Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/May 2023

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.

May 31

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports


(Posted) RD: Kurt Widmer

Article: Kurt Widmer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Basler 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: Swiss baritone singer, especially remembered as voice teacher. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:14, 5 June 2023 (UTC) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:14, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Withdrawn) Trial of Lina E.

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: 
neo-Nazis. (Post)
News source(s): NYTABC NewsZDFDW

Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: A widely watched trial in Germany, which prompted violent protests and riots around the country. Festucalextalk 11:06, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Violent criminals are jailed every day, including for murder, rape etc. While this case certainly affected the six people she attacked, I don't see any broader impacts that would justify a blurb. Modest Genius talk 11:24, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Modest Genius: As mentioned in the sources, there have already been riots in Berlin, Bremen, Dresden, Hamburg, Leipzig and other cities in response to this ruling. [1] This is no common case, it's more of a national spotlight one. Festucalextalk 11:36, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The article has just two sentences about the protests. If those are the main story, that should be reflected in the blurb and the article. But it looks like they're still pretty small. Modest Genius talk 12:13, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius + notability. Violent criminals like this are arrested and jailed and convicted every day, and have been for forever. I can't see how this one instance is so notable that it deserves to be put on the Main Page as a blurb. If the protests were George Floyd-level (i.e. everywhere and everyone knows about it, and no I'm not comparing the people, just the protest sizes), I could see it. In this instance, however, this is the first time I'm hearing about it. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:12, 2 June 2023 (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: Sergio Calderón

Article: Sergio Calderón (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.

 Thriley (talk) 04:40, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Latvian presidential election

Proposed image
Articles: 2023 Latvian presidential election (talk · history · tag) and Edgars Rinkēvičs (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Latvia, Edgars Rinkēvičs (pictured) is elected president. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters - ABC - DW - AP - Bloomberg
Credits:
Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Presidential elections were held in Latvia. Edgars Rinkēvičs won, being noted for the first open homosexual who will take the position. I would like the clarify that although Latvia has a parliamentary system, the position of president is not entirely ceremonial, and from my understanding, is a position of power largely shared with the PM. (NOTE FOR POSTING ADMINS: Edgars2007 (talk · contribs) created the article on Edgars Rinkēvičs). - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 15:46, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Is this really ITN/R? While the president of Latvia isn't purely ceremonial, it's the position is not nearly as powerful as in countries with a presidential system. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    in my opinion, if it isn't voted by a popular vote, it is not notable. did we post the 2022 Indian presidential election? Rushtheeditor (talk) 21:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Technically the president of the United States ins't elected by popular vote either... DecafPotato (talk) 00:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a bit different though, since people vote for electors who then vote for their candidate. On the other hand... people don't vote for the Prime Minister in Westminster systems by popular vote, but, quite obviously those are notable enough for ITN/R. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 01:41, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, this is ITN/R. It doesn't matter if the country isn't "nearly as powerful" as other countries. All countries listed under the list of sovereign states are to be in ITN, given that the article quality meets the requirements for ITN. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:10, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You must have misunderstood me, or perhaps I wasn't clear. I didn't say anything about the power of the country; that is absolutely irrelevant here. I said that the president isn't nearly as powerful in Latvia as the president in presidential systems are, and so this arguably does not qualify for ITN/R. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 01:39, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    My apologies, I did misunderstand you. In your case, it could be indeed argued that it might not qualify for ITN/R, but at the same time, if we try to put it in another perspective, would we post the elections of the Finnish president, despite him/her holding little power compared to the prime minister? TwistedAxe [contact] 10:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No worries. Rereading my comment, I realize I wasn't clear. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't post the Finnish president. --RockstoneSend me a message! 20:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Article needs some work, but should be ok for ITN. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Parliamentary system plus Turkey isn’t posted either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.248.15.100 (talk) 00:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ama Ata Aidoo

Article: Ama Ata Aidoo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/Renowned-Ghanaian-writer-Prof-Ama-Ata-Aidoo-is-dead-1777163, https://citinewsroom.com/2023/05/renowned-ghanaian-author-ama-ata-aidoo-dies-at-81/
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 & renowned Ghanaian author, poet, playwright and academic. Well written article Ampimd (talk) 09:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

May 30

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Royalty

  • Princess Eugenie of the United Kingdom gives birth to a baby boy named Ernest George Ronnie, who was named after "his great-great-great grandfather George, his grandpa George and my grandpa Ronald". (BBC News)

Science and Technology


(Posted) RD: Jessie Maple

Article: Jessie Maple (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: Pioneering Black film maker; first African-American woman admitted to the New York camera operators union. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:38, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: John Beasley

Article: John Beasley (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
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: American actor, 79. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Don Bonker

Article: Don Bonker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
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: Former U.S. representative from Washington; big player in the trade policy of the '80s. Sourcing is practically non-existent. Curbon7 (talk) 04:29, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Harvey Pitt

Article: Harvey Pitt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg
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.

 Thriley (talk) 23:38, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Eusebius McKaiser

Article: Eusebius McKaiser (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2023-05-30-eusebius-mckaiser-dies-from-suspected-epileptic-seizure/
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: South African journalist. Article looks alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support— Article seems in good shape. McKaiser was well-known enough in South Africa to merit mentioning on the main page. Goldfritter 11:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bill McGovern (American football)

Article: Bill McGovern (American football) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://uclabruins.com/news/2023/5/30/football-ucla-mourns-loss-of-bill-mcgovern.aspx
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: American Football coach. Article looks alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

·Support There are a lot of references and information, and it looks like a very well-developed article. And he is a contributor in his field (American soccer). Roci xu (talk) 07:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Drone strikes on Moscow

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: 
intercepted 8 Ukrainian drones over Moscow.
News source(s): [4][5][6]

Credits:
Nominator's comments: May be a serious escalation per 194.102.58.600Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This might turn out to be a serious escalation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine BBC AP CNN. 194.102.58.6 (talk) 14:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to
WP:ITN. In order for your nomination to be considered, please create a nomination using the {{ITN candidate}} template. You've already got the sources, we need more information such as a blurb and a target article. Cheers, WaltClipper -(talk) 14:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Noting for the record that this comment was made prior to Editor 5426387 creating a proper nomination, when IP 194 previously attempted to nominate this item. --Cheers, WaltClipper -(talk) 12:55, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait to see just what the nature of this escalation will be. Unless Russia truly ramps up their military response, this may just be considered an incremental exchange in the war (if indeed this was a Ukrainian attack). --Cheers, WaltClipper -(talk) 15:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — See ongoing. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - per my statement on the Kremlin drone attack. Ukraine is denying it, but it appears as if Russia's claims are being acknowledged much more by international press this time, perhaps due to greater evidence. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:22, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment what interception? The drones hit their targets. --Ouro (blah blah) 17:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose - covered by ongoing. nableezy - 18:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If this is covered by the ongoing item, then "Russian invasion of Ukraine" is no longer a valid label (perhaps "Russo-Ukrainian War" would be more precise). Striking buildings in Moscow is definitely not part of the invasion of Ukraine.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I would support a target change to the entire war article. The invasion is merely a phase of said war. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There isn't a target article comparable with
    2023 Kremlin drone explosion. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I've created one (
    2023 Moscow drone strikes), but its still in an infantile state; it will need expansion before going on the main page. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 21:19, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    That's currently just two sentences and expansion seems difficult because of a lack of reliable sources. Note that Ukraine denies launching the attack and so we're mostly dependent on Russia's side of the story. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There was no reason to create a separate article at this time on that. It is seemingly part of the war, and should be covered as part of the time line. Masem (t) 03:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If it turns out to be insignificant it could later be redirected to the main article on attacks or the war timeline, with any salvageable content merged. --Ouro (blah blah) 05:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Covered in ongoing. The article currently seems to undergo major changes, too. --NoonIcarus (talk) 00:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. First, it's covered by an ongoing event, and second, as for the material impact it's minor. I agree that on the whole it's perhaps significant, as the place lies quite a distance from the invasion area but not ITN-worthy. --Ouro (blah blah) 01:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until we receive some type of confirmation that these drones were, in fact, fired by Ukraine at Moscow. If that is the case, then I think this would be a significant enough development by itself to merit a standalone blurb, ongoing link notwithstanding. However, I'd like to register my extreme skepticism that Ukraine would order such an attack and risk losing the goodwill of the international community, which has been vitally important in their war effort. Kurtis (talk) 01:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment either we decide everything related to the war is covered by ongoing, or we post major developments in the war anyway. I personally prefer the latter, but whatever we choose, we should be consistent. Banedon (talk) 01:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, again. Yet another non-story. So a bunch of drones are shot down or suppressed in a country actively at war with a neighbor. I fail to see why this event is worth posting. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment We don't have confirmation that Ukraine is responsible for the drone attacks, so, at this stage, it's unrelated to the invasion already posted onto ongoing. If we evaluate this independently, drone attacks on buildings in the capital of the largest country in the world is a very big deal and notable news, which is proved by the front-page coverage in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:08, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - We're a day out now and I don't see there being any evidence of an imminent escalation. If we get to two or three days out from the drone strikes and still nothing is done, that would hint at this being a
    casting my crystal ball of original research aside, it would indicate nonetheless that this would not be a suitable standalone blurb. --Cheers, WaltClipper -(talk) 12:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose per above. Covered by ongoing barring any major escalation, which at this point seems unlikely. The Kip (talk) 13:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The first blurb is a no go since we still can't say as a matter of fact who did it, whether it was Ukraine, a Russian false flag, etc. Russian claims are that "none of the drones hit their target" and that there were only "two minor injuries" and no fatalities. Despite pledges from Russia to retaliate, it also seems that this (fortunately) has not led to major escalations. So as of right now, this doesn't stand out from the other incidents involving drones in the Russo-Ukrainian war.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 16:53, 31 May 2023 (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: Gershon Edelstein

Article: Gershon Edelstein (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Haaretz
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.

 Shibolet Nehrd (talk) 22:10, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

This is significant not only due to religious and social reasons (over 200,00 people attended his funeral),

Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah
- hence wielding significant power in Israel's politics - which has been a topic of interest for the news page for a while.

Is it good now? Shibolet Nehrd (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. Stephen 23:46, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The biography needs heavy sourcing. I've added the required CN tags to the article where the paragraphs are unreferenced. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:20, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 29

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Ready) RD: Victor Galeone

Article: Victor Galeone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.archbalt.org/archbishop-william-loris-statement-on-the-death-of-bishop-galeone/
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: Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of St. Augustine. Article looks like it's nearly there. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Shame this didn't get promoted since it was marked as ready. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:40, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Support after fixing CN tag One unreferenced paragraph needs to be fixed before it's ready. Support, article is now ready. TwistedAxe [contact] 22:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Twistedaxe: I provided a reference for that paragraph. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:01, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Perfect, thank you! TwistedAxe [contact] 22:04, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It has enough prose & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:01, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Much of the earlier bio reads like an CV in prose. There are more materials for his career as a bishop, but I'm not sure about the sourcing. Is "Sylvia's Site" RS? BLP may apply there. --PFHLai (talk) 22:24, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @PFHLai: I replaced the Sylvia reference w/a reference from a Florida news station. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:13, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: William O'Neil

Article: William O'Neil (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg
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.

 Thriley (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Michel Côté

Article: Michel Côté (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/michel-c%C3%B4t%C3%A9-dead-72-quebec-actor-1.6858108
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: Canadian actor. Article is short but looks okay. Roncanada (talk) 13:47, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Jacob Turkel

Article: Jacob Turkel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/ryglh0xgi3
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: Israeli Jurist. Article seems okay. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) 2023 Indian Premier League Final

Article: 
M. S. Dhoni pictured).
News source(s): ESPN Cricinfo

Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Game just completed. Good game. Congrats CSK. Article looks good and ready for homepage. Ktin (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support - Article looks good enough to be posted. Crecy1346 (talk) 21:29, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Crecy1346 -- I think @MNWiki845: has taken care of most of the stats. I filled a couple of minor ones and the article does seem good. Ktin (talk) 21:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
👍 - We should post now. Crecy1346 (talk) 21:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Suitable prose update, everything looks sourced now. Good article. Black Kite (talk) 21:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good amount of prose now. The Kip (talk) 22:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The article has enough prose & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ITN/R with good enough prose + citations. Good for the Main Page. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:10, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support prose added, looks good. Congrats to the updaters! - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 00:30, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Withdrawn) Ugandan Homosexuality bill

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: 
homosexual activities becomes punishable by life imprisonment under a new anti-gay bill. (Post)
News source(s): NYT - Le Monde - The Guardian - WaPo - Reuters - The Independent - La Times - Al Jazeera

Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Uganda just made gay sex illegal. Additionally "aggravated homosexuality" (those between gays who are HIV positive or involving a minor) is punishable by death. This bill has received sustained coverage internationally since it's been introduced, and only more so now that its in effect. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:04, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per Guardian "Bill retains harshest measures of legislation adopted in March, including death penalty for certain same-sex acts". This is maintaining the status quo for the most part, outside of the expanded penalties. --Masem (t) 16:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — Per Masem. As other editors have noted, additional sources will not help your case. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:23, 29 May 2023 (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) New Indian parliament building

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: New Parliament House, New Delhi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurates a new building (pictured) as the new house of the Parliament of India, replacing the previous structure due to structural issues and inadequate capacity for MPs. (Post)
News source(s): NYT - Euronews - AP - Al Jazeera - Time - The Guardian - Politico - BBC - CNN - SCMP - ABC - Reuters - JP Times - Times of India - The Hindustan Times - Econ Times - The Independent
Credits:
Article updated
Nominator's comments: India just opened a new parliament building to replace the old yet iconic 85 year old former building that struggled with capacity and structural issues. For anyone who would oppose, I would like to ask, would you do the same if the US moved Congress away from the Capitol, or if the UK moved their parliament from Westminster (which I've heard is a real proposal that is actually being made)? This is a hugely significant issue for India, the world's largest democracy demographically and soon (if not already) the world most populated country in general, and is already hugely controversial (most opposition parties protested the opening due to various issues [largely orienting around how Prime Minister Narandra Modi inaugurated the building instead of President Droupadi Murmu] as well as other groups such as wrestlers who were protesting sexual abuse) and will definitely be remembered in Indian history for years on end. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 04:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, you do not need to post 20 news sources in the nomination header. They will not help your argument. Three is fine. WaltClipper -(talk) 13:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If notability is to be further gleaned from the protests then they should be in the blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 14:13, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very Strong Oppose per Fakescientist8000 and Andrew🐉. Cheers! // 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 14:40, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. A million links to articles will not convince me that this should be on ITN. It's getting to the point that when I see an obviously-not-improtant-enough headline, I know who nominated it. (Also, you'd think after this many nominations, said user would learn how to write a usable blurb, but alas.) -- Kicking222 (talk) 14:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sine the snark, I have to agree. This is unproductive and borders on intervention. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A change in national capital city à la Egypt and Indonesia, postable. Moving to a different building down the street, not postable. Curbon7 (talk) 14:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. It's making some news, and was a project of considerable expense, but what lasting significance does it really have? There's no effect on India's administrative organization whatsoever; it's just new chairs and offices. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose New buildings are not ITN-appropriate topics. --Masem (t) 16:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Even if it's something major like the tallest building in the world? Cheers, WaltClipper -(talk) 17:11, 29 May 2023 (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.

May 28

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Sports


Manchester City win the Premier League

Proposed image
Article: 
third season in a row. (record scorer Erling Haaland pictured) (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In association football, Manchester City win the English Premier League.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In association football, the Premier League concludes with Manchester City as champions.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In association football, Manchester City win the English Premier League (Player of the Season winner Erling Haaland pictured).
News source(s): The Guardian

Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: This was nominated last week (20th) when the title was actually won, but wasn't posted since editors wished to wait for the end of the season. The season is now over and this seems to have been overlooked. Unfortunately the article still needs work. Effy Midwinter (talk) 03:41, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Oppose as stale Man City already won the title on 20 May.[7] It was already nominated at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/May 2023 § Man City wins Prem, and was not posted. We've posted winners before the season is over on many occasions (Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 83 § Adding clarification for sports ITNR) This is old news, and still the article prose is largely unsourced. We shouldn't post early in some seasons, yet conveniently defer in others to buy time for it not being ready.—Bagumba (talk) 08:14, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support alt2. Firstly, this is the correct time to nominate - at the end of the season when all the games have been completed and the final positions have been determined (including relegation, qualification for Europe etc.). I strongly disagree with Bagumba on this point. Secondly, the previous nomination failed because the article lacked prose content. There's now a seven-paragraph summary of the season's events, which isn't particularly well referenced (there are a few {{
    cn}} tags throughout the article) but does meet our minimum requirements. It would be good to resolve those before posting, but fundamentally this is the correct time for this blurb. Alt2 is our standard blurb phrasing. Modest Genius talk 11:14, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Your suggestion that we post at the end of the season was rejected by almost all participants in the discussion linked by Bagumba above.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:32, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not true. Three editors (including me) argued to wait, one argued against, and the rest didn't mention that aspect. Modest Genius talk 11:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Who were the three who argued to wait? As far as I can see, Masem initially proposed codifying that as the rule, but then switched to neutral, with the extra opinion that should we not post when the winner is known, we shouldn't then give a second bite of the Cherry later on, which is what's being proposed here. As far as I can see, every other participant in the discussion bar yourself was for posting as soon as the champion is known, and that's also the precedent in all but one affected year. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 12:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Are we looking at the same discussion? In Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/May_2023#Man_City_wins_Prem, Black Kite !voted to wait until the season completed and nableezy agreed saying 'wait for the conclusion of the season'. Kiril Simeonovski then disagreed, though their argument was disputed by the same two users. My comment was right at the end, also arguing for waiting until the season was over. Masem doesn't seem to have commented at all. Modest Genius talk 12:21, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ha, now I understand the confusion, we are looking at different things. I'm alluding to the 2021 discussion at WT:ITN - Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 83 § Adding clarification for sports ITNR - discussing the principle of such things. Everyone but yourself opposed the proposal to set in stone that we post at the end of the season, and rather opined that we should post when the winner's known. And we them posted the 2021 result before season end. That consensus should have been explicity noted at ITN/R really, but in any case it should be binding now per that discussion and the precedence, absent a clear consensus at WT:ITN to revisit that.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as stale and speedy close. Per Bagumba The Premier league winner is always posted when the winner is known, not at the end of the season, as per most past precedent and the discussion Bagumba linked above. If this wasn't posted at the time it was actually in the news then that's too bad, apologies I would have supported strongly at the time but missed it. Two wrongs don't make a right though, and we shouldn't post old news now just because it was missed earlier.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We were specifically told when it was known to wait until the season ended, and now we're being told it's old news because it wasn't posted when it was known? The Kip (talk) 20:15, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    More people said that the quality was lacking. As for those that said wait, one of them was in the prior ITNR discussion in 2021 that determined that we have posted before the season ends many times, and there was no consensus to have to wait. Another one perhaps just remembered what they wanted to happen in 2021, not what ultimately happened with the nom.—Bagumba (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Re "We were specifically told" - who told you exactly? Is there someone in charge here who gets to pronounce on such things with definitive authority? Past precedence, including the meta discussion in 2021,clearly established that we post when the winner is known. That did not happen because the article was (and still isn't) up to scratch and nobody fixed it in time. The boat has now sailed, but everyone will know for next year.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now due to quality issues due to an orange-tagged section & cn tags elsewhere. Neutral on whether or not this is stale. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:27, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Definitely not stale, as we didn’t post the winner back then because the seasons article was unstable and incomplete and could not be complete until this weekend as the relegation places were yet to be decided. If the Premier League winner is posted when they clinch and not when the season ends then idk how you’d post it in the case where you could not know who would be relegated. So in sum support when the tags are fixed. nableezy - 21:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when cited It’s not stale. Still needs citations but well-written otherwise. The Kip (talk) 06:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It emphatically is stale. ITN goes by stories that are in the news, per the purpose outlined at
    WP:ITN, and the story here - "Manchester City win the Premier League" broke in the news on 20 May, when all the media outlets declared it as such - [8][9]. It wasn't posted then due to quality issues, but that doesn't mean it should be posted now.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    No, it's not stale. The ITN/R listing is for the Premier League which didn't conclude until last Sunday. It isn't for "who wins the Premier League". Having said that, this is probably moot anyway as it needs a lot of citations and I doubt if those are going to be fixed before it does go stale. Black Kite (talk) 12:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Exactly. The story here is the entire tournament, not just who won. I appreciate this may be difficult to understand for users who aren't used to leagues having promotion and relegation, but the relegation & European qualification places are just as important to fans of the teams involved as the championship is to the winner. Modest Genius talk 13:07, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Im quite sure Amakuru is well aware of promotion and relegation. But the rest of the comment I agree with. The Premier League concludes with Manchester City as champions is not a stale story since it depends on the Premier League concluding. nableezy - 19:58, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as stale, close - It's unfortunate that this is what happened given the discussion in the previous nom, but the time to post would have been at the conclusive game. Sadly, that nom fell apart due to failure to meet the minimum quality required for posting to ITN. As we have failed to post this event at its pinnacle of newsworthiness, this needs to be closed. --Cheers, WaltClipper -(talk) 23:31, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Harald zur Hausen

Article: Harald zur Hausen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): German Cancer Research Center, Telegraph
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: German virologist. 2008 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Thriley (talk) 00:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) 2023 Indy 500

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Indianapolis 500 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In auto racing, Josef Newgarden wins the Indianapolis 500. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In auto racing, Josef Newgarden wins the 107th Indianapolis 500.
News source(s): The Athletic USA Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Okay, after Newgarden made the pass on last year's winner, he takes home his first Indy 500. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 20:34, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support now that we have a race summary. It's a major sporting event that should be put there if Brooks Koepka winning the PGA championship is there. I would recommend putting "107th Indianapolis 500" in the blurb because it's formally referred to that way. Tableguy28 (talk) 22:12, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with adding "107th" to the blurb. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  03:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2023 Turkish presidential election

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Turkish presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is reelected President of Turkey in a run-off election, while the People's Alliance retained a majority in the Grand National Assembly. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:

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

 elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:03, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Conditional support Some prose should be added to the section "Results". Once done, it's good to go. Schwede66 19:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now Several cn tags, no prose in the Results section, the Aftermath section should be expanded too. --Vacant0 (talk) 20:45, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Still oppose the Aftermath section has been slightly expanded, which is good, but there is still no prose in the Results section, and the two cn tags and one clarification needed tags are still present. Vacant0 (talk) 08:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb as written—The fact that he won in a run-off election, and that the People's Alliance retained their parliamentary majority, are important details that should also be mentioned. Kurtis (talk) 00:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I support the new blurb. 👍🏻 I think the article is serviceable enough for the main page. Kurtis (talk) 07:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality for now Lots of tables with little prose as of now. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 03:03, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article has been improved and updated.Randam (talk) 04:29, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now Quality still isn't great, especially the "Reactions" section, most of which is just an unreadable one-paragraph list of people having congratulated Erdogan. Chaotic Enby (talk) 05:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the "Reactions" is now much better and once the results is 100% the page is ready. Shadow4dark (talk) 17:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe add that he defeated the united opposition candidate
talk) 18:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
No. In a run-off, the opposition is always united, and we never post losers in presudential elections.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support after improvements and as a common topic. --NoonIcarus (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once the orange tag in the "Second round" section is resolved (though I do doubt if it is even needed). DecafPotato (talk) 07:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this should have been added already.
talk) 09:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Support It's been days since the official results were released. GodzillamanRor (talk) 06:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think it's too late to add it now. RobinZwaard (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A455:D07B:1:44C0:F60C:B24A:5592 (talk) [reply]
Support Important election in a G20 state and looks comprehensive and good quality — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.248.15.100 (talk) 00:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comac C919

Proposed image
Article: Comac C919 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Comac C919, China's first domestically-built passenger jet, completed its first commercial flight from Shanghai to Beijing by China Eastern Airlines. (Post)
News source(s): https://apnews.com/article/china-comac-c919-first-commercial-flight-6c2208ac5f1ed13e18a5b311f4d8e1ad
Credits:

Nominator's comments: First commercial flight of a new airliner model N509FZ (talk) 14:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Very long and detailed article. It could do with a copy edit for tense. I count five "citation needed" and two "needs update" tags. Overall, it's good enough to go to the Main Page, though. Schwede66 18:12, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: I've deal with a number of the "citation needed" by either removing the uncited content or by adding a reference. I count one remaining cn tag. Schwede66 19:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A maiden flight of a brand new commercial airplane, in keeping with the same consensus that we apply to orbital space flights. We've posted similar instances of Boeing aircraft firsts and lasts. WaltClipper -(talk) 20:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Are we going to do this for every country? Good for China, but what exactly is the broader significance of this? DarkSide830 (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a competitor to the Boeing/Airbus airplane manufacturing monopoly. It'd be akin to a new big tech company being built in direct competition to Google and Facebook. WaltClipper -(talk) 22:51, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And assuming proper competition will be achieved is CRYSTAL in my estimation. For example, I could start the nest Facebook or Google today, but it's most likely my company won't even merit an article in the near future, much less merit ITN consideration. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The difference is that news agencies are taking the time to report on this. This being in the news hints that this is being considered a genuine competitor to the two aforementioned airline agencies, especially with all of the financial and technological horsepower that China and COMAC possess. Crystal ball or not, clearly someone out there thinks it's newsworthy. WaltClipper -(talk) 01:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Comac is supposed to be the Chinese competitor of Boeing and Airbus, and it clearly has potential because it comes from the second country with most air passengers. Just for comparison, we posted
    Boeing 787's maiden flight in December 2009, so it's not uncommon to post such events.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose per DarkSide830. No broader significance. --Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 21:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Kiril. One of the few states with the economic infrastructure to realistically compete with commercial transport giants such as Boeing/Airbus/UAC. The Kip (talk) 21:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - could be a harbinger for competition with Boeing and Airbus. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 22:27, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm not opposed to the idea, I think this is noteworthy of being on the front page. The being said, the article has at least 5 Citation Needed prompts. I know the guidelines page said 1 or 2 shouldn't hold an article up, but as this a bit more than just 2 is that fine? CaptainGalaxy 23:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - It helps emphasizes the importance of the flight of the airline. Rager7 (talk) 00:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is just another product. No further significance. And personally, for me the significance is reduced further as it was likely manufactured with the help of industrial espionage and IP theft. --Ouro (blah blah) 03:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Without commenting on the notability of the maiden flight itself, I don't think espionage and theft mitigate the significance of an event in any way—they might even bolster it. For instance, let's say Venezuela managed to successfully detonate a nuclear weapon, but the only reason they were able to do so is because they used spies in another nuclear-armed state to procure everything they needed. Would we use that information to disqualify Venezuela's nuke from the main page? Kurtis (talk) 08:06, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, but bear in mind that nuclear arms (and their detonations) are quite a different league than airplanes. Such a case as You described would qualify for ITN either way. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per DarkSide830, this has no significance, it is not ITN-worthy, and, if we do this for every product there is, we'd be having a completely messed up ITN. Editor 5426387 (talk) 03:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This doesn't seem significant. IMO, posting this when less significant stories are rejected would seem like an ad for this jet. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:06, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not seeing the significance. If it was supersonic or had some radical new technology I would support it but from my understanding it is neither of those things.
Aure entuluva (talk) 06:45, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Antonio Gala

Article: Antonio Gala (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El País
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: Spanish writer. Life and career section needs more citations. Alexcalamaro (talk) 20:48, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support - I've cited much of the article and removed the statement regarding him being part of a Hispano-Soviet friendship group (cited to a now dead Wikispaces page in the past) and the sweeping statement that he was president of the ITI that was recently added without any sources (and has unfortunately already begun to be featured prominently in news coverage of his death, so more reason why we should pay extra care to our articles on Wikipedia as the ones carrying the burden of knowledge in the internet age). @Fakescientist8000 - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 05:46, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support – I've placed a couple of {{cn}} tags that will have to be resolved before this can be posted. Schwede66 02:29, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks good now. --Vacant0 (talk) 12:45, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. DatGuyTalkContribs 13:07, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 IIHF World Championship

Article: 2023 IIHF World Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In ice hockey, Canada won gold in the IIHF World Championship, while Latvia won bronze, their first ice hockey world championship medal. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.reuters.com/sports/ice-hockey-canada-defeat-germany-win-world-championship-gold-2023-05-28/
Credits:

 Gustamons (talk) 14:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As per the usual, a lot of trees are sad since there too many tables vs. prose. Also, the playoff bracket is wonky; Canada is on the lower half of the bracket from the semis onward, but is on the top-half of the bracket in the final? Howard the Duck (talk) 15:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per the typical sports article reason: too little prose, too many tables. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 27

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Mordechai Rechtman

Article: Mordechai Rechtman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): slippedisc
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 Israeli bassoonist, Israel Philharmonic Orchestra 1946 to 1991, which is from its foundation, and he played for the declaration of independence. Great also as arranger for his instrument, founder and conductor of wind ensembles, and professor internationally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:28, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: George Maharis

Article: George Maharis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter
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: American actor. Died on May 24, but his death was reported on May 27. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 12:01, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Attention needed) RD: Odette Nilès

Article: Odette Nilès (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Monde, La Depeche (both in French)
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: French anti-fascist militant and communist. A bit short, but it covers the major details and it's well enough over the stub limit at 2kb readable prose. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

2023 Astore avalanche

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: 2023 Astore avalanche (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 11 people were killed and 13 injured in an avalanche in Astore District of Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Reuters, BBC, Fox 9, Gulf News
Credits:
 Ainty Painty (talk) 09:08, 28 May 2023 (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: James Hartle

Article: James Hartle (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): UCSB
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.

