places in college than in NFL which makes strategy less rote and emphasizes the asymmetry and specialization between the strong side players on the strong side of the ball and the weak side players on the weak side, is that distinct enough? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Remember the hundreds of times a game when the fatties get ready for sumo then one snaps the ball? In NFL you can only do that up to 9.25 feet from the centerline, in college you can do that up to 20 feet from the centerline (the one parallel to the side of the field). The ball starting further from the center affects play. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both on importance and article quality. Formula E is a poor man's Formula One (which is why it's filled with F1 rejects and youngstars hoping to make the step up to F1 in the future). Not important enough to a broad audience therefore. On article quality, it would need a summary like 2020 Formula One World Championship#Season summary. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:24, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • If we're going by the criteria above than we would never post anything that isn't F1 because every other motorsport on the planet is filled with as you put it F1 rejects and youngsters hoping to make the step up to F1 in the future, and given F1 is by far the richest motorsport formula around, again, everything else is a poor man's Formula One by that standard. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:08, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well WEC or DTM would be considered way more notable, as they're proper series in their own right (and not filled with rejects like Formula E) But Formula E isn't anywhere near as popular as any of those- the champion is a Mercedes F1 test driver. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:16, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • DTM is a terrible example, the winner René Rast is leaving to join Formula E permanently after many years of being on the FE sidelines! Let's also add that DTM famously failed to expand outside of Germany many times and even within Germany struggled to get manufacturers onboard. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:34, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not even in the sports news. Kingsif (talk) 18:53, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: even though it's a FIA world championship, that doesn't grant it automatic ITNR status; whether it should is a different matter. My own view is that if we were to give another FIA championship ITNR status, I'd go for the WEC over FE, because despite the FIA's efforts, it's still not seen as equal to F1, the WRC, or the WEC. Sceptre (talk) 20:28, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I do not agree with the comments above; this championship is unique, as are the cars, format and everything else about it and does have widespread coverage, more so than most other motorsport events. We should not be looking what newspapers/media outlets post, if we did we'd never post any sports news that isn't top 5-EPL football news; the criteria is it encyclopaedic and is it important, and I would strongly argue yes to both. There's a reason all major car manufacturers and top racing drivers take part, and TV rights are hotly contested by e.g. Eurosport. Also it's truly global, unlike some of the other motorsports that get posted. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • We should not be looking what newspapers/media outlets post - literally how else would you define "in the news". Please, tell me. Also, Eurosport is basically brand new and everyone hates it for stealing Olympic airing rights for all of Europe so national broadcasters got shafted but go off on its relevance lol Kingsif (talk) 01:19, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed, "in the news" is for covering what is in the news, that people might come on here to look at. Seeing as Formula E didn't even make BBC News (and was never more covered than halfway down the news articles on BBC Sport), I don't see how anyone can suggest that this is ITN-worthy. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:15, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted RD) RD/Blurb: Gerd Müller

Article: Gerd Müller (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  German footballer Gerd Müller dies at the age of 75. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Süddeutsche Zeitung
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: One of the most famous German footballers. SoWhy 11:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

It's odd how I (and many Americans) find it boring that Messi can get only ~0.9 goals per game instead of like 3 or 4 but if a baseballer ever gets 0.4 home runs per game (which is 3-4 hours) again for even 1 season without doping I'd be amazed (my soccer attention span is 2 hours per matchday per World Cup) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I (and many Earthlings) would rather watch MMA, where even the low-card losers regularly rack up 24 to 28 points in 15 minutes. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why do some combat athletes that suck get 8 points? It's like you're equally skilled you can still get 9 points, you suck you get 8 points, you suck AND commit a foul you get 7 points. If MMA was like soccer they'd have to start 100 yards apart, one guy would have to try to connect a kick to the head in 1 try while handcuffed and the other would have to wait for the kick to reach a point chosen to be "the end of easily duckable" (to keep score around 2-0) before he can duck to simulate not knowing whether to dive left or right till the soccer ball leaves the foot (and for fairness the rest of the kick would have to be as predictable as a fast kick could be, no more tricks). Penalize touching opponent besides a kick to the head so no one does it, alternate turns from 100 yards, repeat for 96 minutes with a short halftime unless there's an instant win like ref stoppage. If you can hire Telemundo or Univision soccer commentators then even better (I don't know if you get Mexican channels like us but if you watch enough soccer eventually one of the instances of speedtalk and getting more and more excited isn't a miss so they take a deep breath and yell GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! GOL! like a train horn and the goal also replaces the score with the word GOL rotating like a planet and starts a railroad crossing bell sound or siren or something like that) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What would make soccer fun again is just a return to a simpler foul system. If a player is accidentally kicked in the eye, junk or back of the neck, put the cards away and see if they can shake it off, ref! If not, instant draw. If the kick's intentional, instant win! If instant replay shows it was a free and fair cleat to the upper inner thigh, kisser or temple, the attacking team (and the crowd) celebrate sudden victory with style points, and go home happy, maybe drink a [British Coors equivalent] and get on top of their husbands and/or wives like they used to in Rome. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A team that only needs a draw to advance will try to get someone bumped and he'll flop in pain till the game ends. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just like real life! Anyway, I gotta run. Just remember, in all sincerity, they don't have to suck for pieces of eight anymore, the judges' cabal lowered the bar three or four years ago. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was probably started to make boxing matches seem closer than they actually are, a dumb trick that still helps a little like the prices ending in 9's thing. It just seems closer than say 3 points for a win and 0 being like a 7 (can you get 7 points in UFC now without fouling? I don't know how many levels the judges can differentiate, they should just use that many tiers and make the lowest tier without fouling 0 points) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A natural 10-7 is a rare bird indeed, and oddly enough, Sammy Morgan got his (from one judge) well before the 10-8 was made easier. There are also very rare two-point foul deductions. So, in theory, a five-point must system is all we need to give a zero to those unicorns who just barely survive despite cheating like there's no tomorrow, without worrying about scorecards dipping into the Minus World (which I assume would destroy all worlds). InedibleHulk (talk) 01:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - Major international footballer. Mjroots (talk) 14:25, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb for consistency. We didn't post Cruyff so Muller doesn't get posted. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 14:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    And for such a "legendary player", pitiful coverage of his career in the article. For a quick comparison, see Johan Cruyff. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:53, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, as a major figure in his field ( football). Jackattack1597 (talk) 15:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb I supported a blurb for Cruyff and would like to support one for Müller. The wrong that no blurb was posted for Cruyff's death cannot be righted by not posting this one. After all, football is a very big deal so there should be some room to post iconic and influential players other than Maradona.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:07, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Old Man Dies RD only, please. If he's famous, people will still notice and click his name. Especially his fans. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb when page up to scratch: As I saw cited on Ballon d'Or, Muller was one of eight players to win the World Cup, European Cup/Champions League and Ballon d'Or. [26] That's an exclusive club. He remains 87 goals clear in the Bundesliga scoring charts 42 years after his retirement. The decision not to post Cruyff - who aside from his club, international and managerial honours was recognised as one of the true transformers of football into its modern form [27] - should not form precedent. Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb on the simple grounds that one was not posted for Cruyff.--WaltCip-(talk) 16:03, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb In addition to the facts pointed above, this article is awfully short for someone claimed to be a major player. His stats may be impressive, but let's compare to someone like Pelé or Wayne Gretzky (in terms of content) --Masem (t) 16:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb for now. We have pretty high standards for death blurbs in virtually every category except politicians (who, by virtue of their leadership of a nation probably ought to get death blurbs the most often). Is Gerd Muller one of the greatest soccer players of all time? I'd argue that he falls short of the Maradona/Pele/Messi standard, so he doesn't get a blurb. (As evidence, consider this list or this list, both of which put him all the way down at 12th all time; or this list which has him at 17th. All the lists seem to imply we were wrong to deny Cruyff a blurb, though, as they all elevate Cruyff into that Maradona/Pele/Messi echelon.) NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, not that it matters, but there are fourteen footballers who are listed as Level 4 vital articles, and Gerd Muller is not one of them. To me, that suggests that he's just not high enough up the list for a death blurb. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per article quality, too short for that. But support RD.BabbaQ (talk) 20:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted RD --PFHLai (talk) 23:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Afghan Government collapse

Article: 
twenty-year long war.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The Afghan government collapses as the capital city of Kabul falls to the ongoing offensive by the Taliban and President Ashraf Ghani flees the country.
News source(s): Alarabiya News, AP, BBC, Guardian, Reuters, Al Jazeera, MSN

Credits:

Nominator's comments: Obviously post it when (if) it happens, but given that Al Arabiya has a pretty good track record of generally being cautious with their sources, I doubt this doesnt come true. --212.74.201.233 (talk) 10:03, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait till the president of the new "transitional government" is announced. We can also nominate an RD for Afghan women's rights Scaramouche33 (talk) 10:47, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, that's not all that bad. At least Bacha bazi's gonna be banned 212.74.201.233 (talk) 10:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I see. So that makes a brutal medieval fundamentalist regime, which enslaves women, perfectly acceptable, yes? Must have been in that Taliban manifesto leaflet I binned. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I did not say it's preferable, what you are doing is a textbook example of stramanning. With that being said, as a left0-wing atheist who is fundamentally opposed to the Taliban's ideology, if I had a choice between making my daughter wear hijab outside, and having my son get raped by some 50-year old militia commander, I'd prefer the former to the latter. Cheers. 212.74.201.233 (talk) 15:17, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Have her married off at 13 to a Taliban murderer and endure a life of domestic drudgery too, would you? But I'm not sure choices in Afghanistan are quite that simple. And not sure Bacha bazi is likely to feature in any ITN blurb. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:48, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, but post once Kabul falls.Jackattack1597 (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Call me crazy, but the last time the Taliban was in control as thousands of Americans arrived to liberate and protect their "Afghan people", this endless 20-year war began. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Extended content
Maybe we should wait until 9/11, when the "planned withdrawal" was supposed to be complete? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:25, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. What's the tallest symbolic building left standing in Afghanistan? When we see it crumble on TV, then we can safely say mission accomplished, "we got 'em" or whatever again. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think Osama bin Laden's been found. But was it posted at ITN? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:39, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I always thought he was killed in 2001, before ITN was cool. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Meanwhile, wisps of smoke could be seen near the embassy’s roof as diplomats urgently destroyed sensitive documents, according to two American military officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the situation." InedibleHulk (talk) 12:12, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait—But I will obviously support when it happens (I wish I could also say "if" it happens). Kurtis (talk) 11:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – in principle – as story develops. Widely covered (see added sources above). No-brainer. – Sca (talk) 12:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until he actually resigns and they enter the capital. At the moment, sources are saying that he could resign, that he is planning to resign or is in negotiations over resigning, but hasn't resigned quite yet. At the moment, Kabul is still under govt control, although that could change by the end of the day. When/if these events happen, Strong Support for their inclusion, as they would be some of the biggest intl' news in recent memory. Goodposts (talk) 12:19, 15 August 2021 (UTC) P.S. Just a few hours after I posted this, Ghani left the country and the Taliban entered Kabul. There is nothing to wait for anymore. Goodposts (talk) 14:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - We should be using this article
    Battle of Kabul (2021) Sherenk1 (talk) 12:28, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support (and oh, cr*p...) - The Economic Times has confirmed here... Turns out that was confirmation that he will step down, not that he has stepped down... Anyways... Tube·of·Light 13:25, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in a few hours Jerusalem Post has reported the resignation as fact. Juxlos (talk) 13:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since we also don't know whether this actually ends the war (maybe there's more anti-Taliban insurgency or something), I propose an alternate blurb:
    Ali Ahmad Jalali as interim head of government. (Jalali's text subject to him actually being appointed, of course). Juxlos (talk) 13:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Some of us actually remember this. – Sca (talk) 14:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The current situation is that capitulation talks are ongoing, that's big news in its own right. Count Iblis (talk) 14:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Juxlos' Alt, pending extreme cleanup on Jalali. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Al Jazeera says Ghani has left Kabul for Tajikistan. Not clear whether he's resigned. – Sca (talk) 14:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

  • Support BBC now reporting that Ashraf Ghani has done a runner, this is all over bar the shouting. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 14:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Well, now Vietnam has been surpassed as a metaphor for U.S. military catastrophes.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Smile for the camera, boys. – Sca (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Proposing altblurb 2 based on the recent developments 212.74.201.233 (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for altblurb2. Kabul has fallen, Afghanistan continued their reputation to be graveyard for empires. SunDawntalk 15:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until final collapse confirmed. Papers still reporting Taliban preparing to enter Kabul.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:40, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    "Fallen" not yet unequivocally reported by major RS sources, obvious though it seems. T-ban quoted saying there'll be no transitional government, they're waiting for govt. to surrender. (U.S. embassy staff being moved to Kabul airport.) – Sca (talk) 15:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: Is ending the twenty-year long war in the proposed blurbs really true? --PFHLai (talk) 15:46, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    War in Afghanistan (2001–present) says no. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Even Operation Freedom's Sentinel has 16 days left, semiofficially. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The American invasion was a reasonably direct outgrowth of the Afghan Civil War, which in turn was an extension of the Soviet invasion, which was triggered by various uprisings in response to the Saur Revolution. Combat in Afghanistan has been reasonably constant for the past 43 years. --Carnildo (talk) 05:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If you want to go back even more reasonably, Winston Churchill once realized, "The Pashtun tribes are always engaged in private or public war." If an unknown number of sensitive ancient documents hadn't been blown to infinity, we'd have real trouble disambiguating one War in Afghanistan from the next. Apparently excellent toward strangers, though; maybe if Hypothetical Group X only invades for a couple of weeks next time, and stays cool, relatively modern peace might finally have a goddamned chance. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with comment It deserves to go main page but can we conclude that the 20 years war has ended? I think the last phrase should be removed.Seyyed(t-c) 15:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seyyed's proposal above I haven't seen sources saying that the war is over. So I don't think we should be posting that part of the hook. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb 1 Government has collapses and Kabul was overtaken, as reported by multiple sources. The potential set up of a transitional government is a formality that doesn't change what has already happened on the ground. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:11, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting alt1, for which it seems we have the most consensus. Feel free to adjust as the story develops. --Tone 16:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Now let the fun begin. – Sca (talk) 17:26, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @JMonkey2006: for the fall of Kabul? Or did you mean to post this on the Haiti thread? Juxlos (talk) 00:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I did! Got caught in the moment haha JMonkey2006 (talk) 00:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should the offensive still be ongoing? Seems like there isn’t much left for the Taliban to take over. Juxlos (talk) 00:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for bringing up this point. The word "ongoing" is now removed from the blurb on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 02:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong post posting support for alt 3 or 1; major event that pretty much ends the war, though I don't think saying so would be strictly correct.  Nixinova   T   C   04:49, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's all over but the fleeing. [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] – Sca (talk) 12:34, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support. I !voted to wait on previous noms, in the expectation that the Taliban would be victorious within a month or so. I was not expecting less than a week! Apparently conclusive end to a 20yr war. Modest Genius talk 14:23, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Or latest pause in a 50-year one. (Or pushing 200-years, if you want to be even more maximalist one.) US and the Afghan government are gone as protagonists, but might not be too long until the civil -- or conceivably otherwise -- war reconfigures. AB1 or AB3 are for that reason better. (Are we still open here in consideration of mid-posting tweaks of that kind?) 109.255.211.6 (talk) 00:33, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very Strong Post-Posting Support – The Afghanistan Government has collapsed and surrendered to the Taliban, the terrorist group that controlled most of the country prior to the start of the war. This also ends the 20-year-long war. Definitely needed to be posted. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 18:15, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 14