 Count Iblis (talk) 01:38, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Twitter is not a reliable source. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, I think the article has been updated, because according to the article, he's apparently still alive. Also, like User:Muboshgu said, Twitter is not a reliable source. For more information regarding reliable & unreliable sources, see

WP:RS. TwistedAxe [contact] 10:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Cannes/Palme d'Or

Articles: Palme d'Or (talk · history · tag) and 2023 Cannes Film Festival (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Anatomy of a Fall, directed by Justine Triet, wins the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival. (Post)
News source(s): AP NEWS
Credits:

One or both nominated events are listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: The film's article could use expansion (longer plot summary, reviews in the "Reception" section, more details on production...) Mooonswimmer 19:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

FC Bayern Munich wins Bundesliga

Article: 2022–23 Bundesliga (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, FC Bayern Munich win the Bundesliga. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, RTÉ
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Bayern win on the last match day after Dortmund let the title slip with a draw against Mainz.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 18:08, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Oppose Stub with only prose in the lead. Otherwise, all tables.—Bagumba (talk) 18:13, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once more prose regarding the course of the season is added. This year, it's never been so close in such a long time with the champion last being decided via goal difference over 20 years ago. Also, if we have blurbed the Prem, then this BL season is much more blurb-worthy as many decisions (Championship, Europe & relegation) fell on the last matchday. - CDE34RFV (talk) 19:05, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @
    WP:ITNR to be posted, the only relevant concern at this point is the page's quality. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 19:27, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Added season summary. Might need some citations, but at least we got some more text. - CDE34RFV (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We haven't even blurbed the Premier League yet. It seems it was decided to leave it until the whole season was finished, despite the fact that it was agreed in previous years that the time to blurb was when the title was won. It's old news now of course. Effy Midwinter (talk) 22:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's a perfunctory amount of prose in the lead including the wonderful "However, they bottled it ..." And then it's just table after table – sixteen by my count. And there's a year error – 2022 rather than 2023 – which indicates that this is just a set of tables cut/paste from last year. And there are no pictures – not even a Nike hat. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:15, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There’s now a sufficient write up of the season but it is entirely unreferenced. Schwede66 20:36, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Orange tagged section for being completely unsourced. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 02:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Seemin Jamali

Article: Seemin Jamali (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DAWN
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.

 Ainty Painty (talk) 17:25, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support Looks good to me. Fahads1982Talk --- 17:47, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article is a stub. Schwede66 20:41, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Currently, there are only 196 words of prose. Please expand this stubby article. Too much materials mentioned in the lede should be elaborated in the main prose. The Career section reads more like the subject's Education section, with little on what she did in her career to earn her nicknames as mentioned in the lede. --PFHLai (talk) 09:15, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as a stub. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:56, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article is currently too short to be put on the Main Page. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:49, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Attention needed) 2023 Mauritanian parliamentary election

Article: 2023 Mauritanian parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Equity Party wins a plurarity of votes in the Mauritanian parliamentary elections (Post)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Today the elections ended as per previous nomination. It's a confusing system and top of that there are local and regional elections too. The parliamentary election article looks good though. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:36, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Weak support Well-sourced, but a bit too high of a table-to-prose ratio for my taste. Chaotic Enby (talk) 18:28, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose When I read an election article's lead, I should be able to understand the outcome or current status. That’s not the case here. So I go to the section "Preliminary results" and how much prose do I find? Exactly none. Article isn’t ready. Schwede66 20:55, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And four days later, no significant work has been undertaken to fix those shortcomings. Time to close this. Schwede66 19:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Schwede66: It’s been improved. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:21, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Still nowhere near good enough. Elections were held in two stages a fortnight apart. Where does it explain the voting system? And the little that is written about the results, how do I know what was decided in the first round and what came out of the second round? It just doesn’t tell us. Schwede66 20:10, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Schwede66: Where does it explain the voting system? That’s explained in the “Electoral system” section. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:54, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now Prose needs to be added to the "Preliminary results" section. Support It’s well-referenced & it covers everything it needs to cover. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 00:00, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It seems like the issues have been addressed. There is now prose in the lede and the results section. --Vacant0 (talk) 12:43, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Looks good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 19:53, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 26

Armed conflicts and attacks

International relations

Politics and elections


(Closed) Nagano attack

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: 2023 Nagano attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Japan, four people, including two police officers, are killed in shooting and stabbing attack in the city of Nakano. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian - ABC - WaPo - CBS - France24 - ABC (Australia) - BBC - Al Jazeera - CNN - LA Times - AP
Credits:
Nominator's comments: In a rare incident for the country, four people were killed by the alleged son of a local city councilman in Nagano, Japan. It's received notable international coverage - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:21, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Unless something has gone seriously under the radar, this is the first mass shooting in Japan. Very sad, unfortunately makes it very notable. Article is short but fine. Kingsif (talk) 01:26, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's received
    primary international coverage, which does not confer notability. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:27, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose on quality Article as of now consists of only a few short paragraphs, will change my nom to Support once article has been reworked to a better quality. TomcatEnthusiast1986 (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle The death of the two police officers by shooting is what pushes this over the edge for me, rather than just a typical random act of violence (especially considering this Insider report from just a few weeks ago). As stated above, though, article needs work before it is mainpage ready. Curbon7 (talk) 04:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per
    WP:NEVENT. There's plenty of outrageous events in the news like this. For example, a car rammed the gates of Downing Street in London yesterday, generating front page news. On the front page of the NYT this morning, there's an account of a woman being pushed into the path of a subway train. And so it goes. This is valid news but we're an encyclopedia and so should be covering such topics at a broader level, not reporting each incident. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose We apply a consistent standard for posting mass-shootings, that being of stand-out factors (racial/terror/other notable motivation/factors for the attack; higher number of deaths; and the place where it took place (commonplace or not)). I don't see the first two being fulfilled here and neither do I think the place alone makes it notable. Gotitbro (talk) 09:42, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Article needs way more work, but the fact that this is a gun-related incident in Japan is very remarkable. Japan basically has very little to no gun violence, the last notable shooting that most of us remember is probably the assassination of Shinzo Abe back in July 2022. Strong support in principle, but due to the current state of the article and the quality, my support will be weak for now. Once article is expanded, consider my support. TwistedAxe [contact] 11:06, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above and NEVENTS. I've also removed an inappropriate updater name. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:03, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Article is currently not convincing me that this is suitable for posting. Currently, the aftermath section only talks about Twitter users calling it an "unforgivable crime." The "Incident" section is a bit confusing and it is possible that Masamichi Aoki is not as involved as they currently appear. Needs work at the very least. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:57, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Though unusual for Japan, this isn't important enough for ITN. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 14:04, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - domestic violence isnt typically something that would be featured on the front page of Wikipedia. nableezy - 14:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the time being, oppose I want to see how the events after this play out before. This, along with the still fairly recent killing of Shinzo Abe, may be enough to spark a conversation in Japan about firearms. If it doesn't, I'd oppose. As of now, there's nothing stating I should oppose, but if there becomes a national conversation with guns, I'd support. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 15:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Just as there are shootings in countries which have many shootings which nonetheless reach a level where we put them on ITN, there are shootings in countries where they are rare which nonetheless do not rise above the general level of crime reporting and should not be put on ITN. This case, though tragic, is one such. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:50, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support seems strange to see Americans opposing this mass killing, when they routinely support the regular mass shootings in the US. Multiple killings in any country not at war is unusual unless it's the United States, so this is definitely newsworthy. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:32, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because its domestic violence and not all that massive? Seems strange you support this and oppose ones with 10x the coverage. nableezy - 23:41, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SOAP
  • I support newsworthy items which might be in an encyclopedia in a hundred years time. Mass killings in just about any country other than Amurica are almost, by default, worthy. Your parochial little "one mass shooting every day" country is a disaster and shouldn't be ever used as a context for literally anything other than exactly how life shouldn't be. What an embarrassment. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 00:00, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And just a quick question: while we have, on average, 1.5 mass shootings per day in the United States, where do any of them become relevant? Is it "the second biggest shooting in Texas on a Tuesday"? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 00:02, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you see, on average, 1.5 nominations for shootings in America a day? If not, as usual, stay on topic here, as
    WP:SOAP is prohibited. Toodles, nableezy - 00:42, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @
    WP:ANI for that rant. What the fuck is wrong with you? This is not your soapbox. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 07:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Newsworthy (burst of news coverage) is not equal to notable (enduring in-depth coverage). We have to stress pretty much constantly that WP is not a newspaper, and we should be looking to events that clearly will have a long tail of coverage, rather than just those that splash across front pages for a few days and then are never heard about again. Masem (t) 01:16, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Tragic, but relatively small casualty event. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:25, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If we don't post about the every-day mass shooting in America, why would we post about some small-casualty event in Japan? Article is currently still a stub, and just because it is a first, doesn't make it notable. Editor 5426387 (talk) 02:38, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for the same reason that everyone else is opposing it, it's just domestic news. It's tragic, but not worthy of being posted in ITN. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 07:32, 27 May 2023 (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.

May 25

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology


RD: Ed Ames

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: Ed Ames (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.
Nominator's comments: American singer & actor. Died on May 21, but his death was reported on May 25. Needs some more citations. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 11:55, 31 May 2023 (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: Gary Kent

Article: Gary Kent (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2023-05-27/gary-kent-stuntman-who-inspired-tarantino-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-dies-at-89
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: American film director, actor, and stuntperson. Article looks decent enough. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:33, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Denny Stolz

Article: Denny Stolz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
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 college football coach who won conference coach of the year at all four of his schools. —Bagumba (talk) 10:10, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Joy McKean

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

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

Nominator's comments: Australian country music singer-songwriter and wife and manager of Slim Dusty. Known as the Queen of Australian country musicThriley (talk) 13:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Jerry Krause (basketball, born 1936)

Article: Jerry Krause (basketball, born 1936) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Spokesman Review
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 --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:39, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(posted) RD: Javier Álvarez (composer)

Article: Javier Álvarez (composer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yucatán 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: Avant-garde Mexican composer. Updated and refs well under way. Moscow Mule (talk) 20:06, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Typhoon Mawar

Proposed image
Article: Typhoon Mawar (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Typhoon Mawar (satellite image pictured) strikes the Mariana Islands and Guam as a Category 4-equivalent super typhoon. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, NBC, ABC, The Guardian
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Most intense typhoon of 2023. Interstellarity (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Oppose for now. I say wait until the typhoon dissipates as the Mariana Islands and Guam aren't the only areas that are expected to be affected. Moreover, the total damages aren't known yet and no fatalities are reported. Additionally, to your comment "Most intense typhoon of 2023", that is way too early to be said. 🛧
    話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 23:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    True but it d
    did reach 185 mph 1-minute sustained which is the new West Pacific record for May. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 13:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. The typhoon is still ongoing and the damages currently known are very, very minimal. Plus, most of the typhoon's path has been situated within the ocean. I'm opposing if the damages are very minimal. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:39, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Despite the intensity, impacts are run of the mill. It killed 2 people. That isn't enough for posting on ITN. NoahTalk 21:07, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(posted) RD: Karen Lumley

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: Karen Lumley (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Redditch Standard
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: Former UK MP Karen Lumley Fahads1982 (talk) 12:25, 25 May 2023 (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: Ahmad Kamal

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: Ahmad Kamal (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): APP
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.
 Fahads1982 (talk) 11:59, 25 May 2023 (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.

May 24

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology


RD: Kenneth Anger

Article: Kenneth Anger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY 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: American experimental filmmaker. Thriley (talk) 11:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Rolf Skår

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: Rolf Skår (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Computerworld
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: Norwegian engineer and entrepreneur. Oceanh (talk) 07:26, 26 May 2023 (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: Cotton Tree (Sierra Leone)

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: Cotton Tree (Sierra Leone) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, 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: Important national symbol of Sierra Leone, described as the country's "Eiffel Tower, Statue of Liberty, Big Ben" gobonobo + c 05:07, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Article seems of good quality? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as a result - forgot to say lol QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 17:25, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support? Article seems fine, but can a tree count as a recent "death", or should this be a blurb? TheCorriynial (talk) 22:08, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism. Curbon7 (talk) 22:51, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah right. Forgot the "organism" part applied to RD as well. My bad. TheCorriynial (talk) 01:42, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above; article quality is very good. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:39, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Article is of good quality but could use more work and be expanded. I suppose it's ok for RD. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:44, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Article looks good. Could we keep the "(Sierra Leone)" part in the RD entry perhaps? I understand this is against precedent, but just "Cotton Tree" appearing in RD may confuse readers. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:40, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted No consensus for
    WP:IAR to display disambiguator.—Bagumba (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2023 (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: Norbaiti Isran Noor

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


]
The 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) Blurb/RD: Tina Turner

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: Tina Turner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American-born Swiss Hall of Fame rock singer Tina Turner dies at aged 83. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
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 Queen of Rock and Roll. Article is a GA. Curbon7 (talk) 18:45, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Support RD, Blurb? She might be on the level for a blurb. Worth seeing what others think. Although RD, wise article seems to be fine. TheCorriynial (talk) 18:53, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb Not wanting to disregard Jim Brown's achievements, but Turner is way more notable and globally well-known. It would be a nonsense if he was blurbed and she was not. Black Kite (talk) 18:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Filmography is cited to IMDB. I'd be in favor of removing it altogether, because most of it is documentaries or cited in the prose. On balance, support RD neutral on blurb. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:59, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb Tina Turner was one the greatest singers of the 20th century, you don't get the nickname the "Queen of Rock & Roll" without a reason.--TheDutchViewer (talk) 19:01, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb One of the most recognizable singers of her time, certainly a transformative figure in her field. Her death is currently the top headline globally. Davey2116 (talk) 19:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb - just post. She was top field.BabbaQ (talk) 19:09, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Blurb blurb blurb, now now now! --WaltClipper -(talk) 19:12, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, as we normally would with a reigning queen. BD2412 T 19:13, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Clearly meets the "transformative figure in their field" standard. Regards SoWhy 19:14, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb I'm usually neutral on blurbs, but a GA? That's an exception I'm willing to make. The main page should be a showcase for high quality articles, and here's one of those for an internationally significant entertainer that's pretty much ready to go up right now. There's some excellent sourcing in the article, apart from a few spaces (the filmography, namely), but they are minor aspects of a whole that I assume will be ironed out before this posts. Doc Strange MailboxLogbook 19:14, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, weak oppose blurb — Article is in fine shape and the subject is obviously notable, but not for RD. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb - obviously, and would support it being posted sooner than later too. nableezy - 19:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems kind of weird to call her former American Swiss naturalized in the blurb, maybe just drop the nationalities entirely? nableezy - 19:29, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    She renounced her US citizenship, so it was accurate. Whether it still needs to be there is another question. Black Kite (talk) 19:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh Im not questioning the accuracy, it just feels stilted to write out in the blurb. If nationality has to be included, and I dont think it does as her Swiss naturalization isnt really relative to her notability, then just call her Swiss. But better yet, imo, just say Rock and Roll Hall of Fame singer ... nableezy - 19:41, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb World famous singer with decades spanning career. One of the best-selling recording artists of all time. There was a film about her, which is one of criteria for blurb.
    talk) 19:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support blurb when IMDb, Discogs, Metro, and NYPost sources get replaced. Definitely notable enough for a blurb. --Vacant0 (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb No question. Article is a GA as well. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:20, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb there are a few films nowt sourced but the article is if high quality and explains her legacy to the music industry (with the obits, this probably should be ecpanded). --Masem (t) 19:21, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blub Easy one, as others have already explained. Johndavies837 (talk) 19:23, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 20 minutes in and this is going to be a pretty clear cut case for a blurb. Which I Support. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:25, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - To me is a no-brainer. One of the greatest musicians in history.--Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 19:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb A genuine legend in the music world. The Kip (talk) 19:37, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Simply the best.
    talk) 19:40, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Posted blurb - Clear consensus to post. Using straight-forward blurb rather than one focused on birth nation and citizenship. - Fuzheado | Talk 19:39, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support for blurb Musical legend who revolutionized rock and roll. NoahTalk 19:41, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Fuzheado: need to update the two blurbs now that Turner is pictured and not Koepka. nableezy - 19:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the reminder. Done. - Fuzheado | Talk 19:51, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close - This is about as efficient as a death blurb nomination can get. We've got the blurb, we've got the picture, consensus is clear; now we can close this out. --WaltClipper -(talk) 19:52, 24 May 2023 (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) 2023 Mauritanian parliamentary election

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: 2023 Mauritanian parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Equity Party wins a plurarity of votes in the Mauritanian parliamentary elections (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: I think the results are out just now, but it's a confusing system and top of that there are local and regional elections too. The parliamentary election article looks good though. May be suitable for ongoing? Any help is appreciated. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Wait - like you said, a bit confusing, but there apparently is another election on May 27, so we should probably wait. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 12:17, 24 May 2023 (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.

May 23

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime


(posted) 2023 International Booker Prize Winner

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: Time Shelter (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The International Booker Prize is awarded to Time Shelter, written by Georgi Gospodinov and translated by Angela Rodel. (Post)
News source(s): NY Times The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
(talk|contribs) 05:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Support - Looks fine enough. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restoring I'm not sure of the protocol for this, so apologies in advance if this violates any rules. But there does not seem to be any objections against posting and I do think the article's quality is enough to be posted.
    (talk|contribs) 04:21, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment FWIW, the last posting in 2021 bolded the author and translator, and not the book. Not sure if there's a preference which article should be the featured one. The book was nominated (and reviewed) here.—Bagumba (talk) 13:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Only issue is red links for the translators. If that's okay, then we can post, but I fear this to be a noteworthy issue given the fact that we tend to include said individuals in the blurb. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:00, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is on ITNR, the book article is fine, and the announcement is newer than several of the current blurbs (despite being older than the 7 days archiving). If anything, it's better to bold-link the specific work than the individuals involved. It's unfortunate that we don't have an article for Rodel but that doesn't disqualify anything. Modest Genius talk 18:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedSchwede66 19:30, 31 May 2023 (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: Fusaichi Pegasus

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

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

Nominator's comments: 2000 Kentucky Derby winner Blaylockjam10 (talk) 10:22, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Cotton Nash

Article: Cotton Nash (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [11]
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) 04:46, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Jean Haudry

Article: Jean Haudry (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [12]
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: French linguist, 88. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Tom Sawyer

Article: Tom Sawyer (Ohio politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Akron Beacon Journal
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: Ohio politician for nearly 50 years, 77. Death announced on this date. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Robert Zimmer

]

(Closed) Ely riot

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


Nominator's comments: Two Welsh teens yesterday were killed in a road accident. Social media reports falsely blamed the police, leading to a substantial riot in Cardiff. 12 officers were injured, a member of the public was attack, and property damage was extensive. The incident has been receiving coverage in the UK and also seems to be going transatlantic (see listed sources). - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:33, 23 May 2023 (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: Rolf Harris

Article: Rolf Harris (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC, 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: Died last week, announced today. Anarchyte (talk) 12:11, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Our purpose here is to evaluate whether the proposed target is of sufficient quality to promote to the main page; there is no proposal to promote those other pages at this time. IMDb has been deemed generally unreliable by the community. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:28, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Watson and Reeves are not dead yet. WaltClipper -(talk) 18:04, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: David Brandt

Article: David Brandt (farmer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): OCJ
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: Pioneering no-till farmer, and a internet meme. The article could do with some work, but from what I see, there isn't much to change. Mobius Gerig (talk) 01:08, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Weak support Article needs a bit of polishing, other than that it's okay. GodzillamanRor (talk) 02:08, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Pretty notable, he has been apart of the meme culture for quite a while. TwistedAxe [contact] 10:58, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Twistedaxe Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. Please focus on the quality of the article, not the notability of the subject. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Quality looks just fine, I was just pointing out the obvious due to there being a WP:GNG tag, which I decided to counter here. I'm sure @Editor 5426387 also used it in the same context as me to provide more insight and context. TwistedAxe [contact] 17:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support notable guy, not really as a farmer, but as a memer. The article needs some polishing, but this guy is notable enough to be on RD.Editor 5426387 (talk) 11:57, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Editor 5426387: Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD." Please stop using notability for a reason to either !support or !oppose ITNRD nominations. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:09, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The article ain't much, but it's honest work! Chaotic Enby (talk) 16:19, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. What a legend. RIP. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. Anarchyte (talk) 14:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 22

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Sarath Babu

Proposed image
Article: Sarath Babu (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
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: Popular Telugu and Tamil actor. Article is expanded now Abishe (talk) 07:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Ray Stevenson

Article: Ray Stevenson (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.

Nominator's comments: Lots of CN tags that need to be covered. Entirely unsourced filmography. Mooonswimmer 18:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) Mahdia school fire

Article: 2023 Mahdia school fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Guyana, 19 children are killed in a fire at a secondary school dormitory in the municipality of Mahdia. (Post)
News source(s): NYT - ABC - CNN - Reuters - Al Jazeera
Credits:

Nominator's comments: 20 students were killed in a fire in Guyana. The article is currently stubby; I'll try to add more info if I have time. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:32, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Would support in principle and the proposal is fine but single line articles should be avoided as noms (even if stubs are proposed an expectation of at least a few paras is there). Gotitbro (talk) 16:48, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral on notability but strong Oppose on article quality for now. It's barely a stub. Chaotic Enby (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality as it’s a stub. Will reconsider if/when expanded. The Kip (talk) 18:46, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once the article is expanded. --NoonIcarus (talk) 18:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose on quality. Consider my vote to be a support once the article is expanded. estar8806 (talk) 20:11, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @
Layah50, @The Kip, @TheBlueSkyClub, @Fakescientist8000, @Thebiguglyalien, @Twistedaxe in light of the recent expansion. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:12, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
320 words, with 17 sources. This is still not good enough quality for the Main Page, and I could barely see this getting by ITNRD standards. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:16, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I'm inclined to agree with @Fakescientist8000 here, the article still isn't long enough and it's barely long enough to even escape being a stub article. Needs alot more work before it's ready. TwistedAxe [contact] 10:57, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Same here. Agree with @
話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 14:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Still not enough, I have to say. I'm with @Fakescientist8000, sadly. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 21

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: C. Boyden Gray

Article: C. Boyden Gray (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/21/obituaries/c-boyden-gray-dead.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: American politician. Almost ready aside from some minor citation issues. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:20, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) Brooks Koepka wins 2023 PGA Championship

Proposed image
Article: 2023 PGA Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Golf, Brooks Koepka (pictured) wins the 2023 PGA Championship. (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: PGA Championship is a recurring ITN, so as long as the article is fine, and a photo of Brooks is cropped, it should be good enough to post. TheCorriynial (talk) 00:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Comment - Nothing like some good old Nike product placement splashed on the Main Page. Although I'm not in favor of removing a good picture if it works, I definitely understand the complaints of other editors who say it's problematic. This particular example is pretty blatant. --WaltClipper -(talk) 17:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good point. WaltCip is talking about the picture which was first nominated (right). That didn't seem to be a good picture and so I replaced it with FILE:Brooks Koepka, 2019 PGA Champion.jpg which is the image in the nomination template now. That image has the PGA as a background, which seems more appropriate than a shoe company. And the trophy looks cool. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:47, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As the poster, I chose the right one as it seemed in line with what I thought is the general ITN practice to prefer a portrait, cropped if needed, which was also in the nom: ...and a photo of Brooks is cropped... I otherwise have no preference, nor issue if a new consensus forms about the pic. —Bagumba (talk) 06:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've cropped a version with the trophy (no water brand endorsement either). Would not get as good a view of his face still.—Bagumba (talk) 08:34, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@
WP:NOTADVERT, but I can twist the POV argument the other way, and say that via actively removing product placement, we're being biased against these companies and with advertising, I really doubt that that a Nike hat in one image is equivalent to puffed up nonsense to make readers buy shit, especially considering Commons' comparatively loose attitudes regarding neutrality. All in all, oppose removal of current image. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 13:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm not here to argue about POV, I just think the photo was taken and set up with the express purpose of advertising Nike, and they succeeded. WaltClipper -(talk) 14:35, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose change of picture per Knigtoftheswords. The current one is clearly the best pic available. And the "promotion" angle is a non-argument IMHO. Just as we don't deliberately advertise companies, we don't deliberately not advertise them either.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I meannnn, yeah the alternate isnt from this year, but its from this tournament, and could add to the blurb saying (pictured from his win in 2019) which makes it marginally more interesting as well. I dont care about the nike bit, he wearing the same hat (i think) in both. nableezy - 16:08, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2023 Greek legislative election

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: May 2023 Greek legislative election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the Greek legislative election, ruling New Democracy (leader Kyriakos Mitsotakis pictured) wins the most seats in the Hellenic Parliament. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: ITN/R, ND declared victors although they will call for snap elections as they want a majority. BastianMAT (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Wait to see what happens after, due to the results being very uncertain. It's still very early to say anything - otherwise I'd support posting this. TwistedAxe [contact] 21:02, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait a day or two to see full results, then support posting. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It seems like ND did not win a majority in the Hellenic parliament, and it seems like a second round/snap election might be imminent. TwistedAxe [contact] 08:33, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait If what the nom says is correct and snap elections are likely to be called then no oupose is served by posting this now. Gotitbro (talk) 16:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Snap elections won’t be for at least another month or two, however. The Kip (talk) 18:46, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for...? what we have to wait for is to see the cn tags fixed, and prose added to the results section and expand the one in the Aftermath section. The results are official and we are not soothsayers to speculate whether or not there will be snap elections. However, this does not mean that this nomination is correct, as they are per se ITNR situations independently. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment II: I say we close this and re-nominate this once the second Greek election rounds are over, as multiple sources, such as Reuters[13] and Euronews[14] suggest that a second Greek election round is very likely, due to Mitsotakis not securing a majority in the Hellenic Parliament. It's too uncertain to say right now who will win, as it is a very close race between ND and the opposition. Also, I'd like to add in that this nom is a WP:CRYSTAL. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not exactly how it works. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:20, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The elections are due in June, which means that all of the previous noms in May will be archived, so what is the point of keeping this nom open? TwistedAxe [contact] 23:23, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The completed election processes are indivudally and independently ITN-worthy. Whether or not there is an electoral rerun in a short space of time. This conclusion was reached some time ago. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:02, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've never heard about this. If you'd be kind to link the conclusion, that would be appreciated. With practically every election we nominate for ITN, we always wait for the final results to come out. TwistedAxe [contact] 11:57, 25 May 2023 (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) 49th G7 summit

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: 49th G7 summit (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 49th G7 summit (G7 leaders pictured), held at Hiroshima, concludes on 21 May. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.wionews.com/videos/curtains-close-on-49th-g7-summit-in-hiroshima-594820
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Nominating this here mainly because I saw that G7 Summits are somehow listed at ITNR here. So take that for what you will. I'm not too sure how to word the blurb for this though. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Oppose That doesn't look like an article in the correct shape to be on the front page. Chaotic Enby (talk) 23:41, 21 May 2023 (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) Bakhmut taken by Russian forces

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: Bakhmut (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Russia officially claims capture of Bakhmut (pictured) from Ukraine. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia claims it has captured the city of Bakhmut (pictured).
News source(s): NBC News, The Guardian, CNN, Reuters (via MSN)
Credits:
 Jalapeño (talk) 11:19, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and please close this before it turns into unproductive discussion that wastes time. We keep the ongoing item for a reason.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:46, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close just close just close and stop listening to those people. --Ouro (blah blah) 11:59, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and closing immediately Probably not a good idea to listen to Russia and Prigozhin. Twistedaxe (talk) 13:00, 21 May 2023 (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.

May 20

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Sports


(Posted) RD: Rick Hummel

Article: Rick Hummel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [15]
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) 18:46, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

San Salvador crowd crush

Article: San Salvador crowd crush (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A crowd crush in the Cuscatlán stadium leaves at least twelve dead and more than a hundred injured in San Salvador, El Salvador. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At least 12 people are killed and dozens injured in a crowd crush at a football stadium in San Salvador, El Salvador.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Worst sports tragedy in El Salvador's history. NoonIcarus (talk) 11:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Too stubby for now. Reassess when more details of the circumstances are available.—Bagumba (talk) 14:18, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article is currently at a Start class, as it was when it was first nominated. --NoonIcarus (talk) 18:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Stubby" ≠ rated a stub —Bagumba (talk) 03:34, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barcelona wins La Liga(s)

Article: 2022–23 La Liga (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, FC Barcelona win La Liga. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In association football, FC Barcelona win La Liga and FC Barcelona Femení win Liga F.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In association football, La Liga concludes with Barcelona as champions.
News source(s): Sport, Eurosport
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Trophy was presented on 20 May, so nominating for this day. La Liga is ITN/R, not Liga F, which I've included mention of in altblurb though the trophy for that was presented earlier (but season ended 21 May). Bold links are the leagues' season articles, based on Premier League nom below. Kingsif (talk) 20:25, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Oppose on article look. Too table-y, not text-y enough. Chaotic Enby (talk) 23:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same issues as the Premier League item below: wait for the season to actually finish and oppose on quality due to lack of referenced prose, and alt2 added that follows our standard phrasing. Also, ITNR is for La Liga, not the women's equivalent, so don't include that. Modest Genius talk 19:00, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality. Very little prose, and if the tables were to be taken out of the article, it would no doubt be a stub. Article needs more work. Consider my support once article is expanded upon when it comes to prose. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:28, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[Attention, please.] RD: Paul Desenne

Article: Paul Desenne (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SlippeDisc, El Nacional
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: Venezuelan cellist NoonIcarus (talk) 17:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Comment: Being marked is different from being a stub. The article had nearly 2 KB of readable prose and over a dozen references in its nomination (as well as currently). The length and quality should be enough for its posting. --NoonIcarus (talk) 12:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Marked it as a stub due to the article literally having no more than 10 lines worth of prose. Article needs major improvement before its ready. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:41, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This wikibio is long enough (300+ words of prose and thus no longer a stub), its formatting looks fine, there are footnotes where they are expected, and Earwig has no complaints. IMO, this is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support It’s just barely big enough to not be a stub & it’s well-referenced. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:50, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Man City wins Prem

Proposed image
Article: 
third season in a row. (record scorer Erling Haaland pictured) (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In association football, Manchester City win the English Premier League.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In association football, the Premier League concludes with Manchester City as champions.
News source(s): The Guardian

Credits:

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

 2601:2C2:500:F260:4D82:3D7D:CDB1:FD82 (talk) 19:27, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Not Ready - article is pretty bad currently. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:08, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article is not in a good state (and isn't even linked in the main blurb), prose is desperately needed, citations too, and the Premier League should probably not be the one bolded. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:49, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Very little prose in the article currently, mostly tables and such. Needs lots of work before it's ready. Twistedaxe (talk) 09:52, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Wrong article linked for this. As for the correct one, it is not ready at all (I say as a Gooner). And Strong Oppose the alt blurb, it is "THE Premier League", never "English Premier League". The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the article isn't ready yet. It doesn't even say the Premier League has ended. Strong oppose for the alt blurb as well, it was never the English Premier League, just the Premier League. // 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 11:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait I don't see why this can't wait until next week, when the season will finish and there are likely to be more updates (especially to do with the relegation places, at least one of which is going to be decided next weekend). Otherwise, unless you semi-protect it, you're probably going to end up with an unstable article on the Main Page. Black Kite (talk) 13:24, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with Black Kite, just wait for the conclusion of the season and an article that would presumably have the needed updates to go along with it. I get the title has been clinched, but no reason to not wait. And Jalapeno, thats because the season has not ended, just Man City have clinched the title. nableezy - 13:46, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I disagree that we should wait until next week for the season to conclude. We post when the winner is known. It’s news now and won’t be in a week. Compare this to presidential elections: we post them when the winner is known, not when the person assumes office.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:00, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thats posting an election, you dont post the results before the polls close even if the polling numbers are wildly skewed. But the article here depends on things that have not yet happened. It is definitely going to be changing, in not insignificant ways, between then and now. And we actually dont even post the results of an election until the page of the election is filled out completely. The US House race was pulled last time because some of the races were not called for months, even though the overall result was known. nableezy - 14:33, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t think the information until the end of the season is relevant when the winner is already known, so we can post it when the article receives prose update elaborating how Manchester City won the title (no need to await content on the last week, which doesn’t impact the outcome of the season).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:10, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The ITN/R entry is "Premier League", not "Who wins the Premier League", so it doesn't matter when we post it as long as the update is sufficient. And yes, the last week will impact the outcome of the season, because it will decide the relegation places. Black Kite (talk) 15:28, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If that’s the case, why we posted it when the winner was decided in the past and why you didn’t advocate to wait until the season ends? To put it simple, everyone knows what “Premier League” means as an ITNR item. I’m sure we’re not going to post the relegated teams. The same criterion didn’t apply when we posted the winning driver of the
    2022 Formula One Championship on 12 October even though the winning constructor was decided later on and the season ended on 20 November.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:00, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    To which the simple answer is - the article was of sufficient quality at that point and there was consensus to post it. The article has 7 days after 18:30 BST next Sunday (the end of the season) to be posted - there is no rush. Black Kite (talk) 16:05, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that the article lacks a prose update and shouldn’t be posted because of that, but I disagree that we should wait for the conclusion of the season to post it. If it gets improved by tomorrow, we’ll post it immediately.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:23, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that would also be fine; I'm merely saying that there isn't a rush to do it. Black Kite (talk) 18:56, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article isn't great, and the main blurb doesn't even link it? (The alt blurb isn't better, no one calls it "English Premier League"...) Chaotic Enby (talk) 15:20, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's sometimes called the English Premier League in the US. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:45, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For obvious reasons. That isn't its name, however. Black Kite (talk) 18:57, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for the season to finish, relegation & European places to be determined etc. Also oppose on quality - there needs to be some actual referenced prose in the article, summarising the events of the season. See 2018–19_Premier_League#Summary for an example. And finally, I've added an alt2 blurb, which follows our standard phrasing. Modest Genius talk 18:56, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Martin Amis

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

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

Nominator's comments: -- Substantial sourcing work needed. Too many quotes, and some of the book descriptions are a bit too long. "Views on Islam (2006 interview controversy)" section can be condensed. Article needs to be updated to reflect Amis' death. Mooonswimmer 18:50, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Oppose Early life and Early writing sections are nearly entirely unsourced, and there are a few CN tags in the career section. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:58, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As far as I can see, that is not the case. I don't see any [citation needed] in there, and the sections you mentioned are well-sourced. // 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 15:12, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    They might not be tagged, but there are significant unsourced sections there. This is not close to being ready. Black Kite (talk) 15:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Amis was one of the most important and influential writers of his generation (regardless of what one thinks of him or his writing, headlines read: "era-defining British novelist"; "literary giant"; "Mick Jagger in literary form"; "Stylist extraordinaire"; "Witty, caustic, dazzling"; "he stamped his style over a generation of writers and readers"; etc.). I am not qualified to comment on the state or readiness of the article itself (in a technical sense with regard to WP:MOS or other policy re: main page nomination), however a cursory read shows it to be quite thorough and detailed. That his passing was marked in every major media outlet but not on this page strikes me as odd. If there are improvements to be made to the article, then it would seem that drawing attention to it here, with a very wide audience of community members, would help achieve this objective. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 12:03, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A lot of work has now been done on this. Spicemix (talk) 14:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, two remaining {{cn}}s notwithstanding. Last chance, really, before Amis gets Jake-the-Pegged into oblivion. Moscow Mule (talk) 15:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Jake the Peg (and its creator) may well deserve oblivion (or worse). Amis? Probably not – time will be the judge. However, we won't be able to run the clock backwards and undo his absence here (Time's Arrow notwithstanding). Clock is ticking. Pageviews since the announcement of his death would indicate that the general reader finds the subject worth pursuing. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 22:10, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Bibliography section needs sources or ISBNs for his works.—Bagumba (talk) 15:23, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba: ISBNs done. Moscow Mule (talk) 16:23, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Struck my oppose.—Bagumba (talk) 16:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree Spicemix (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Rattan Lal Kataria

Article: Rattan Lal Kataria (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tribune India
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: -- Rushtheeditor (talk) 16:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Kacper Tekieli

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

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

Nominator's comments: -- Rushtheeditor (talk) 16:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Brian Booth

Article: Brian Booth (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Cricket Australia
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: Australian dual international represented Australia both in cricket and field hockey. Death announced on this date of 20 May 2023 Abishe (talk) 04:18, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Support - Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 04:35, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have no better reason than the other supporters here, but I notice at the Jim Brown article that votes were counted, and this might help get this exceedingly obvious nomination posted. Please don't let it sit here ready to go for days as other recent non-American nominations have. HiLo48 (talk) 22:52, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is well cited and long enough for ITNRD. Marking as ready. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HELLO!!!! An American footballer was posted as an RD much faster than this. Brian Booth was an international in TWO sports. You will never convince me there isn't a US sports bias here. HiLo48 (talk) 07:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, we'll never convince you. WaltClipper -(talk) 15:04, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That might also be due to Brown being better well-known in general, including his involvement as a civil right activist? (Still sad that his activism wasn't even mentioned in the blurb tho...) Chaotic Enby (talk) 15:18, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Better well known globally? No. That would be wrong. HiLo48 (talk) 21:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the page views, it seems Jim Brown is more well-known - Booth had about 6,000 views on the 20th, Brown about 300,000. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:42, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you check that view with the billion cricket fans in India? HiLo48 (talk) 23:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If he was really that popular, even if his fanbase was mostly in India (and I don't see why it would be there since he played in Australia) I would still expect there to be more than 0.02% of the views Brown got. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:09, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As an American you really should stop now. You clearly have no idea how international sport works, and are giving your countrymen a bad name. HiLo48 (talk) 03:58, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It’s time to stop, HiLo, before you end up breaking civility policies. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 10:17, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The small handful of ITN admins being busy is not a conspiracy. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:29, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK. So what IS the explanation for American sports stars always being posted quickly? DON'T say better well known. That would be US-centrism, and wrong. HiLo48 (talk) 21:29, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they are better well known, for starters. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:38, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you have data at hand, my guess would be confirmation bias. You notice when it happens, you don't notice when it doesn't. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 19

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Hasanuddin Murad

]

(Posted) RD: Ella Stack

Article: Ella Stack (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ntnews.com.au/news/northern-territory/dr-ella-stack-australias-first-female-lord-mayor-has-died-at-94/news-story/91d72eff6238985f985caafd319c1f3f https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-22/dr-ella-stack-former-darwin-mayor-cyclone-tracy-dies/102376262
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 female lord mayor of an Australian city. Steelkamp (talk) 03:04, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Aase Foss Abrahamsen

Article: Aase Foss Abrahamsen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): snl.no
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: Norwegian writer who primarily wrote for children and young adults. Death announced on 19 May, snl updated 20 May. Oceanh (talk) 06:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Marion Berry

Article: Marion Berry (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WashPo
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: One of the last of the era of federal Arkansas Democrats; his early retirement due to a brain tumor pretty much killed the state party. Needs source work. Curbon7 (talk) 05:11, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Tim Keller

Article: Tim Keller (pastor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WaPo
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: American pastor, 72. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:34, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Andy Rourke

Article: Andy Rourke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, 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: Largely unsourced, needs a lot of work and even expansion, nothing that can't be done. Mooonswimmer 12:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Oppose. Needs additional sourcing. Twistedaxe (talk) 20:15, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support significant work on the article in last 24 hours. Ceoil (talk) 15:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a couple of cn tags in the main prose. Discography is partially unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment as you can see I am tagged as a major updater so I won't cast a vote, but this looks good-ish to post. The only CN is on the subject of musical equipment, which is not my forte. If a page of this length and citation was on the main page and then got one CN tag over a minor issue, it wouldn't be pulled, would it? Unknown Temptation (talk) 20:07, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    One CN tag wouldn't be an issue in this case. Mooonswimmer 00:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ Unknown Temptation thanks for all the work this weekend. I removed the uncited stuff re gear; we can look it up later but dont want it to become an issue ino getting his passing on main page. To mention, as a bass player, Rourke was one of the most significant (and loved - he was always the "cool" Smith) English musicians of the last 50 years. RIP Andy. Ceoil (talk) 20:24, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 18

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime


RD: Sam Zell

Article: Sam Zell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP 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.

Nominator's comments: Very prominent real estate/private equity billionaire. Curbon7 (talk) 04:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I obviously have a conflict of interest being one of the people who updated this article with news of his death, but I would personally say the article is good enough to go out. -Asheiou (they/them • talk) 00:40, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This article is disorganized with a lot of short sections and one sentence paragraphs.
    Criticism sections are inappropriate, especially for biographies. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:23, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

(Posted blurb) Jim Brown

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: 
fullback Jim Brown (pictured) dies at 87.
News source(s): [16]

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: Level-4 vital article, R.I.P. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Support I've fixed up some of the article's quality issues, and some more could be fixed, but this looks good to go as of now. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb world famous figure, was active in several fields.
    talk) 20:01, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment I did nominate the blurb, so my Support !vote doesn't count for that. Not sure if credit is given to separate people (one who nom'd the RD vs the blurb) but it doesn't truly matter. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb - a million percent, Jim Brown is or was iconic in several fields, and the blurb should mention civil rights icon. nableezy - 20:05, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If he was a civil rights icon, that should be a clear expanded section in the article, otherwise its burying the lede for all purposes. Masem (t) 20:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Our article about a Black American being shit is unsurprising, but there is no if. NYT headline on his death: Jim Brown, Football Great and Civil Rights Champion, Dies at 87. nableezy - 22:08, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb when article fully updated; filmography needs references. Widely considered to be one of the best NFL players of all-time; major role in activism and film. SpencerT•C 20:16, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, strong support RD Not notable enough to be a blurb, but he was an icon and definitely needs to be mentioned in RD. Twistedaxe (talk) 20:18, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb May have been one of the bests in the league, but nothing about any impact or legacy that we would normally look for blurbs. Article is also in proseline in a lot of places and would not represent our best work. RD is sufficient but it still can be improved. --Masem (t) 20:24, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support blurb The article has been improved significantly to include his civil rights work, and the death section has some aspect of his legacy. I would suggest some of the Accusations section could be cut down (one paragraph has very minor charges or accusations that went nowhere, compared to the other accusations made). --Masem (t) 16:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: the article does a very poor job of explaining why Jim Brown is blurbworthy. The article makes zero mention of his activism and the section about his NFL career is so short. The section about his acting career is much longer than the section about his football career. Compare to other legendary NFL players like Dick Butkus and Johnny Unitas. Those players have narrative/chronological sections written for their NFL careers, not a slipshod arrangement of facts.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 20:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with this in re: his civil rights activism. It does a great job of explaining why he's a legendary athlete, but not why he's important off the field. I would consider supporting a blurb if that were improved. Kicking222 (talk) 20:46, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support blurb: article has been updated to include civil rights activism. He was always blurbworthy to me, just needed a better article.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 16:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb when ready. One of the greatest figures in football history. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:46, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb in principle - Jim Brown nearly destroyed his long-term career prospects as an athlete in order to take a stand for civil rights along with
    Kareem Abdul Jabbar, in an era where civil rights was very much a fraught topic. His story goes well beyond just being a football player, and his legacy will outlast him beyond his death. This is the sort of person that the sui generis transformative blurb criteria was made for. That being said -- God, it's dreadful and almost criminal that the article doesn't reflect any of this. --WaltClipper -(talk) 20:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • WaltCip Take another look, I added a good amount of detail related to his Civil Rights work. SpencerT•C 04:35, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb on principle, weak oppose on quality the Pele of American football; nothing more needs to be said. However, his film career section is in need of referencing; while not what made him famous, the full article should be at front-page quality, and it isn't. NorthernFalcon (talk) 20:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose on quality After giving the article a quick look, the article is in poor quality w/ sections missing sources or have no sources at all. All sourcing issues must be fixed first. Once it's fixed, I would support a blurb given his influential career. Support blurb Top of his field, influential football player and article in good shape. Good work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb in principle based on WaltCip's poignant explanation. Curbon7 (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @NorthernFalcon:, @TDKR Chicago 101:, sourcing issues have been fixed. @WaltCip:, @Kicking222:, @Bait30:, @Curbon7:, I have added a section to his activity regarding civil rights. Apologies for all the pings! Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:38, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per Masem. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:21, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If being the greatest college football player of all-time, one of the greatest professional football players of all time, one of the greatest lacrosse players of all time, being an important civil rights activist, and being a notable actor, all at the same time, is not blurb-worthy, then what is? BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:06, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @BeanieFan11 Darts. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    remains a figure of very minor impact and international relevance. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:49, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A "very minor figure"? Are you absolutely kidding me? Brown is very arguably the greatest American football player ever, not to mention he had a huge impact on civil rights, was a notable actor, and is considered one of the best lacrosse players ever as well. That does not meet any definition of "minor"! BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:39, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    “Greatest”? Come on. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:01, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Jim Brown is regarded as one of the greatest NFL players ever (Brady too, - its probably Brady as the best QB, Brown the best RB, the two most important positions) and the greatest college football player ever, hence I said "greatest American football" rather than greatest NFL. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Per BeanieFan11, it takes much more than a quarterback to win a football game. WaltClipper -(talk) 15:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Masem now supports a blurb, by the way. The Kip (talk) 17:00, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb maybe include his lacrosse experience as well. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 23:53, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Can't believe this is even being discussed. Blurbs are only for the highest echelons, the "Thatcher and Mandela" standard, and this guy who's had no lasting impact is nowhere near meeting it.  — Amakuru (talk) 05:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It shouldn't be a surprise.
    WP:ITNRD only says:

    The death of major figures may merit a blurb. These cases are rare, and are usually posted on a sui generis basis through a discussion at WP:ITNC that determines there is consensus that the death merits a blurb.

    There is no guidance about "Thatcher and Mandela".—Bagumba (talk) 05:42, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • RD ready, mulling blurb Sourcing issues resolved.—Bagumba (talk) 05:38, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Level-4
    vital. For comparison, Doyle Brunson is level 5, Margaret Thatcher level 4 and Nelson Mandela level 3. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:02, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Andrew, you’re right on article’s overall quality, but please take a look at the quality of the death update and compare it to all those people you’re mentioning. I don’t see a reason to post a blurb for someone whose death has received a one-sentence update in the “Personal life” section. That’s the minimum update for an RD, and even many RDs have had longer updates. I advertised this problem on the talk page some time ago, but it was subsequently archived without any resolution.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:36, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • We would be blurbing this because Brown was a "major figure" per
    WP:ITNRD, not because the details of their death were particular remarkable. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:59, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Per {{
    Recent Death}} "This article is currently being heavily edited because its subject has recently died." I expected that the article would be expanded and this has been done – see Jim_Brown#Death which includes tributes from Obama and others. Kiril Simeonovski's objection has therefore been addressed. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:09, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose blurb This is the type of routine death that is best suited for RD. Blurbs are not and should not be given to talented sportspeople simply because they do/say a few things here or there about social issues. I would presume that when Adam Goodes, Craig Foster, Michael Long, Nicky Winmar and Ashleigh Gardner die, that people have the common sense not to nominate them for blurbs. Chrisclear (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    He did more that just "a few things". Most stories are leading with his activism. For example: Jim Brown, the legendary American footballer who became a Hollywood action hero and civil rights activist, has died at the age of 87. (BBC)—Bagumba (talk) 08:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, but the same is likely to be true of obituaries about Goodes, Foster and Long when they die. And at that time, people will have the common sense not to nominate them for blurbs. And in the unlikely situation that they are nominated for a blurb, I find it difficult to believe that Americans will support a blurb for someone they have not heard of. Furthermore, as a general observation about people who have died, the significance of their accomplishments are frequently embellished/exaggerated when compared with living people who have done similar things. Chrisclear (talk) 09:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems it doesn't matter that your comment about "a few things" is wrong. Which is fine, but perhaps just be upfront and say you don't trust any writeups on sportspeople's deaths. Period. —Bagumba (talk) 10:12, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Both Shane Warne and Lata Mangeshkar got posted despite probably being known to about .1% of Americans, so I’m not so sure your argument holds up. The Kip (talk) 17:03, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have no opinion about this, but all of India knows both, which outweighs your argument by roughly 1.1 billion people. Coulda chosen better examples (but then again only 30% of Americans know that Jefferson was a president). AryKun (talk) 18:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @AryKun I wouldn't say something from 2007 is a really true depiction of Americans in 2023, but be my guest. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • RD posted, currently unclear blurb consensus - leaving nomination open to allow a more obvious consensus for the blurb to develop. Anarchyte (talk) 07:54, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Whilst there's a paragraph on his civil rights activism, there's no mention whatsoever of it in the lead paragraph, 80% of which is about his football career with 2 lines about his acting. Outside of North America Brown was known by many people as an actor who used to be a footballer, not the other way round. Black Kite (talk) 08:12, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In the lead now, last paragraph. nableezy - 11:11, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose blurb I was looking for the “Death”/“Later life and death” section before realising that there’s a one-sentence update in “Personal life”. That tells a lot why this person doesn’t deserve a blurb. Compare this to Pelé or Shane Warne to get an idea of how an update of the death of a sportsperson who merits a blurb should look.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:18, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just to clear up that misleading claim, here was the Death section of Warne's article when it was posted. nableezy - 11:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It was in much better shape than this one.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because it had three sentences? nableezy - 11:30, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, because it included relevant information on the reactions by famous people. Also, if you take a look how the article progressed in the next few hours after being posted, there are more relevant details on the funeral and memorial services. As I noted in a comment above, if the community isn’t interested to add more information about someone’s death, then it’s debatable how much that person can be considered a major figure. If you want to demonstrate it, please expand the update with more information on the funeral, reactions and memorial services, and I shall re-consider my vote (my vote is chiefly based on quality, not that he wasn’t significant). We’re an encyclopedia and quality is what matters the most.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:45, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
     Done, see Jim Brown#Death. nableezy - 11:52, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks good now. Thanks for your work. Support blurb as a result of the expansion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb He was 1 of the best football players of all-time (& apparently lacrosse too), a famous movie star & a notable civil rights activist. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 09:24, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Nothing here to show that he was more significant than many others the didn't get blurbs. HiLo48 (talk) 10:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    He was as, or more, significant as Shane Warne, Maradona and so on. It's this same reflexive oppose any American blurb BS that always happens. And if there was any consistency on admins ignoring the clearl IJDLI votes this would have been posted hours ago. Thanks for again proving this page's worth. nableezy - 11:04, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Did you just say he was more significant than Maradona? I'm going to try to unread what I just read. It would be interesting if you had a little more international sensitivity. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:18, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes lol. That you lack the sensitivity you demand of others is an interesting bit of lack of self-awareness, but yes Jim Brown was certainly more influential than Maradona. Maradona was a soccer star, the end. Jim Brown was a football star, movie star, civil rights leader, influences an entire generation of Black athletes in the US. So yes, more significant than Maradona. You, of all people, pretending like you have an international sensitivity when nearly every contribution here is to oppose anything American, can shove it. nableezy - 11:25, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If we are oposing "anything American" probably because almost all nominations related to the USA are the result of a closed mind to Americanness and a nationalistic view of Wikipedia, fact that provokes the nomination of anything you read in the "American" media "just to see if it sticks". You don't have to be a genius to come to this conclusion. But hey, if you followed me with a little attention you would see that I object also when it comes to events in other countries. Let me know what you think when you do. Cheers.
    PD: few sportsmen in history will be able to say that they have had an international and intergenerational impact like Maradona or Pelé. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:32, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Jim Brown's generational impact is not in dispute except in the minds of European Wikipedia editors. And his impact is not limited to how well he played a sport, in case you missed that minor bit of news. nableezy - 11:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb In line with my increasing mindset that no death warrants a blurb except where the death (not the deceased) is a news item (in which case, normal blurb nom with required article), or if a good part of the world is affected (i.e. treating it like a news item; think leading politicians or, yes, sports stars global enough that monuments are lit up and moments of silence are held; any death that warrants official mourning I would consider). As far as I can tell, Jim Brown's death isn't either of those. Very important person - within a sport and a movement that had regional impact, it has to be acknowledged - but RD exists for a reason. If we continue having ITN death coverage in increasingly tiered ways, we might as well scrap RD. As a side note, the US/not-US thing needs to be settled, but not in jingoistic arguments every time there's a related nom, it probably needs a proper talkpage discussion. Kingsif (talk) 12:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb those suggesting a pro-American bias need to check the record. We posted
    WP:AGF that those from their home countries know better. Americans never get that benefit of the doubt here. Everyone feels justified in weighing in because they are vaguely aware of him. Brown should be blurbed based on his football career alone. He was universally considered the greatest of all time for decades after his retirement, and still ranks in the top 3-5. That's to say nothing of his post-football impacts. He is infinitely more important to his sport than Maradona was to his, to say nothing of Warne. This is embarrassing. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:39, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Implying that Maradona and Warnie aren't considered among the greatest sportsmen in their own sports is the dumbest argument I've ever seen, period. AryKun (talk) 18:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That last sentiment was completely unnecessary to your argument, and has to be demonstrably incorrect based on the godlike worship of Maradona and Warne. That you decided to include it shows a far too POINTy view.
    I won't say anything on your !vote because your reasons are your reasons, that's fine. But I will add that, you're right there's much less benefit of the doubt towards US-centric items that come up: this is because the relationship of US culture with the rest of the world is such that non-Americans have heard of most important US cultural things, while Americans remain largely ignorant to what is important everywhere else. It's a strange one, but, again Jim Brown was massive in two fields - American football and US civil rights. Two fields that are massive in US sport and in US history. Two fields that are indeed acknowledged as important, but have no effect on people, everywhere else. Whether people think that warrants a blurb? Well, it's clearly debatable. Kingsif (talk) 20:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb per GreatCaesarsGhost. We’re trying to avoid “pro-American bias” so much that we’re flying awfully close to anti-American bias instead; in particular I agree with the point on Warne and Mangeshkar, who both received a fraction of the opposition a similarly-famous American would (and is, at the moment. The Kip (talk) 14:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - It's hugely disappointing, though not entirely surprising, that there are Wikipedians who seem to be ignorant (perhaps blissfully, but nevertheless) of the contentious history of civil rights in the United States and how extraordinarily tense it was in the late 1960s, and are instead choosing to weigh in with their highly limited and subjective viewpoints. I remember getting similarly upset when we snubbed Bill Russell, despite the fact that we have chosen to blurb Shane Warne without any apparent rancor. I'm continually led to believe that we ought to demolish the "transformative figure" criterion altogether, since it's being used as a selective cudgel to squash out the posting of individuals who otherwise would have been important within and even outside their specific field. Still, I hope that after and despite all of this, that ITN and Wikipedia's Main Page can still be considered colorblind. --WaltClipper -(talk) 15:06, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Didn’t you oppose the Russell blurb? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:21, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but I was upset at the rhetoric that certain users used in denying Russell a blurb, when we would never see that same rhetoric being used for denying Shane Warne a blurb. I'm aggravated about the double standard that exists. WaltClipper -(talk) 15:26, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just because we do not support Brown's candidacy does not mean that we ignore or belittle the civil rights movements of the 1960s in the United States. Let's not get things mixed. But welcome to the world: the United States is not the only country in the world that has had momentous civil rights movements, democratic transitions or contentious stages in its history that we should be very aware of and consider. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with WaltCip that the hyperbole used to downplay Brown's impact is unfortunate. However, I think that Walt is also in the comment engaging in hyperbole, as you point out, by suggesting that users !voting are trying to diminish the US civil rights movement its very self. As Walt points out, it was massive in the US in the 1960s - as Alsor points out, that's a limited part of world history. Other thoughts: I think all candidates should be judged on their own merit. I think that while it may be true that to suggest the US civil rights movement was monumental in world history is to equate world history with US history, that it is up to individual opinion whether someone so influential in US history is blurbworthy for that sphere of contribution. Less hyperbole on all sides is what is needed, I think. Kingsif (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The fact Warne was added fairly easily while Russell wasn’t blurbed and Brown might not me should be the ultimate proof that the issue of “American bias” on here is hilariously overstated. The Kip (talk) 16:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I might be beating a dead horse at this point, but ITN is
    an actual sitewide guideline. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support blurb. I was inclined to oppose, but supporters have made the case that this is consistent with past practice. Srnec (talk) 16:13, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Blurb. As much as I wouldn't put Brown on the level of Bill Russell (who should have been posted), and I believe his civil rights impact probably comes up short of the not-blurbed Harry Belafonte, I think Brown's combined impact in several spheres makes him a worthwhile enough candidate for posting. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:30, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted blurb appears to be about 2:1 in favor of a blurb, by the numbers alone.
    [majestic titan] 16:46, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment: I'm not totally sold on the blurb (his death isn't a notable event in itself the way some deaths are), but if it is blurbed then "civil rights activist" should appear somewhere in it. On a related note, it's shocking that his article doesn't go more in depth on this aspect of his life. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't really care about whether this gets blurbed or not, but to all the Americans angry about the "anti-American bias" we're displaying here: the reason that cricket and football blurbs get through easier is because, amazingly, these two sports have 5–8 times the fans that American football and baseball have. Stop complaining about us prioritizing the stuff that more people care about. AryKun (talk) 18:20, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just because soccer or cricket blurbs get by faster doesn't mean that we have to hold up football or baseball blurbs. (Side note: how many of those "5–8 times the fans" of soccer/cricket are both native English speakers AND frequent readers of the English Wikipedia?) Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm an American angry about the American bias that ITN has. Between this and the Dominion Voting Systems blurb, it's clear that ITN is looking more like USA Today's front page than something representative of the world. I won't deny Brown's significance on civil rights, but his life is better known as a fullback. Out of some of the death blurbs that we've had—Mikhail Gorbachev and Elizabeth II coming to mind from just this last year—the figures in these blurbs are globally recognized. I would be hard-pressed to find someone who shares little interest in American football to recognize who Brown is. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:36, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "This is what people care about" isn't usually given much weight in Wikipedia discussions. That's why
    WP:ITN explicitly discourages !votes based on geographic region. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Pull blurb - 99% of people outside the US haven't heard of him. He can't be compared on the same scale as Pelé, who was world famous. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 19:00, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a Canadian, I admit that I can't recall ever having heard of Jim Brown prior to yesterday. That being said, I don't think a lack of prior familiarity on my part indicates that someone isn't iconic or world-famous. Sometimes I'm just less informed than other people, for one reason or another. Kurtis (talk) 20:26, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
“Please do not… Oppose an item solely 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 generally unproductive.” The Kip (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting blurb support and suggest close - I read the article carefully and don't see any quality or updating issues. That leaves ITN-noteworthiness as the point of contention. In my view, Brown is worthy for many if not most of the reasons supporters gave above. Since continuing discussion here is likely to generate more heat than light along the usual lines by the usual parties, I strongly suggest this successful blurb nomination be closed, and further debate, if actually needful, be conducted on the ITN Talk page. Jusdafax (talk) 19:36, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support blurb Issues resolved, incredibly notable figure in sports and US history. -- Kicking222 (talk) 20:26, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He's notable in one country only; the vast majority of the world hasn't heard of him & has no interest in his sport. His acting & activism were also entirely domestic. There are hundreds of sportspeople who are far more well-known than him. Jim Michael 2 (talk)
  • Whats your point? I have zero interest in cricket, and so does most of the world, and Shane Warne was posted, and that was without the activism or the fame from a groundbreaking acting career. So what if you or anybody else does not care about his sport? You havent heard of him? Click the link and learn something then. nableezy - 20:42, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Lata Mangeshkar was posted despite being a major figure in effectively only one country as well. The Kip (talk) 20:43, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cricket is popular in several countries; American football is popular in one. Black US history only; he didn't have any involvement in ending apartheid or the Cold War. His acting career is not well-known in the US & is unknown outside it. The four current blurbs are a national political crisis & election, two disasters & the natural death of an octogenarian whom the vast majority of people in the world have never heard of. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 20:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Football is actually popular in multiple countries, and even then, so what? Especially given the fact that over 40% of the pageviews of the English Wikipedia are that one country, over 4x the number of number two on that list. The vast majority people of the world have never heard of Shane Warne either, but again why would that matter at all? And beyond that, youre basing this entire argument on your own ignorance and assuming "the vast majority" is just as ignorant. I didnt realize propagating ignorance was in our mission statement. nableezy - 21:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep blurb Despite not being American or a fan of American football, I immediately recognized his name. He comes up very quickly when reading about Black history or Muhammad Ali. Connor Behan (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2023 (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: Charles Stenholm