August 14, 2021 (2021-08-14) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

RD: Gabriel Fortuné

Article: Gabriel Fortuné (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AJC
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
talk) 01:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

(Posted) Haiti earthquake

Proposed image
Article: 2021 Haiti earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A 7.2 magnitude earthquake strikes Haiti, killing at least 304 people. (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes, ABC, BBC, AP, Reuters, CNN
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: While there are not yet reports of deaths yet, this has only happend a few hours ago and there is known to be people that got caught in collapsing buildings/etc. I am adding this as something to watch as it has the likelihood to be "bad" (Haiti's just recovering from the 2010 Haiti earthquake of similar magnitude, and the USGS is claiming "high casualties" per CNN above) Masem (t) 16:47, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment almost certainly it will be notable enough. In a few hours, I imagine there will a lot more coverage and information that can be added. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support A earthquake which killed around 30 people (and maybe more) belongs in the news section. Pyramids09 (talk) 18:31, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree, but right now, the actual information on the earthquake in the article is sparce. Over half of the article is just explaining the tectonic plates in the region. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:50, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If the casualalties are not given, that might be interpreted as Wikipedia being racist. 2600:1702:2670:B530:FC7C:D44C:73F6:8E79 (talk) 22:04, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't go that far, but I do think not including the death toll would be an odd decision considering there are clearly a lot of casualties. WaltCip-(talk) 23:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You can say "at least" X amount of deaths to cover the fact that there might be more. -184.56.75.144 (talk) 01:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – in principle, pending honing of article. Around 21:30, BBC, AP, Reuters agreed on toll of 227 – which indeed may increase. – Sca (talk) 21:58, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, article looks as complete as much older earthquake articles. Abductive (reasoning) 23:56, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Closer. There's now some content in the lead not referenced in the body, which needs fixing. Would also like to see a little more expansion of the section titled "earthquake".
    talk) 01:53, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support as per nom HurricaneEdgar 02:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Very notable event. There should be more updates on its impacts however. --CactusTaron (Nopen't) 03:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Obvious choice, just piling on. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:30, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks good to go. Hanamanteo (talk) 08:29, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 08:40, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting support. Also now a large after-shock. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very Strong Post-Posting Support – Another catastrophic earthquake that has left over 1,300 people dead. And the country hasn't even fully recovered from the 2010 quake yet. Definitely deserves posting. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 18:15, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 13

August 13, 2021 (2021-08-13) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: James Hormel

Article: 
talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT

Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
talk) 00:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

RD: Nanci Griffith

Article: Nanci Griffith (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
talk) 00:33, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

(Posted) RD: Alia Muhammad Baker

Article: Alia Muhammad Baker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.iqiraq.news/society/25691--2003.html
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: This is The Librarian of Basra who saved thousands of books in 2003. I'm hoping for English sources to be available soon. --PFHLai (talk) 02:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Gino Strada

Article: Gino Strada (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Corriere della Sera
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Italian human rights activist and war surgeon, founder of Emergency. This wikibio can use some more clean-up, but seems close to be ready for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 17:53, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Douglas Applegate

Article: Douglas Applegate (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times-Reporter
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former member of the United States House of Representatives and 1988 presidential candidate whose death was announced on August 13. Jon698 (talk) 08:21, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Closed) Lab leak is a "likely hypothesis"

Consensus will not develop to post. --Tone 09:54, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Articles: 
origins of the COVID-19 pandemic admits for the first time that lab leak theory is a "likely hypothes" (Post)
News source(s): WaPo, WSJ, NY Post, Le Parisien, El Mundo, Telegraph, France24, AlJazeera, Independent, Fox, Taiwan
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Considering that for over a year the pandemic has been the biggest story, and now officially for the first time the "conspiracy theory" is admitted as a likely hypothesis while "Chinese officials pressured investigation to drop lab-leak hypothesis", with all the misinformation campaigns and discrediting done everywhere, including on this site, I think some kind of update of official mentions need to be published. Even if this is proven beyond reasonable doubt, due to geopolitical games, it is highly unlikely that the WHO would officially accuse anybody, so this might be as much as we will ever get officially. Feel free to shut this down with actual legitimate rationales besides you don't like it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.27.36.191 (talk
)
Eugen Simion 14 "Claims" is not an actual determination or finding of fact. It's what someone thinks. That one person thinks it was a leak, and the WHO says a leak is a possibility(which we already knew) are indeed speculation until there is a formal investigation and finding, which is unlikely without Chinese cooperation. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This was never a "conspiracy theory" and was always a possibility. The conspiracy theory is that it was artificially created in a lab, not that it merely escaped a lab. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose the wording is very misleading, as one can read from the source. "An employee who was infected in the field by taking samples falls under one of the probable hypotheses," Ben Embarek told the interviewers. This implies Ben Embarek considers multiple different hypotheses as "probable", which is surely nonstandard usage of the word. This verges on misinformation and should absolutely not be posted. Banedon (talk) 09:20, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose Pure speculation. There seems to be much confusion about what "likely hypothesis" and "probable hypothesis" actually mean. Superficially there can't be more than one "probable hypothesis", it makes no sense. Unless the phrase "probable hypothesis" simply means that it is probably a hypothesis, rather than a hypothesis with a greater than 50% chance of being correct. Nigej (talk) 09:46, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

August 12

August 12, 2021 (2021-08-12) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Haydée Coloso-Espino

Article: Haydée Coloso-Espino (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://mb.com.ph/2021/08/13/greatest-pinay-swimmer-passes-away/
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: “Asia's Swim Queen" from the 1950s/60s. Her wikibio needs more refs and maybe a little bit of work to make it ready for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 23:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC) I have put in as many footnotes as I can. I hope that would be enough. --PFHLai (talk) 07:09, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Johnny Groth

Article: Johnny Groth (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Palm Beach Daily News; United Press International
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Only reported today (August 12); died on August 7 —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:47, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Kurt Biedenkopf

Article: Kurt Biedenkopf (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel, Die Zeit
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Politician, Former Minister President of Saxony Grimes2 (talk) 19:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

 Done Grimes2 (talk) 07:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I added - with 2 more refs from Spiegel and FAZ - a bit of academic and business career, and wrote a lead. Should suffice. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:54, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 12:23, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John A. Rizzo

Article: John A. Rizzo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; The Washington Post
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Only reported today (August 12); died on August 6 —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:45, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Plymouth shooting

Template:ITN candidate

Oppose: while I am aware of the rarity of this, this appears to a purely domestic matter. (I doubt whether it is truly an thing that should be in Wikipedia, but that can wait.) It is not of a weight now for ITN. --PaulBetteridge (talk) 07:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
and by "domestic", I mean literally to do with a household --PaulBetteridge (talk) 08:29, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose yes, worst mass shooting in a decade but a domestic crime with likely no ongoing impact to the already stringent laws on firearms in the UK. Utterly tragic though. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 08:41, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I suspect it will be largely a domestic UK event. Nigej (talk) 09:29, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • From that article's talk page it seems it was an "in the news" item. Personally I'd still oppose. Big story in the UK but, sadly, pretty common round the world, I suspect. Nigej (talk) 09:58, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cumbria was the third worst mass shooting in the history of the UK so that was perfectly reasonable to post. This event is not ground-breaking at all, just tragic. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 10:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, because it's not important enough. Being rare in the UK doesn't make it notable enough to post. The killer was a lone gunman & there's no indication of any ideological motive. Jim Michael (talk) 10:04, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose Yes, incredibly rare in the UK, but the previous event (

2010 Cumbria shootings) was a mass shooting as we understand it including some random members of the public being targeted, whereas this appears to be a tragic event confined to victims in one household. Black Kite (talk)
10:16, 13 August 2021 (UTC) [reply]

  • Note Although it now appears this may not be case (that the victims were from one household - the Guardian quotes a witness as seeing a man "shooting randomly at people"), so waiting to see what transpires. Black Kite (talk) 10:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, he went through the streets shooting at passers-by. Why did you think it was all one household?  — Amakuru (talk) 10:33, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - probably opposing per above, since the death toll is relatively low. But also noting that the expansion is below 1500 bytes at present so would need some expansion if it were to be posted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:35, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Unusual crime here in the UK, but it would open the door to a flood of shootings in other places where they are nowhere near as rare. Unless this leads to a further tightening of gun laws (which seems unlikely and can be considered at the time if that happens) I don't see how this has any long-term impact. Notable enough for an article, not significant enough for an ITN blurb. Modest Genius talk 10:58, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd guess actually fairly likely, whether directly by primary legislation, or in terms of the practical application of it in terms of the checks and standards police operationally apply to issue and renew shotgun licences. ("Will you give us access to your social-media accounts?" "No!" "We'll be in touch.") But agree that's a separate issue and possible future article, other than to the extent it's already under discussion in reliable sources and successfully addressed in the nominated article. I must disagree with the slippery-slope argument. One applies one's crampons, rather than getting out the most waxed pair of skis one can find. Shootings where nowhere near as rare will generate less coverage in reliable sources, consequently fewer articles in the first place, and less likely to be of even serviceable quality in any timely manner. And even if such do arise, this can be addressed at the ITN stage simply by pointing this out. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 15:48, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Renomination, prompted (though not directly suggested) by the observations of Effy Midwinter on the article talkpage. This is not, as may have initially been believed given the understandably confused nature of the reporting, a single-household domestic incident, nor one without a political or ideological dimension, per almost all of the opposing !votes. Indeed it has particular significance for being not just a rare UK mass shooting, but the first I'm aware of there with apparent elements of incel movement and misogynist terrorism as either the motivation, or at the least a framing rationalisation of the violence. Initially the leading UK news story ahead of Afghanistan, and still featuring prominently. Presently appearing on the top four stories on CNN's world news page, so not without general importance, either. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 02:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Re-opening nomination due to arguments brought up by commenter above, as well as some opposition related to article quality. Article was closed 8 hours after nomination so IMO is worthwhile to open up for a little longer to let discussion play out. The article and the story has undergone considerable development since initial reports so I agree that it's worth re-opening for additional discussion. SpencerT•C 03:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hear what you're saying about quality concerns; the article's rather harshly marked as "Start-Class" at present hopefully a slightly lagging indicator, and it's maybe more B-adjacent at this point. The sourcing seems pretty robust, certainly. But if the first rough draft of history is still a little too rough, then so be it. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 14:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, and would have before it had a supposedly OK motive, but it was closed when I first saw it. English mass shooting, unusual enough. Plus, the current blurbs are stale. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:25, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. As per IP109, somewhat tragically still leading UK news story ahead of the fall of an entire country to a fundamentalist Islamist movement. And I really don't see that "Summer Olympics close (ceremony pictured)" is in the news any more, if it ever was. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now it's clear the domestic crime was just the start of an extremely unusual (for the UK) mass shooting with wider implications (the incel movement). Article quality is fine. Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:49, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support given our intent here is to encourage and reward improvements to WP, and the target is an entirely new article of some quality. There is certainly reasonable debate on both sides of the significance question, but "qualities in one area can make up for deficiencies in another" (per ITN criteria) GreatCaesarsGhost 12:56, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, very unusual mass shooting .Jackattack1597 (talk) 15:00, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now we have more information, effectively (and being quoted as) a terrorist event. Black Kite (talk) 15:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose While the potential connection to incel aspects may be new, we still have the fact that this may simply be a person that was having mental health issues, and still all seems like a "lone wolf" issues and not the start of a fresh wave of potential violence from incels. --Masem (t) 15:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There's definitely a connection to incel culture, as the article now pretty clearly establishes, which I think is highly notable in itself. That's not to say it's clear-cut between that and mental-health issues: it needn't be -- and likely isn't -- entirely one, or entirely the other. The two may have interacted -- the perpetrator himself essentially claimed that movement had worsened his own mental health -- or it might be more of a framing rationale. It's certainly lone-wolf in that this isn't an organised attack or conspiracy. But that's true of many incidents classed as terrorism, under the 'self-radicalised' category. Or more precisely, radicalised under the influence of many others, but not with the explicit purpose of this sort of violence. I don't think the 'fresh wave' idea is suggested as part of why this is especially notable or newsworthy. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 02:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Why is this reopened? The death toll is low on a global scale, worse incidents happen all the time elsewhere. The guy was a nutter, we knew that all along. Just because people start talking about "terrorism" doesn't suddenly change what happened. And we're not a news ticker.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support I would more support posting if this led to some extended background check being implemented since this guy was apparently a clear danger from social media posts and family reports, but article improvements and the new information seem generally sufficient. Kingsif (talk) 18:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The background checks thing is being more and loudly mooted. The Telegraph had a retired chief constable commenting on this yesterday, and according to the BBC review of The Papers, they've another story tomorrow on this being likely to actually happen -- apparently not yet on their own website, nor is it on the BBC's, so not usable in the article at least until then. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 23:41, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the third most deadly mass shooting in UK history: the Ballymurphy massacre, Bloody Sunday, Kingsmill massacre, Hungerford massacre, Greysteel massacre, Dunblane massacre & Cumbria shootings were all mass shootings in the UK with higher death tolls.
Had this happened in the US, it would have been quickly closed with a fairly strong consensus against posting. Jim Michael (talk) 19:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well either you're being contrary or you don't understand what I'm saying, the IRA (etc) vs the Army aren't part of the thinking of the vox populi. Still, I'm not engaging here, it's a waste of my life. In the US, six dead from mass shooting happens almost every month. In the UK it happens perhaps once a decade. Next. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:19, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You said mass shootings, you didn't limit it by perpetrator, but even if you do, how do you work out that Plymouth was only the third most deadly? In any case, being rare in its country doesn't make it important to most of our readers or to history. The international media report this prominently because of its rarity, not importance. We wouldn't post a fairly small earthquake due to it being rare in its location. Jim Michael (talk) 19:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you're going here for some kind of "record"? I'll defer to your infinite knowledge, and just stick with facts, it's the worst mass shooting in the UK since 2010. Of course, yesterday and tomorrow we'll see worse in the US. I don't know what you're trying to achieve here. Rarity and importance are intrinsically related. Oh dear........ The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:29, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Could call it the second-worst mass shooting recorded, all the others seem to be massacres (i.e. intention to kill a large homogenous group, not shoot and hope), if we want to get specific. Kingsif (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not massacre is in their titles is mostly due to whether or not that's the common name. I listed mass shootings. Kingsmill is just as much a mass shooting as Plymouth. Hungerford & Cumbria weren't about killing a homogenous group, so how can you say that Plymouth is second? Jim Michael (talk) 08:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On "There's no international angle", per
WP:ITN/C, "Voicing an opinion on an item [...] Please do not... [...] oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." I've read a series of comments from Jim Mitchell about the lack of "importance" of this, and can't discern any operable standard that would apply here to preclude this -- while including any reasonable number of other ITN items at all -- short of ignoring reliable sources as being hopelessly biased, and ignoring what's in the news as playing any part in determining what appears as "In the News". 109.255.211.6 (talk) 23:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Your statement "we almost never post incidents with fewer than 10 deaths" is immoral and absurd by any standard. You're saying that man just hasn't killed enough people. STSC (talk) 11:32, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
He hasn't. Not as far as ITN is concerned. Although the regulars here do fiercely deny it,
WP:MINIMUMDEATHS was actually a thing for a while (indeed, it still exists as a userspace essay). WaltCip-(talk) 12:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
We shouldn't judge UK gun deaths by UK gun death standards, but by 'global' -- meaning US -- ones? Even ignoring that notability is localised (rainstorm in the Atacama = news, rainstorm in Cork = Tuesday) why wouldn't the standard be the global median? Or what's typical for the developed world? Or the global maximum? (Full-scale civil war or it didn't happen.) 109.255.211.6 (talk) 22:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC) PS/ETA: Just looked at the MINDEATHS essay, not sure whether to be amused or appalled (and not sure to what extent it's satire, and to what degree it's userguide). But I somewhat wryly note that by its 'mass shootings' bul-- eh, point number three, this "should be enough for posting". Except possibly in Belgium.[reply]
  • Oppose - The totality of the low death toll, the minimal impact and the staleness of this story essentially makes this a non-starter. Yes, the UK is reacting to this by adding more restrictions. They are actually doing what governments are supposed to do all the time, as opposed to the US which functions as a very dubious exception to the rule.--WaltCip-(talk) 12:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Not a 'low death toll' by UK standards, as has been pointed out, scratching my head at 'low impact' (on what or whom?), and as to 'staleness' I'd point out that ITN#4 is still "The Summer Olympics close in Tokyo, Japan." Though perhaps in hindsight I should have re-nominated this as soon as I became aware of it... 109.255.211.6 (talk) 22:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    When an Olympics closes in Tokyo, it stays closed for years. A shooting in Plymouth is more fleeting, like cherry blossoms, post them while they're hot! But yes, less philosophically, your nom's way fresher. Another thing the Chinese Silver Show had going for it was advance notice. For weeks, the regulars all kind of knew it was just a matter of time before they felt compelled to post it. When people think deeper about things, they can still seem fresher later than literal yesterday's news does now. Even Plymouth Rock will still seem fresher to millions in about three months. Face it, mass shootings are difficult sells in this market, you did the best you could, eh? InedibleHulk (talk) 07:43, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    My renom, for accuracy. Bear in mind that this was nominated days earlier, and I'm just trying to help out with the wikiprocess, futile as that may be. Nor have I done any of the heavy lifting on the content. Olympics is indeed still closed, and but not still in the news. Plymouth shooting is still in the news, albeit no longer leading it or contending with Afghanistan. It's fairly clear to me which is the more useful and accurately described front-page content; editors and process may have different priorities, of course. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 22:50, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Una Stubbs