Article: Charles Stenholm (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [17]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former US representative from West Texas. Needs some source work. Curbon7 (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Closed) Montana TikTok ban

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: 
a bill fully banning TikTok by January 2024, making the U.S. state the first to fully ban the app in the country. (Post)
News source(s): NYT - WaPo - WSJ - CBS - CNN - Reuters - BBC - France24 - DW

Credits:
Nominator's comments: The U.S state of Montana became the first state to enact a total ban on TikTok. Yes I know, subnational news, but this is a fairly big deal, especially amidst talks of nationally banning the app in the U.S and other countries. Additionally, a single state outright banning an app is unprecedented at least in the US, with the closest comparison I can think of being Utah's age restriction on PornHub a few weeks ago. The subject article needs work however. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 14:51, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose firstly it's subnational, secondly even if it's a national ban, it's still only one company. Banedon (talk) 14:54, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — Not major and could be challenged. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:54, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose article is a stub with very little information. --Jayron32 15:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Subnational stub that may or may not have any major impact on anyone. Pass. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it's a company getting banned from a single state, the article is a stub, and it's from a single state, not an entire nation. Editor 5426387 (talk) 15:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose Not only is this subnational news, it's also heavily americentric. Not alot of people outside of the US care if one US state ban TikTok. From a Wikipedia perspective, the article is ineligible to be on ITN due to it being a stub aswell as not having much prose. Article needs major improvement. Twistedaxe (talk) 16:42, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not oppose an item solely 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 generally unproductive. - ITN/C voting guidelines - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 17:18, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't bite, that "rule" is not absolute, and I save myself from explaining something that is obvious to many editors. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not opposing solely based off the fact it's completely irrelevant outside of the United States, but also because it's a stub. And like others have pointed out, it really is irrelevant even outside of Montana itself. Maybe if the ban reaches a national-level it would be alot more notable, but for it to be 1 US state, of which not too many look likely to follow in Montanta's steps, this becomes even less relevant and appropriate to post. Please read through thoroughly and carefully why I opposed. Twistedaxe (talk) 17:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The banning of a single app is hardly of note especially if the same app has already been restricted in different ways in different jurisdictions. Gotitbro (talk) 16:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose so what? Really irrelevant outside the small Montana. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If a whole country banned it I could see the relevance. A state with around 0.3% of the US population? I think not. Black Kite (talk) 17:50, 18 May 2023 (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.

May 17

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Alicia Dussán de Reichel

Article: Alicia Dussán de Reichel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.icanh.gov.co/index.php?idcategoria=26548
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: Colombian educator. Sourcing seems acceptable. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:40, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Ready to go Looks good.
_-_Alsor (talk) 22:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Pale Male

Article: Pale Male (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY 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: Hawk who was a longtime resident of Central Park in New York City. Thriley (talk) 16:36, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) Floods in Italy

Articles: 
talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Flooding in the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy causes widespread disruption, including the cancellation of its Formula One Grand Prix (Post)
Alternative blurb: Flooding in the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy causes 11 deaths and widespread disruption, including the cancellation of its Formula One Grand Prix
News source(s): Guardian, Washington Post

Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: There are various aspects and articles to consider... Andrew🐉(talk) 19:26, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support: In essence, also a story of climate change ironically halting a gas-guzzling festival.
Iskandar323 (talk) 19:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Comment Can we please decide on an article to bold? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 19:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: A disaster with several deaths and widespread damage, due to heavy rains and climate change, which also caused the cancelation of important events like the Formula One GP. -- Nick.mon (talk) 20:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Widely reported in the news, 11 deaths. Heythereimaguy (talk) 01:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - widespread news. Anarchyte (talk) 08:15, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update The latest reports such as this indicate that the area affected includes other countries across the Adriatic including Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:38, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The weather is affecting the broader region indeed, I suggest expanding the article. In Slovenia and Croatia at least, this has been top news for a couple of days already. Tone 11:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the floods have spread to Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, causing similar damages and disruptions, but we need to document it somewhere. I’m unsure if a new article should be created or this one to get expanded.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support As an Italian myself, I definitely support this entry, but I would just re-phrase the blurb slightly, since the region has been hit by multiple floods and suffered several deaths among civilians. Oltrepier (talk) 09:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t have time since I am at work, but could someone please update the info box to the new one since floods is deprecated? NoahTalk 10:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I tried but the template appears broken :/ Chaotic Enby (talk) 11:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and support update mentioning the impact in other Adriatic countries. Chaotic Enby (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 11:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Crap, I'm trying to fix the new template ASAP. Feel free to re-revert to the old one in the meanwhile Chaotic Enby (talk) 11:09, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed! @Hurricane Noah @Stephen the new template is there Chaotic Enby (talk) 11:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - not sure I would include mention of the Grand Prix myself. The big story here is the floods and the deaths, we wouldn't be posting this if it was only about a F1 cancellation...  — Amakuru (talk) 13:34, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll remove the grand prix, it is a minor story in the big picture. Tone 14:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Per the discussion below, I've re-added the F1 mention for now until a clearer consensus emerges. Feel free to remove it again if there's more support. Anarchyte (talk) 15:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the specification of Emilia Romagna important to the blurb? Italy isn't big enough to justify such a precise location. We didn't specify that Mocha will hit (for example) Chittagong Division in Bangladesh, etc. so I see no need to specify which region of Italy this is impacting. Also interested in the above comments that it is affecting other neighboring countries on the Adriatic - if that is the case (idk about the subject) then we should change "Emilia-Romagna region of Italy" to "Italy, Bosnia, Croatia, and Slovenia" or something like that. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    …specifying Emilia-Romagna is important because that’s where the floods are happening. What? The Kip (talk) 19:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem is that there isn’t a discussion of the effects on other countries in any article, so it doesn’t seem appropriate to put that in the blurb right now. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose pull of Grand Prix - Firstly, one dude in a discussion with nearly 10 commenters doesn't like something and that is apparently enough to warrant removal after less than an hour? Additionally, much of the coverage surrounding the flood mentions the grand prix cancelation (e.g, F1 Cancels Emilia-Romagna Grand Prix Amid Floods in Italy [NYT] - Exceptional rains in drought-struck Italy kill 5 and cancel Formula One Grand Prix [NBC] - Exceptional rains in drought-struck Italy kill 5 and cancel Formula One Grand Prix [Reuters]). I support keeping the floods in since that's a major story regarding the flood itself (hell, there's a reason why a quarter of the subject article is devoted to it). - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 14:40, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was originally throwing my support behind the guys choosing not to put the Grand Prix in the blurb. However, Knight's point is pretty strong (and I myself first heard of the floods from the cancellation of the Grand Prix.) If most of the coverage is, while still focused on the deaths, injuries, and damage, centered on the race being cancelled, I find that to be good enough reasoning to blurb the GP in particular. Then again, F1 fan bias, perhaps. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 14:57, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support pull of Grand Prix: Most articles only mention the cancellation of the Grand Prix in like one to two sentences. Out of Knight's examples above, the only one that goes in depth is the New York Times link, but that's because that article is from the sports section. The New York Times article written for the European news section of the paper only has three sentences about the race out of approximately 55 sentences. Same with most articles about the flood (BBC: two sentences; RTÉ/Agence France Presse: one sentence; Reuters: three sentences; New York Times: three sentences; NBC/Associated Press: one sentence; The Guardian: zero sentences, The Hindu: one sentence). Just a few examples, but it seems clear that most articles just add the Grand Prix as a passing mention. This would be akin to posting about the Coldplay concert in Houston being canceled because of Hurricane Harvey ([18], [19]).  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 22:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I do think it's a somewhat different situation here. Houston is a big city that a lot of readers have heard of, and concerts are something that happen pretty frequently, thus all that's needed for a hook is "Houston is hit by Hurricane Harvey causing (insert damages here)." However, the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy is an area not that many readers outside of Europe (or Italy, maybe), have heard of. Meanwhile, Formula 1 is a series that's gained worldwide popularity. Tagging the Grand Prix there gives people a bit more of an interest, because it's an area they wouldn't otherwise bother with. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Nevermind, I gave it a bit of thought and then realized Houston is probably well known just in America, and not in the rest of the world. Same goes for Emilia-Romagna, but I think the same logic is usable when I think about it. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 19:22, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In my opinion, the location can be contextualized from the Emilia-Romagna link. The Grand Prix link isn't necessary for that.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 20:28, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support pull of Grand Prix as the less-major aside about the race is likely to force out (per
    WP:ITNBALANCE) more major recent items like the cyclone and Thai election.—Bagumba (talk) 03:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

(Closed) New Prime Minister of Afghanistan

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: 
Prime Minister of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan due to the ill health of Hasan Akhund. (Post)
News source(s): Independent, Pajhwok, The News

Credits:
 Ainty Painty (talk) 17:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Oppose Temporary acting Prime Minister, but no definitive change in leadership yet. Not too sure about the implications, waiting to see how it unfolds. Chaotic Enby (talk) 17:35, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, the article on
Mohammed Abdul Kabir definitely needs to be expanded, provided we can find enough info. Chaotic Enby (talk) 17:51, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Edit: Apparently the PM has no actual powers, being under the Supreme Leader, so notability isn't there, plus the article still isn't great... Chaotic Enby (talk) 09:50, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article needs some expansion. Standard scattershot "small list of random facts" and lacks a clear narrative describing his career. If someone could clean up the target article and expand it significantly I could support posting it. --Jayron32 17:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've starting putting it up-to-date (at least adding the fact that he became acting PM again), I'll see what I can do in the evening! Chaotic Enby (talk) 17:58, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose strongly on quality and weakly on notability. Will need to see this pan out for more details, but my goodness that bolded article is of nowhere near good enough quality for the Main Page. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose any leadership change outside the premier executive (absent exceptional circumstances). GreatCaesarsGhost 12:02, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose so, the Prime minister of a country changed temporarily, this is not really ITN-material. Editor 5426387 (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose—Article quality notwithstanding, the prime minister of Taliban-led Afghanistan is subordinate to the supreme leader. Per GreatCaesarsGhost, I would only support blurbing someone occupying a lower office under exceptional circumstances. Kurtis (talk) 19:29, 18 May 2023 (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: S. P. Hinduja

Article: S. P. Hinduja (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Bloomberg, Hindustan 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: Indian-born British billionaire businessman, investor, and philantrophist. Article well-sourced and in good shape! Tails Wx 16:49, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) Guillermo Lasso dissolves National Assembly

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Ecuadorian political crisis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: President of Ecuador Guillermo Lasso dissolves the National Assembly to avoid impeachment proceedings, triggering an earlier general election (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Amid a political crisis, President of Ecuador Guillermo Lasso dissolves the National Assembly and triggers an early general election
Alternative blurb II: ​ Facing a political crisis, President of Ecuador Guillermo Lasso chooses "mutual death", dissolving the National Assembly and triggering early elections
News source(s): BBC, The Washington Post
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Article up to date, well sourced, making global headlines, first time an Ecuadorian president dissolved the National Assembly to avoid impeachment --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Which part of ITN/R does this fall under? -- AxG /   16:03, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Pretty extraordinary constitutional event. They need to close that wide-open loophole.
Iskandar323 (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
I thought Ecuador used a Presidential system. Dissolving the legislature generally isn't something the President can do. Strange. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 20:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It comes at a price: he could lose his own job. See muerte cruzada. Big gamble, given his current approval ratings. Moscow Mule (talk) 22:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not ITN/R, but still an unprecedented and concerning action. IMHO, the general election shouldn't be the main target article as it hasn't taken place yet. I'll take a look to see if I can do anything to improve these articles. Chaotic Enby (talk) 17:32, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think bolding Lasso's article is reasonable, unless we want to make a specific article for this muerte cruzada, that would make sense as well. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 12:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: "Superstar" Billy Graham

Article: "Superstar" Billy Graham (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, Sports Illustrated, Hollywood 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: American professional wrestler, longtime champion throughout the 1970s in the northeastern US and WWE Hall of Fame inductee. LM2000 (talk) 02:35, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Support there's still some bits that need a cite, but it's mostly fully cited. Updated. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 06:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Pro wrestling legend and icon. The article looks acceptable. --
    Mann Mann (talk) 11:03, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose Each paragraph had a source, but a lot of citation needed's now tagged in between.—Bagumba (talk) 14:15, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Question How many of those tags were necessary, and how much was just tag bombing of sourced material? Is it really necessary to repeat the same citation in every sentence, or even multiple times within a sentence? GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Consider that almost each paragraph had an ending source, but did not support all of the preceding material, and two reviewers deemed it ready before. Yes, I think it was necessary. Would people do unnecessary things? If consecutively tagged sentences can be sourced by the same reference, then one citation would be sufficient to address it. —Bagumba (talk) 01:12, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Lots of cn tags need resolving. --Jayron32 14:36, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Looks fantastic now. --Jayron32 11:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Over the past couple days, I've fixed some of the sourcing issues with this. Would you mind taking another peek at this, User:Jayron32 and User:Bagumba? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Still outstanding are new tags: five citation neededs and three failed verifications. Most I tagged just by seeing diff of the changes since the original tags Unfortunately, some tags were removed without supplying a new source, and I double-checked that its not supported. Feel free to supply supporting quotes in the talk page if I just flat out missed something. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 12:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 16

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

  • The
    Ecuadorian president Guillermo Lasso begins, with Lasso attending in person for his defense. (AP)

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Robert Lucas Jr.

Article: Robert Lucas Jr. (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal
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.

 bender235 (talk) 01:30, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Bill Perkins (politician)

Article: Bill Perkins (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY1, Patch, New York Daily News, CBS News, WBLS
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 politican from New York state, served as a Democrat in the New York City Council. Other than the few {{citation needed}} tags, article looks in good shape! Tails Wx 13:16, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Sorry, I didn't see this. Wrong date, and a former start of the article, nominated now on 15 May. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 15

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Maria Mies

Article: Maria Mies (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express, Der Spiegel
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: Considerable reference work needed! --Tails Wx 17:13, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

German sociology professor, pioneer for women's position in society, studied in India first. Article completely transformed by SusunW. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who is still feverishly working on it, trying to remove the huge section of OR and replace it with scholarly reviews of her work. SusunW (talk) 19:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it's mostly done. Need some clean up on the lede and citation of the awards. SusunW (talk) 22:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ralph Lee

Article: Ralph Lee (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY 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: American puppeteer. Founder of the New York's Village Halloween Parade. Death announced 15 May. Thriley (talk) 13:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Ready) RD: Robert Lucas Jr.

Article: Robert Lucas Jr. (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal
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.

 bender235 (talk) 01:30, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) Thai general election

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Thai general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the 2023 Thai general election, the Move Forward Party led by Pita Limjaroenrat (pictured) wins the most seats in the House of Representatives. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the 2023 Thai general election, anti-military junta parties win a majority in the House of Representatives (Pita Limjaroenrat, leader of the largest party, the Move Forward Party pictured).
Alternative blurb II: ​ In the Thai general election, an anti-military junta coalition led by the Move Forward Party (leader Pita Limjaroenrat pictured) wins a majority in the House of Representatives.
News source(s): [20][21][22][23][24][25]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: The article looks good. I see no {{Citation needed}} tags. A bunch of redlinks but those can almost certainly all be removed. estar8806 (talk) 20:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Support No tags, the article looks good. I'd prefer the alternative blurb too. Chaotic Enby (talk) 06:15, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Looks good to me. Nascar9919 (talk) 07:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt II General election results are ITNR. Breadth and sourcing is fine. The presumed prime minister change can be posted later as another ITNR item. Prefer Alt II, as the surprising upstart Move Forward Party should remain in the blurb, even after the leader's picture eventually gets bumped.—Bagumba (talk) 09:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked readyBagumba (talk) 09:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Will add pic when commons protection passes. --Jayron32 12:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Where's the support for Altblurb? I haven't seen that much detailed blurb posted for any other country's election. 182.190.197.37 (talk) 17:50, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems on par with Sweden's.—Bagumba (talk) 07:26, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba Where in the article does it say anything about "an anti-military junta coalition"? 182.190.197.37 (talk) 15:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your objection was the level of detail. That one uses the same amount of detail. Before you just stated there, you never mentioned any objection to the phrase "an anti-military junta coalition", merely that other blurbs hadn't had as much detail. The Sweden post has a similar amount of detail. --Jayron32 18:28, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's a related discussion at
WP:ERRORS about "anti-military junta". —Bagumba (talk) 03:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Turkish general election

Article: 2023 Turkish general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the first round of Turkish general election, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan gets 49.23% of the votes and his People's Alliance secures majority. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the first round of the Turkish general election, the People's Alliance secures a majority.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The People's Alliance secures a majority in the Turkish general election, while the presidential election advances to a runoff.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The People's Alliance secures a majority in the Turkish parliamentary election, while the presidential election advances to a runoff.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ In the Turkish parliamentary election, the People's Alliance retains its majority.
News source(s): [26]
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
talk) 10:20, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose good faith nom -
WP:LOCALCONSENSUS for this (i.e, there was only one nom for the French election last year despite there being two rounds) and first rounds not being posted in the past (IIRC). - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 11:09, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
This event is ITNR as the "general election" results are known (or will be shortly). The presidential runoff is technically NOT ITN/R, but the succession would be. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Major story.
talk) 12:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Wait until an actual winner appears following the second round. estar8806 (talk) 02:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The presidential election isn't finished, and the parliamentary election article still has orange-tagged sections. Chaotic Enby (talk) 06:12, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until after the runoff vote has taken place, whereby a winner will be officially declared. Tofusaurus (talk) 11:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb 4. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
or blurb 3 actually is good to me too. As long as the parliamentary election results are official / clear enough at this point. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until the runoff is complete. Then we can announce the general election results and the runoff winner. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 16:32, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until we know the president-elect, at which point we should have a blurb recognizing them as the winner after a run-off vote while also mentioning the fact that the People's Alliance retained its majority. Kurtis (talk) 17:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle for the parliamentary results, once that article is ready. We will post the presidential result in two weeks when the runoff happens. Curbon7 (talk) 00:16, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There is still "Preliminary" in the heading at 2023 Turkish parliamentary election § Preliminary results. Have officials at least called the election, formalities aside?—Bagumba (talk) 15:02, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Shoaib Hashmi

Article: Shoaib Hashmi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Dunya 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.

 Fahads1982Talk10:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

RD: Farooque

Article: Farooque (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rising GPD
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.

 Fahads1982Talk10:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

May 14

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections


RD: Mary Parker

Article: Mary Parker (Australian actress) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [27], [28]
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
Victoria. Happily888 (talk) 15:03, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

(Posted) RD: Gloria Molina

Article: Gloria Molina (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, 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.

Nominator's comments: Groundbreaking Chicana politician. Funcrunch (talk) 20:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Doyle Brunson

WSOP
in 2006
Article: Doyle Brunson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Texan poker champion Doyle Brunson dies at the age of 89. (Post)
News source(s): Cardplayer, ESPN, New York Times, Guardian
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.

 KTC (talk) 07:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Oppose. too many unsourced contentious statements. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:20, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think a good rule of thumb that we might consider codifying is whether the death itself notable enough to have an article (for example,
Death and state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II or Assassination of Shinzo Abe). If it is, that indicates it's probably important enough to blurb. Likewise, no one is going to take Death of Doyle Brunson seriously as an article, which implies that the death isn't significant enough to blurb. It's not a perfect rule, but it's a fairly strong indicator of what deaths might be "blurbable". At the very least, it would be something to guide discussions like this where everyone and their mother is a contender for a death blurb. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
There were 17 individual deaths blurbed in 2022 and only 6 of them have separate articles for their death/funeral. So the suggested rule doesn't fit that pattern and a similar idea was rejected when proposed. But YMMV as it doesn't seem that we've had any individual death blurbs so far this year and it's May already. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was considering reviving that proposal, but with clearer language and options. Part of the reason I pulled it back is because Abductive said it was badly worded. There wasn't necessarily a consensus against changing the criteria. WaltClipper -(talk) 12:25, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now, sourcing issues, several paragraphs lack any sources. Would support RD only; blurb is redundant given that all we'd have to say is that he died. --Jayron32 13:17, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose blurb, weak oppose RD Article needs some sourcing fixing and quality updates in order to be ready for ITNRD. Blurb? No. As a not-so-wise editor once said, "Old man dies." Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 17:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose blurb, support RD Not notable enough to be blurb, could be good for RD though. Twistedaxe (talk) 21:09, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose blurb for obvious reasons. Oppose RD on quality reasons, I identified a number of uncited statements in the article. The Kip (talk) 23:06, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until and unless improvements are made to the sourcing. I also oppose blurb, as I'm not convinced that Brunson is really that transformative of a figure in poker, nor do I think there is anything particularly remarkable about his passing. Kurtis (talk) 17:28, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I've replaced the {{citation needed}} tags with citations. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 18:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's support for blurb or no blurb by the way. Repeating the NYT line: "On his website, Mr. Brunson was once immodestly described as 'the Babe Ruth, the Michael Jordan, and the Arnold Palmer of poker.' The comparisons were apt." Hameltion (talk | contribs) 18:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Doyle_Brunson#World_Series_of_Poker_bracelets still needs references and 1 CN tag remains. SpencerT•C 20:02, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Spencer – fixed those. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 20:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 03:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Cyclone Mocha

Proposed image
Article: 
refugee camps in the area. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Cyclone Mocha strikes Myanmar and Bangladesh, killing at least 81 people.
News source(s): The Guardian, Reuters, BBC

Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Usual disclaimer of this being early on in the impact period of the cyclone, but massive evacuations already took place as Myanmar's strongest storm in at least a decade made landfall. This region is notorious for some of the worst tropical cyclone-related catastrophes in the world, such as Cyclone Nargis in 2008 and the 1991 Bangladesh cyclone. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:50, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - its happening, it's notable, and its led to historically massive evacuations. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 18:26, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It reached 175 mph 1-minute average according to the US Navy hurricane center, is that the North Indian Ocean record?Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:33, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tied with Fani 2019. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 02:07, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait this could be notable but we'll have to wait to see its effects. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Death toll and damage is high enough for me to support Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:09, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Weak oppose Whilst it is a terrible catastrophe to have hit Bangladesh and Myanmar, fatalities only reached 15 and dissipated rather quickly. Unless the damage is found to be worse, I'm opposing for now. Support due to fatalities rising into the hundreds. Twistedaxe (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

400 estimated. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 13:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not only for the death toll (already 29), but also for the fact that this directly affected more than one million people. Chaotic Enby (talk) 07:16, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The alternative blurb should be updated, as the death toll is regrettably increasing (other, possibly more precise source reporting from AFP, in French unfortunately) Chaotic Enby (talk) 18:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked ready. I can't post because I voted. Hopefully, another admin will notice some day. --Jayron32 12:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think anyone is going to pillory you for posting an item with 8 to 1 in favor. WaltClipper -(talk) 12:35, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support 44 confirmed fatalities, 400 estimated, thousands of houses, 64+ schools, 27+ religious buildings, 14+ medical facilities and 18+ government buildings destroyed. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 13:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 13

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

International relations

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Sibylle Lewitscharoff

Article: Sibylle Lewitscharoff (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [29]
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: German author, 69 Cheers! Fakescientist8000 16:09, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Re-posted) Sweden wins Eurovision

Proposed image
Article: 
Loreen (pictured) wins the Eurovision Song Contest 2023, becoming the first woman to win the contest twice. (Post)
News source(s): BBC

Credits:

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

 XxLuckyCxX (talk) 23:11, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Support for internationally recognized and well-known music competition. Although I do recommend you add the song (Tattoo) for clarification, as is precedent from past years. ActuallyNeverHappened02 (a place to chalk | a list of stuff i've done) 05:28, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Table-heavy with no description of the actual event. Says nothing about the two stand-out moments – Croatia's bizarre entry and Mel Giedroyc's milkmaid act. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support. Eurovision has always been significant, and this year Loreen makes history. Extra significant. Twistedaxe (talk) 07:49, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reminder - Hey everyone, "Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance." Thanks -- KTC (talk) 07:55, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. The article is really long but most of the things I checked are properly sourced. I will tweak the blurb a bit. --Tone 08:31, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull @Tone: where is the prose update? I and several others insisted this was a prerequisite for posting, as it always is for events and sports matches etc. Please wait until this is provided. The assertyion that Loreen won doesn't even seem to be cited at present, it's mentioned in the lead only, other than maybe in one of the many tables.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:05, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The posting was nicely in the tradition of the contest which is notorious for its "irregular voting patterns". I'm not sure of the details as they are complex, keep changing and the article doesn't explain them but my understanding is that Americans were allowed to vote and that viewers could vote up to 20 times. And the key principle is that the British must not be allowed to win. It's rather like Wikipedia... :) Andrew🐉(talk) 10:57, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm surprised this was posted, considering there's very little actual prose about the nights events. It's all in table form which isn't a substitute. I'd recommend pulling. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull Not a lot of prose about the results, just a bunch of tables. Not suitable for the main page. NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 14:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull per above. A prose update for results is the minimum required update needed for such an event like this. --WaltClipper -(talk) 14:21, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Reminder to everyone, that when an item is indicated as being ITN/R, there is NO NEED to provide a significance/notability rationale in your !vote. "It's internationally recognized", "it's an important event" -- yes, we know all of these things. That's why it is
    WP:ITNR. Restating them is redundant and can also cause confusion regarding whether the article is qualitatively ready for the Main Page, as it would seem has happened here. --WaltClipper -(talk) 14:24, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment I disagree that there's no prose update on the final. The thing is that it's organised in a different section, which contains two paragraphs at the end on the final. Whether it should be moved to the section on the final or not is something that should be discussed on the article's talk page. And please check the nominations on the ESC in the past because the exact same thing regarding the quality of the update has been discussed multiple times before.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There should still be more about the final vote and the winner just beyond saying Sweden won. I see articles covering reactions to the final performances and the like. It is fair to have everything about the non-voting aspect of the finales in a different section, but the final should still be developed more given how fast I see articles about it - eg we're not waiting for viewership numbers or the like. Masem (t) 15:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pulled - technically I was
    accountability. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 21:42, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @Amakuru: You’ve done at least three things wrong. Firstly, you pulled it as involved, which you noted yourself. Secondly, you’ve apparently failed to see that there’s an update of the final elsewhere in the article. Thirdly, you’ve also failed to check the discussions from the previous years in which the exact same thing was discussed. There’s nothing relevant missing from the article; it’s just not under the “Final” sub-section, which isn’t a requirement (we’re evaluating the whole article, not specific sections, and the articles on the ESC have had a standardised format for decades). What kind of information you expect to see there?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @
    [majestic titan] 02:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Trout the bad post too then. It ignored almost half, even some "supports", that said more prose was needed. None of the other supports rebutted the quality concerns. Poster should have !voted instead.—Bagumba (talk) 04:03, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @
    [majestic titan] 17:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @
    WP:SUPERVOTE or an oversight on what people said was still missing. The pull's intent was to improve WP, whether or not one condones it or even if it didn't achieve it's intended purpose. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 20:31, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Definitely no. The main problem here is that some people want to treat every single article the same way even though there are clear guidelines on how an article on the Eurovision Song Contest should look like. If we put the tables aside, this article still contains more prose than 90% of the articles we post, but for some editors it’s not enough. I know that it may sound too harsh, but this seems like trolling.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:33, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The top of that "guideline" says:

This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.

Bagumba (talk) 03:05, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Tayeb Belaiz

Article: Tayeb Belaiz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Radio Algerie
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: ---Algerian jurist, minister of justice--- Fahads1982Talk 18:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

May 12

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

Other


RD: Don Denkinger

Article: Don Denkinger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Baseball umpire best known for blowing a call in the 1985 World Series. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 01:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Michael J. Juneau

Article: Michael J. Juneau (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Lafayette Daily Advertiser, KATC
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: United States district judge, well-sourced, maybe some expansion can be useful! Tails Wx 15:13, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Removed) Remove Israeli protests

Article: 2023 Israeli judicial reform protests (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: Article is not getting updates "regularly" or "continuously." I see one substantial update in two weeks. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Hodding Carter III

Article: Hodding Carter III (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, Clairon-Ledger, AP 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

Nominator's comments: American journalist and politician, served as Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs in the Jimmy Carter administration, article looks in good shape! Tails Wx 18:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

May 11

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Teina Maraeura

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

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

Nominator's comments: French Polynesian politician. Curbon7 (talk) 12:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Posted) RD: Jacklyn Zeman

Article: Jacklyn Zeman (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: 45 year tenure on General Hospital. Filmography is unsourced. Curbon7 (talk) 12:06, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

(Closed) 2023 United States migrant surge

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



Nominator's comments: Traditionally, I'm against these types of stories from the U.S., but it involves the Americas. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose article is only a sentence long.  Hamza Ali Shah  Talk 21:15, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - The article is tiny, the newsworthiness of the topic is at best highly subjective, and I don't understand the nominator's comment - don't all stories from the USA involve the Americas? GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Stories from the United States involve the United States, not the Americas. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:00, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose - I have never in my life seen such a sad and tiny article for an important topic. In my opinion, this should have been a draft so work could have been done on it. Rushtheeditor (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have draftified this article, and thus it is ineligible for nomination. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 23:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional strong support - yes, the article is currently ass, but contrary to what @GenevieveDEon might claim, this is a pretty critical news story. The expiry of the COVID-era Title 42 provisions will, and already is causing a massive surge of migrants that will bode an enormous amount of strain on the US southern border. The Department of Homeland Security predicted that this will lead to 10k migrant crossings per day; it's already exceeded that with 11,000 being apprehended on Tuesday and Wednesdays each (NPR). To @GenevieveDEon, is 70,000 migrants crossing the border in a week not newsworthy? How about 300K in a month? Even Biden himself has admitted that the southern border will be "chaotic for quite a while" (Al Jazeera). Both sides of the aisle are skeptical of America's ability to handle this (CNN), and the border is already being seriously overwhelmed (NBC). Even with his attempts to combat this, its likely to get bogged down in a series of legal challenges (BBC). This is a story of substantial importance, that is quite literally In the news, receiving coverage from sources on the left and the right.
I would like to emphasize that final part too as I suspect there will be !voters who will oppose, dismissing this as "republiKKKan fearmongering." All of the sources I cited were not right-wing, being a mixture of centrist and liberal outlets; certainly not the type that would back Trump and his ilk. Liberals and progressives are both saying that this will be bad for the border and Biden, with again, even he himself stating that it will lead to chaos on the border. The fact that for an issue like illegal immigration on the southern border, you're seeing people on the American left be like "oh shit, this could be bad," is demonstrative of this event's significance. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 00:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Bad article. --WaltClipper -(talk) 01:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait The restrictions only just expired yesterday, lets wait and see if there is a large increase to justify it. At the moment, personally I don't see that emerging so I am leaning oppose but willing to wait and see what happens. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:08, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ongoing This border has been in the news for years and I was reading press reports about the end of title 42 months ago. And there's plenty of similar migration/refugee issues elsewhere such as the boat crossings of the English Channel which have likewise been in the news for years. See 2014 American immigration crisis which seems to peter out but my impression is that it's been an ongoing issue throughout. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:28, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Article quality seems to have improved considerably since it was initially assessed. It could still use for some expansion and clean up (it still reads like a scattershot list of single sentence anecdotes rather than a coherent narrative, for example) but it's not terrible and is probably barely acceptable for the main page currently. --Jayron32 12:31, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The size of the "surge" (ie the difference from prior) would seem critical in assessing significance. I'm not seeing this clearly and reliably indicated in the article. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Good grief, really? Given that migration into many other countries is on a scale many times what this article suggests (i.e. one million into the UK in 2022 [31]), this (41 people arrived here, another 50 arrived on a bus) is basically trivia. Black Kite (talk) 19:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Too soon to tell if this will be a significant event, hence the article's nomination at AfD.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) RD: Long Boi

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: Long Boi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian, The Times, ITV, Northern Echo
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: It is not certain but seems reasonably official now. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
]
And my response will be "If you say this, you don't know how AfD works." Someone creates a BLP for an RD. I oppose saying they aren't significant. You say oppose on significance not allowed, go to AfD. I go to AfD, and they say keep *because article is new* and may improve with time. This is reality. AfD was not set up to square this circle. GreatCaesarsGhost 16:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your AFD experience seems to differ heavily from me. Either its coincidental or the articles your nominating for AFD aren't as lacking in notability as you think. Either way, regardless, any article which fails
WP:GNG or any notability criteria should be AFDed, so the response to a failed AFD nom should not be using ITN as some sort of weird backdoor. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:32, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
You're forgetting
WP:NOTBURO which says "Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policies without considering their principles." You're literally saying we should ignore our principals and follow the bureaucracy "regardless" of if that bureaucracy is even functional. And WP:ITNRD isn't even a policy; it's an information page. GreatCaesarsGhost 16:44, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
How did the response to a failed AFD nom should not be using ITN as some sort of weird backdoor turn into fellating the bureaucracy? I repeatedly stated that this seems to contrast with my experiences on AFD. Comments like you listed are frequently disregarded by closers. Maybe you aren't waiting long enough. Besides, AFDing an article is already a showstopper for ITN noms anyway (since, the typical duration of an AFD is as long as the archiving/duration period for an ITN nom to be posted [a week], meaning that unless the AFD is closed early, it wont get posted). Also, yes,
WP:ITNRD is a policy page, there is policy listed there. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 00:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
No, ITNRD is very much not a policy page, and if you think it is, I think you should step back from the level of adversarial editing you are doing here until you have taken some time to educate yourself. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of AfD.
arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Note that we're currently blurbing a horse. "
Four legs good, two legs bad"? Andrew🐉(talk) 14:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
The death of a horse is not currently the subject of any blurb. --Jayron32 15:09, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article in that case makes a big deal about the death of seven horses for some reason. It was quite mysterious when first posted but now the details are starting to emerge... Andrew🐉(talk) 15:30, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And? That's not why we posted the Derby. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leave it to Andrew to argue in bad faith. The Kip (talk) 03:38, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Derby was rubber-stamped as WP:ITN/R and is being blurbed uncritically as a routine sporting event. I looked at the article when it was posted and was puzzled by the article's sketchy details of some horse deaths which seemed to be a non sequitur. But more details have been emerging since and it appears that they are the real story. See Stench of death..., for example. "There’s something going on..." Andrew🐉(talk) 08:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose. Despite this duck being somewhat unique, is it really newsworthy and worth posting on RD? 🛧
    話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 14:11, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose on quality, then support, IAR oppose after that Article is eligible for ITNRD notability, though the sourcing needs work and the quality is subpar. Further !votes have convinced me that this isn't ready for ITN/R, at all. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 14:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once NPSN is cleared up As stated earlier, RDs are not based on significant and this article would be of good quality once that tag is cleared. CaptainGalaxy 15:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I noticed it. I'm IAR opposing. I don't think we are improving Wikipedia by including this item, certainly not in its current state. This is one of those rare exceptions to guidelines that Wikipedia permits for. WaltClipper -(talk) 15:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand that too, but, man... feels like a bridge too far, honestly. I'd IAR oppose, RD is pretty packed as it is nowadays - care to explain exactly how it's a bridge too far, aside from "well RD has too many articles?" Not to be a dick, just genuinely asking. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 15:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because:
    1. There's no confirmation that the duck in question is actually dead, and no legal authority exists to do so,
    2. The article is of considerably poor quality, with a very unencyclopedic tone, almost equivalent to a college newspaper in its writing,
    3. There are serious questions raised as far as
      notability
      which merit further exploration, and that may very well lead to an AFD, but in the meantime, it's not a good idea to rush into posting something just because the prose is sourced and readable.
    I think it'd be a bad look for Wikipedia to post this to the Main Page. WaltClipper -(talk) 15:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    There's no confirmation that the duck in question is actually dead, and no legal authority exists to do so

    I'm going to make another comment about this, but is there any legal precedent regarding death in absentia for matters relating to animals?

    The article is of considerably poor quality, with a very unencyclopedic tone, almost equivalent to a college newspaper in its writing

    As I will always state, just because an article is in piss-poor shape does not mean that it cannot be included on ITN on paper; it can be improved to main page status. That is once of the cornerstones of ITN, working together to improve articles about newsworthy topics to feature on the main page.

    There are serious questions raised as far as

    notability
    which merit further exploration, and that may very well lead to an AFD, but in the meantime, it's not a good idea to rush into posting something just because the prose is sourced and readable

    If you think the article isn't encyclopedic and or noteworthy enough for inclusion on Wikipedia, than
    you know where to go. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Per
    disruptive, I plan on taking my time on that decision -- but at the same time, guidelines are just guidelines for a reason, and I think there's a good discussion to be had about whether the ITNRD guidelines really should unilaterally apply to this item as they have all other items. WaltClipper -(talk) 16:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Just a few things to note. First, guidelines are guidelines because they've undergone sitewide scrutiny and are the current state of consensus. Second, there are no guidelines that apply to ITN separately from the rest of the site's policies and guidelines. The guidelines that apply to ITN are limited to the ones listed
    WP:IAR does not give any individual editor the power to overrule the consensus of other editors. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I'm not trying to overrule consensus. I am proposing an IAR oppose to this nomination and giving my reasons for why I'm doing so. Other editors are free to agree or disagree, and as it turns out, quite a few editors do agree with me. We have done this before for a recent Blue Origin launch. The launch was technically ITN/R, but it received a sizable enough IAR opposition that the decision was made not to post the item even though the guidelines specifically state that ITN/R items are not subject to notability tests. My !vote is just as valid as yours or anyone else's. WaltClipper -(talk) 16:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. Respectfully, does a university have the legal authority to declare a duck dead in absentia. I mean, I know that sounds silly, but we're adding an item to RD because the subject was not seen in a week? Sorry, that's not good enough for me. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:30, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait: It has not yet been officially confirmed that this duck is dead yet. I think we should hold off until it is confirmed before declaring duckus mortus on ITN. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 15:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, to be fair, this is because the law rarely has reason to care about non-human deaths. My point really is death in absentia is already jumping to a conclusion, but we must utilize it because eventually an individual must be declared dead for legal reasons. Why I dispute this entry as RD eligible is not only is the target's ability to be declared as such disputable, but we're going simply off of a body saying "well, we guess the duck is dead". DarkSide830 (talk) 19:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Long enough and sourcing is sufficient. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose A bird flew away, and hasn't come back in a little while. I am failing to see how this qualifies as a death? --Jayron32 16:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Article needs improving, but the coverage suggests it to be a notable death (or not) despite whatever of us think about the relevance of this particular duck. Bedivere (talk) 16:49, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Frankly ITN is in desperate need of light relief to dissipate some of the doom and gloom.
      Iskandar323 (talk) 16:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      Agreed. Bedivere (talk) 17:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Never before have I seen someone suggest that the means to dissipate the doom and gloom on ITN with a light relief would be via posting a Recent Death. WaltClipper -(talk) 17:18, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I'm just glad that I could bring something new to the table
      Iskandar323 (talk) 17:33, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      I'd sure like a nice Peking duck brought to the table, but inflation makes it so hard to eat out nowadays... WaltClipper -(talk) 17:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment, might be just me, but there appears to be absolutely zero evidence that the duck is dead. I mean, it almost certainly is (it's a famous duck and someone would have seen it if it had just popped down to the lake next door), but ... if it is found, will we need a Recent Resurrections section? Black Kite (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Borderline Support and or Oppose The duck appears to be notable, so that's fine.
      But I do wonder if this is too soon, as since its close to or mating season, that it may be a temporary disappearance. TheCorriynial (talk) 18:33, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Okay, I did a little digging on the lifespan of Indian Runner Ducks (by digging I mean a bunch of google searches), and, well, for one he's 70cm/27in, and an adult Indian Runner Duck is about 26-32in, meaning when our Long Boi surfaced, he was probably an adult. An Indian Runner Duck lives 8-12 years, and he surfaced about 5 years ago, so at least he's lived 5 years. I'm skeptical, frankly, and I couldn't find a source that tells me when Indian Runner Ducks reach adulthood, so on account that our Boi here hasn't lived the lifespan of an average runner duck, I must oppose. And the fact I'm opposing makes me sad for the sole reason that my humor makes me think having a name like "Long Boi" on the main page is funny. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      This is one of the best comments I've seen on ITN/C in a long time. And I agree- seeing "Long Boi" on the main page would be awesome, but alas, it probably won't happen right now. -- Kicking222 (talk) 20:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      If this isn't original research, I don't know what is. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:42, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Forgot to mention that my thoughts are what's likely, not definite, sorry. Don't want to say this is the definite conclusion, of course, but it's enough I can base a support or oppose around it. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 14:58, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support blurb and everything that is supportable worse things I’ve seen and we will see over here. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Support making it Today's Featured Article. If enough of us support it then they can't stop us. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      My thoughts exactly! TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 20:59, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I’d support this if the duck was definitely dead & the article quality was good enough, but there seems to be a question about whether or not the duck is definitely dead. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • IAR Oppose - This is why I oppose the automatic inclusion of non-human subjects on RD. In no reasonable world is the unproven death of a wild duck in the news. And I note that several of the above !votes are intentionally disruptive - proposing blurbs and other promotions for the article just because it would allegedly be funny. GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose RD equates humans and animals alike, fine. But would we post the former as a death if missing for only a week, I am sure not. The same is the case here. Gotitbro (talk) 21:38, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose No evidence the duck is dead. He’s not nailed to the perch, nor pushing up the daisies, etc. - SchroCat (talk) 22:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment once more - for the people complaining that their is no definitive evidence that he died, you're statements come into direct conflict in the article, which recognizes U of York's claim that he died, as do many other
      WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 23:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    Knightoftheswords, please stop
    WP:BITING the newcomers. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Maybe stop calling for all nominations you disagree with to be
    WP:SNOW closed, otherwise, I will follow on WaltCip's call to action when you started doing that. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 00:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Gave me a bit of a chuckle with that one, but no, I don't call for speedy or snow closes w/ every nom I disagree with. There's plenty of proof out there, because I did not start editing ITN in March of this year. Side note, why are you getting this defensive over a single RD nomination? Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:38, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I also don't bite newcomers. Additionally, the reason why I'm getting this defensive over a single RD nomination is because in many ways this entire thread highlights everything wrong with ITN in 2023. People using nomination discussions to make largely unconstructive oppose votes that are entirely detached from widely accepted policy and instead using it to
    WT:ITN. All this to just pave way for frequent uncivil bickering that is completely untethered from any of ITN or Wikipedia's policies and does nothing but make ITN an embarrassment to the rest of the project. On an RD nom nonetheless, which was supposed to be a sanctuary from the chaos that occurs on blurb/ongoing noms. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 00:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    The university BELIEVES the duck dead, and said sources are reporting on the matter as such. Again, the University of York does not have the authority to declare anything (duck or otherwise) dead in absentia. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    TomcatEnthusiast1986 (talk) 00:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - A person can be declared dead in abenstia. Animals... not so much. Most ducks live between 5 to 10 years. Did he die a natural death? Or did he just go from the university to live somewhere else? No one really knows. I have no problem supporting death in abenstia cases for RD where the person has been declared legally dead through the court system. However, this is a wild duck. The university has no actual legal authority to declare the duck dead in absentia. Canuck89 (Gab with me) or visit my user page 03:47, May 12, 2023 (UTC)
    • Wait. While it saddens me to hear that Long Boi is no longer at York, we need to wait for a more reliable confirmation of death. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I will note that if this duck is confirmed to have died, that it would warrant an RD, in light of the relevant community consensus. My issue is mainly with the quality of sourcing in support of the claim. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:06, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. It's a duck. A duck. Sandstein 08:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      WP:ITNRD. Anarchyte (talk) 11:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      That's a bit disrespectful to the duck. Ollieisanerd (talkcontribs) 20:07, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Reliable sources are reporting the duck is presumed dead. --Mika1h (talk) 10:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose – it's a duck! Any excuse to post a duck. I've read the rules and based of that his death (/ non-death) shouldn't be posted, but given the plethora of duck-haters above I was mightily close to issuing a support. Alternatively, ignore the rules and post it anyway, because it will certainly draw interested clicks. J947edits 11:50, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait Not yet confirmed, and as this is a wild animal, a death in absentia is likely not sufficient. Curbon7 (talk) 11:53, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      any person, animal or organism, so no issue with posting if it is confirmed dead. Curbon7 (talk) 11:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - When
      overseen
      by a zoologist or a breeder, who can provide bona fide independent confirmation that the animal has died. It was never designed for these odd and unique instances in which a wild, untracked animal gains popularity. By nature of their being wild and out of captivity, it becomes difficult to track their status, whether they die of natural causes, migrate, get eaten, etc..
    Understanding that
    WP:IAR due to the oddness of it. That all being said, I'm sticking to my oppose !vote, because all things being equal, the litany of factors I've outlined previously make this not a suitable candidate for the Main Page. --WaltClipper -(talk) 12:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @
    WP:ITNRD. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • The world does not record and track the entries that flow through the RD ticker; it barely notices them. And if the duck reappears, this would generate more news in which the focus would be on the happiness of the students and people of York. The idea that Wikipedia would be at significant risk is indeed quite imaginary. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:58, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      One wonders if individual Wikipedia entries on any page anywhere make a difference. Analytics on Wikimedia Statistics show an upward trend; compare April 2016, which had just under 20B views, to April 2023 which has close to 24B. According to Semrush, 72.23% of hits originate from Google searches. In the grand scheme of things, does anything we do here at ITN have any effect? See also Discourses of Epictetus. Also, "The world is a vampire..." WaltClipper -(talk) 16:21, 13 May 2023 (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.

    May 10

    Armed conflicts and attacks

    Disasters and accidents

    International relations

    Law and crime


    (Posted) RD: Ed Flanagan

    Article: Ed Flanagan (American football) (talk · history · tag)
    Recent deaths nomination (Post)
    News source(s): Altoona Mirror
    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 football offensive lineman. Four-time Pro Bowler. —Bagumba (talk) 08:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

    ]

    RD: Ian Hacking

    Article: Ian Hacking (talk · history · tag)
    Recent deaths nomination (Post)
    News source(s): [33]
    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: Canadian philosopher, 87. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 10:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

    ]

    Djerba shooting

    Nominator's comments: A local guard committed a mass shooting in Tunisia, causing 15 casualties (including himself). - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 23:24, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Pinging @Jayron32 @Kicking222 @Fakescientist8000 per @Mooonswimmer. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 11:32, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - I kind of feel like mass shootings are at the point now where it needs to be super significant to be posted. As people have mentioned before, there are hundreds of public shootings in the US alone. Even though Tunisia isn't well known for such events, six deaths isn't really at the level where it's distinct from every other such shooting. This topic (mass shootings) should potentially be discussed in general for ITN significance. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:55, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Arrest of Imran Khan

    Proposed image
    Article: Arrest of Imran Khan (talk · history · tag)
    Blurb: ​ Former Pakistani prime minister, Imran Khan (pictured), is arrested on corruption charges, sparking nationwide protests. (Post)
    Alternative blurb: Nationwide protests erupt in Pakistan following the arrest of former prime minister Imran Khan.
    News source(s): BBC, CNN, The Guardian
    Credits:

      Hamza Ali Shah  Talk 20:31, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Strong support - regardless of the "guideline" that supposedly states that we don't post arrests (which as @
    WP:NEVENTS), this is a absolutely historic moment. The resulting protests and political ramifications alone make this blurb worthy even if he is not convicted. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 23:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Support — Solely because of the protests. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Theoretically support The large & deadly protests caused by the arrest make this ITN-worthy. However, the quality of the article about the protests isn’t good enough (the article about the arrest is good enough to post). I prefer the original blurb b/c the arrest caused the protests. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added and Support Altblurb. The protests should be the driving factor if this nom passes, so I added an altblurb that focuses more on them. Also, I may or may not have done an opposie and caused an edit conflict, so if I ate someone's comment I'm sorry about that. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per ElijahPepe. Banedon (talk) 04:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • support - and the idea that something is "merely an arrest" and so "not ITN worthy" is based on nothing but ones own imagination. Widely covered, significant impact. nableezy - 05:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support: Not just an arrest, but the end of a long story arc and a trigger for unrest in Pakistan.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 05:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Support for alt blurb per all above. --Saqib (talk) 07:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ongoing There have been a series of incidents since Khan was deposed in April of last year. The arrest attempts and related protests go back to March. There's more to come, I suppose. This sort of running battle between the government and opposition seems commmon and my impression is that it's politics as usual. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Leaning Support for alt-blurb The hook should be the protests to not tread into BLPVIO (as also the protests are where the notability lies here). Also agree with Abc that the potpourri of articles needs to be cut down and streamlined. Not ouright supporting this as the onoing nom shows that the article lacks quality. Gotitbro (talk) 08:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong support—A very consequential arrest in multiple respects. I also personally prefer the original blurb over the alternate proposed by DarkSide830; I believe the arrest itself is a notable event, being that it sparked the protests that followed, and ought to be highlighted. Kurtis (talk) 08:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. Protests, Internet blackout.
    talk) 09:19, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Support Alt blurb. The protests are important, arrest may not be. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak oppose on quality; would rather see an article with a cohesive narrative; currently it's written as a rather disjointed timeline. Would support if someone took it on themselves to do something to make that better. --Jayron32 11:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose on quality - support alt if article was tidied up. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:15, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Having three separate articles on this (the linked one, Imran Khan's own article, and the protest article) seems overkill. The key part of the arrest is only a paragraph long, so that makes a lot of fluff in this article. Obviously, Khan and the protests are linked, but I don't see the need for the arrest article at this time (using the protest article to explain how the arrest kicked those off). Presumably, Khan will see a trial (fair or not) and that would be reason to have a whole article dedicated to that event. --Masem (t) 12:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose on quality. Alex-h (talk) 14:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Note that the story has moved on - BBC "Pakistan's Supreme Court has ruled that former prime minister Imran Khan's dramatic arrest on corruption charges this week was illegal. The court ordered Mr Khan's immediate release." Turini2 (talk) 17:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support We posted Trump's indictment in a country of similar population, so I feel this is a no-brainer unless one is biased. Perhaps more notable, given how well known Khan was known internationally since the 1970s, long before Trump was known outside his own country. Nfitz (talk) 18:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I think there is clear consensus on both points that 1) the significance is there and 2) the quality is not. GreatCaesarsGhost 20:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support alt blurb and propose adding ‘and other leaders of his party’ to the end of ‘Nationwide protests erupt in Pakistan following the arrest of former prime minister Imran Khan’ as SM Qureshi, Shireen Mazari, Fawad Ch, Asad Umer have all been arrested (abducted really as there were no arrest warrants) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.248.15.100 (talk) 23:05, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: The article has undergone significant improvements, and it is now time to promptly post it without any further delays. --Saqib (talk) 09:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support alt blurb The protests are what make the event especially ITN-worthy. Chaotic Enby (talk) 06:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Closed) 2023 Pakistani protests