Template:ITN candidate

At least the article is not a stub[bs]. --180.244.163.23 (talk) 06:39, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Small
Absolute fucking A* major irony klaxon. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:53, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reminding us all. Great to see ITN looking as vibrant as ever. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:34, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Till Death Do Us Part While ITN has snubbed Stubbs, note that her article was the top read for the day, with a larger readership than
    Template:Quote
Andrew🐉(talk) 10:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. We fool ourselves that an appearance on Main page will direct readers, only when the article is good enough. Readers go straight there regardless. The main task should just be improving the article, not all lining up to say "it's not good enough yet"? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - it was a big shame to see this legend of the British acting scene go by un-notived, so I've fixed up the refs on the article. Looks good to go to me. Any chance of posting it before it slips off the bottom? Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Ready to go now.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --Tone 14:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 11

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 11
Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Peter Fleischmann

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment. This is absolutely not "too late". So, you should not have to worry there. I will give this article a detailed read later today. Looks largely good at first glance. But, a quick question for you -- are all of the points on the filmography section covered by ref #11? Similarly the screenwriter section? In addition, I would be curious about the secondary points on each of those bullets e.g. Arkady and Boris Strugatsky's 1964 novel Hard to Be a God, also producer. Should ensure that they are covered by ref #11 or add a separate ref.
PS: Did you mean real life "pleasures" or "pressures". If you meant the former, I am genuinely happy for you. If the latter, I send across my warmest wishes for you to feel better soon. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 16:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Pleasures. The ref is rich, has a list (right) which has his functions, often many for one film ("Mitwirking" = participation, didn't know how to say that, "Sprecher" = speaker, narrator, "Regie" = direction, "Drehbuch" = script, screenplay, "Kommentar" = commentary, "Produzent" = producer, "Interviews" = interviewer, "Darsteller" = actor, "Schnitt" = cutter, "Stoff" = theme, "Ton" = sound, "Regie-Assistenz" = assistant director, "Kamera" = camera, ) and prose with more detail to some on the left. There's a link to more details about each film if that's not enough, and some films are covered also by other refs further up. I had no time to check, and still have a DYK nom due today. Thank you for looking into it! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Article looks good for homepage / RD. I am assuming good faith
    WP:AGF on the Filmportal.de ref (currently ref #11) covering of all of the filmography entries that are not covered by in-line refs. RIP. Ktin (talk) 23:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Posted Stephen 02:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: David Levene

Template:ITN candidate

August 10

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 10
Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Donald Kagan

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Tommy Curtis

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Neal Conan

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Eduardo Martínez Somalo

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) Lionel Messi joins PSG

Template:Archivetop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose just like we opposed him leaving Barcelona a few days ago. We wouldn't post a transfer for any other sport. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:53, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archivebottom

(Posted) RD: Tony Esposito

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment article is good to go now. NorthernFalcon (talk) 20:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good team effort, everyone. Didn't think this one would make it. Teemu08 (talk) 23:14, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The article is worthy of such a great player now. Well done. --Jayron32 23:22, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 23:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Andrew Cuomo to resign

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Template:Tq No it really doesn't, maybe you should read them with this nom in mind. You keep throwing around that New York is a "sovereign state", and the article pretty clearly shows that no subdivisions are. I assume you're saying it's a federated state with sovereignty (you should say "autonomy" and/or specify not nation-state to prevent the confusion). And as the federation list shows, and what my point very obviously has been from the start, is that US states are no more special than hundreds if not thousands of other nations' states using the same system - and others not on that list with a non-federal system - so creating an ITN "exception" would not be an exception in the slightest and would certainly justify nominating any political mishap from, say, the island of Nevis. P.S. I don't know why you're harping on about Scotland/UK when I mentioned so many other examples but you cling to your one line of Westminster-devolution defense ;) Kingsif (talk) 22:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • I just got the weirdest deja vu (of something else, not this thread), but, note about Nevis taken, let's agree that New York isn't an actual sovereign state by UN definitions, that Scotland needs to gain independence just to make this thread funnier, and that if you would support every New York-equivalent-'state' story being posted then I have nothing more to offer. I think it sets an awful standard but if you would stick by it no matter where, you do you. Kingsif (talk) 22:33, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough -- I agree. Under the UN's definition, New York isn't a fully sovereign state, and this whole thing is semantics. :-) And yes, Scotland (and Northern Ireland) should gain independence. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 22:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U International significance is not required, if it were, very little would be posted. 331dot (talk) 19:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Template:Ec

    • There is a whole section of the criteria for "significance", which is generally held to mean international (or at least non-parochial) significance. As for the Tsimanouskaya business, it is internationally significant in that it shows the antics of the Lukashenko regime during the Olympics; although New York is (probably the City alone, definitely the State) more objectively important than the entirety of Belarus, subnational entities are held to a boatload-higher standards if their stories are to be posted at all. Allowing subnational politics on ITN opens the door to potentially thousands of gubernatorial and mayoral elections being nominated, which even if shot down would be a timesink for ITN participants, and it's almost guaranteed that there will be a US/UK bias in such nominations that would exacerbate pre-existing systemic biases.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • So I looked into that section. It lists as an argument which is not helpful "Arguments addressing how many international newspapers/news channels are or are not covering the story". We have a whole "Please do not" above stating "oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country" so in fact it seems that not only is there no "international significance" requirement but it's actively discouraged and oppose !votes based on that criteria should be ignored. In fact, evaluating consensus in that way I'm considering marking this as ready. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • This isn't even affecting the whole United States, it's affecting just a single state, and fairly strong historic precedent has been to not post subnational politics. Since none of this counts as Wikipedia policy or even guideline, !votes cannot generally be discarded and pure numbers matter quite a bit more here than at stuff like AfD; given that the opposes outnumber the supports almost 2:1, no admin in his/her/etc. right mind would post this at the moment. You can mark it if you'd like, just know that the tag will be quickly removed.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:32, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Parochial politix. Lacks general significance. Suggest close. – Sca (talk) 19:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Sexual harassment in the workplace is nothing new. – Sca (talk) 19:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- I feel like semi-sovereign states (such as US states, or Canadian provinces) should be treated differently than unitary local Governments. Therefore, I Support this nom. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 19:48, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Huh? Many other countries' top-level regional divisions are much more just as autonomous than US states and Canadian provinces. The UK is literally four distinct countries. India, Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy and to an extent France and Germany, have state-equivalents that are so different they have their own languages. Australia's are separated by a giant desert. Do you want to get noms every time Sardinia's leadership screws up? Kingsif (talk) 21:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Collapse top

  • How does one determine if a sub-national location is "semi-sovereign" versus "unitary local government"? And how are the countries of the UK different (and "less sovereign") than a US state? Chrisclear (talk) 21:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Simple -- can the powers given to the sub-national location be taken away by a simple act of the national legislature? If so, it's a unitary government. If not, it's semi-sovereign. --Rockstone[Send me a message!] 21:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Re This explains so much about your thinking. I've never seen "federated" described as "semi-sovereign". If that's "official" in any capacity, please show me. And no, of course I re-read the federated states page and I can't see it. Kingsif (talk) 22:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • No, what? They are not sovereign, that's a simple fact. You can make an argument that they are culturally more distinct than individual states, but you can't argue that they are sovereign. All the powers the countries of the UK have are granted by the Government of the United Kingdom and could be taken away by simple vote in the UK's parliament. The UK is considered a unitary government. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 21:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wasn't saying they're sovereign, I'm saying that 1. US states are definitely not sovereign states, and much further from being so than various European subdivisions. 2. many if not most countries in the world have top-level regional subdivisions that are equivalent to the US and Canada, so your argument made no sense. I deal with Venezuelan topics a lot, which has an identical system to the US, and dear god you do not want nominations in here every time someone screws up there. The point was that if we give more leeway to federated states, it's not exclusive at all. 3. more off-topic, but you asked. In practice, there are many nations whose regional subdivisions are much more distinct from their central government than the US. They are less like nations with subdivisions (which is how I would describe the US), and more like lots of regions that have been stuck together. (Yes, this is especially true in western Europe where borders have been redrawn many times over the last century and so regional identity and politics seem adamant to prevail.) While, in the UK example, London could un-devolve, and Washington cannot do that in the US, California and New York are far more similar than Kent and Orkney. The practical relationship of the UK countries is more like the US with Puerto Rico, because of devolution. And until Alaska competes in the Olympics with Canada, or Florida with Cuba, you can't say the US's federated states are more autonomous than Northern Ireland at least. Kingsif (talk) 22:00, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1. The US states are sovereign states. Not fully sovereign, but they are sovereign. You're wrong regarding US states being "subdivisions" and your understanding is flawed. Each state is politically independent of one another. Kent and Orkney could disappear by act of parliament in the United Kingdom; the US Congress could not get rid of California or New York. If you mean that they are more alike culturally, you are correct, but that doesn't mean they're any less sovereign. Northern Ireland is only autonomous because the United Kingdom gives it that power. The UK Parliament could decide to ignore NI parliament's decisions or destroy their autonomy at any time. That's what makes a political division sovereign or not. But we are getting off-topic. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 22:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2. That's not true at all. See Federation -- about half of the countries of the world are unitary, and half are federated. And also see "The difference between a federation and this kind of unitary state is that in a unitary state the autonomous status of self-governing regions exists by the sufferance of the central government, and may be unilaterally revoked." -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 22:07, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Tq - I said "many", did you want me to specify "about half"? Fine. Doesn't change the damn point, does it? Back to that: I made a point, and you definition-debated us to off-topic territory instead of accepting it. As you point out, "about half" of the world is made up of subdivisions of equal autonomy to New York. Ping me to support when you nominate all their screw-ups. Kingsif (talk) 22:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Template:Re Shhh. But yeah, my first instinct was to compare with Venezuela which has the exact system of the US, but then I couldn't remember if I'd ever nominated a comparable state-level Venezuela item and didn't want to risk the hypocrisy. I will say when I learned Spain is unitary I was very surprised. Kingsif (talk) 22:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Template:Collapse bottom

Template:Tq You've been told this over and over. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:55, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Template:U Why are you telling me this instead of all the other people above who are opposing because it's local news? Citing the "please do not" is also silly becaues it just encourages people to switch to the effectively-equivalent-but-not-complained-about "doesn't see enough global news coverage". Besides, "local news" does not mean it relates to a single country, because in this case it relates to a single state in a country with fifty of them. Banedon (talk) 21:09, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
In this hypothetical, how's Giuliani dying? Kingsif (talk) 21:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Peacefully in his sleep surrounded by family members. I was talking about the "autoblurbs" that former POTUSes and UKPMs get, whether that applies to mayors of huge cities; I don't recall whether we blurbed David Dinkins. Or you could imagine he has a glorious suicide on the 9/11 anniversary if that's what you'd prefer.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:47, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd only blurb it if it involved flamingos somehow. Kingsif (talk) 22:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Ec Well, he wasn't. Not that it's a good reason to post. Kingsif (talk) 21:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Pointed then that you would phrase it that way, as clearly you accept that New York State is substantially more significant than Chhattisgarh. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have to say that I totally agree with you on that issue. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mean fun debates, right? ;) I feel like I should set up a sub-talkpage to reroute them, but could I make it semi-sovereign, you know? Kingsif (talk) 22:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well...it's a good idea as long as you keep an eye out for movements that demand full sovereignty and mess things up!. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 23:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Domestic event + sexual harassment in the workplace (which sadly isn't new) . --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as others have said political resignations are quite common, and at the sub-national level they carry very little weight. There's nothing particularly special about Cuomo's troubles anyway.
    5225C (talk • contributions) 23:33, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted) RD: Naga Thein Hlaing

Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Just a non-notable surgeon who did some non-notable stuff. Pyramids09 (talk) 21:12, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:U, per the small print in the box above, anyone with an existing article is considered notable for Recent Deaths (RD) we should only discuss if the quality of the article is sufficient for it to be posted on the main page JW 1961 Talk 21:23, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
He didn't have an existing article - it was created today. It's perfectly reasonable to question notability in that case (though the lack of a prior article is not itself a reason to question notability). GreatCaesarsGhost 21:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The citing sources in the article are from BBC, VOA, RFA, The Irrawaddy, and The Myanmar Times; I have no idea why you are talking about the notability. It clearly passes GNG. Htanaungg (talk) 05:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A non-Burmese speaker would, upon review the article and its citations, be unable to verify notability for themselves. I don't know that the citing sources are about the target or address him in a non-trivial way. Please note I'm neither opposing nor nominating the article for deletion, merely suggesting it's appropriate to have those discussions here. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Just about long enough for RD, but it has plenty of sources of which I could only check 2 (in English), AGF on the Burmese sources JW 1961 Talk 21:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article does not seem to indicate why this person is notable, and I'm unable to verify if the coverage cited passes
    WP:GNG. Perhaps the OP could advise on this? GreatCaesarsGhost 21:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Template:U I'm so pity you 😢. Taung Tan (talk) 05:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
You pity me for not speaking Burmese? Uh, okay. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support He has been regarded as the "god of Nagaland" per BBC source. A highly respected surgeon of the nation. How much do you need? Taung Tan (talk) 05:27, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    $500,000 and a Lamborghini would be a start. I shan't be too lavish. WaltCip-(talk) 12:43, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - article seems to meet requirements assuming the refs which appear to be mostly in Burmese are reliable sources. - Indefensible (talk) 20:17, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks good to go. Hanamanteo (talk) 09:38, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is well-cited and more than a stub. 504 words per DYK tool. That's to say, it is fine for ITN/RD. ─
    (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Posted AGFing non-English refs. --PFHLai (talk) 23:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Climate Change

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Covered by Blurb. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once the blurb rolls off. Climate change certainly is ongoing, is regularly in the news, and the target article (or one of the myriad of "sub-articles") is getting regular updates. Seems to tick the boxes. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2021 in climate change? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Say goodbye to all standalone natural disaster blurbs, if and while you guys win, excepting possibly earthquakes. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose covered by blurb, and interest will roll off right around when the blurb will as well. Indeed, this very nomination initially struck me as ridiculous; climate change has been going on, and will continue to go on, for a century, and we don't post uber-chronic crises like the inexorably rising entropy leading to the heat death of the universe even though that is also of note.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    More like 4.6 billion years. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Not even counting the mystery winds that blew us together in the first place, whenever the hell they started picking up... InedibleHulk (talk) 02:18, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unlike COVID which there was clear, active worldwide participation to fight it on a daily basis, warnings about climate change have rung for years with little momentum to make them an everyday ITN topic, which is what ongoing is meant for. --Masem (t) 02:22, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The blurb is already covered. 36.69.55.6 (talk) 02:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this would be like adding Expansion of the universe to ongoing. It's certainly ongoing, but it's not something that makes the news every day, and any actions taken would only have delayed impact. Banedon (talk) 02:42, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive bottom

August 9

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 9
Template:Cob

RD: Cameron Burrell

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comments: Several unreferenced paragraphs. SpencerT•C 15:33, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments: I've added a few refs and tagged a few sentences with {cn}. I find it a little odd that there is no mention of his long jumping. His profile at UH Track & Field has more materials to prosify and add to his wikibio, if anyone is interested in improving the coverage there. --PFHLai (talk) 15:26, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Rand Araskog

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment: Close, but needs some copyediting (and perhaps some additional detail if available). Phrases like "He spent the early years building the group's telecom business and developed the System 12 a digital routing and switching solution for telecom companies" seem promotional (what exactly is a "solution for telecom companies"? The link also leads to a disambiguation page). "Dismantling the conglomerate from multiple businesses" is also a little unclear-- were various entities sold? Spun off as separate companies? "Dismantling" seems to parrot from the WSJ obit title without explaining what this actually means. SpencerT•C 13:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed dismantling. Substituted it with divesting, which is it what it really was. Eg. Sheraton Hotels sold to Starwood Hotels and Resorts. Fixed the disambiguation for System 12 - a telephone exchange system. Hopefully not too promotional. If there are any additional edits that are required, I can get to it later tonight.Ktin (talk) 15:41, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. SpencerT•C 19:10, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Re do you have the link to the Bloomberg ref? Seems broken on the article. - Indefensible (talk) 20:27, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Will check this evening. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 23:55, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. Replaced the Bloomberg link with a different one. For some reason it was pointing to a robots page. Thanks for the catch. Ktin (talk) 00:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Better refs are needed for info on his father, ITT's problems with politicians, and his various awards (French Légion d'Honneur, Order of Merit of the Italian Republic, Order of Bernardo O'Higgins, ...) Perhaps these sentences should be removed if better refs are unavailable. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 23:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi PFHLai. Many thanks. All of the information on father and ITT international relations are from the WSJ obituary. The awards were pointing to a deadlink which I restored from archive.org Hope that's good. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 00:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 02:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. Thanks for the new footnotes. --PFHLai (talk) 12:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lester Bird

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support Political career section could possibly use a sub-header or two but otherwise has appropriate depth of coverage and is referenced. SpencerT•C 12:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 23:03, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Olivia Podmore

Template:ITN candidate

RD: Bob Jenkins

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) IPCC say global warming can be stopped

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment. Without actually opposing this, this is just a report detailing a possible outcome if certain things occur; sounds like a lot of
    WP:CRYSTAL to me. Lots of groups have predictions or projections related to climate change, why should this one be given more weight? 331dot (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
good question - answer is because it is a consensus and has been approved by governments Chidgk1 (talk) 09:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Governments do not have to approve UN reports; this is a consensus of those writing the report. There are many reports and predictions out there. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are right there are many reports - but for climate change the IPCC ones are by far the most important. The governments approve the summary of each report. Chidgk1 (talk) 10:24, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U now that alternative blurbs have been suggested which are not projections can you support any of them? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:12, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
I am sure there are lots of possible blurbs - I just fancied an optimistic one - please suggest alt blurbs - thanks Chidgk1 (talk) 09:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's going to happen. WaltCip-(talk) 10:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support - this is a major report, already top of news broadcasts in Europe (understandable, perhaps, given
    Wildfires in southern Turkey and Greece, recent flooding across Germany and Belgium, etc.) However, I would reformulate the proposed headline, which IMO misses the point, namely that major actions are needed in the next two years or we will not be able to stop climate change. (And it's climate change rather than global warming). BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:07, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I have not managed to download it yet so I am not sure it does say we can stop climate change. But everyone please suggest alternative blurbs. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:28, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality article is a stub. If it's that important to be ITN-worthy, there must be much more that can be said about it. Rather than the one line of text suggested for this blurb. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:19, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure a lot more will be added over the course of the week once the IPCC website manages to cope with the load of people downloading the report. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have added more so have rerated "start class" Chidgk1 (talk) 10:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U Now someone else has improved my version can you support one or more blurbs? If not is there another improvement I can make?Chidgk1 (talk) 14:07, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
I am sure any blurb you guys agree is fine by me. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say that, or we'll end up with just "The IPCC releases its Sixth Assessment Report" without any details. WaltCip-(talk) 11:06, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I retract - I too now see the flaw in altblurb2 so do not support that one. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:12, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Tone's blurb or something along those lines. Make no mistake that this is of incommensurable importance.--WaltCip-(talk) 10:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    And as per below, I'll get behind altblurb2 at this point. WaltCip-(talk) 12:12, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, wait for article content. The article is extremely short and needs at least a couple of paragraphs on what the report actually says. The blurb should be short and neutral - I've added alt2. Modest Genius talk 11:07, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Now have 2 paras on report content - hope that is enough to start with - expansion continues. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:32, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Much better now, striking my length concerns. Modest Genius talk 15:57, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alt2 looks good to me, better than my own one. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Monday's lead story on most Eng.-lang. RS sites. – Sca (talk) 12:29, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either of the first blurbs. The last one is at odds with the role of the IPCC: they don't advice on policy, just on science. They don't argue it must be halved by 2030, but that halving it is in line with internationally agreed warming targets.
    talk) 12:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Obviously she means she does not support altblurb2 as I have now added a new last one. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:09, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Given the infrequencies of the IPCCs, I would support posting something about it, but I disgree with the blurb's focus on future action since this has been a message of all prior IPCCs for the most part. I would instead focus on actual findings, such as the average global temperature rsing ~1 degC higher in the last decade. --Masem (t) 13:02, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you find that a bit depressing, whereas actions are more likely to cheer readers? Chidgk1 (talk) 13:06, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As others have pointed out, the current blurbs focus on CRYSTAL factors, whereas ITN tends to be grounded in what actually happened. Yes, its more depressing, but its also what is been proven true. Again, I support posting something about IPCC as each iteration has been important. Now, that said, you can work in something like both. "The 6th IPCC reports that the Earth's average global temperature rose 1 degC in the last decade, but asserts climate change can still be halted." --Masem (t) 13:13, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK have added another alt - that is probably enough from me Chidgk1 (talk) 13:25, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh maybe passed blurb limit or I did something wrong as not showing up - anyway you can see by source editing.Chidgk1 (talk) 13:28, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the original blurb most, but support any blurb except altblurb2 Chidgk1 (talk) 13:33, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you're going to put it can be stopped on shouldn't it be worded to make clear that you're still stuck at whatever level it eventually stops at (somewhat above the 2050 level) and it'll take thousands of years to reverse back to normal? Unless the carbon already released is removed by something that doesn't seem to be inventable any time soon or you wait a few thousand years for it to go from air to carbonate seafloor rocks. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 13:57, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have probably suggested enough blurbs - feel free to suggest one yourself or support one or moreChidgk1 (talk) 14:01, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The
global warming can stop intensifying at 2 (1.5?)°C if net greenhouse gas emissions are halved by 2030 and reach zero by 2050.? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:05, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
  • WP:CRYSTAL cautions against making predictions of the future in articles, it does not prohibit discussing notable predictions so long as they are clearly discussed in context - which the target article here clearly does. --LukeSurl t c 14:25, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Template:Ec

I agree, this is nothing to do with WP:CRYSTAL. For a start, much of the report is organising and synthesising measurements that have already been made. The modelling work is explicitly clear on the range of possible outcomes and where the uncertainties lie. This isn't speculation about the future, it's the most authoritative statement for 8 years (since the previous IPCC report) on what is currently known about climate change . Modest Genius talk 16:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The Czechs have gone for a long one:

Mezivládní panel pro změnu klimatu vydal první část své nové hodnotící zprávy. Uvádí v ní, že lidská činnost prokazatelně způsobila nárůst teploty na Zemi a vedla k menší stabilitě celé planety.

which apparently means:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has issued the first part of its new assessment report, which states that human activity has demonstrably caused an increase in temperature on Earth and destabilised the entire planet. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:58, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, but I find the blurb misleading. I read the news differently than what the blurb suggests. We cannot avoid global warming, it's too late for that. What is possible is to avoid truly catastrophic climate change if we are able to cut CO2 emissions as mentioned in the blurb. See here: "The new report also makes clear that the warming we've experienced to date has made changes to many of our planetary support systems that are irreversible on timescales of centuries to millennia. The oceans will continue to warm and become more acidic. Mountain and polar glaciers will continue melting for decades or centuries. "The consequences will continue to get worse for every bit of warming," said Prof Hawkins. "And for many of these consequences, there's no going back."" So, it's like the case of a patient who ignored doctor's advice to stay healthy for too long and now has to undergo quite intrusive medical procedures just to save his life. So, the best prognosis for the patient assuming successful medical treatment is that at he'll survive but in a poorer health condition. Count Iblis (talk) 15:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support blurb, Alternative blurb or Alternative blurb II--PJ Geest (talk) 15:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • undue weight on certain sections/findings.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:07, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Template:Ping Good call. I'm happy with the posted blurb. Modest Genius talk 16:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I feel the blurb somewhat misrepresents the report, as this report has been very clear in not framing climate change as a future event but as a current event. We can simplify as "The
    talk) 17:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Post-posting comment – The blurb strikes me as rather complex. Suggest we shorten and simplify, perhaps as:
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change releases the first part of its Sixth Assessment Report, detailing the state of climate change and describing its possible future effects."
– Sca (talk) 16:19, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose The complete lack of agreement on what blurb should be used demonstrates the reason why this shouldn't be blurbed. A semi-regular report was released. It doesn't tell us anything new, and doesn't suggest anything new that will happen in the future. For one brief glorious moment, a bunch of academics got a boost to their publication stats. Everyone else will see what they want to see for a day, and move on. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 18:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have you noticed whether it's in the NEWS? – Sca (talk) 19:14, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IPCC reports are rare, the top of the field on climate reports and state of the art, they have to be posted, even if no one can agree on a blurb and it has to default to "the report was released". Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Only controversial in my country full of
Jewish space lasers and other conspiracy theorists. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:13, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Don't forget Canadian brainwave meddling, "we" invented Global Research (the website, not the discipline or way of life). InedibleHulk (talk) 00:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The existence of climate change is not (genuinely) controversial, but nor was it revealed by the report. It is policy recommendations and specific numbers that become inherently political, and thus ultimately toxic and controversial. Without any comments on the recommendations themselves, stuff like "global warming can be stopped if we cut emissions X percent by year Y" has absolutely no place on the front page of the world's greatest encyclopedia.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose WP:CRYSTAL . Given how politically engaged climate science has become in the West, I wouldn't trust this report either. 212.74.201.233 (talk) 00:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Your last three !votes on ITN have all been
    WP:NOTFORUM violations. Stop it. WaltCip-(talk) 00:19, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Template:Ec I mean, the blurb just says the report was published, that's already happened. Your crystal ball work in reverse? On to the reason: wow, you have no idea what you're on about, do you? If this particular group of scientists can't be trusted then the moon could be made of cheese. There's skepticism and then there's choosing to push anything that goes against status quo, and you're doing the latter: look at the sources about news rather than blanket oppose because you personally don't like the subject the news deals with. Kingsif (talk) 00:22, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Template:Abot

Any further discussion on "the matter" should go to the Ongoing proposal. - That's somewhat disingenuous considering that the Ongoing proposal has now been closed as
WP:SNOW.--WaltCip-(talk) 12:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

August 8

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 8
Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Najma Chowdhury

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Jane Withers

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support GA, marking ready. SpencerT•C 02:27, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 03:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Just because something is a GA, doesn't mean it's automatically eligible. The filmography is largely unreferenced at present.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Template:U The Filmography section has 3 overarching references at the bottom of the table, and that seemed to cover the filmography from what I could tell. This was apparently discussed prior to the GA review on the talk page: Talk:Jane_Withers#Filmography_table_sourcing. I'm going to go ahead and remove your tag, but if you have additional concerns, I'm happy to self-revert the tag removal. SpencerT•C 02:49, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      Template:Ping ah yes, my bad. Sorry about that. All looks good, thanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:39, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
      ]

(Posted) RD: Bill Davis

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment multiple sections lacking in sourcing- which is a shame, as the first half of the article has good sourcing. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:37, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Almost the entire article could be sourced to the Steve Paikan book I've been using for the first few sections. Unfortunately the Google books preview only goes up to page 93, so I'm hoping someone might have digital access to a copy. - Floydian τ ¢ 00:39, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note there were a small handful of citation needed tags remaining. Since they are not of much importance, I've hidden them and moved discussion for them to the talk page. This article should be ready for posting. - Floydian τ ¢ 23:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 05:38, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bobby Bowden