    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: 2023 Pakistani protests (talk · history · tag)
    Ongoing item nomination (Post)
    Credits:
    Nominator's comments: Major national unrest. Pg 6475 TM 12:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose The ITN/ongoing criteria states "
      In order to be posted to ongoing, the article needs to be regularly updated with new, pertinent information." The three most recent updates are March 19, April 25, and May 9. Information trickling into the article at a rate of one update per month is not "regularly updated". Several times a week would be the level I would expect, not only once per month. --Jayron32 13:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      Agree, might have to wait for sometime to see whether the event is worthy enough. Thanks for the enlightenment. Pg 6475 TM 14:31, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose per Jayron32, but the article is also sub-standard, not really making it clear what the protests are about and in parts who is actually protesting. Black Kite (talk) 13:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose per above it is too early to consider that the second wave of protests is sufficiently noticeable. Protests, per se, are not always ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:55, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose and wait the situation has the potential of becoming a civil war, but we're not there yet. Let's see if the situation develops any further. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Article is not being updated regularly, and, just because some protest is happening, doesn't mean it's ITN-worthy. We've already got like 3 protests in the past month. Editor 5426387 (talk) 16:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Article last time I checked isn't great, and updates are not consistent. I do think that this unrest is decently notable, as protests cause by the arrest of a former state leader and leading to riots, but article is plain bad with no consistent updates either way. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 17:24, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose adding this to ongoing due to the lack of updates. However, the arrest of Imran Khan may be blurbable. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose per Jayron. Literally only three listed days in the last three months. The Kip (talk) 18:51, 10 May 2023 (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: Wilferd Madelung

    Article: Wilferd Madelung (talk · history · tag)
    Recent deaths nomination (Post)
    News source(s): IQNA
    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: German-American Islamic scholar; Laudian Professor of Arabic at Oxford. On the shorter end, but may be sufficient. Curbon7 (talk) 12:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

    ]

    Support: Absolutely huge figure in Middle Eastern Studies. Sad news indeed. What a loss.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 17:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Only quality is assessed for RD nominations. --Jayron32 12:23, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support: Yes He is a renowned scholar in Middle Eastern Studies.--Seyyed(t-c) 17:24, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Only quality is assessed for RD nominations. --Jayron32 12:23, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Closed) E. Jean Carroll vs. Donald J. Trump

    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: 
    jury trial in New York, former U.S. president Donald Trump is found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll. (Post)
    News source(s): The Guardian, New York Times

    Credits:

    Article updated
    Nominator's comments: I know that ITN doesn't like looking like a news ticker for Trump's antics, but the outcome of this civil trial is front-page news worldwide, and the article is quite good and has been updated.  Sandstein 08:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support: It's a significant legal update that's a potential game-changer for US politics, with prospectively global political ramifications. It's naturally exhibited a decent news spike and diverse global coverage. Article quality is perfectly fine.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 08:49, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Oppose Ignoring the fact that this is Trump we talking about, celebrity gossip isn't really ITN's thing. Civil judgements of any kind aren't really noteworthy, because the ramifications aren't felt by anyone not listed as a defendant or plaintiff in the judgement. ✨  4 🧚‍♂am
    KING  09:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    But why would we ignore that? Trump is the black hole at the swirling center of US politics.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 10:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Well, that's your view; but we usually follow the judgment of reliable sources, and they think it's big news, judging by their front pages, at least much more so than the snooker championships or horse races we blurb out of some reflex. Sandstein 10:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Meh Is it front page news around the world? Most certainly. Is it likely to be enduring or massively significant? That I'm less convinced by; after all, the vast majority of the people considering voting for Trump aren't going to be put off by this, especially as they're probably credulous enough to believe him when he says it's made up. Weak support. Black Kite (talk) 11:05, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I think there's a swath of people strongly put off by sex abuse that don't really care about the intricacies of say, exorbitant business tax fraud. I support this being included on the main page because it's a subtle game changer. UpdateNerd (talk) 11:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Is it though (a game changer) when it comes to a legal case? It doesnt raise or alter any points of law so its not a defining case in that way. The law that allowed it to be brought (the change in statute on civil cases in NYC) has already resulted in other cases as far as I am aware, so this isnt the first. Isnt there another Trump case that hinges on if its ok to sue the ex-president? That one at least might set some precedent. Only in death does duty end (talk) 11:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Whether or not it is a "game changer" or of lasting significance in any respect is speculation. Like @Black Kite, I suspect that it is not. But that does not matter. The purpose of ITN is that people can look up good articles about things that are currently big in the news. Well, this is big in the news, and the article is good. Everything else, in my view, is secondary. Sandstein 11:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Donald Trump is slated to be the frontrunner when the Republican primaries for the 2024 election start. He's the undisputed leader of the party at this point. It doesn't matter what the outcomes of the civil cases are, when you've already created a narrative that everyone is out to tear you down and your constituents believe it. WaltClipper -(talk) 13:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per Sandsteins arguments Josey Wales Parley 12:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose This was a civil trial, the period when criminal charges could have been brought forward having expired. The other trials/cases are all criminal trials and thus will have much more significant impact than this one. --Masem (t) 12:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @
      Iskandar323 (talk) 17:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      There are secondary issues beyond quality that still must be considered, such as the fact we gave rarely posted civil trial results but have posted criminal trial ones. We are not a news ticker and have further standards that keep us running a newsticker on the Main Page. Masem (t) 19:01, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Big deal... it's not like he's going to prison or anything like that. He forks over money and it's over.
    NoahTalk 12:27, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose A civil judgement. One that may or may not make an impact on his electability should he run again. Unlikely given the weighty revelations before he was elected in 2017. CoatCheck (talk) 12:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose
    D (Depth) - There's a fair amount of coverage nationally, as well as in the BBC, but this story is not being internationally covered. This is likely because this is a civil case and not a criminal trial.
    I (Impact) - This really impacts only the defendant and the plaintiff. Public opinion towards Donald Trump would likely not shift as a result of these proceedings. No one else is directly affected.
    C (Consequences) - Donald Trump takes a relatively small financial hit, one that he can easily appeal, as the gears of the civil legal system slowly and painfully grind through the process.
    E (Encyclopedic) - There is a standalone article, which has been significantly updated as a result of this trial's outcome.
    I can't find myself supporting this item due to the general lack of importance, even if it does have a Wikipedia article to its name.--WaltClipper -(talk) 13:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment ... so, this seems like another example of a well updated page that people are voting against despite objective levels of global coverage. So, the entire global news circuit thinks this is news, and the article has been updated, but we're not going to post it at "in the news" because editors think that their own editorial opinion about what is relevant is more important than that of professional journalism. This is basically
    Iskandar323 (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    The answer is primarily
    Trump's indictment will not ban him from running for president. There has been a certain media circus around him, giving a false impression of notability, so we have to exercise editorial judgement in that particular area. I'd support posting everything that results in some meaningful historical impact on Trump, but this is not the case. Brandmeistertalk 17:26, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    If there are questions about its enduring notability, then
    WP:FAILN requires that it be merged into another article or nominated for deletion. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I mean, maybe? I've been looking all over to see what notability guidelines we have around civil cases, and we don't seem to have one (or really for legal cases at all really). However, it's not a "we don't post at ITN, therefore we delete" deal. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 17:55, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The notability guideline is
    WP:GNG. If anybody legitimately thinks that this trial hasn't gotten significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subjects, then I don't know what we're doing here. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    WP:FAILN provides instructions on how to proceed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    It is not a settlement; it is a verdict. It is not out of court; he has been tried and found liable by a jury of his peers. The former president of the United States, not a random celebrity, has essentially been found guilty of sexual abuse. This is not a normal event; it is not a routine event; this rather seems like it should be obvious, but it's a pretty exceptional event. A former or sitting president hasn't been dragged through the mud like this since Nixon or Clinton.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 18:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    We have struggled with ITN standards for some time, but as I keep having to say, frequency of coverage is an easy bar to clear in a general sense. Most large media outlets cover most events. Is this event notable beyond many of them? Yes, but if we posted everything that was in the news we would be adding probably a dozen articles a day. Is coverage worth noting? Yes. Is article quality worth noting? Yes. However, that is hardly some automatic bar for ITN inclusion. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Please remind me when was the last we posted a civil case hereon ITN between individuals (we did not post Depp v. Heard). The only ITN worthy cases of Trump or other heads/former heads would be convictions, this is not it. Should not have posted his indictment either which opened the floodgate we see here. Gotitbro (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      This isn't Hollywood crap; it's a former US president - you know, the guy elected every four years who essentially commands global geopolitics.
      Iskandar323 (talk) 18:15, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      “commands global geopolitics”. That was a nice dad joke. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Believe the last civil case we posted was actually Dominion v Fox a few weeks back, but that was one of the largest settlements of all time. The Kip (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose — Per Masem. ITN doesn't stand for "In Trump news". elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose – A billionaire paying US$5 million isn't super notable, and ITN does not document all of Trump's legal troubles. DecafPotato (talk) 20:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong Oppose. ITN is not "Trump In the News". Not everything pertaining to him must be on ITN. This is not Trump's biggest roadblock to re-election, and even postulating on the matter is CRYSTAL. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose very minor, with no apparent long-term consequences. Banedon (talk) 04:26, 11 May 2023 (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.

    Ongoing: Manipur violence

    Nominator's comments: The ethnic violence in Manipur is an ongoing event, with tens of thousands of people displaced. The updates are still coming, though slower due to an internet blackout till 13 May. It is trending comparably with other Ongoing items. 

    Iskandar323 (talk) 06:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Comment: Further to the above, this is still very much an ongoing situation. A policeman was killed, five more injured and a soldier stabbed today, alongside several abductions of civilians. That's what is leaking out with an internet blackout.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 10:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    May 9

    Armed conflicts and attacks

    International relations

    Law and crime


    (Posted) RD: Günter Wewel

    Article: Günter Wewel (talk · history · tag)
    Recent deaths nomination (Post)
    News source(s): FAZ as all major German papers per dpa
    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
    Dortmund Opera and in Europe, then for almost two decades as a popular television presenter, introducing regions and their culture, especially songs, filmed in the regions, which was then a first on German TV. - The article was there, even referenced! I added detail about recordings. 2 nice yt to listen to, meeting an extremely pleasant person, in one pretending to be cruel ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    (Posted) RD: Heather Armstrong (Dooce)

    Article: Heather Armstrong (talk · history · tag)
    Recent deaths nomination (Post)
    News source(s): Associated Press
    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 blogger. It seems she was better known by her username Dooce, so I'm not sure what's the most appropriate name to use. Johndavies837 (talk) 20:05, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

    ]

    RD: Arman Soldin

    Article: Arman Soldin (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: French journalist killed in Bakhmut. A couple of CN tags, but otherwise looks good. Curbon7 (talk) 12:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply

    ]

    RD: Edward Cullen

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose for now, pending improvements to the article's sourcing. The "Early life and education" subsection has only a single citation at the very end, and it does not verify either the assertion to which it has been added, nor anything else in the previous two paragraphs. The next section, "Ordination and ministry", could also use a couple more—for instance, at the end of the first sentence:
      Template:Tq Finally, under "Retirement and legacy", there is a contentious assertion being made about his actions within the Diocese of Allentown, but the citation provided does not adequately verify this claim. I'll try to find some new references to add to the article. Hopefully we can address the sourcing issues soon enough for it to approved for an RD listing. Kurtis (talk) 15:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      And that's why source spot checks are important! Thanks. Curbon7 (talk) 15:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I've replaced that wrong link in the cite template. The sourcing was apparently meant for info in the wikibio of Cullen's successor. --PFHLai (talk) 22:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (posted to RD): Denny Crum

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) RD: David Miranda

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support pending fixes Heartbreaking. Article looks fine for the most part, except the orange tags on the controversies section. The text in that section doesn't seem unreasonable to me on a cursory read, so probably it'd be okay to fold that into the career section and just drop the "controversies" heading. However, I'll defer to someone who knows more about these allegations and can read Portuguese sources. Davey2116 (talk) 04:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Looks ready. Thriley (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support, Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 15:55, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support I did some reorganization on the article and expanded the part about his detention and subsequent court rulings (idk if that's enough for credit or not). There's one comment on the talk page about unrelated content about Bolsonaro's sons, which I've addressed too. Legoktm (talk) 22:38, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • PostedBagumba (talk) 09:09, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Terrence Hardiman

    Template:ITN candidate

    May 8

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 8
    Template:Cob


    (posted to RD): Joe Kapp

    Template:ITN candidate

    RD: Rita Lee

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Article has an orange tag that hasn't been fixed in nearly 10 years. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 22:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - still unready. Anarchyte (talk) 12:29, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Ready) RD: Kemal Derviş

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Comment the article is great, and there are a lot sources; however there's a lot of key sentences that need to be sourced (for example: that he was key in Turkey's EU accession talks, that he had made decisions regarding the lira etc.). Maybe the sources are all there but they need to placed in the correct sentences. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak oppose. It's close, but the sourcing isn't quite there. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Template:Ping would you mind taking a second peek at this? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    Weak support: Fairly Sound. Has some loosely cited stretches on some mundane WB details.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 15:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    (Posted) RD: Marc Lalonde

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Four citations, 2 of which are at the end for his death and the other two for his awards. Needs sourcing work ASAP. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 23:44, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Template:Ping Can you please put CN tags where they are needed? It would help me so much with sourcing. Thanks! Rushtheeditor (talk) 20:38, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      Template:Ping There should be at a minimum one citation at the end of each paragraph. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      Thanks! Rushtheeditor (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Finished citing! Rushtheeditor (talk) 23:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support I'd get rid of the redlink - but an obvious support. A very well known cabinet minister in his time - for over a decade, including two of the biggest portfolios (Justice and Finance); perhaps I'm one of the few here to remember him though. I even almost bumped into him once when Turner was PM; while being a tourist in the Centre Block, he saw the tour coming and turned around and went back up the stairs! Nfitz (talk) 03:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support The article is OK for a notable person. Alex-h (talk) 15:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose One-sentence lead, needs a tad bit more overview.—Bagumba (talk) 08:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Tad more was added.—Bagumba (talk) 11:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak support an article with this much of the body must be having a better lede. Please add some more summarised stuff in the lede. ─
      (talk) 14:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • PostedBagumba (talk) 11:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Yaseen Akhtar Misbahi

    Template:ITN candidate

    May 7

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 7
    Template:Cob


    Brownsville crash

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Conditional support this seems to be a hate-motivated attack. Support posting if it turns out to be intentional. 142.186.19.181 (talk) 10:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose It happened several days ago and the article is still only a stub. Schwede66 12:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Authorities are saying they don't even know if it's a hate-related attack. There are suggestions he was drunk, and has history of drunk driving. Nfitz (talk) 18:42, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I don't really see why the time of the event is relevant for its posting: it's far from being stale, as the latest event in the front page (King Charles III's and Queen Camilla's coronation) took place the day before, on 6 May. The article currently is a Start class, and its quality should be good enough for posting. --NoonIcarus (talk) 22:55, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Not significant for ITN, and the article is still only a stub, with few details. Natg 19 (talk) 20:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Patrick J. McGrath

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support. Sourcing isn't perfect, but it's not enough of an issue to oppose. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I've added two cn tags. Once the two citations get added, I'll change my vote to support. --Vacant0 (talk) 09:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Soňa Červená

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Comment: I added a more serious ref instead of Operissimo (which is a copy), and referenced those awards, adding a few others. We have now obits in English (AP). I think it's good enough, what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. It could afford to be better organized, but it's good enough in terms of length and referencing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • PostedBagumba (talk) 09:14, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Palmirinha Onofre

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Article appears to be well-cited and holistic enough for our purposes. AGF on the Pt language sources. Curbon7 (talk) 11:33, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Per user above. --Vacant0 (talk) 09:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted Stephen 23:51, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Grace Bumbry

    Template:ITN candidate

    Gigantic reputation amongst opera fans. Very major death. MattiaBattistini (talk) 18:52, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. Poor sourcing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: I got rid of many citation tags today, but won't be able to do more today. Please check again tomorrow, or whenever someone else has cleared the rest. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I've added quite a few sources since making this nomination, but need to take a break. Hopefully some others can chip in, otherwise I'll resume in a couple hours. Funcrunch (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Please look again, User:Thebiguglyalien and all. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ready. It was sufficient earlier, too.Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Much improved since it was first nominated. Well done to all. Cielquiparle (talk) 15:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • PostedBagumba (talk) 08:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Seán Keane (fiddler)

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) RD: Larry Mahan

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support - Article looks pretty good to me. Decently sized, good citations, good overview of subject's life. Mahan won numerous awards over his decades-long career and was a world champion. That Coptic Guyping me! (talk) (contribs) 03:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - I filled in a couple missing refs, and it looks ready. Jusdafax (talk) 05:14, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The Discogs source cited is unreliable (
      WP:RSDISCOGS)—Bagumba (talk) 07:21, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    I have removed the challenged source, the track listings and your tag, and added additional sourced material including his modest comments regarding his music. Jusdafax (talk) 08:33, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Viktor Djalilov

    Template:ITN candidate

    Syria's reinstatement to the Arab League

    Template:ITN candidate

    Oppose - Bolded article is in really poor condition and would need to be improved before posting. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose per Onegreatjoke; article has an orange tag + 2 CN tags. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 19:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I support posting this one in theory, once the issues above are resolved. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 04:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (NEEDS DECISION) Peruvian gold mine fire

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support once expanded Article is three lines at this point, but 27 deaths is notable enough for ITN inclusion. Infinity (talk - contributions) 18:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:Ping I expanded it, but I'm not sure if I did enough to make it ready for ITN. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 09:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Template:Ping I expanded it, but I'm not sure if I did enough to make it ready for ITN. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 09:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Support: High/unusual death toll for an industrial accident in the 21st century + Peru's worst since 2000. Article quality now appears to be sufficient, though it could do with more information on the government/public's response to the incident.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 08:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Support It's notable enough for ITN & the article quality seems like it's good enough. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:39, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Article quality is still not good enough for the Main Page. Needs work asap. Side note, should we really be using the term 'eliminated' to describe the deaths of dozens of people? Cheers! Fakescientist8000 16:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    New PM in Slovakia

    Template:ITN candidate

    Conditional support - article is currently a stub. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 17:29, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not Ready per above. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Article quality is not up to par for ITN. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 19:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose — I have expanded the article significantly, but it'll likely need a Slovakian speaker to expand it further. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose for now. There's basically no information on his political career or how he came to be designated the next prime minister. It talks some about some random jobs he's held throughout his career, but there's no lead-up to the designation as prime minister, it reads like he was randomly plucked out of the blue. What was he doing in the government that led to him being a candidate? How did the process of selecting him go? It needs a LOT of work to be main page ready. --Jayron32 18:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - another confusing thing is that Prime Minister of Slovakia still lists Eduard Heger. --RockstoneSend me a message! 02:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Per the article, "Ódor will replace him, effective 15 May, according to President Zuzana Čaputová". DecafPotato (talk) 19:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Doesn't that mean that we should wait until May 15, or whenever he actually becomes prime minister? Mucube (talkcontribs) 03:58, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait if the article says that he is scheduled to become PM on May 15, we should be waiting until then. Plus the article is in bad condition, compared to other world leader articles. Mucube (talkcontribs) 04:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait The article has been expanded, though this should be re-nominated when he takes office tomorrow. --Vacant0 (talk) 09:09, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Vida Blue

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Article currently has a work in progress tag but looks to be in decent shape as is. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Looks good to go. Jusdafax (talk) 23:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Article quality is good, well cited and long enough. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 23:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • PostedBagumba (talk) 03:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Closed) 2023 Allen Texas outlet mall shooting

    Template:Atop
    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose routine event, no expectations of long-term consequences. That time of the week again in the States, I suppose. Juxlos (talk) 08:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose routine event. Not even the first mass shooting in Texas this week. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - we'd post this if it happened elsewhere. --RockstoneSend me a message! 09:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I agree, we'd post it if it didn't happen in a country which has had 196 mass shootings already in 2023. And it's only May. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 09:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      We aren't discussing posting the other mass shootings. We are discussing posting this one. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 10:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I think the point
      Template:U is making is that there is nothing specifically exceptional about this event that justifies it being on the main page. This event is not as globally newsworthy as, say, the Serbia attacks because the world expects this to happen weekly. Portal:Current events is filled with tons of murders/deaths every week that include both more people (e.g. 2023 Africa floods) that we don't mention in ITN. — Ixtal ( T / C ) Non nobis solum. 10:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • If a bomb by far-right terrorists detonated in the middle of New York City, killing 3 people, it would be headline news. If a bomb by Taliban (before 2021, anyway) detonated in the middle of a busy market in Kabul, killing 10 people, that's not going to pass the stub mark. Fact of the matter is where things happen matter a lot, and mass shootings are page 3 news in the US unless a couple dozen kids are killed. Juxlos (talk) 10:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      And even then. There's a racial/socioeconomic angle to it too, where shootings in certain localities are downplayed, and those in affluent areas are more likely to receive coverage. There is a nationwide as well as a worldwide numbing to these sorts of events. WaltClipper -(talk) 13:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose We know the drill, with all the exact same noms on ITN this year alone. Nominators should impose a moratorium before they rush to propose these, nothing here sets this shooting apart as of now. Gotitbro (talk) 10:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose routine in the USA. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:39, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. Another day, another American spree killing. Ericoides (talk) 12:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - It's true that a good many people in the community are impacted and hurt by this. Unfortunately, the long-term consequences of such a shooting are - by their idiosyncratic nature of being in the U.S. - basically nil. The coverage will also inevitably fade away as has been the case with all stories of this type, with no follow-up of any kind from state or federal government. I'd be open to the idea of a moratorium but that's not something ITN really does per se, because every story can be different in its own way regardless of the body count. But in this specific instance, there aren't any unusual characteristics that set this story apart. --WaltClipper -(talk) 13:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak Oppose This was a close a call. Unfortunately mass shootings in the US are so common that I have found it necessary to consider some, admittedly arbitrary, criteria to look for, lest we turn ITN into an endless catalogue of American mass murder. Absent evidence of terrorism or a hate crime type motive I typically will support if the death toll is in the double digits. While not generally a fan of WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, the situation in the US is unique in the developed world and some sort of criteria needs to be applied. For good or ill, this is mine. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Normal in the United States. List of mass shootings in the United States in 2023 gives 198 already. What would be news is if people in the US could go 1 day without shooting each other... 31.21.114.36 (talk) 13:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Abot

    (Posted) 2023 La Vuelta Femenina

    Template:ITN candidate

    Writing the other stage reports at present, will be updated soon. Tables and lead of article is up to date. Turini2 (talk) 13:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Now fixed, article fully updated and cited. Turini2 (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Good prose update, the Vuelta is a major sporting event. Recommend bold-typing the event name in the blurb. Kingsif (talk) 23:00, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Article is well-written and well-cited. The Kip (talk) 02:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support It sounds like this an important cycling event & the article's in good shape. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:13, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Article should be held up as an example of how sports event articles should be written. There's excellent, detailed, and well-referenced prose for every part of the event, just great. We should be proud to direct readers to the article. --Jayron32 13:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. SpencerT•C 02:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - not suggesting we pull this, but I'm somewhat surprised it's been posted.
      WP:ITNR mentions only the Tour de France, with an expected story count of 1. Now I could clearly see a case for adding Tour de France Femmes to that list, but we don't routinely post the men's Vuelta or Giro d'Italia, and if we were to post all those for both men and women we'd end up with six cycling stories a year rather than one. Which might be excessive when compared to other sports, based on proportional worldwide interest and coverage. Something to think about anyway. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      ITNR doesn’t limit events that can be posted, only those that don’t need a discussion on notability. This event had unanimous support for posting. Stephen 10:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      It’s an exceptionally well-written sports article of some importance. Hence I lend my support after the fact. Schwede66 20:12, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Maybe people are realizing the value of fresh, quality content. Or just wanted a different picture up. —Bagumba (talk) 16:59, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    May 6

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 6
    Template:Cob


    (Posted) RD: Frank Kozik

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Still a couple of {cn} tags. --PFHLai (talk) 11:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support: I've removed the offending sentences. Otherwise all sourced and seems perfectly viable.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 15:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    RD: Derek Keating

    Template:ITN candidate

    Template:U, I've expanded the section to elaborate on Keating becoming TD in 2011! Hope this helps! Tails Wx 22:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Thank you for the new paragraph,
    Template:U had found to be too short earlier. Hope this helps. --PFHLai (talk) 08:29, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    (Posted) RD: Paulus Moa

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support. Long enough, well sourced, and has info about death. Good work on this article with such a quick turn around. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 10:15, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Menahem Pressler

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) RD: Newton N. Minow

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) 149th Kentucky Derby

    Template:ITN candidate

    RD: Habib Chaab

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Article is currently a stub. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose, Article needs more information. Alex-h (talk) 14:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • A stub with only 136 words of prose. Please expand it. --PFHLai (talk) 10:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose It’s a stub. Schwede66 20:20, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Nabeesa Ummal

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Article is well cited and of good enough quality for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 02:44, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support length and quality is sufficient. Juxlos (talk) 03:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support, Article is good enough for ITN Alex-h (talk) 14:28, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • PostedBagumba (talk) 03:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) Coronation of Charles III and Camilla