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment - I'm not seeing sourcing for all that info in the "Head Coaching Record" section at the moment. And "The Bowden Bowl" seems misplaced as a subsection of "Personal life", as it's still related to this football career. Other than that, the article looks good.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:U, sort of fixed. Sports Reference doesn't include his coaching at Howard or South Georgia State for whatever reason. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:22, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Template:Ping OK, I think I've sourced the other bits. Good to go now, Support. CHeers  — Amakuru (talk) 22:48, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 04:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Taliban capture city of Kunduz

Template:ITN candidate

Support. Maybe a cropped version of
Talk∕Contribs 14:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
PS: The pic. suggested above doesn't grab me. – Sca (talk) 16:27, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@
Talk∕Contribs 17:41, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Somewhat better. Could be cropped a bit. But are there any pix of the Tollyband doing their violent thing? – Sca (talk) 17:51, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose there has been this relentless effort to post the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan. Kunduz is a regional capital 100s of KMs away from Kabul and the media hysteria doesn't make it any less inevitable since Trump surrendered to the Taliban last year. When they take Kabul and assassinate Ghani it'll be time to post. Not now. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:22, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Kabul is definitely looking to be the last American stronghold, so I'd support a blurb then. But in a closing ceremony, remove from Ongoing sense. Not because American news likes Kabul better than Kandahar. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    When they take Kabul - what if they never do? Never post also? Banedon (talk) 00:28, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If they don't, they've either been defeated or made peace, both blurbable endings. If it turns into another stalemate, we can quietly remove it from Ongoing. But it sure doesn't end here and now, big moment or not, so your vote confuses me. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:37, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support If a militia captured Miami after taking over several states in just a few days we wouldn't be thinking twice about posting. Just because it's Afghanistan doesn't make it less relevant. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:21, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It does a little bit, in the sense that there has been war there for 20 years so it's not comparable to a non-conflict zone effort of the same size. But I still think this is big enough news to overcome that. Kingsif (talk) 20:15, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Covered in Ongoing. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it's already covered in the ongoing section. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:59, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I thought the understanding was that items would move out of ongoing when a truly blurb-worthy development occurred, and then moved back. That's what happened with Venezuela last year. Kingsif (talk) 20:17, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Extraordinary developments can stand alone. But continually taking back territory is the meat and potatoes of this ongoing story. It'd be like saying four cities (or countries) succumbed to COVID complications, during that overall lengthy drama. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditionally support AltBlurb The capture of these provincial capitals seems like a significant development. However, the capture of the capitals should be in the article’s intro. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:44, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb and remove from ongoing - a notable development. Banedon (talk) 00:28, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Major development and article in good shape. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per the previous nominations. I think we should wait until the Taliban capture either Kandahar city or Kabul. It's just a matter of time, so better to wait until the more significant fall of one of those two largest cities (Kunduz is the sixth largest in Afghanistan). Modest Genius talk 11:11, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Sixth provincial capital, Aibak, seized. [35] BBC headline: "How the Taliban retook half of Afghanistan" [36] Wide coverage. [37] – Sca (talk) 12:37, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This story is in Ongoing already, and the whole point of Ongoing is that we don't blurb the individual developments. If they take Kabul, then I'll think differently, but we're not going to blurb all the provincial capitals one by one.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Amakuru.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:36, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as it's already covered in the ongoing section. We may consider posting a blurb for an event that will mark a ceasefire but this is clearly not it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:40, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As the lead in the target article points out, theyhave taken over 65% of the country in 3 months and are likely to finish the job in 1-3 more. In this context, each city falling is not notable; it is assumed. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – In terms of news, the Taliban offensive continues to be prominently covered. Today's AP headline: "Taliban take 10th Afghan provincial capital, squeezing Kabul." I don't expect to change anyone's mind. Nevertheless, I offer this as food for thought. – Sca (talk) 13:06, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Change mind from what to what? You do know that 2021 Taliban offensive is currently linked on the main page, and has been for some time, right? I'm confused as to what change you're hoping to happen? --Jayron32 13:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Blurb of course. As noted above, I'm not expecting it immediately – although newswise it is blurb material now. – Sca (talk) 13:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    But this is more appropriate as an ongoing story as it is rapidly changing and developing, as such would require frequent changes to any blurb. Ongoing is exactly what this kind of situation is designed for. --Jayron32 15:57, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Herat - 3rd largest city - has been captured, and Kandahar will probably fall in, like, 24 hours or something.[38]At this rate, we might as well wait the next 3 days for them to take Kabul before posting the blurb, really. Juxlos (talk) 16:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Honest people may differ. I understand the logic of Ongoing, but to an ex-newsie it seems we're underplaying the topic. Oh well. – Sca (talk)
    Update: "Taliban take 11th provincial capital in a week." – Sca (talk) 18:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support new blurb ALT2 when ready Herat has fallen, and Kandahar has fallen or will fall within the day. I think it's time for a blurb. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 21:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • All there is from reliable sources on Kandahar is a one-sentence AP report; it will take at least 2 hours for sourcing and the article to be ready for that blurb. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 21:04, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    See: "Taliban take Kandahar, Herat in major Afghanistan offensive." About 1,000 words; moved at 21:30. – Sca (talk) 22:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS: "The Pentagon said it would temporarily send about 3,000 extra troops ... to help evacuate embassy staff" from Kabul. (Moved at 21:35.) – Sca (talk) 22:22, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Added ALT3 in case editors still think the city names are too obscure. Kingsif (talk) 00:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There seems to be a persistent belief that Ongoing is second tier to the blurb space...that this current ongoing story is too big for ongoing and must be promoted to a blurb...which is completely unsupported by any policy or guideline I can find. Ongoing is not < or > a blurb. GreatCaesarsGhost 02:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No website is an island. On Friday Afghanistan leads every major RS site. – Sca (talk) 12:12, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS: "Im Krieg in Afghanistan haben nach dem Ende der NATO-Mission Resolute Support die Taliban 15 Provinzhauptstädte eingenommen." (Ger. ITN) — Sca (talk) 12:30, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As always, we appreciate your informed, well-articulated comments that having nothing to do with the conversation everyone else is having. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:30, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ganz typisch bei dir. Geh bloß weg, Bübchen. – Sca (talk) 15:05, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I think the reason this situation has gone awry is that the usual process for Ongoing was not followed - namely that a story is blurbed first, and then rolls down to Ongoing once it falls off the bottom of ITN and the story is still important enough to merit posting. But in this case, for whatever reason, it was added straight to Ongoing with no blurb ever added. Well that's in the past now, and it's in Ongoing, so there's really nothing more to be said. Things seem to have hotted up in the past 24 hours, but according to today's Guardian: Template:Xt[39]... so it's certainly not as if this is going to be all over by Sunday. Therefore Ongoing is still the right place for it.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, this isn't about Wiki's prosaic internal processes, it's about what's actually in the news. Here's the current picture. – Sca (talk) 15:15, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed. And, as noted already numerous times, this story is currently posted on the main page in the ITN section. As GCG says, Ongoing is not inferior to a blurb, it's equal in status but simply covers a case like this in which dribs and drabs of developments, each individually newsworthy, happen over the course of weeks. I suggest this discussion be closed soon, as it's becoming a circular argument. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This story is currently posted on the main page in the ITN section.
– No it isn't. A link is posted there, easily overlooked by our hapless readers. And it's just a topic label, telling almost nothing about what's going down. We're missing the boat. – Sca (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's no boat to miss. ITN is not a news ticker; it is not designed to keep readers up to the minute on current events. It's there to provide links to further reading for stories they are seeing in the news elsewhere. --Jayron32 16:07, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just trying to see it from the reader's point of view. Oh well. C'est la vie. – Sca (talk) 18:10, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd imagine our readers don't view themselves as hapless, and can find "Ongoing" news if they want it, using their inherent Power of Reading. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:42, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Od

2021 Lithuanian/EU migrant crisis

Template:ITN candidate

  • Is it just Lithuania? Poland says they've been sent migrants from Belarus as retribution for supporting Krystsina Tsimanouskaya. Anyway, the blurb feels back-heavy to me but I can't think of a way to rephrase it? Kingsif (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think for now it's fair/representative to keep the title as is: the number of illegal crossing to Lithuania is over 4000 in the recent months, while Latvia and Poland reported only dozens, so it's not (yet) a significant increase. However, the situation is still developing and if there will be substantial numbers of migrants reported by other countries, then we will have to re-think the title.. but I think we are just not quite there yet. --Mindaur (talk) 15:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Tq - over 500, but not a good argument anyway (see below). Kingsif (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Comment – Should include a section on migrants fleeing Belarus for Poland. – Sca (talk) 16:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The article contains a section about Poland. I just added a reference with some numbers, but as per my comment above -- they still seem to be significantly below the crossings into Lithuania. --Mindaur (talk) 17:20, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Reply here also for above: if you want to look at this in terms of absolute numbers, Lithuania's are low compared to other migration and it won't get posted. The story that's in the news, and relevant here, is that the increase (%age) in migrants is an unprecedented surge, and is caused by deteriorating relations with Lukashenko. And the same is also true for Poland. IMO neither or both. Kingsif (talk) 20:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, as I said elsehwere -- it's not about the absolute numbers. It's about an unprecedented state-sponsored human trafficking. I am not very creative with blurbs, but I can propose more alternatives; feel free to beat me on this. --Mindaur (talk) 22:16, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Do you even understand how many migrants cross the US-Mexican border every well? How many travel through the mediterrenean every month? Hint: way more than did on this small stretch of Belarussian-lithuanian border 212.74.201.233 (talk) 16:58, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Been going on for years. Belarus is a current political crisis. – Sca (talk) 17:08, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Irrelevant; your comment seems to be a case of whataboutism. --Mindaur (talk) 17:20, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I've never ever seen an intelligent person accuse others of whataboutism. Probably because invoking it is in and on itself a logical fallacy. Changing my vote to oppose 212.74.201.233 (talk) 21:29, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm pretty sure an oppose doesn't count if it's made because you don't like the fact someone said the word "whataboutism". Kingsif (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If it were Belarusians fleeing for Lithuania it might be interesting (the article is a mess though) but it's mostly Iraqis and no one should be surprised that Iraqis are fleeing Iraq. Also, 4000 people in 2021 ... that's basically a weekend on the US-Mexican border. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:24, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article certainly needs improvements, but did you actually read it? You are comparing very different things: borders and populations of different scale and very different nature of the event. The significance of the article is not the absolute number of the illegal crossings, but the nature of the crisis i.e. it's effectively a state-sponsored human trafficking and a geopolitical/diplomatic conflict. If we have a news item about the Krystsina Tsimanouskaya's humanitarian visa, then I really fail to see how is this less significant? --Mindaur (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sure did, I mean except for the meaningless wall of reactions. Terrible background section that has nothing to do with refugees. The claim that illegal immigration was "weaponized" is actually tagged "citation needed". Seems like your standard "Lukashenko bad"
WP:SYNTH disaster article about an issue that's been affecting Europe in one way or another since the invasion of Iraq and the creation of ISIL. In other words, literally nothing at all to see here. Don't worry, it'll be posted. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:54, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
So, improve it. The background section contains two references about the election fraud (and if you need more, there is
WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT. It's not constructive. --Mindaur (talk) 21:21, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Comment and reply Seconded the above, absolutely incomparable. By that logic you'd have to mention the Greek, Maltese, Spanish, UK and Italian migrant crises and routes, except this is a whole completely different scenario and different geo-political impact. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Belarus is shipping in Iraqis, keeping them in horrible conditions, then sending them across the border to countries without good migrant support infrastructure as a political weapon. "Be nice to us or we'll create a strain on your resources, and you'll feel bad because it's human lives". Quite a different situation, and I actually hadn't noticed it had got so bad in Lithuania. Kingsif (talk) 20:13, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ongoing There's no point comparing this to US-Mexico border. The population of Lithuania is similar to that of New Mexico alone, Belarus has less than 7.5% of the Mexican population and the border is only a few kilometers long in comparison. Different situation, different politics, different migrants etc. and this is a new unique development. Also
    WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:58, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • I raise you "Biden imposes sanctions against Belarus' Lukashenko regime" [47] Kingsif (talk) 20:29, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Actually they are not Belarusian migrants. It's just another human trafficking route to the EU. Nothing unusual here. STSC (talk) 21:37, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I agree that it's a state-sponsored human trafficking probably triggered by the failed repatriation of Timanovskaya but it's clear that Lithuania did very little to prevent this even though Lukashenko announced he would let the migrants cross the border as early as sanctions were imposed against Belarus following the aircraft carrying Protasevich had been landed more than two months ago. That being said, this is a relatively minor and not unexpected diplomatic incident compared to what else happened involving Belarus over the past year. The ITN section is really not meant to be a place for posting every single move made by Belarus and it's neighbouring EU member states.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:18, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – "Lithuanian parliament to debate building fence on Belarus border." [48] – Sca (talk) 12:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Three-month state of emergency declared at Latvia-Belarus border" [49] --Mindaur (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment With Poland's surge and Latvia's SOE, I think it's clear the target shouldn't be the Lithuania article. But what should? I don't think "Belarus migrant warfare" would fly as an article title, and Belarus migrant crisis sounds like Belarusian migration, but Belarus is the connecting factor. Kingsif (talk) 15:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I propose EU-Belarusian border migrant crisis as it would be factually correct and include Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I very boldly went with a slight variation on that,
2021 European Union migrant crisis. Kingsif (talk) 19:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Template:U: It might have been better to initiate the discussion in the article's talk page -- just FYI. Anyway, the move is done and I think the new title is reasonable (even if not ideal). What is the process here, though? Should it be a new ITN proposal? Also, see my response to your other comment below. --Mindaur (talk) 21:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
  • If commentators don't think the migration aspect specifically is notable here, then how about something like: "EU nations accused
    2021 European Union migrant crisis"? --Mindaur (talk) 21:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The problem with that name is that it is separate crisis to the usual Ceuta, Malta, Lampedusa, Greek Islands, Calais issues, which are all still struggling but completely different scenario. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:06, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2020 Summer Olympics closing ceremony

Template:ITN candidate

  • Whether it is or not, it was in the news when it occurred, and as it is ITNR it will be posted when quality is there(it isn't yet). You are free to propose the removal of the closing ceremony from ITNR if you desire. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I know, this is how ITN words. Maybe I'll propose changing the title to "What was in the news". Martinevans123 (talk) 10:41, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support ITNR so only quality is a consideration and I see a couple of [citation needed] tags in there. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:27, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb. Support removal from ongoing - Now the closing ceremony should be added.BabbaQ (talk) 21:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb as proposer—the country winning the most medals is a key fact, particularly this Olympics given the competition between the U.S. and China. We have room to include it so we might as well. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are several tags in the article. Hanamanteo (talk) 02:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Whole paragraphs unreferenced. Pawnkingthree (talk) 02:49, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the original blurb once the article is improved and strong oppose the alternative blurb per Article 6 in Charter 1 of the Olympic Charter, which states "The Olympic Games are competitions between athletes in individual or team events and not between countries."--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:16, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess this means that the whole notion of a medals table is un-Olympic? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:14, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The IOC is free to consider the Olympics what it wishes, but what matters is how RS report on it, and almost all of them report out which country won the most medals and most gold medals, usually in the form of a table. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The BBC's report on the closing ceremony doesn't even mention which country won the most gold and total medals. So, there's no need to load the blurb with superfluous details when it's clear that the closing ceremony is the main news and an ITNR item that should get posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Other than the unencyclopedic term "taking home" (should be "winning" probably) I think it's fine to mention the US as medal table winners. Sources do take major note of that.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:48, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • And let's hear it for the eight countries who shared joint-86th place with one bronze medal each. At least every country got something. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:53, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still think that any outcome of the event is a different story from the closing ceremony and should be dealt with separately. But if we really need an extended blurb documenting achievements from the event, my first choice would be either Caeleb Dressel's five gold medals or Emma McKeon's seven total medals. Their achievements as most successful athletes are covered in RS as much as the US finishing on top of the medal table but the difference is that one such blurb would give more context compared to the blunt message that a country won the most medals.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 7

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 7
Template:Cob

(Closed) 2021 British & Irish Lions

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose relatively insignificant sports series. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not significant enough competition for ITN. News coverage of it in the UK was way lower than e.g. the Six Nations Championship (which does get posted, as it's ITNR). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose agree with the above two comments re significance and also oppose on article quality - mostly a stats page. Only one match has any prose coverage.--Bcp67 (talk) 10:19, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted) RD: Markie Post

Template:ITN candidate

RD: Brad Allan

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comments: The Filmography section remains unref'd. More footnotes are also needed in the biographical prose. --PFHLai (talk) 16:26, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Trevor Moore

Template:ITN candidate

August 6

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 6
Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Herbert Schlosser

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support Made NBC relevant to the 1970s, short sweet article, woe is us. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:40, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 11:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Attack on Ralph Gonsalves, Prime Minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose It can't be pleasant to be hit with a rock, but he doesn't seem seriously injured. No broader impact than that. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Eh, a concussion to be precise[51], so he will be monitored for some weeks. No lasting issues though. Joofjoof (talk) 02:45, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This has made the regional news: Jamaica Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana. The CARICOM chair also released a statement.[52] Joofjoof (talk) 02:45, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose One wounded fails MINIMUMDEATHS, and he's far from a major world leader (my queen is his country's head of state). But yes, I've felt his pain, not fun. Stay strong, brother! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:56, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Lacks general significance. Suggest close. – Sca (talk) 12:05, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Your average Milkshaking, but with a rock. Kingsif (talk) 23:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

Dixie Fire

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) Prime Minister of Moldova

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment: we already posted the results of the election back in July, so this is probably just a formality? --Tone 13:38, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Tone, this is a duplicate posting; we already posted the election and the results. Occasionally we have posted things like this instead of elections, in cases where we missed the election posting for various reasons, but in general, when the election has already been posted, such formalities like this or like inaugurations and the like are not normally posted. --Jayron32 14:49, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I would not call it a formality because in this case, the leader of the winning party does not automatically become a prime minister (in fact, he is the current speaker of the parliament). It is not the Westminster system. Nevertheless, the prime minister in Moldova has more powers than the president, therefore should be important enough to be posted. Also worth noting is the fact that the country has had no government since last December, so this is a formal end of the local political crisis. --Andrei (talk) 15:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Still, according to the election results, it was expected that the new PM would come from a party that has comfortably won the election. We typically reserve the PM posting in cases where there is a prolonged government formation, such as when no party can form a coallition and similar, which was not the case here. --Tone 16:45, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Per Tone, it is a formality because we knew who the PM was going to be at the election, and nothing strange or unexpected happened between then and now. It was expected, at the time of the election, that what happened above would happen. Had it not, we would have a story to post. Since everything happened according to plan, there's no reason to post such an update. --Jayron32 17:37, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Does seem pretty much a foregone conclusion. – Sca (talk) 18:52, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

August 5

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 5
Template:Cob

(Closed) Lionel Messi leaves Barcelona

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archive bottom

(Posted) RD: Richard Trumka

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment I think I got the last couple citations in about his work on the U.S. Shell boycott; I would definitely support if so, as it seems everything else is sufficiently referenced. rawmustard (talk) 17:43, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks solid. Teemu08 (talk) 21:56, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • One citation needed. Stephen 06:09, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I just deleted the only unsourced information. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Article looks good for homepage / RD. RIP. Marking Ready. Ktin (talk) 18:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 20:24, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Brian Henderson (television presenter)

Template:ITN candidate

August 4

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 4
Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Jean "Binta" Breeze

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: R. Aravamudan

Template:ITN candidate

  • Though long enough at 405 words, it seems a little thin as a wikibio -- it would be nice to know, apart from writing ISRO: A Personal History, what he has achieved while carrying all those big titles. I am not sure if this is a deficiency that should hold this nom back. Otherwise, this is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 03:31, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as fully sourced and although a short article it should be sufficient for our RD requirements JW 1961 Talk 12:31, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 14:20, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Karl Heinz Bohrer

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support But meets already minimum requirements. Grimes2 (talk) 15:39, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - fully sourced and ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 18:10, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bobby Eaton

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: J. R. Richard

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support as per the nomination. rawmustard (talk) 17:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Article looks good. Added a couple of minor CN tags.
    Template:U please can you have them fixed. Should be relatively easy. Once that is done, this is good to go to homepage / RD. RIP. Ktin (talk) 18:19, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Template:U, they're resolved. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Template:Re ESPN says he died "Thursday" (Aug 5).[53] However, the article currently says Aug 4 and in a hospital, neither of which is specified in the page's current citation. This should be resolved.—Bagumba (talk) 19:27, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    This source says Wednesday in hospital.[54] Whichever is deemed more reliable, it should at least be consistent with the citation.—Bagumba (talk) 19:39, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not too close to the game. But, I did see a few other sources including a statement on MLB.com that referenced Wednesday, August 4th. So, I think the article has the date correct. [55] [56] Ktin (talk) 19:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, it also seems to me that Aug 4 is correct and ESPN is incorrect. This source says that the death was reported by the Astros today, though he died last night in a hospital, and I will switch to this source. ESPN is probably taking the day of the report to be the day of death. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

(Posted) 400m hurdles world record, update

Template:ITN candidate

  • Adding a new article requires people to check that article for ITN criteria. No error, no "simple" change. Kingsif (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - But I do not support this blurb. Just add MacLaughlin into the current blurb and add her image and make it a trio.BabbaQ (talk) 18:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • At current that would be a bit long. Feel free to propose alts that don't take up half (if not more) of the box. Kingsif (talk) 18:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted by adding to the existing blurb. I will repeat what I said in my edit summary - this entire blurb is somewhat arbitrarily (and perhaps unfairly) putting a spotlight on athletics and ignoring the other world records in other sports, so I question the entire approach of putting Olympic world records in this ITN box. - Fuzheado | Talk 18:44, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • PULL How was this allowed to go AND get posted when it's a copy-paste of a nom below with 2 opposes? 188.27.36.191 (talk) 22:34, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    While your observations are interesting and may even be valid, without a preponderance of
    original research to make a judgment to consider these world records as requiring special treatment in ITN. Now as to whether we should be taking this much blurb space at all for arbitrarily highlighting these world records, but not the ones in swimming or cycling, that is indeed a valid issue to bring up. For now, it is only logical and fair that either all three folks should be gone from the ITN box, or all three should exist. Putting only 2 of the 3 athletics world records, as it was previously, just doesn't make sense. -- Fuzheado | Talk 01:30, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
For reference nobody seems to have addressed any issues here: Seems that this new record was set WITH the "super spikes" that are reportedly a 1-1.5% bump over the old ones. Since this new decrease of .44 sec is by less than 1% of the old record (compared to the 1.6% for the men's one) and it is done WITH the new technology, this is definitely significantly less notable. The magnitude of the men's hurdles one was the notability there, and the long-jump one was the age of the record, neither of which apply in this case. Had this record been set outside of a competition with many records, this should have been posted, but can be skipped now. Alternatively, can add the records article to the ongoing link on the bottom of ITN (alongside medal table one).
How many records are broken? Yet the biggest single event in 100m is not posted but 1 support gets posted?2A02:2A57:60AF:0:7931:FDE6:C873:15B2 (talk) 13:25, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you not nominate it then?BabbaQ (talk) 13:28, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Milavče train collision

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Wait Stub article that also somewhat contradicts itself: it suggests there is a definite cause for the collision, but also that an investigation has just been opened. We should wait for it be clear which of those is true (do they know why, or are they looking into it?) RS should hopefully clarify with a few more hours. Kingsif (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless there's a criminal investigation, this isn't notable enough to be posted. Jim Michael (talk) 18:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:Re your wish has been granted. Criminal investigation opened. Mjroots (talk) 19:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support No longer stub and apparently criminal investigations are open now. Cindercat 🐱 (Want to talk?) 05:42, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opppose -- it is unclear what significance this has, but it does not appear to be notable enough to be posted. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 06:58, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Significance - it's a major rail crash in a first world country. ITN getting dominated by Olympics stories. Well developed article with no issues. Mjroots (talk) 11:15, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Doesn't seem major at all. A major rail crash would be one killing 10-20 or more, which unfortunately would not be unusual in certain countries. – Sca (talk) 12:13, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps percentage of a country's annual rail death toll would be a better metric for comparison? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:28, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It does seem to have had a fair amount of coverage in English language sources. Not sure it really has that much significance for the wider world. I think the Stonehaven derailment another train related incident with the same number of deaths was rejected from ITN for that reason last year. Llewee (talk) 12:18, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The Stonehaven derailment discussion was closed as
    WP:MINIMUMDEATHS for a reason. Each article needs to be assessed on its own merits, at the time it is nominated. Nominating an article in my experience has a twofold purpose. Firstly, it gets more eyes on the article, and generally leads to improvement of said article. Secondly, it might actually get on the main page, which again gets more eyes on the article. If it don't make the second stage, then its not the end of the world. Mjroots (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Oh, that happened in 1962 anyway. – Sca (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, we don't have a
WP:MINIMUMDEATHS because an otherwise notable disaster is not completed mitigated by a low death count. However, the death count is often the most prominent factor in a disaster's significance. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:08, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Oppose – Lacks general significance. – Sca (talk) 12:52, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I would also prefer we not post multiple Olympics stories, but that's not a legitimate reason to post other stories. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:08, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I do not agree with the Opposing side here. Clear significance, deaths, rare event in the country, has received plenty of international coverage. Article is sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 11:17, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Closed) More world records

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment/suggestion: Can we have a cap on the number of these new records in the same blurb at the same time, please? Perhaps the most recent three? Just to avoid putting up bloated bullet-points on ITN. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment May I suggest bumping Rojas out (back to individual blurb?) and having the 400m hurdlers in the same blurb. Kingsif (talk) 13:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I agree that it's better to combine the world records in 400 m hurdles in one blurb and keep Rojas in a separate one. We should also consider a new montage of Warholm's and McLaughlin's photos.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:07, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:U Users unrelated to the nominator are allowed to propose alt blurbs; nominations are not the property of the nominator and unalterable by others, and adding an alt blurb does not suggest support by the nominator. 331dot (talk) 13:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
How then can it be allowed to appear without accreditation or being marked as distinct from my proposal in a section that has my name, and my name alone, attached to it? Kevin McE (talk) 13:26, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Users have proposed alt blurbs on the nominations of others for years and this is the first objection I've seen to it. Often discussions lead to such things and it is assumed that alt blurbs were not necessarily written by the nominator. My suggestion, if you are concerned that others will interpret the addition of an alt blurb as your suggestion, is that you make a statement saying that you do not support any suggested alt blurbs. Perhaps the nomination template can be tinkered with as well. 331dot (talk) 13:34, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Simple: it's not your proposal. The nominator's name is only there to give credit for bringing attention to the item, which is what gets the bulk of pure !votes, with blurb wording always open to improvement, sometimes (often) even changed by the posting admin without discussion at all. Kingsif (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Patent nonsense, a proposal made by me, in my name, is my proposal. Why the incredibly rude tone from you on this page? Kevin McE (talk) 16:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true, and I've not been rude. ITN isn't a series of mini-autocracies, and I have merely tried to elucidate that. Wordily and firm, probably. You're making incorrect generalizations of a process you evidently don't understand and now are trying to "win" by saying I'm not nice to you. It's embarrassing. Kingsif (talk) 18:44, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Seems that this new record was set WITH the "super spikes" that are reportedly a 1-1.5% bump over the old ones. Since this new decrease of .44 sec is by less than 1% of the old record (compared to the 1.6% for the men's one) and it is done WITH the new technology, this is definitely significantly less notable. The magnitude of the men's hurdles one was the notability there, and the long-jump one was the age of the record, neither of which apply in this case. Had this record been set outside of a competition with many records, this should have been posted, but can be skipped now. Alternatively, can add the records article to the ongoing link on the bottom of ITN (alongside medal table one). 188.27.36.191 (talk) 13:35, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm going to suggest that for the purposes of the rest of the games that we do not try to suggest more WRs, and instead add a link to World and Olympic records set at the 2020 Summer Olympics in the ongoing line (eg "Olympics (medal table, world records)") That article seems to be reasonable sourced and in good shape. That will avoid this issue of us not featuring every WR set. --Masem (t) 13:38, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And removing those already there? And acknowledge that sports other than athletics exist? Radical: I like it. Kevin McE (talk) 13:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should think about posting a box with links to multiple articles about the Olympics as we did for the COVID-19 pandemic last year. It's clear that the Summer Olympics are the main ongoing event in the world and the ongoing section cannot properly accommodate multiple links.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:18, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The box for COVID was more as a attention-getting highlight because of its severity and that we felt the need that we wanted to do something to alert the readers of a global issue. Olympics is not of that severity, but we can add extra links to what are likely articles of high interest, which I agree include the medal table and WRs. I would propose a similar approach for any other ongoing where there is a subpage or two that would be a reasonable target article associated with the main ongoing event where that information isn't on the target page (eg when World Cup comes round, the tourney bracket structure if its not on the Cup's main page could be a possible target like this). --Masem (t) 14:26, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I came here to propose exactly what Masem just suggested. --LukeSurl t c 14:19, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't that a suggestion at ITN talk, and completely shot down? Kingsif (talk) 14:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There was a suggestion to have sports icons alongside the Olympics to point to every single major event. That was shot down. But having a couple side links is completely reasonable given that we already have one (the medal table). --Masem (t) 14:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, well, I'm sure that would be a separate ongoing nom. Kingsif (talk) 14:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose and, frankly, suggest close. Massively overloaded blurb, and the nominator has made it very clear that t
    (his) nom is for that blurb wording alone, rather than for the item (i.e. event, i.e. bold article) - which ITN noms are supposed to be. I suggest Kevin, who also stuck this nom outside the date template until I fixed it, actually learn the ITN rules before trying it again. The rules which also say that items have to be nommed to get posted, so nobody is actively saying swimming and cycling can't be posted and he should stop whining about it. Kingsif (talk) 14:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Template:Abot

August 3

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 3
Template:Cob

(Posted) Ongoing: 2020 Olympics

Template:ITN candidate

Yes, I foam at the mouth, on cue, at the sight of an 8-ball. – Sca (talk) 22:26, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose quite conflicted here, as I appreciate the epic troll y'all are running on Rambling Man. But we shouldn't burn the whole project to the ground to do it. Just make fun of Thatcher or something. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • May I make the suggestion that we add Chronological summary of the 2020 Summer Olympics to the Ongoing section just as well as the Medal table. They are all three part of the Olympics. I see no reason to Pull neither of the other two articles part of the Ongoing section though. BabbaQ (talk) 22:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is zero reason to pull this, if we want to alter what is posted, we can do so. 331dot (talk) 22:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your comments! The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:03, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post the timeline (per ITNR). Last chance saloon for me. This has dramatically changed my view on what the community believes "Ongoing" is for. We can now post things like the World Cup or the Euros because there's literally no updates to the articles in question, but "they're a big tournament". We will remember. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds great! Glad we reached this solution.