    Template:Atop
    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose. We already posted Charles ascension as King, we shouldn't post his coronation as well - similar to how we posted Biden's election as President, but we didn't post his inauguration. BilledMammal (talk) 05:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Charles III already started serving as the De Facto King since September, we're just posting old news. Editor 5426387 (talk) 05:54, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - I was wondering if someone was going to nominate this. We don't post inaugurations, and that's when the power actually is transferred. This is actually less than an inauguration, as the power transferred to him when he ascended to the throne. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 06:02, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • You say that "we don't post inaugurations", but there's no policy or guideline to support that. It sounds like a
      WP:LOCALCONSENSUS that can be overruled at any time. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • ...The Presidential inauguration was also in the news everywhere. --RockstoneSend me a message! 06:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I didn't see the whole weekend of constant coverage this is poised to get, nor the dedicated sections to news about the coronation on websites like Reuters and BBC – there's a difference between being in the international news (which for the inauguration, assuming you're talking about Biden's, was certainly helped by January 6 in terms of coverage, and is not representative of all inaugurations) and being stuck to the front page of international news for weeks. DecafPotato (talk) 06:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Once this is done, I highly doubt this will be in the international news at all. I've no idea what it's like elsewhere, but here in the US, it wasn't front page news at all (until now, but that's because it's actually happening). --RockstoneSend me a message! 06:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Of course it hasn't been in the news in the US. You've not had a monarch since 1776! Mjroots (talk) 06:45, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Neutral On one end, it is likely going to be (at least in the Anglosphere) one of the biggest events of the year. On the other hand, it is a relic of the past, the last hurrah of a dying (or dead) empire. Curbon7 (talk) 06:06, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      There is no indication that this is a "last hurrah" for the British monarchy...that seems like
      WP:CRYSTALBALL material. DecafPotato (talk) 06:11, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      Respectfully, you missed my point. The monarchy is probably fine anyways. Curbon7 (talk) 20:23, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Based on what you've written here it sounds like a support would be in order. "One of the biggest events of the year for the entire anglosphere" demonstrates significance, "a last hurrah" (if it were true, which is impossible to say) demonstrates lasting impact. Flyingfishee (talk) 06:59, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I'm finding the oppose arguments much more convincing than the support arguments, particularly Template:Tqq and that it's Template:Tqq with no manifested significance. Curbon7 (talk) 20:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Weak support I've been mulling this over, and I suppose the article being high-quality is what pushes this over the edge for me. I think comparisons to presidential inaugurations are in-good-faith, but I think there is a difference in time-scale, and the "first in seventy years" schick works for me. I will be opposing William's whenever that comes, but that's beyond the point. Curbon7 (talk) 21:57, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support as this is obviously very significant, and front page news around the world. Those opposing this should seriously considering whether any biases or pre-disposed opinions they might have are obscuring their view of what counts as ITN. That being said it doesn't happen for a few hours so I think it would be best to wait until the coronation actually happens before posting. Flyingfishee (talk) 06:50, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • We've already established that we don't post inaugurations, even though they also generate headline news. I don't see how a coronation that is nothing but a formality and actually has no effect in law (as he has been king since September!) is any different. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 07:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Why do we post sporting events then if they don't have any effect in law and instead are just spectacles watched by millions? Flyingfishee (talk) 21:16, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support This is obviously today's big story – it is, for example, already the lead article in the NYT, which has more articles about it too. The other sections of the main page are running relevant items and so, if ITN snubs the event, it will mainly make this section look incompetent and irrelevant. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:56, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Why is Wikipedia UKPedia? -- RockstoneSend me a message! 08:44, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Because it has the good taste not to feature yet another predictable spree killing? Ericoides (talk) 16:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The
      NYT is an American newspaper, not a UK one. On a personal note, I walked around the scene yesterday and then wound up with beer in St Stephen's Tavern. We had a pleasant chat with some other patrons including a lady from the Philippines, who was pleased to have seen her President there, and a party of ladies from Long Island who had made a special trip. It generally seemed to be a good-natured international event. For contrast, see the recent elections which got plenty of news coverage but are more parochial. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:29, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      ITN is not a news ticker. We do not expect to mimic what newspapers may cover, we don't care if something is a front page story, or the like. Masem (t) 13:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. The Biden parallel is quite apt. Just like a US presidential inauguration, this is big headline news, but at present we are not regarded as a news ticker. We posted Charles's accession to the throne, and this event just follows on from that.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:04, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      This is not a "news ticker" type event, it has not been seen for 70 years. It's really not comparable to a US presidential inauguration, which happens on a routine cycle. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:37, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. In the news, article is of sufficient quality. Event is going to be watched around the world and the idea that it shouldn't be on the front page because US inaugurations are somehow comparable is asinine and just comes across as sour grapes. The coronation of the head of state for multiple countries internationally is obviously newsworthy and of interest to millions. Even if just purely a ceremonial event. (Hint, the entire monarchy is a ceremonial series of events. It's a ceremonial position.) Only in death does duty end (talk) 07:52, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support mostly because this hasn't happened for a very long period of time, and it's also widely covered in the news and broadcast everywhere. For those comparing it with presidential inaugurations, note that the last time this happened was 70 years ago (almost like the Halley's Comet), when many of us were not even born, whereas presidential inaugurations typically happen every 4-7 years. I'd perhaps oppose this in case monarchs changed fairly frequently and coronations were commonplace (for instance, comparable to the time span between two presidential inaugurations).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Charles is 74; there is a good chance there will be another coronation before we see two more presidential inaugurations. BilledMammal (talk) 08:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      We're discussing the first coronation in 70 years, not the next one that no-one knows when will happen (see
      WP:CRYSTALBALL).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:34, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Support An event that is happening after a very long time and which is definitively in the news. And, as mentioned by Andrew, the rest of the Main Page is in on it as well - we should not rest behind. Gotitbro (talk) 08:23, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Once-in-generations event, attended by heads of states and government dignitaries from all over the world, and huge coverage by the media that have also been running ton of articles and op-eds about the monarchy since last month in anticipation of the main event. StellarHalo (talk) 08:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose per BilledMammal. Banedon (talk) 08:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - this is an historic event whether we like it or not. Definitely for ITN.BabbaQ (talk) 09:15, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - very similar to the inauguration of the US President. It's in the news, but it is merely a formal acknowledgement of a succession that we marked back when it happened. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:26, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Strong Support - definitely ITN. It's an important and historic event, first time in 70 years this has happened. It's not just a celebration in the United Kingdom, but throughout the Commonwealth. A comparison between this and a U.S. presidential inauguration just doesn't exist. Estar8806 (talk) 09:43, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Very much in the news; dedicated whole day coverage in the US for this event even though Charles isn't the monarch. Speaks volumes to how important the media perceives this event to be. NoahTalk 22:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support - even using the long-standing consensus against posting inaugurations, this is still significant as being the first coronation within the Commonwealth since 1953. Its front page news across the world. Before you ask, I'm not necessarily opposed to (nor in support of) posting the inaugurations of US presidents either. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 18:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - TFA, DYK, and TFP all have content related to the monarchy. Not posting this blurb would be incongruous with the rest of the Main Page. Edge3 (talk) 19:31, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support (as a republican): this is the coronation of the monarch of 15 countries. The news story is not that Charles III is king, which was true from the moment Elizabeth II died, but that an inordinate number of people are watching or participating in inordinately expensive pomp and circumstance, similar to the recent Platinum Jubilee (posted) or 2018 Royal Wedding (posted). — Bilorv (talk) 19:45, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Yeah, but it's all pomp and no circumstance. 2.101.142.41 (talk) 19:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - Despite my personal (negative) feelings about this event and monarchy in general, this coronation is a major international news event. Yes, Charles III has been king since the moment Elizabeth II died, but her death was the major news story then. It's now eight months later, and this is the major news story now. Also, as this is the first UK coronation in 70 years, and Wikipedia has only been in existence for a fraction of that time, I'm not sure how much precedent should apply here. Funcrunch (talk) 19:59, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support: A notable event for its rarity, since it is a once in a generation (or even once in a lifetime) event. Presidential inaugurations occur every four years, whereas the last coronation occurred 70 years ago, and there were only four in the 20th century. It is also the first coronation to include contributions from representatives of multiple faiths, and to include content in the Welsh and Gaelic languages. This is Paul (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support: Official coronation of head of state in multiple countries. Once-in-70 years event in a 1,200-year tradition. Clearly of extraordinary levels of media coverage and attention of a global nature. Naturally of strong general interest to readers.
      Iskandar323 (talk) 20:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Support Major global news event with millions of views. A public celebration of a real transfer of power. Thriley (talk) 20:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comparison with US presidential inaugurations is fatuous. They occur every four years. This is the first coronation for the UK and thirteen other countries; and the head of the Church of England, in seventy years. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:30, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Okay, but the coronation is just performative. He was king the moment his mother passed on. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 20:37, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Striking my oppose !vote to support. I'm now convinced by the above arguments that the parallel to presidential inaugurations are inaccurate. WaltClipper -(talk) 20:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Would we post any other coronation? Serious question. --
    RockstoneSend me a message! 20:56, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not a chance, if the most recent nomination is anything to go by: 2022 Zulu coronation Abcmaxx (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Was that attended by 100 heads of state and watched by 300 million people? Ericoides (talk) 21:57, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not a popularity contest though is it? "My king is better than your king" is the exact imperial mindset we are trying to avoid here. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:18, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, but the simply fact is this got far more public/media attention. Same reason why we don’t post blurbs for comparatively minor deaths/terrorist attacks/sports events/etc, but I never see a “bias!!!” uproar over those. The Kip (talk) 23:43, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Is the Zulu king a head of state with a significant amount of legal reserve powers over an elected government? --2001:8003:1C20:8C00:805A:7DC0:127C:4AB5 (talk) 00:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Arguably more than the King of Britain has. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 00:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support, I fully share the arguments of user:Funcrunch above. Alexcalamaro (talk) 21:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support, it meets notability requirements, is a recent event, it is largely cited, and it is not a stub. No valid policy-based argument has been presented to challenge its inclusion. The fact that this is controversial despite no policy argument against it shows just how out of touch ITN is with the rest of the project and
      its processes. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Support per above. Renewal6 (talk) 21:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. For those comparing this event to a presidential inaugoration, this is something that only occurs once in a generation, and hasn't happened for almost 70 years. For the record, I wouldn't object to a presidential inaugoration either. Voice of Clam (talk) 21:31, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment About time this was speedily posted now eh?
      Iskandar323 (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    I agree. It’s time to speedily post.BabbaQ (talk) 21:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support This is a historic once in a lifetime event which has recieved global news coverage. The coronation deserves to be posted. Golem08 (talk) 21:37, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      It's not once in a lifetime event is it though, plenty of people lived through the previous British coronation and given the king's age we are likely to see another too, not to mention all the other kings and queens all over the globe. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:50, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      For many people it will be, simple as that. Golem08 (talk) 21:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong Support I'm surprised it hasn't already posted. What more do we need? Class envy doesn't count either. CoatCheck (talk) 21:52, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Even if the event is mostly ceremonial, it’s undeniably in world news and not just in English-speaking countries (e.g. it is placed prominently on the websites of Bild, Yomiuri Shimbun, and Folha de S.Paulo). The Commonwealth has a population of over 2 billion people, and even the Commonwealth realms (a narrower term, those with the British monarch as head of state) over 100 million. This is an uncommon event, as others have noted. I skimmed the article and didn’t see any glaring issues. The orange NPOV box is gone. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 21:56, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Before the unfortunate soul who gets to decide whether this gets posted or not, let's not forget the uproar after the last time Wikipedia turned into Royalopedia: Talk:Main Page/Archive 205#Extreme bias on the main page Abcmaxx (talk) 22:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Was it really an uproar, though? WaltClipper -(talk) 22:02, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      DYK, FA and POTD are all coronation-related. This is some crazy imperial bootlicking. 5.151.106.0 (talk) 22:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Can't disagree with this interpretation. Wikipedia is UKPedia whenever it involves the British monarchy. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:52, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: The comments saying there is too much bias to the UK or western countries are amusing to me. I mean, this is the english language wiki and most of the largest English speaking countries are closely aligned with the UK. Does the Japanese wiki have to deal with this "oh we focus too much on Japan" argument? -- 64.136.123.133 (talk) 22:18, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Japan is the only country where Japanese is the predominant language. In terms of population, I'm pretty sure India would be country with the most English speakers, followed by perhaps US and then Nigeria. Pretty sure those countries would definitely not have strong royalist sentiments would they. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:22, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Yay, arguments over semantics. My comment was about the "western bias" argument in general. Regarding the last part of your argument, so? You could say that about anything. -- 64.136.123.133 (talk) 22:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      All of the five newspapers mentioned in the second paragraph of Newspapers published in Nigeria feature an article about the coronation on their front pages, although the level of prominence varies (probably least prominent on The Punch, while very noticeable in most of the others). Similar rule holds for The Times of India, Dainik Bhaskar, etc. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 22:43, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Funnily enough, this news item has already been posted on at least 5 of the top 10 language editions of Wikipedia on https://www.wikipedia.org/ (German, French, Russian, Spanish, Italian). Japanese Wikipedia doesn’t seem to have ITN (maybe I missed it). It has been nominated for inclusion on Chinese Wikipedia without any opposition so far. That leaves English, Persian, and Portuguese. I expect that Portuguese Wikipedia will post it eventually. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 23:13, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I wonder if anyone is accusing the Russian wiki of having a Western bias? -- 64.136.123.133 (talk) 23:18, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The fact that other wikis are posting this item just shows how well our editorial significance standard works around here, in that we don't just post items that show up in the news willy-nilly. After all, we're not a news ticker. WaltClipper -(talk) 23:34, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, that's the takeaway here. Wikipedia has better editorial standards than all other wikis and most major news outlets. Nope, it's not that there are a lot of nitpicky users who oppose based on their own biases (and yes, I've read most of the comments and 90% boil down to "I don't like it" or "it's not a big deal where I am" arguments) and if someone posted it quickly a great many tears would be shed. It's that Wikipedia has better editorial standards than the New York Times. -- 64.136.123.133 (talk) 23:41, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I think that's the biggest problem with ITN's significance standard is that it does allow editors to become armchair editors-in-chief, deciding what is and isn't important. It's one of the few areas on Wikipedia in which
      WP:IDONTLIKEIT are treated as valid arguments since the standard is by definition subjective. I do wonder if a centralized discussion is in order to see if maybe that needs changing. WaltClipper -(talk) 00:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      We have a significance standard that differs from what the media reports on because WP is not a newspaper, nor is ITN a news ticker. ITN is here to feature high-quality articles that happen to have news coverage, not the reverse of providing links to articles that make up news coverage. To achieve that, we have to avoid the systematic bias of media reporting and instead use our own opinions and past decisions to guide our selection of articles better. Masem (t) 00:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Wrong way around: ITN is there to feature news articles about topics that blatantly feature highly prominently in the news cycle and which meet a better minimum standard of up-to-date content and coherence. This topic was obviously going to in the news a mile off, and the 5 other major wikis that have already got it right, as have the other main page sections here, which have rightly ascertained that it an opportune time to promote related content. ITN is just demonstrating that out is slow to react, taking a day to post obviously ITN material, and clearly hampered by a range of
      Iskandar323 (talk) 05:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Strong support as per the reasons given above. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 22:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Front page news in a good chunk of the world. The inauguration argument is silly imo, inaugurations happen routinely every four years; this, meanwhile, is the first coronation since the last Churchill ministry. The Kip (talk) 23:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes, and the average global lifespan is around 73, so the average person around the globe who was a young child at the time of the last coronation has not lived to see this one. There was plenty speculation that Charles wouldn't either, and at 74 years he's broken the record as the oldest British monarch to ever be crowned (I haven't yet been able to ascertain if there's a global record that's higher).
      Iskandar323 (talk) 05:37, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Support - Contrary to the arguments above, U.S. presidential inaugurations are commonplace as they happen once every 4 or 8 years like clockwork. A coronation ceremony for England's monarch is not commonplace at all and this is indeed historical and deserves its place on ITN. Probably the first coronation many of us have seen, given that the last one happened 70 years ago. :That Coptic Guyping me! (talk) (contribs) 22:41, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support: An event receiving extremely high levels of international coverage. --Inops (talk) 23:49, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: I don't envy whomever is stuck deciding if there's consensus to post. I think there's clearly *not* consensus, though. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:50, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      One would have to determine however many supports/opposes are simply “I do/don’t like it” or other non-policy/quality stuff, but by my count there’s about 54 supports to 24 opposes now, so I’m not exactly sure I’d agree with your conclusion, unless the opposes have a far stronger argument. The Kip (talk) 23:59, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      And, to be frank, most of them don't, and are based upon either
      WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:21, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      Make that 55. The Kip (talk) 00:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, consensus is not determined just by vote. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have any actual arguments besides pithy rejoinders? I've seen you offer plenty of those throughout this whole nomination process but no actual substantive arguments beyond just "we're not UKpedia". WaltClipper -(talk) 00:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. We don't post inaugurations, we have never posted a coronation, and the entire process has no legal effect. We wouldn't post the coronation of any other monarch, the British are not an exception. Wikipedia is already way too pro-monarchy and biased towards the west. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 00:39, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    …you do realize you just completely proved his point, right? This entire comment reads like a combination of
    WP:IDONTLIKEIT. We’ve never posted a coronation because the British monarchy hasn’t had one since before the internet was even a mere concept (making your argument a degree of bad faith), and it’s been well-established by other editors that the comparison to a US inauguration is a poor one (to the point where WaltCip was convinced to flip his vote). The Kip (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    This is a genuine question, has there been a coronation (I'm speaking strictly coronation, not inauguration) in recent history that we could have posted here? Someone earlier talked about Saudi Arabia's King and Japan's emperor who have ascended to their respective titles in recent years, but neither even have an article related to their coronation (and as far as I'm aware, Saudi don't even have an article related to their version of a coronation overall). I'm sorry if I am sounding ignorant and am completely misinformed. But I'm just a bit confused why people bring up about we won't post a coronation because we haven't in the past, but as far as I'm aware we've never had the chance to post a coronation in the past as there were no articles to go alongside them. CaptainGalaxy 01:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Today I learned that trying to avoid systemic UK bias means I'm making an "I don't like it" argument. Got it. --RockstoneSend me a message! 01:54, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because posting one front-page news item =/= "systemic UK bias," unless your opinion is that it is, in which case it's
    WP:IDONTLIKEIT
    .
    It's now been posted anyways because it has a clear consensus to post, so this is a moot argument. The Kip (talk) 02:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not just that. It's the constant bombardment of news from the UK for the past year that we would never do for any other country. That's what makes this a form of systemic bias, and you know it to be true. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 03:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:Re the way to counter the bias you seem to think there is is to find stories in the news elsewhere, write quality articles on them and nominate them at ITNC. Mjroots (talk) 05:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I don't think it's done that at all. But that's not what this posting is about. HiLo48 (talk) 04:54, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Would someone like to do the paperwork please? Mjroots (talk) 07:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Stats It's interesting to look through the Top read 100 articles from yesterday. Charles III heads the list, which is no surprise. But the first lady was not Camilla but rather Penny Mordaunt who impressed with her sword-wielding and cape. Overall, over 50 of those 100 articles were connected with the Coronation or the Royal family and so the event dominated readership yesterday. Note that none of the other topics which ITN was blurbing made it into the Top 100 – even the previous coronation did better. Finally, a special mention for Jeffrey Hudson who performed well at #11. I'm not sure how he got into the public eye but he adds a nice Game of Thrones element to the proceedings. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reluctantly un
      consensus can change, and not as some special case for the UK. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 08:45, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      I think I share your opinion here. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 09:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The issue here is with a want for a quid pro quo with postings or the need to equate them. Each nom can be decided on its own merits (as this was) and past precedent (none exists here); the inaugration has been distinguished with this in multiple comments above and its precedent [with the last two inaugrations] stands. Let this posting not be considered a precedent/point of argument in future noms. Gotitbro (talk) 11:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Theres a bridge over the Thames I’d like to discuss for sale with you at my user talk. nableezy - 11:37, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Abot

    May 5

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 5
    Template:Cob


    (Posted) RD: Chris Strachwitz

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Article is 99 percent, except for one [when?] tag, but that doesn't stop this from going onto ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 23:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Long enough, well sourced, updated with death. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:16, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • PostedBagumba (talk) 04:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Samuel T. Durrance

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Orange tag + some unsourced statements that need to be fixed. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 23:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Still orange tagged. Too much footnote-free prose. No edits in the past 5 days. --PFHLai (talk) 09:59, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support: I've expanded/rescued the refs, and tidied it. The citation issues are not chronic and the overall quality is ok: it's not promotional or controversial, and I'm convinced the information is all there between the various Who's Who articles etc.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    (Posted) RD: Terry Lewis

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) RD: Padma Desai

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Ktin, Thenightaway and Santhoshsum1spc1 edits have strengthened article quality and referencing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schwinnspeed (talkcontribs) 01:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Article has one (maybe two?) CN tags left. Support Article is now of adequate quality for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 15:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @Fakescientist8000 - Thanks much. A CN tag had been added for the date of birth. I have added a source for the date of birth. Please have a look at your convenience. Ktin (talk) 16:29, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @Ktin, I have now changed my !vote. Nice job. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 22:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Well written and sourced, updated with death. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 02:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Arsenio Iglesias

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) COVID-19

    Template:ITN candidate

    Support - we've repeatedly asserted in the past that we only declare the pandemic over on ITN when the WHO says so (example). While this is not exactly the "end" of the pandemic, it's signal that the pandemic has receded from its peak and is now largely subliminal at most. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 14:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think it's particularly important that the COVID-19 pandemic is a "pandemic", and that's how almost every single person in the world refers to it (when someone says "the pandemic", it's apparent that they mean "the COVID-19 pandemic"). That's why we should post when the "pandemic" officially ends. On the contrary, very few people were aware that it was a public health emergency of international concern, which sounds too sophisticated to be used in the plain language.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's a simple solution to your dilemma: You judge the newsworthiness of something based on whether or not it is in the news. Remember, we aren't making the news here at Wikipedia's ITN section, we're highlighting quality content on items which were already in the news. News editors and journalists at reliable sources make the decisions about what to write about. We're only here to post the occasional high-quality article that aligns with the stories that already exist. Everything else is beyond the purpose of this section. --Jayron32 18:45, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      ... Yeah, that was my point, Jayron. That's what I was saying. WaltClipper -(talk) 14:18, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • SupportKurtis (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support We could be years, if not decades, before the pandemic ends. But I don't see how that compares to the end of the unprecedented and longest global health emergency. Nfitz (talk) 21:26, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support but strong oppose to altblurb. WHO did not declare an end to the pandemic. Johndavies837 (talk) 21:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Degradation in emergency status is newsworthy, when the pandemic is officially declared over (likely not anytime soon) we will post that as well. Gotitbro (talk) 21:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support This is notable and globally newsworthy. If or when the pandemic is declared over, we can blurb it again. Against the current alt-blurb b/c it is still considered a pandemic.-TenorTwelve (talk) 22:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per above, though I strongly oppose the altburb because it is incorrect. DecafPotato (talk) 22:57, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per above. BilledMammal (talk) 23:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted Stephen 23:31, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Post-posting support This is the most appropriate time we will have to declare the pandemic over on ITN. Flyingfishee (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    May 4

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 4
    Template:Cob


    RD: Gabrielle Carey

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Article has an orange tag, and has some missing citations. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 21:08, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Too many footnote-free paragraphs. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 12:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Terry Vaughn

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Article is a stub and has multiple orange tags. Not ready for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Not a stub, though indeed that is an orange tag. Curbon7 (talk) 04:45, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Rifat Rastoder

    Template:ITN candidate

    Support I've just fixed up the article a little bit and added some references. It's not perfect but it might be enough for RD. Flyingfishee (talk) 08:24, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak oppose Article is barely long enough, but there is an orange tag in there. Please fix it! Cheers! Fakescientist8000 21:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Merged to existing blurb) 4 May Serbia shootings

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Conditional support - article is currently stubby, but this is again a pretty uncommon event in Serbia. Hell, given the death count, this might have been posted even if it occurred in the United States. Also, I think some might complain of having two Serbian mass shooting blurbs on
      Template:Temp, so I wonder about y'all's thoughts on combining the two into a single consolidated blurb (EDIT: I didn't read the last part of the nom comment. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 23:41, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Support merge with present Serbian shooting (and possibly Pakistan shooting below) This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk)
    • Oppose Article is two paragraphs long, and is a stub. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Currently in stub. Fahads1982Talk02:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support, article is of sufficient quality now. Extremely rare event for Serbia, and given the high death toll might even be warranted if it occurred in a country where such events are less rare. Oppose combining blurbs; significant story in its own right, and from the current reports unrelated to the previous attack. BilledMammal (talk) 07:21, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support and I would also support merge with the other shooting. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:42, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support merge per nom // 💪
    Aid💪 🖊️ 08:07, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Support merge per nom Xx78900 (talk) 08:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    To avoid two separate blurbs for shootings on consecutive days in the same city, which would take up more space on ITN. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Eh, doesn't matter very much to me. The shootings were unconnected with the exception of both having took place in Belgrade, Serbia. I would consider it if the perpetrator committed both acts, but this to me just looks like a solution that needs a problem to solve. The blurb that would most likely roll off with this (the World Chess Championship) happened back in April. Yes, we're just 5 days into May, but it's stale that there's no point in keeping it. Not to mention, I highly doubt we'll ever have a need to do this anyway. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support merge per above. -Ad Orientem (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong oppose merged blurbs These are two very separate stories and merging the blurbs implies a connection that doesn't exist. --Masem (t) 18:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose merge for reasons I stated in the reply to Jim Michael. There's no connection between the two shootings, so they should not be merged. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 18:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose merge again, the stated significance in the last nom is that this sort of thing doesn't happen often here. Now it's happened twice in a few days. If you want to post it, fine. But there is not even a whiff of connection. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:57, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      It is true that these incidents are most likely unrelated beyond that they occurred in the same country. But both are ITN worthy events. The proposal to merge the blurbs is not intended to imply a connection. It's merely a convenient way to post both without taking up a second blurb slot. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:19, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose merge per Masem, undecided on a separate blurb. DecafPotato (talk) 22:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Serbia has a lot of these mass killings compared to most countries - there's already been two bigger ones this century! (which isn't surprising, given Serbia has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world). Nfitz (talk) 00:14, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Template:Tqq. From the article itself. Curbon7 (talk) 04:44, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Your argument is that there's been twice as many mass shootings this century as I've mentioned? There can't be too many countries that have more than that - especially in Europe - outside of war! Gosh, it doesn't seem that long since the last one! Nfitz (talk) 05:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The statements Template:Tqq and Template:Tqq are mutually exclusive. The latter statement is the correct one. Don't take my word for it, take it from NBC and USA Today and The Guardian and CBC. Curbon7 (talk) 05:48, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      You need to better elaborate that argument. A total of four mass shootings in the 21st century isn't really more frequent than in other European countries (for instance, there were four mass shootings in Finland this century for which we have articles even though it commonly ranks as one of the safest countries in the world). Of course, you'll always find countries with less or no mass shootings, but it'd be sheer cherry-picking.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support in principle. I don't think it'd be a mistake to merge with the blurb on the school shooting for conciseness. The fact that they happened in a single country makes them the state authorities treat them jointly. A mistake would be to merge two school shootings in two unrelated countries just because they're school shootings.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support merge we need to specify that while the two mass shootings might have occurred at the same time, they are unrelated. The proposed blurb does specify this. Readers should be smart enough to notice that we say "two separate shootings." Flyingfishee (talk) 08:37, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Merge - Personally, I support the arguments for merging more than not. The hook should display that these are separate incidents though. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support merge per above. Two similar incidents in the span of days, in a country/region where such incidents are rare. The Kip (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Blurbs merged together. Sandstein 09:13, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Pakistan school shooting

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose As of now, a two-sentence stub. Will need a massive expansion to be main page ready. --Jayron32 18:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment There are two articles about this which need to be merged. The other one is
      Parachinar school shooting. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 19:25, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    I've merged them now. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:10, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Petr Klíma

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Almost entirely unreferenced. Will need to be cleaned up and fully sourced to be ready for the main page. --Jayron32 17:57, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Article quality is quite poor + orange tagged. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I just added a few references to the "Early career and defection" section: two books, and one LA Times article from 1985. Each one is a named reference, so if I don't come back to finish adding the refs to every claim that they can verify, I encourage anyone here to check out each source and add them to the article in my stead. Kurtis (talk) 02:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • At least 10 {cn} tags remaining. Please add more footnotes & REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 05:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC) It's time for a re-review. --PFHLai (talk) 22:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Looks good now. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Linda Lewis

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support I've patched up the one unsourced album in the discography section, so this article should be ready for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 14:10, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Article looks solid. --Jayron32 17:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted Stephen 22:58, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    May 3

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 3
    Template:Cob


    (Posted) 2023 Manipur violence

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support The event is certainly a significant escalation in ethnic tensions in the northeast. Article appears to be well-cited and is of a sufficient length at the moment. Curbon7 (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support - as per Curbon7 Nfitz (talk) 00:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. Started a move discussion on the article title, and in the same vein added an altered altblurb that sounds a little better. "Ongoing" may not be necessary, but "unrest" is a better word to use than "violence" here. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support seems to be a significant event, at least in India. Re above, considering that it seems to be between two ethnic/tribal groups instead of between it and the government, "violence" seems appropriate. Indian media used it, too. Juxlos (talk) 09:00, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per Curbon7. Schwinnspeed (talk) 13:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support, Topic is ITN worthy and the article seems to be well cited and is of a sufficient length. Prodrummer619 (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per Curbon7 and Juxlos. Flyingfishee (talk) 21:42, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support can we add what the cause of the violence is? Otherwise it just suggests an element of randomness. Added altblurb2. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Article is well cited. Fahads1982Talk 02:04, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support ALT2 per above. Consensus seems overwhelming, so marking as Ready. The Kip (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. Sandstein 09:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Dean Corren

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support seems to be good enough for main page. Weird photo, but is what it is. Juxlos (talk) 09:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Article quality is of sufficiency for ITNRD. Oh, and by the way, I don't really think that that is a 'weird photo', but whatevs. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:24, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 16:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Nikica Valentić

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) RD: Razie Jachya

    Template:ITN candidate

    (Posted) RD: Lance Blanks

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Not yet ready The "NBA career" section, which is the most important part of this article, is almost non-existant. Curbon7 (talk) 11:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @Curbon7: Expanded his playing career a bit. —Bagumba (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Support Good enough for our purposes, considering his career was "undistinguished". Rest of the article also looks good, well-cited and holistic. Curbon7 (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Sufficient breadth and sourcing.—Bagumba (talk) 11:42, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 12:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Muhammad Taufik

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Looks good to me. Fahads1982Talk
    • Support Article is well cited with good enough quality for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 14:18, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Needs work Reads like it was written by a non-English speaker and has some tense issues too. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:06, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support There was one "is" that needed to be changed to "was", and I took care of that. Otherwise, it reads like idiomatic English to me. Don't see any indication that there are any problems like those noted above. --Jayron32 17:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 09:04, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Needs decision) 2023 French pension reform unrest