In my opinion that article should be added to Ongoing as well, along with the Medal table with the 2020 Summer Olympics as the main article. This is the biggest Sporting event in the world. So having three articles at Ongoing for a few more days would make sense. BabbaQ (talk) 23:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Swap medal table for chronology. I'm not generally a fan of chronology articles (there's a very good reason the other item is COVID-19 pandemic, not Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic), but the chronology article here includes the winners of all the events, which is relevant in the newsy sense. I think the general Olympics article is the target readers more expect, though, so I would very much oppose removing that. Including two Olympics links is fine, but I wouldn't want to see more than that. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article has a continually updated medal table. Will China win? Stay tuned! InedibleHulk (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The ongoing section was originally created for having a link the Olympics and then was built up since then. Appropriate to continue having a link since various events are on subpages that can be reached by the existing link. Has a clear starting and end point, unlike the vast majority of other events on Ongoing. SpencerT•C 03:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Horrible choice to now instead cram two Olympic items to ongoing because
    WP:IAR this (though I am updating 2020 United States men's Olympic basketball team).—Bagumba (talk) 06:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

(Closed) World records

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose lots of the cycling records are unreferenced. The article lacks a suitable introduction. Also, is the intention to extend this if records are beaten in other disciplines, to the point where it becomes the only news story in the ITN template? Also, rowing (for example) lists them as "world best" not "world records", this nuance doesn't come across in the blurb, so it's misleading. Either these are world records or they're not. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The official weightlifting records are all from 2018+, pre-2018.5 records became historical interest-only with a weight class rearrangement. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking about rowing. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Lengthen the blurb some more with World records are set in weightlifting, cycling, swimming, shooting and athletics at the Tokyo Olympics, along with world bests in rowing.? Why not alphabetical order? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's not really news that new world records are set during Summer Olympics because that always happens. The real news is when a world record is broken after a long period of time or by a significant margin.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:43, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
People always die and elections always have results too. Kevin McE (talk) 20:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So we no longer need RD because we can post a blurb that links to
deaths in 2021 as a target article. Don't we?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Sure, as long as we can still argue there aren't enough sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't be surprised if a nomination with a proposed blurb "Sportspeople win medals at the 2020 Summer Olympics." arrives. And all such nominations come as a result of the reluctance to post the Olympics to ongoing.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Sportspeople win medals at a big event". A lot simpler, I think. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, take a break now Martin, maybe a week or two. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose too vague to be meaningful. An "ongoing" for the Olympics is one thing, this is just silly. What's next? "Football matches occur in England, Germany, Spain, and France"? User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 20:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    What? Football matches occur is not equivalent to world records are set. I don't know, perhaps you're just testing us, this is patently absurd. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:56, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted, Closed) 400m hurdles world record

Template:Atop
Template:ITN candidate

  • I'd support merging the two athletics world records, it even gives us the opportunity to have a direct link to the Olympics in the blurb. --Tone 08:27, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support simply because this is perhaps one of the most outstanding results in the history of athletics. It's extremely rare to see a race in which the first two athletes have run way better than the world record and 0.76 seconds in 400 m is really a huge margin.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment agree with support rationale above. Just noting a few of the results in the table are unsourced (but happy to try and find some). Also not sure if this would get subsumed by the proposed "on-going" nomination (if that succeeds). Martinevans123 (talk) 08:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - we've already set a precedent by posting the triple jump, although I still think this is ridiculously unfair on the swimmers who set world records and weren't posted. So probably, as Tone says, let's fold this in to the triple jump story. And preferably add the swimming records too. That said, I don't think this is as surprising as the margin or the hyperbole above would suggest. Of course, the athletes today are strong, but comparing their times to those of the past is apples to oranges, as a result of changes in the spikes used on their boots.[57]  — Amakuru (talk) 08:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to see world records in other sports being posted but the problem is that no-one nominates them.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:U The winner didn't use the new spikes (the 2nd place guy did). Black Kite (talk) 22:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • If it's an event that has history, like BMX (X-games), then that could get posted posted. New to Olympics doesn't matter, right? But setting a record in a new event shouldn't. I think I heard that the new triathlon event has been trialled before, but I don't know if that time was used to set the record? Kingsif (talk) 14:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds reasonable. The GB time of 1:23:41 for the Mixed Triathlon Relay is, of course, the current Olympic record. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is like claiming that not posting every death in RD is saying some people were more important than others when, simply, nobody nominated RDs that would have been posted. If you want to see every new record posted, it's on you to nominate them all. Of course, some record breaks are seen as more newsworthy (i.e. actually ITN) than others: long-held records, those broken by a big margin, and those in sports like track and field which are contested by people from lots of countries, are generally in the news much more than someone taking 0.001 second off their own record in a sport only their nation cares about. Kingsif (talk) 14:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would that be in track and field or some new summer biathlon, I wonder. Kingsif (talk) 16:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as this world record is newsworthy. If you feel other world records being set are also newsworthy, feel free to nominate those, but don't oppose this one for that reason.Jackattack1597 (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and agree with the sentiments above that this is an "overhaul"-standard record-breaking effort. Much like those others which we've posted lately. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this appears to have significant consensus to post, I marked it a while back but no willing admin yet. Suggest this is dealt with expediently and then we'll see what happens with the plethora of other Olympic nominations, premature or otherwise. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kevin McE. It's the Olympic Games, didn't you all expect the world records to be broken? In the end, that this happens has a lesser impact on society than the personal one of the achiever. If we don't even have the Olympics ongoing, it's nonsense that we have to put on the Main Page every single record that is broken. It's not pragmatic, neither a Sports page. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Nobody (other than Kevin) is suggesting we link to every record broken. Just those which are significantly broken, whether that be by a notable margin or from a notable period of time. We don't have to put on the Main Page every single record that is broken, self-evidently that hasn't happened. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You severely overestimate how many world records are broken at the Olympics, they're not gold medals. There's probably an article somewhere comparing world records and Olympic records. If you want to oppose with the argument that breaking a world record is something that is "just personal for the achiever", well, should no awards ever be posted? There's a lot of ITN/R gone... Kingsif (talk) 17:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the blurb that is proposed currently. The most notable and important thing about this event is that both the gold and silver medallist set a time that was quicker than the existing world record. This a very rare occurence and that is what the blurb should deal with.Tvx1 17:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That makes this world record more outstanding but I disagree that a blurb should mention it. The second fastest time, albeit significantly better than the previous world record, is not a world record itself. I prefer including the exact margin in the blurb instead of this.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don’t care about the individual merits of the second time. It’s about the event as whole. If you want to highlight this sport event in the in the news section, than it needs to convey the key elements why it is notable. And both the winner and the runner-up setting a time quicker than the existing world record is a key element of this event.Tvx1 19:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand your point but the news is the world record and that's what should be included in the blurb. The results of the other athletes, including the time of the runner-up and the total of six national records set, should find their place in the race summary, which is indeed the case because the summary is very well written and captures all relevant details about the race.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nom isn't for "400 m hurdles event". And even if it were, a blurb cannot mention every notable aspect of the event. Compare it to awards ceremonies: merely happening is deemed blurbworthy, and by tradition our blurbs mention the top result, even if something interesting happened in a different part. Kingsif (talk) 20:10, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, I don’t care about the unique merits of the other athletes. I’m referring to the combined achievement of the first two. It’s that unique achievement which is actually in the news. It’s not some detail and did not happen in a different part of the race. It’s the most important event of it.Tvx1 10:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support - Changing my stance to strong support. This is indeed an "overhaul"-standard record-breaking effort. BabbaQ (talk) 18:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would be ok with merging it into the triple jump story, but oppose a separate blurb, as with the Olympics looking set to be added to Ongoing as well, that's enough representation of the games on ITN I think. Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment still confused as to why this hasn't been posted. It has community consensus to do so. Are admins now making personal choices on what to promote, based on the fact that a newer item has been posted since this was ready to go? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. We have the Olympics Ongoing handle now to cover all the twists and turns. Pull the triple jump too. As Kevin McE says (and I said below) there are numerous records being set, and we shouldn't editorialise which ones we post.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We literally "editorialize" everything we post. Why one plane crash and not another? Why one death and not another? Are they all nommed, and after the nom, it's a democracy, people vote. If they vote for one record and not another with sensible reasoning, so be it. If this is in the news and not another record, all the more reason to "editorialize", a word you're incorrectly using in place of "fulfilling the ITN goals". Kingsif (talk) 22:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. Oppose withdrawn. Support double blurb though.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:32, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Ping Comments seem to indicate a preference for a double-blurb; in any case, discussion should continue on that even though it's been posted. Kingsif (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Template:Abot

(Posted) Ongoing: 2021 Taliban offensive

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment I nominated this article two weeks ago and it didn't go anywhere. The nomination will probably have more support after one of the provincial capitals falls Scaramouche33 (talk) 07:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose proseline, wall of reactions. Nominate for a blurb when something significant happens. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – UN says 40 killed in fighting over Lashkargah. – Sca (talk) 12:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the news seems to think that the bulk of fighting is in Lashkar Gah and it's getting bad. If they take Helmand province, that would be the blurb. Pending article update, of course. Kingsif (talk) 12:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, these place names don't mean much to most English speakers, I'm afraid, so I guess we'd be back (at least partly) to weighing the death toll. BTW, that BBC story did say 40 civilians killed. – Sca (talk) 14:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. I am convinced that this will be blurb-worthy when the Taliban take Kandahar city (or Kabul, but that seems further away). Re-nominate for a blurb when that happens. Modest Genius talk 15:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe. Kandahar (pop.: 650,000) is at least somewhat more familiar to English speakers. – Sca (talk) 18:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We posted the "peace agreement" which was understood by all as ceding the country to the Taliban. I have no objection to a second blurb when the job is done, but we don't need to post each territorial gain any more than we need to cite that the sky is blue. GreatCaesarsGhost 01:25, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's a process, clearly ongoing, citations look adequate (and I know these places from 25 years of exclusively English news, for whatever that's worth). InedibleHulk (talk) 01:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The Taliban now control the majority of Afghanistan. They
    attacked Kabul on 3 Aug. Jim Michael (talk) 18:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support I imagine that Template:Xt qualifies as "something significant". And of course all this on the back of the US and other nations announcing they will be withdrawing their forces from NATO's involvement there. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support As it's not a blurb, the minimal update for August seems satisfactory. Kingsif (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 00:07, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping can we keep the COVID-19 link left justified in "ongoing" since it's going to be there for another 2 or 3 years it makes sense to keep it in the same place. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:58, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

August 2

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 2
Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Dave Severance

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support – Sourced and ready. Looks good to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:21, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 17:57, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: George Forss

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) Chronological summary of the 2020 Summer Olympics

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

I opened this because I felt the discussion below was closed prematurely; there is clearly a desire to post something. It doesn't have to be this, there's good reasons to not post this as it is now; an IP user made a suggestion above. But we are missing the boat here and should do something. 331dot (talk) 22:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect. The discussion below had served its purpose to remove a sub-standard article without consensus from the main page. You then prematurely re-opened this nomination with the same article in the same sub-standard condition. "Do something" == fix the poor state of the article you have nominated, and feel free to do that. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 06:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose putting the chronological summary as Ongoing, both per above qualify concerns, and also because it's the wrong article to be showcasing. As evidenced by page view statistics,[64] the page that readers are seeking is the main Olympics page, not a poorly structured data dump which receives 50 times fewer hits than its parent. Currently, 2020 Summer Olympics has some orange tags and has not been fully updated with latest info, but I wouldn't be opposed in principle to posting that one to ongoing if someone sorts it out. Not the chronological summary though.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose that article, just put 2020 Summer Olympics up there, its currently a glaring omission.  Nixinova   T   C   07:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment for those requesting 2020 Summer Olympics to be posted as Ongoing, can they demonstrate what aspects of that article (currently maintenance-tagged) beyond the medal table are being regularly updated to comply with the basic requirement of Ongoing items? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:37, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Is that "needs additional citations" template, in the "Sports" section, in the right place? That section looks very well sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinevans123 (talk • contribs) 10:03, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assume it relates to the latter part of that section which is entirely unreferenced. And what part of this article meets the Ongoing requirement? Just the medal table? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 11:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • But only the "Number of athletes by National Olympic Committee" subsection is "entirely unreferenced"? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:10, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's what I said. But no-one's answering the question on what's being updated here for it to qualify as an "ongoing" event. If we want to remove the requirement for continual updates, that's another debate. The medal table? Amaze. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 15:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The medal table is sourced to this. Are you saying that's inappropriate, or just amazing? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can read for yourself. I'm still waiting for an answer to the question "what aspect of the article is receiving updates that complies with the basic requirement of "Ongoing""? I guess if we're now down to just the medal table, this will impact future "ongoing" nominations where just a "number of deaths" (for example) will need to be updated to keep something in there. If that's what the consensus agrees, fine by me, meanwhile I still oppose this nomination (as a woefully under-referenced article is being knowingly proposed) and the alt-"nomination" (which has practically zero updates being applied). Now feel free to find something else to do. Thanks. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not "woefully under-referenced." That template seems unjustified. I'm also unclear what it means for an article to be "continually updated". Martinevans123 (talk) 16:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I'm no longer clear which article you're talking about. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive bottom