    Template:ITN candidate

    2023 French pension reform unrest hasn't received an update in nearly three weeks, so that precludes any sort of nomination. Curbon7 (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    It's definitely not over by any means though (see this, as an example). Mucube (talkcontribs) 23:20, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Great to see that the protests are not over, but the article still needs to be updated. Curbon7 (talk) 23:49, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Clearly this is continuing with the violence escalating. A group of hard-core leftists recently declared their intent to kill policemen and successfully managed to set several on fire with petrol bombs. Unfortunately, the lack of meaningful updates precludes this being posted for now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Someone else has already added a paragraph about the May 1 protests. Mucube (talkcontribs) 00:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Personally i'm definitely opposing for now since this article has not been updated accordingly. Even the new May 1 update is only an update from three days ago while the update before that was April 14, a whole 26 days ago. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:40, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose ongoing Lack of regular, considerable updates. SpencerT•C 03:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Conditional support once updated with recent events, per previous comments. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:27, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak support IIRC, this had been in the ongoing section, but was removed because the article text was not keeping up with events. It looks like that is starting to be remedied. If we want to keep this in ongoing, someone needs to take responsibility to make sure the article stays up to date. Things can only be added to ongoing if we have regularly updated articles about them. Demonstrate a commitment to doing that if you want the support to post this in ongoing. --Jayron32 12:03, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Change to full support. Article is much improved, and is being updated. --Jayron32 11:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Put me in, coach. I've added events on May 1, 2, and 3. I'll continue updating once the sources report new information! Tails Wx 14:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Add me too. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 23:34, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support per @Jayron32 and @Abcmaxx. I plan o working with @Tails Wx and others to updating the article. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 23:35, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support given the updates. Don't think it ever needed to be removed on a factual basis, but had to be because of the lack of updates. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Protests in Paris - c’est toujours la même. There always seems to be something up on May Day - which was days ago now. I've seen barely a mention of this on the news in weeks. It needs to ramp up seriously, or have a wide-spread full strike I think, to be postable. Nfitz (talk) 00:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Remains notable and is being well updated again. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:56, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support This is ongoing news & is receiving substantial updates. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Closed) Kremlin drone strike

    Template:Atop
    Template:ITN candidate

    Wait - still a lot of unknowns. Definitely blurb if it was of Ukrainian extraction, but I kind of doubt it. Optically, looking at the CCTV video, it looks to staged for me. Seems a little convenient that they would be downed right over the damn Kremlin of all places instead of, I dunno, somewhere in the Russian countryside, or even elsewhere in the city. Seems way too optically convenient to have it be shot down over Putin's house of power. Additionally, assuming this is true, this would basically be Russia admitting that their air defense systems are so weak that a country like Ukraine could fly drones Template:Convert into their border unhindered. All this seems kind of staged, but who knows? We've seen that Russia's military capabilities in this conflict far underperform what everyone expected prior to February 24, 2022, and it would make sense that there would be top-notch air defense systems or protocol in and around the Kremlin of all places. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:54, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose article needs some expansion. There's not much there now besides a rudimentary statement saying that two drones were shot down, and then some quotes from the Russian government. We need more article to post. --Jayron32 17:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong support, the blurb covers what is known, it's sufficient. Article is good, even if short. --Ouro (blah blah) 17:38, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The article doesn't have much more information than the blurb. What's the point of directing people to read it? --Jayron32 17:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Because a little more is still more, and it's bound to get updated if/ when something develops. --Ouro (blah blah) 00:46, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. The news here is there is no news. Even if not covered by ongoing, all that happened was two drones were shot down. Whether military or not, they did nothing but get shot down themselves. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose nobody got hurt, nothing major occured as a result, and I seriously doubt a Ukrainian Drone could fly for such long distance. oh, and they say two drones were shot down, so they are saying that two drones somehow managed to get through the Russian SAM Sites, go almost 500 kilometers uninterrupted, and, at complete random, explode just before it hits the Kremlin, and 6 days before the Victory Day Parade? Who would attack now of all the possible time? when the Kremlin is closed and Putin is in some bunker away from harm. seems suspicious. and even if it is real, so what? again, nobody was harmed, and nothing major came out of this. Editor 5426387 (talk) 18:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Nothing concrete to say at the moment. Nigej (talk) 19:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Covered by ongoing. If it struck the Kremlin, even if no one was hurt, then it would've been postable, but alas. Curbon7 (talk) 19:58, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The one time where saying "alas" about an averted death (or near-death) is unlikely to raise any eyebrows, except maybe in amusement. 😏 Kurtis (talk) 21:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose for now. No deaths or injuries. Not even clear what actually happened with lots of speculation out there but few hard facts. The only real sources are the Russian government and news outlets (apologies for repeating myself). Obviously, those are unreliable. Will reconsider if the Russians attempt to use this as a pretext for something extreme. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:10, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose pending significant updates as to what happened. If it turns out that this was a Ukrainian attempt at assassinating Vladimir Putin, or something of that magnitude, then I'd support a blurb. Kurtis (talk) 00:33, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Abot

    (Posted) RD: Tori Bowie

    Template:ITN candidate

    RD: Manobala

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support One of the top read articles yesterday, getting even more views than Gordon Lightfoot. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:10, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose (1) Filmography is unsourced (2) All of leading para after first sentence is unsourced (3) As regards prose, once you ignore the massive unsourced table, the article is a stub. Black Kite (talk) 10:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Article is a stub w/ a massive unsourced table - and thus not of able quality for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 12:54, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Four complete sentences does not an article make. Needs a massive expansion to be main page ready. --Jayron32 17:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Guys updated it and I hope the article is now worth to post in the main front page. 2402:4000:2081:332A:D13F:BDE6:8E7F:8E4A (talk) 05:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The article is much better, but the filmography is still completely unsourced. Black Kite (talk) 08:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Filmography needs sourcing, please. --PFHLai (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) Belgrade school shooting

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support in principle. The article is minimally sufficient for posting, but it would benefit from further expansion as the story unfolds.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:03, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support - ah so you were the one who caused that edit conflict. Anyway, to copy from my nom comment when I was attempting to nominate this,
    Template:Tq - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 13:04, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Template:Tq Beg your pardon? I was just nominating this story and was unaware that you would also be doing so. WaltClipper -(talk) 13:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I was also attempting to nominate this story, but you beat me to it while I was editing, hence the edit conflict. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 13:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak support per Kiril. Article could stand to be expanded. --Jayron32 13:06, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Slight modification. Article quality is much improved in the past several hours. Full support, no notes. --Jayron32 17:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support Highly unusual mass shooting in Europe. Article quality is adequate, though as per above comments, I would like to see a little expansion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak support on the basis of being both unusual and the article quality, though some expansion would be great. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:37, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose I agree there is sometimes an argument for "significant when in happens here, insignificant when it happens there," but that largely is a matter of circumstance, not geograpy. A train derailment in the UK is different than one in Bangladesh. School shootings are not insignificant in the US just because they are common here, but because there is nothing really differentiating one from the next. The articles could be a form with blanks to fill in: weapon, body count, politician comments. You could have a drop-down box with one of the four motives. The argument for continuing to post under the exact same circumstances just because it happened somewhere else seems illogical to me. Are we going to institute quotas for each country? Differentiate for motive or weapon? I think if there is something different to say, then maybe we post. I don't see that here. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the primary reason for this being more significant than the school shootings in the US is not the rarity but rather the reactions from the state authorities. I can't remember when was the last school shooting in the US that resulted in a three-day national morning, a closure of all schools in a million city and extraordinary meetings of high-rank office-holders.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:15, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support — Unusual shooting. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:34, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Marking ready Thank you everyone for working on the article.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:35, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Woah woah woah, let's pump the breaks here. The nom hasn't even been up for 4 hours. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Despite having a recent discussion on this matter, we haven’t agreed on setting any minimum time before posting yet.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:04, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Right. If it's ready, it's ready. No need to enforce instruction creep. WaltClipper -(talk) 17:09, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Hey, look, by all means post it, I just think there may be some post-posting pushback as may happen on topics such as this one. I have no stake in this save avoiding unneeded conflict. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:25, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • support - should be posted if it happened in the US too. nableezy - 17:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support—Serbia is not America. These kinds of mass shootings are not commonplace over there, especially not a young teenager shooting up an elementary school. Kurtis (talk) 17:47, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posting. --Tone 18:05, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Post-posting support It's not everyday an education minister who is old enough to have seen war in their country describes something as one of the country's darkest days. Kingsif (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Closed) African floods

    Template:Atop
    Template:ITN candidate

    • The article is literally one sentence - there's no way we can assess that. Write at least a start-quality article then we can consider. This nomination is premature and a waste of our time without an article to consider. Modest Genius talk 12:47, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support The article has been improved enough to be posted and this event certainly seems notable enough.
    Aure entuluva (talk) 20:03, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Hat

    Template:Hab

    • Weak support. We now have an actual article, which is pretty basic but does reach our minimum requirements. While floods are common, >100 deaths is not. Modest Genius talk 17:41, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Needs work This needs to be expanded. And as of this writing, this topic has been moved to the draft space and is not even an article. Don't get me wrong though, I would have supported this nomination in principle because of the high death toll; however, the prose for this article/draft is still insufficient. Vida0007 (talk) 13:12, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article has been deleted, and it doesn't appear to have been of enough quality when it was around. I suggest speedy close. Oppose Article quality is not up to par for ITN Main Page standards. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      It was deleted as it was moved to draft space to be expanded, and has since been expanded and moved back. Almost not a stub but still a stub though. nableezy - 13:41, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Still a bit short imo, wouldnt qualify for DYK for example at less than 3k readable prose and 365 words. With a bit more expansion support, but not quite yet imo. nableezy - 14:23, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support because the article is good enough & the death toll makes it important enough. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose for now, based on state of article. Needs some more expansion to be ready for prime time, IMHO. Taking out text not related to the event itself (like background and reactions) we have very little information. We need more about the actual event we're reporting on. --Jayron32 17:48, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Support Article quality has improved, it's ready for the main page now. --Jayron32 11:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak Oppose on Quality. Article is short but I believe long enough and impactful enough to post. However, the article mostly is sources from a single single source and death totals are not synchronized. I would support if these things could be resolved. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. The article is not a stub, it has 2292 bytes of text. That's well above DYK minimum. It's cited too, and the event is highly impactful.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. Quality is now sufficient, and if this happened in the West would already have been posted. BilledMammal (talk) 07:25, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Your open-ended accusations of bad faith are growing wearisome and needs to stop. Insinuating that people who don't do what you want are bigots is rude, incivil, and frankly needs to stop yesterday. Please don't do that again. --Jayron32 11:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Acknowledging the existence of systematic bias is necessary, and is not an accusation of bad faith or otherwise rude and uncivil. BilledMammal (talk) 04:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment article has been merged into the
      2023 East Africa floods. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      And now the article is about the entirety of Africa. Which kind of gets rid of the ITN part. Wooooooops. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I understand the article wasn't very long, but why the hasty merge into an article which, in spite of covering more events, is also quite barren? Feels like a mistake. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:55, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment This is nearing on a trainwreck. Too many pagemoves, and the scope of the article has changed three times. Curbon7 (talk) 04:42, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      lets not forget the merger between the original nomination's article and this new one. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Abot

    May 2

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 2
    Template:Cob


    (Closed) RD: Anousa Luangsuphom

    Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

    Template:Archive bottom

    RD: Bernard Lapasset

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose on article quality, which is not up to MP par. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 01:13, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Tony Staley

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Prose on the subject's career is thin and needs footnotes. Please expand it and add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Orange tag found in article, which means that this is not ITNRD ready. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 21:05, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Arun Manilal Gandhi

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Article has a lot of sourcing work to be done - CN tags are everywhere to be found. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • At least 7 {cn} tags can be found in this wikibio. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 19:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: Achmad Sujudi

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Looks good to me. Fahads1982Talk
    • Comment Is there anything that can be added regarding things he may have done during his ministerial tenure? Curbon7 (talk) 11:28, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:Re Not much. All I could find was normative statements. 1999-2004 was a political turmoil era for Indonesia, so not much could be done. I'll try to do it later. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 00:58, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    RD: Charles Engola

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Article is good enough for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 17:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Background section needs more citations. Career section could use more info on what he did while a cabinet minister (apart from holding the titles).--PFHLai (talk) 08:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support. A few cn tags, but not enough to oppose. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Valentin Yudashkin

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose Article is currently a stub. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:00, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • A stub with only 144 words of prose is too short. Please expand it. --PFHLai (talk) 05:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Closed) 2023 Writers Guild of America strike

    Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

    • Support per nom. Festucalextalk 09:01, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. There are lots of strikes going on around the world. I don't see any reason why this one should get a blurb when all the others didn't. Neither the nomination nor the article demonstrates any unusual significance. Modest Genius talk 11:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Article quality is currently not yet at the level where it's a good one to feature on the frontpage. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:57, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Compared to labor strikes in France and elsewhere, this is nowhere close to having any type of major impact outside the delay of some upcoming shows and films. --Masem (t) 12:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak oppose for now on quality grounds. The article is light on prose, if it were expanded some more, I would fully support this. --Jayron32 12:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak oppose - Depth: Decent coverage over multiple news sources, mostly U.S. based. ... Impact: May prevent current and future American television shows from airing such as the Jimmy Kimmel Show. ... Consequences: Certainly unpleasant for the writers, but likely temporary as a settlement will eventually be reached as with previous strikes. ... Encyclopedic: Appears to merit an individual article. ... With all that being said, the lack of long-term consequences for such an event, other than mildly inconveniencing television viewers, makes this an unlikely ITN candidate. --WaltClipper -(talk) 12:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Strong Support per nomination.
    Impact:significant.
    "Decent coverage over multiple news sources, mostly U.S. based"
    only some of sources outside of US
    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/may/01/hollywood-writers-studios-hold-talks-strike-deadline-looms
    https://news.sky.com/story/writers-guild-of-america-votes-to-strike-after-talks-with-hollywood-studios-fail-12871072
    https://www.dw.com/en/hollywood-writers-to-go-on-strike-over-pay/a-65488752
    https://www.lemonde.fr/en/united-states/article/2023/05/02/thousands-of-hollywood-writers-to-strike-over-pay-and-work-conditions_6025089_133.html
    https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/us-news/2023/05/02/64509e75268e3e7e4c8b458c.html
    talk) 13:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    more
    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/2/hollywood-writers-go-on-strike-here-is-what-to-know
    https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-65447046
    https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/hollywood/hollywood-writers-slamming-gig-economy-to-go-on-strike-8586645/
    talk) 13:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Oppose - Ignoring the article which is practically a stub. I'm not exactly seeing the major impact of this strike yet. Maybe if there's a major impact in american television then I might support. Onegreatjoke (talk) 13:42, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Strong support per @
    Кирилл С1. I don't think people really understand the gravity of the situation. Remember how intrinsically linked the film/TV industry is with LA. The last time this strike occurred in 2007, it costed the city of LA several billion dollars. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 18:43, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    How many cities are there in the world? _-_Alsor (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    According to the article on cities most integrated with the global economy, nine of higher importance than LA. DecafPotato (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Does that mean a free bar for everything? Not sure this is how Wikipedia works. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It does not, and I did not claim it did. In fact, I probably oppose this getting posted. But I was pointing out the problems in the rebuttal of "there are a lot of cities", when, in fact, LA is one of the largest. DecafPotato (talk) 00:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose — I would suggest ongoing if this continues and has a real impact. Until then, not suitable for ITN. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:13, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose for now This hasn't had a big enough effect on Hollywood yet. If it lasts long enough, it could be posted to ongoing. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support but the blurb should be more clear. This strike will have a big impact on TV shows and movies. Late-night shows are already canceling new episodes until further notice. Johndavies837 (talk) 20:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait I say wait to see if it goes a little longer. I wouldn't mind this going on Ongoing if it gets to that point, but if it's major to the point that several shows are delayed, let's say 2-3 episodes off schedule, then I think we can consider blurbing or slapping it on Ongoing. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 20:31, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose - Article quality is low as many have already mentioned. Kaushik C 20:37, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
    • Oppose - For a single union in one country - that's not even essential? Given the number of big strikes that haven't ever been nominated, this is trivial. The article doesn't even indicate how many are on strike - but surely it pales to other North American strikes - such as the over 100,000 that were on strike until April 30th when the entire [civil service went on strike]! And that's a MUCH better article. I'm surprised the topic is even notable enough for it's own Wikedia Page! I'd be tempted to merge it to Writers Guild of America West#2023 Writers Guild of America Strike. Nfitz (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak support I don't know if the 2007 strike was posted, but over a decade later I feel like it should have been. I don't think it's quite comparable yet, but otherwise the same. Kingsif (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support per nom and Kirill C1. The strike is notable and in the news, and doesn't happen real often in the entertainment biz. Jusdafax (talk) 22:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Happens roughly every 5 years, and the last WGA strike was in 2008. Definitely not a rare event. Masem (t) 00:18, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I didn't say "rare," that's your rewording of my "doesn't happen real often," as in this is the second time a WGA strike has been called since Wikipedia was founded. I stand by my assertion. Jusdafax (talk) 06:33, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - In terms of size, the Guild will be far from the largest strike even this month (the Canada Revenue Agency is still on strike, and another portion of the Public Service Alliance of Canada representing 120,000 people just ended its strike on Monday). There will likely be delays for films and television series, but delays are common with any labour action.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The impact of this strike is not clear as it has just begun. The prudent thing would be to wait for any sizable/significant event to occur from this than post it now. AFL-CIO has also posted a statement but reading that suggests it also is not strongly worded with the strike's notability being left unclear. Gotitbro (talk) 00:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose We rarely do labor actions. But if we are inclined to go down that road there are far more significant one's going on in Europe. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that's a good point. The one strike that jumps out in my mind as being significant in the USA was in 1981 with the air traffic controllers (how does this not even have it's own article - Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (1968)#August 1981 strike. Maybe an extended automaker strike that breaks international supply chains - must have been one of those surely. But strikes are very common - and surely this one is pretty minor compared to many (if not most). If we start posting minor strikes in only one country (or part of one country - it's not clear to me if the East is on strike, or just the West) - we'll be posting several a day, with 200 countries having only 3 or 4 a year - let's be honest, France will get 100 themselves. Nfitz (talk) 03:35, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak oppose without prejudice against nominating for ongoing again in the future should something sizable or significant happen. Per WaltCip. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 01:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "WGA Strike Explained: The Issues, The Stakes, Movies & TV Shows Affected — And How Long The 2023 Work Stoppage Might Last"
    https://deadline.com/feature/hollywood-writers-strike-wga-explained-1235341146/
    "It’s Not Just The WGA
    A number of unions have contracts with the AMPTP expiring in the next few weeks. Generally, the guild that negotiates first sets the tone for the subsequent negotiations."
    talk) 09:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Template:Ab

    (Posted) RD/Blurb: Khader Adnan

    Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

    oppose blurb
    We didn't blurb Angela Lanesbury, Harry Belafonte, Ray Liotta, author of Gaia Theory. Why should we blurb a guy whom no one knew about a year ago?
    talk) 17:29, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Not to mention, we probably won't be blurbing Jerry Springer. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 17:31, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think only a very specific age bracket of people know any of those people either, and for most people, there is nothing particularly notable about the nature of their deaths in of themselves.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 17:36, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    With that logic: I'm not sure any age bracket knows about this man, and there is nothing notable about this man's death either. Pass. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 17:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There is very much something notable about a three-month hunger strike of someone detained without charge, just so long as you are a person with some sort of vested interest in human rights, the rule of law, etc.
    Iskandar323 (talk) 17:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Several former MPs were killed.
    Charles Engola,
    Atiq Ahmed. Why they weren't blurbed?
    talk) 17:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    They probably should have been blurbed, but doing something wrong once doesn't mean continue to do it wrong forever and for everything. WaltClipper -(talk) 18:13, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Exactly, though I am still undecided on a blurb. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 18:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Quite simply put, because people have much stronger opinions/narratives on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than they do on Ugandan or Indian poltics. The Kip (talk) 19:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Or because Engola wasnt nominated for a blurb and barely discussed, and neither of the deaths had the UN remarking on them or being covered as widely as this? nableezy - 19:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The UN argument, sure, but the Ahmed death received pretty decent coverage even outside of India; perhaps we should also consider the fact that the Israel-Palestine conflict is much more politically charged in western media than Indian politics in general, which reflects a degree of bias on our own part. The Kip (talk) 01:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And also on Deadline, Hollywood website.
    talk) 07:25, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Engola's death is notable, but I'm not sure if he's notable enough for a blurb. However, I'm also not sure if Adnan's notable enough for a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Atiq Ahmed was a gangster who was shot. While it received coverage in international press because it was filmed, it was in no way significant outside of a small part of India. Curbon7 (talk) 02:04, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ray Liotta was in Wild Hogs. Give the man due respect.
    talk) 17:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Oppose blurb the Israel-Palestine issue is always so volatile and extreme historically, we'd really need someone way more important to die (eg. government head etc.) to merit a blurb. Activists in this conflict die often, and protests / unrest on either side happens so often. This does not seem so incredible or unusual to me to deserve a whole blurb. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 19:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC) [reply]
    Support RD though - article looks good to me QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 19:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)non-ec editor comment struck[reply]
    Pull photo, at least. Deeply offensive, while also there is large opposition to blurb. Revert to Brecel photo which has only been.a day or so.
    talk) 20:08, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    By the way, what has 10-year old cartoon to do with blurb?
    talk) 20:12, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I do not see why that image should be posted on the main page either. No idea why there's an image with such a depiction of the flag of an entire country when that country isn't wholly responsible for the things described in the blurb. Nythar (💬-🍀) 20:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There was not large opposition to blurbing. I do agree with you regarding the cartoon, however; it doesn't really seem appropriate for the MP. Curbon7 (talk) 20:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Remove political cartoon. The cartoon is obvious advocacy, and not remotely neutral. Not to mention that it was drawn by a known vociferous antisemite. --Yair rand (talk) 20:30, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Ahem, WP:BLP applies everywhere on Wikipedia. nableezy - 22:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Antisemite may be incorrect, but 'Holocaust-trivializer'—absolutely. I was rolling my eyes when I saw that the admins had posted a Carlos Latuff cartoon on the Main Page. What were you people thinking? -- Veggies (talk) 22:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Image removed. I agree that the image may not be suitable, so changing back whilst discussion continues. Courtesy pinging
      Template:Yo as they changed the image over. Black Kite (talk) 20:34, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    Yes, the general rule of thumb should be to not post political cartoons (unless the blurb is about the cartoon itself). Gotitbro (talk) 02:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose the cartoon, it’s pretty blatantly POV-pushing especially considering the artist. If you’re going to post a photo, post one of Adnan himself. The Kip (talk) 02:40, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey, hey! Let's all settle down and stop accusing people of POV violations. As much as usage of the cartoon was a poor choice, assuming bad faith without serious merit is, in and of itself, in bad faith. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I’m not accusing whoever posted it of POV-pushing, I’m just saying the cartoon itself is POV-pushing, considering it’s a political cartoon. The Kip (talk) 03:17, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:NPOV is a policy that applies to the Main Page as much as any other articlespace area on Wikipedia, and so I'd really like to know the thought process that went behind posting that image. --WaltClipper -(talk) 12:25, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      +1. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:54, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      AGFing, the thought process appears to be new blurb see if there is a free image and then add it. Not everything has to have some underhanded motive. nableezy - 13:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Simply, there is no non-free photograph of the subject available. That cartoon was released into the public domain by the artist. That's it. The posting admin made an oopsie, the image is off the MP now, let's AGF and move on. Curbon7 (talk) 15:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I second that motion: what was the admin who posted it (without prior discussion) thinking? It wasn't part of the original blurb nomination. Is it precedent/policy to slap any free image up on a blurb without a consensus (or even a discussion)? -- Veggies (talk) 16:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Ab

    May 1

    Template:Cot
    Portal:Current events/2023 May 1
    Template:Cob


    (Posted) RD: John Dunmore

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support Article is long enough and well cited, and thus good enough for ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. This article might just scrape over the threshold for RD but it is worth noting that much of the current content is padding - titles, medals, positions - without telling the reader much about what he actually did. Why were these books notable? What did they actually say/argue? Why did contemporaries praise them? What is considered to be his personal contribution to the field/wider public discourse etc? —Brigade Piron (talk) 19:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support verifiable with a lot of sources. Also an interesting guy to read about - his work was clearly well received as he won honours in NZ and France. Flyingfishee (talk) 09:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Felipe Colares

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Support, unless the MMA record table needs to be sourced, in which case this is an oppose. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 02:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Gordon Lightfoot

    Template:ITN candidate

    The split by label is because that's a natural split of his career - he spent X years at one, then Y years at another. Masem (t) 02:57, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Understood. Aside from that, the article does still need a lot of work. Doc Strange MailboxLogbook 03:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Support once fixed As long as it fixed, I can't see any reason why Gordon Lightfoot shouldn't be added to RD.TheCorriynial (talk) 11:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • So, it doesn't need your support for that reason. Every living thing with a Wikipedia article is eligible for RD (so long as it is in good condition). The analysis we need from you is what in the article needs fixing, or is it good enough already. Please make sure your commentary focuses on actionable quality issues with the article, because your support otherwise is not needed. --Jayron32 12:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Many CN tags left, and the United Artists/Warner Bros years sections need dire sourcing. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 17:46, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours? As a former mariner IMO no more haunting line has ever been put to music. Memory eternal. (Not ready but let's get this up.) -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:39, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Does anyone know where the love of Admins goes when RD Noms turn the minutes to hours? As a former editor, no more haunting line has ever been put at Main page ITN. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 12:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      support both, line and work --Gerda Arendt (talk) 04:47, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) 2023 World Snooker Championship

    Template:ITN candidate

    Support,in WP:ITN/R.
    talk) 21:37, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • I had no particular expectations but the Cazoo logo really dominated my first impression when I browsed the topic in the mobile view. Compare with the World Chess Championship 2023 which has commercial sponsors too but doesn't give the impression that it's advertising them. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:35, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      We've been over this before with FIFA players having sponsorships on their jerseys, and the general consensus is that it's nearly completely unavoidable and not something we should bother ourselves with. Even so, I think you really have to crane your neck to notice the logo on a desktop PC. --WaltClipper -(talk) 12:55, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I beg your pardon,vwhere is advertising? Certainly not in blurb.
    talk) 07:28, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • He is Belgian. He is the first ever player born in Continental Europe to win the World Championship. He had never previously won a match in this tournament. All worth a mention? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 13:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)y[reply]
      All of those are good factoids to include in the article, or even a DYK if the articles about Luca Brecel or the 2023 championship have been significantly expanded recently, but generally we don't include those types of "firsts" in the blurb. WaltClipper -(talk) 14:53, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The single word "Belgian" couldn't even be added? It is a first, but it's also basic bio. Brecel is an unusual surname. Oh well. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 15:11, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    (Posted) RD: G. R. Perera

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Oppose one CN tag remaining as well as a few unsourced bullet points in the filmography section. I'll fix it, so this oppose !vote shouldn't remain for too long. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 23:43, 1 May 2023 (UTC) Support all sourcing issues have been fixed, article should be good to go. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:05, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Still an outstanding CN tag. Article leans more like a resume in prose format with no additional information about the types of roles that he played, instead mostly is a list of roles and films. SpencerT•C 03:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Template:Tl tag, hopefully it works for you! Tails Wx 22:12, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
      ]
    • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 03:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    2023 Uzbek constitutional referendum

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Comment. According to The Economist (US, Apr 22-28). Mirziyoyev gets to retroactively change his current term from 5 years to 7 years, after which the two-term limit kicks in, so he could be in power until 2042. Any blurb should definitely emphasize Mirziyoyev, because that's what's ITN. 2607:F470:E:22:74DB:2534:8250:1ECB (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose on quality, but support on notability once updates are made to the article. Roughly on par with Kazakhstan's referendum that we also posted. The Kip (talk) 01:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    RD: Calvin Davis

    Template:ITN candidate

    • Not yet ready Article is a stub. Please ping me once there is expansion so I can re-assess. Curbon7 (talk) 02:27, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose Article is currently a stub, needs expansion in order to be put on ITNRD. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 14:05, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Only 143 words of prose. Too stubby. --PFHLai (talk) 07:34, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]