(Removed) Chronological summary of the 2020 Summer Olympics

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate This has been added with the "roll-off" of the opening ceremony but the discussion to include this as an "ongoing" item ended with opposition. If I missed the community consensus agreeing to adding this very poor article to the main page once the opening ceremony rolled off, could I be pointed to it please? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:40, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I guess I remembered it wrong or didn't follow that particular discussion, I thought this was non-controversial. I leave it to the community to decide whether to keep it or pull it. --Tone 18:14, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    You should revert your edit. I've given you the evidence of the community discussion on this matter above. There was no consensus anywhere at any point that when the opening ceremony rolled off we should post the timeline as ongoing. Not a shred. Please do the right thing now. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:17, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's the criterion for a "very poor article"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Amongst other things, one where a considerable portion of the information is unverified. I think you know that, having seen your work on RDs with discographies where all entries are required to be cited. As you can clearly see, this article has dozens of results without citation. Hope that clears thing up for you. Thanks. Also, there was no consensus anywhere to post this after the opening ceremony rolled off. As you know. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, RD seems to need to have everything cited, not just a considerable portion. Perhaps they just start off as "poor". Martinevans123 (talk) 18:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Whatever, the standard is to not target articles which aren't pretty much comprehensively verifiable. Anyway, this is irrelevant. The previous attempt to nominate this very article for ongoing ended in a consensus against it. Of course, as you're so keen, re-nominate it and, as you note, you could always fill in the missing hundred or so references. Thanks. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the offer of all that help. Perhaps you think there is a more suitable target article? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:38, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No, there isn't. Thanks. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:41, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Removed for the time being. Let's have a discussion instead whether we should have it or not. --Tone 18:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As noted, that will need to be a new "ongoing" nomination which will supersede (or concur with) the previous ongoing nomination where there was consensus directly against posting this subs-standard article. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a good idea. Looks like the ideal candidate. Perhaps people will help to improve it. Radical thought, I know. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:27, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like it's time to close this one, as it's been "pulled" and marked as such. Who needs bureaucracy when you can have pedantic bureaucracy. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:55, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive bottom

August 1

Template:Cot
Portal:Current events/2021 August 1
Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Kazimierz Kowalski

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Paul Cotton

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Eddie Presland

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support - Sourced, Start class, looks good to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:11, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted: A bit slim, but okay for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 22:56, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Triple jump world record

Template:ITN candidate

  • And by Brits you mean Europeans. GDPR is a European law, and yes, sites are completely walled, only the url can tell you where you were supposed to go. Honestly, feel free to nominate those records, it wasn't sarcasm. Kingsif (talk) 21:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Re Yes, I'm aware of how old it is - I watched Inessa Kravets set the previous world record in 1995. My personal view is that breaking a world record is not intrinsically more significant than winning a World or Olympic title, and we don't post those individually. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:00, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • I opposed those as well. And until it's ITN/R, they are discussed on a case-by-case basis. And as for the blurb itself, talk about burying the lead. It doesn't even mention the Olympic gold medal, which is what she came for.Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:51, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree we should consider Thompson's Olympic record, beating FloJo's 1988 record, as a ITN candidate. The 100m is the most famous (or one of the most famous) track and field and in general Olympic events. Wqwt (talk) 21:28, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support be consistent. Either these records are worth posting or not. There's no intrinsic difference between the one we posted a month or so ago, and this one. And this one was amazing to be fair. She beat a record which had stood for 26 years. But then, female ethnic athlete, whatever. Wikipedia continues to disappoint its regulars. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 20:46, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I don't think this is one of the marquee records that is followed by the public at large, like the 100m run record. This isn't top line news(and no sources are offered). 331dot (talk) 21:03, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough, but I still think this record is not highly followed. 331dot (talk) 21:38, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support because four stories on ITN are over a week old and it's a reasonable story to include on ITN. NorthernFalcon (talk) 21:21, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Obvs. Also, when was the last time an Olympic gold medal was shared? Just sayin'. And, of course, what we really need, is a whole separate ITN box on the Main page for all those latest Olympic records!! --Martinevans123 (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as it is a major track and field world record being broken. Jackattack1597 (talk) 22:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think the blurb should be about the age rather than about the exact value, alt4. The caveat is that likely this is a WR cause triple jump women was not an olympic thing during the 80s testosterone era that still has half of women's athletics WRs. 2A02:2F0E:D519:8B00:C9CC:5655:DF34:665B (talk) 03:04, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please add American distance numbers to the blurb as well as meters for reader understandability, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 03:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 26 years is nothing special because this is around the average for such field events – see The Economist's detailed analysis. And lots of other records are being broken at the Olympics. As there are two other Olympic blurbs currently, we should shift all this to a single ongoing entry. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The numerous weightlifting records is fake as they raised the weight classes in 2019 for fairness and set the minimum to count as an Olympic record low enough that it usually happens at least once per record (3 records per weight class, the snatch,clean and jerk and the sum which is the one that determines who won). There is also a mixed team fad going on now in multiple sports, the extreme newness of these events will make it very easy to get an Olympic record in them until at least 2024. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah yes, the Opening Ceremony is still ongoing isn't it, judging by that bold link.... Martinevans123 (talk) 09:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, that's how ITN blurbs are written. For example, the triple jump world record is not being continually broken is it? And please be careful not to disrupt other's signatures. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's your point? Oh, there isn't one. You tried this at ERRORS yesterday and it got nowhere. Those looking for an "ongoing" Olympics article should nominate a suitable candidate (for the second time) instead of just complaining about it (repeatedly). The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 10:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Andrew suggested moving "all this to a single ongoing entry." I don't see what's "ongoing" about the triple jump record/ gold medal. And as far as I can see, neither do you. And please be careful not to describe other editor's contributions as pointless. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sure it is. But there you go, the discussion is linked and you can see for yourself what the proposed target articles would be for an ongoing. I'm sure Andrew has an opinion, but this is Wikipedia and we go by community consensus. Thanks. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 10:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Paging
    Template:Ping. Is there an Andrew Day Vidson in da house? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC) [reply
    ]
That she was born too late? – Sca (talk) 22:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Krystsina Tsimanouskaya / Belarusian athlete defections

Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose. This isn't quite as brazen as forcing a passenger aircraft to land, and there is a plausible reason for this on each side. Maybe if more develops(such as Japanese police arresting someone). 331dot (talk) 14:00, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What "plausible reason" do you mean? This incident is the main topic on the websites of Reuters, BBC, DailyMail, France24 and dozens of others media outlets.--KastusK (talk) 15:23, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean that both the athlete and the team have plausible explanations for this incident. 331dot (talk) 17:16, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, the team did not give an explanation for the deportation at all.--KastusK (talk) 17:34, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a deportation since Japan did not kick her out of the country. Abduction, maybe. Reuters: "The Belarusian Olympic Committee said in a statement that coaches had decided to withdraw Tsimanouskaya from the Games on doctors' advice about her "emotional, psychological state"." I'm not saying they are correct, but that is their answer. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but this supposed "emotional, psychological state" only arose after she criticised Belarusian authorities on Instagram, "for entering her for the 4x400 relay despite her never previously racing the event." Martinevans123 (talk) 14:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – The travails of individual Olympic athletes usually don't pose general significance. This one seems part of the continuing Belarus story. – Sca (talk) 15:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it's certainly news, but not so prominent or impactful to justify a front-page posting. At least not yet. Maybe add it to the Current Events portal? User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:36, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Important news, but just not important enough for the main page.Jackattack1597 (talk) 22:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Taken to airport but not deported. SpencerT•C 05:03, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Just a trivial event. Maybe it's her tactic to gain refugee status. STSC (talk) 11:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe it's her tactic to avoid being "disappeared" by a brutal authoritarian regime? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • She has now voiced fears for her own safety and has said that it may not be safe for her to return to Belarus for five or ten years: [65] Martinevans123 (talk) 19:21, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Ms. Tsimanouskaya (Tee-man-oooss'-skee-yah -??) has been granted a "compassionate visa" by Poland, [66] [67] [68] which apparently amounts to provisional asylum status. This seems to make her case more interesting and significant. – Sca (talk) 12:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tim-an-off-ski-ya, I believe. Kingsif (talk) 14:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ціманоўская / Тимановская – Where does the 'F' come from? (Not that I'm any expert.) – Sca (talk) 15:59, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The thing that looks like a B in Cyrillic is an F. And that pseudo-U at the start is a T. The funny y is a semi-vowel, which I'm not sure how to attempt, they appear in Welsh but those accents are quite different. Kingsif (talk) 16:30, 2 August 2021 (UTC) [reply]
Well, in Russian anyway a B is a V, as in Moskva (Москва) – Moscow to us. – Sca (talk)

Template:Hat

Eh?? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:33, 2 August 2021 (UTC) [reply]
There are two vowels in Betws, but you'll probably only hear one. That's about all I know. Kingsif (talk) 17:11, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. If you go to Betws, I can assure you that you'll hear two. In fact you will at any of them, even this one! Martinevans123 (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2021 (UTC) [reply]
See now, I was just thinking of the common noun, (it was read from the day prayers in a church I visited (chapel, it seems). The w barely sounded voiced?) don't come here with your geography *gasp* Kingsif (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see, you meant 'betws. I only came here with geography in answer to a geographical example. *gasp* But I guess you mean Short U (Cyrillic), for the voiced labial–velar approximant /w/, which can occur in Welsh? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC) [reply]
... Yes. Yes, that's what I was thinking short U voice labia approximate. Am I saying that right? Kingsif (talk) 18:34, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hab

  • Wait Until it is less "developing story" to decide. Kingsif (talk) 14:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Unique and important, we have an obligation here at this international website to highlight human rights abuses. More importantly, its in the news all over the world, which is what this vote supposed to represent also. 212.74.201.233 (talk) 18:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, actually we are not here to
right great wrongs. Please use social media to publicize human rights issues. 331dot (talk) 18:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
  • She's also been given a Japanese visa, so it looks like she can just stay in Tokyo now. Kingsif (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Story was not a one day thing. Has continued to be published in all major media today. Has become an international story. BabbaQ (talk) 16:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Three supports don't constitute consensus. Premature "Ready" tag removed. – Sca (talk) 19:00, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support And added Japanese visa alt: an Olympic host basically sheltering an athlete is news, and the media is treating it as very big news. Also a story about the Belarusian "last dictatorship in Europe", too. Kingsif (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Except for the Duchy of Grand Fenwick. – Sca (talk) 22:30, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – getting closer: – As of 12:00 Wednesday Tsimanouskaya was on a plane from Tokyo to Vienna. [69] [70] [71] – Sca (talk) 12:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Vienna arrival – Plane carrying Ms. Tsimanouskaya lands at 13:00 in Vienna, [72] [73], from which she's expected to journey to Warsaw today. – Sca (talk) 14:23, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vienna departure - Took off to Warsaw shortly after arriving. [74] Kingsif (talk) 18:05, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update Suggested alt4 with a different 'hook' after two other athletes say they won't go back to Belarus. Kingsif (talk) 16:08, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Warsaw arrival – A plane carrying Ms. Tsimanouskaya landed at Warsaw Chopin Airport Wednesday evening, and she was taken to a private terminal where she was greeted by Polish officials and Belarussian expatriates. [75] [76] [77] – Sca (talk) 19:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – When dully updated with Warsaw arrival. No. 1 story worldwide today. Great political significance. – Sca (talk)
    PS: IMO, it would be best not to complicate this spot news by combining the item with stories about other Beloarussian refusenik athletes. She was first. – Sca (talk) 19:36, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Dziękuję, Polska. — Sca (talk) 19:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, at least we know she's alive. Surely can think of five more altblurbs? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also support one of these blurbs. Which one is up to you.BabbaQ (talk) 20:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article updated. Check how much detail you want on the arrival, though, it's one sentence in the saga at the moment. It's a bit of an unravelling story but all blurbs are current, I'd probably go with alt2 but don't mind. Kingsif (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, Alt2 is shorter, but Alt1 tells a bit more of the story and it reads OK, so I'd probably go for that. In any case, let's get it into the box before the day's out. – Sca (talk) 22:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted with Alt1, but if anyone thinks that one of the others is much better, feel free to change it. Black Kite (talk) 22:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I've sent
    WP:CMP if anyone feels it should be the image (when KrinkleBot has done its work). Black Kite (talk) 22:38, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Myanmar military junta

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment. This seems like it would be ITNR. 331dot (talk) 14:02, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps, but it's not clear whether this titular grab portends any tangible change on the ground. – Sca (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Major development from the coup back in February and also depicts a new leadership in the region. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative support, but the update related to today's development needs to be longer. --Tone 18:07, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose respectfully. Smoke and mirrors or window dressing. Call it what you like but nothing substantive has changed. It was a military dictatorship last week and it's still a military dictatorship today. Changing job titles does not fundamentally alter political reality. This is not what ITNR was intending to cover. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The change in job title is what is ITN/R, though, not the change in power. We still post the results of elections in countries with rigged elections or in which real power is held by a different individual. We also post when the incumbent wins and when someone takes the relevant job title by law (e.g., VP taking power after President dies), so clearly there doesn't have to be an actual change in power and there doesn't have to be an actual election for it to be ITN/R. Mlb96 (talk) 21:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Legitimization of dictatorship by change in administrative position, ITNR and article looks fine. Gotitbro (talk) 00:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ITNR
    WP:ITNR#Elections and heads of state and government says: "Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government...as listed at List of current heads of state and government." This list shows President of Myanmar to be the executive, not the Prime Minister. Joofjoof (talk) 04:48, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I see both President and Prime Minister listed in that article for Myanmar. Mlb96 (talk) 06:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Only the President is marked as executive, as mentioned in the key at the top of the article. Joofjoof (talk) 07:37, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This just appears to be pedantic, the guideline's purpose is to highlight significant administrative changes. Even if take this into account, the president is clearly not that important in the present regime. This is in the news and the assumption of a different substantive role does appear to fall into that category. Gotitbro (talk) 07:59, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - It's not a normal change of head of state. I think article "2021 Myanmar coup d'état" should be included in the blurb. STSC (talk)
  • Comment – Opposition on Monday condemns Min Aung Hlaing's asumption of PM title, calling it a bid to gain legitimacy. – Sca (talk) 12:38, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Fails ITNR in both fact (the president is the leader) and spirit (a change in leadership has not occurred). GreatCaesarsGhost 22:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - sad situstion but ITN worthy still.BabbaQ (talk) 18:21, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as not ITN/R per GreatCaesarsGhost. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment debate can continue on significance, but I'm untagging as ITNR, as there is too much doubt about if this event is covered. GreatCaesarsGhost 01:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Turkish wildfires

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment Article should probably be beefed up a little bit more before posting. As of this comment, the article is only four paragraphs long. Mlb96 (talk) 06:08, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK I hope to add more shortly. I have not done ITN before so please ping me if enough or not right. If/when this is accepted I will cancel my DYK request. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have added more info - if there is anything else I should do please ping me. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support because the fires are major & the article is of sufficient quality to post. Jim Michael (talk) 09:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Widely covered, affecting many people and prompting seaborne evacuations. Note however that according to Reuters most fires have been contained. – Sca (talk) 12:06, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
True but 7 are still burning - I don't know how big. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Perhaps I am not reading carefully enough, but I have trouble finding the prose on the nominated wikipage about the "injured more than 400" mentioned in the proposed blurbs. I can see "Non-fatal injuries 410[2]" in the infobox, but the linked news article, dated July 29th, does not mention 410. --PFHLai (talk) 13:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately it is now over 800 - cited Chidgk1 (talk) 14:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to watch just this section - please ping me or write on article talk page if anything needs changing Chidgk1 (talk) 15:04, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Posted: Thank you for the new refs and updating, Chidgk1. --PFHLai (talk) 16:10, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/August_2021&oldid=1073211778"