Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/February 2022

From 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.

February 28

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports


RD: Kirk Baily

[edit]
Article: Kirk Baily (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety, NBC News, Yahoo
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American Actor - died of lung cancer on February 28th. TheNewMinistry (talk) 11:32, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Kim Jung-ju

[edit]
Article: Kim Jung-ju (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): GamesIndustry.biz
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Co-founder of the Korean video game publisher Nexon. Died sometime in February, the company only announced it on Feb. 28. A few places need sources but nearly there. Masem (t) 13:17, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Nominated this, not seeing your nom in this section. I've added sources where needed and added some missing information, such as the corruption scandal he was involved in. Yeeno (talk) 🍁 00:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: David Boggs

[edit]
Article: David Boggs (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Co-inventor of the Ethernet protocol that most of the Internet is based on. Died on Feb 18th, but the news did not come in major publications until yesterday. Masem (t) 13:18, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sheila Benson

[edit]
Article: Sheila Benson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Los Angeles Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (February 28); died on February 23 (i.e. provable gap of at least two days). —Bloom6132 (talk) 11:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Richard C. Blum

[edit]
Article: Richard C. Blum (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): San Francisco Chronicle
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Ad Orientem: & @Bagumba: I've added some neutrality to it and removed some puff from it. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The section title "Controversy" remains, which is generally consider WP:POV (WP:CSECTION), isolating negative items into a section instead of integrating tidbits into his career or starting a balanced "Public image" section. All too often, it's just a WP:COATRACK for anything negative, without regard if WP:DUE coverage exists. For example, I randomly looked at the Tutor Perini entry. I don't see those cited sources supporting that this was a major controversy, other than it being brought up that his wife is a politican and the contractor did construction in countries occupied by the U.S. Was there foul play? How "controversial" was this? To what extent did this impact him? No context is indicated in the existing sources.—Bagumba (talk) 07:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Bagumba: Should this section be removed? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:43, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given how this section is sourced to one source for each bit of controversy, that seems inappropriate for a BLP and would be better removed until more comprehensive sourcing can be made. --Masem (t) 15:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think having a couple of sentences noting the criticism is ok. But in general we try to avoid whole sections labeled as "controversy." -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:41, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. to my above; I think the article is acceptable for posting now. Support -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 11th Emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly

[edit]

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: Eleventh emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): Politico, Reuters
Credits:
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: UN link Only 11th time in the history of UN such a session is being held, 9th one was in '82. 2A02:2F0E:DE07:BF00:28EE:4F79:A71B:62CC (talk) 14:10, 28 February 2022 (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.

IPCC report

[edit]

Nominator's comments: The IPCC assessment is released as three separate reports plus a synthesis. We posted part 1, on what, how and why climate change is happening, in August 2021. Today they released part 2, on the impacts of climate change on nature and on humans. Part 3, on mitigation strategies, is due by the end of 2022. I think we should blurb all three parts. The last time the IPCC tackled this topic was the Fifth Assessment in 2013-14. The report was released 2 hours ago and runs to 3675 pages, so the article hasn't been updated yet, but I wanted to get the discussion started on whether we should blurb each part. Modest Genius talk 13:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment We should probably figure out what statistic people are hanging their hats on for the headline on this. "Report was released" even with something like IPCC isn't a great ITN blurb, but "6th IPCC report on impacts of climate change estimate 40% of the world's population is at risk." (scanning from bbc) would be more appropriate, but that's just a first part. And given that part 3 of the 6th IPCC is about mitigation of CC, this second part is likely more important to post than the 3rd. --Masem (t) 13:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind adding an example of the biggest impacts, but it would mean picking one from a smorgasbord of suffering. We also need to be careful about the wording: that 40% figure refers to those considered 'highly vulnerable', with everybody being at risk, just lower risk. Modest Genius talk 13:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That was just something I caught in a 5 second scan, obviously any stat should be vetted and carefully and clearly worded. --Masem (t) 14:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The events going on in Ukraine currently do not and should not have any bearing on whether or not we post another blurb on a different topic. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:09, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely and completely irrelevant. Climate change is a long-term threat to humanity. The invasion of Ukraine, however grisly, has no bearing on this. WaltCip-(talk) 15:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment We posted the first part of this report in August 2021 and we should probably post this as well, but the problem is that the summary of this part is way to short compared to that of the previous one.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:21, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we posted the first part of this report in August 2021, we shouldn't post all 6 interim reports that are going to come from this as that's just way too much emphasis and POV on it. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The assessment consists of three working group reports plus a synthesis document. This is the second report. Where did six come from? If you mean the Sixth Assessment, that's a process which reports every 6-7 years; the Fifth Assessment was in 2014. Modest Genius talk 18:52, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I read it as the second part of a six part thing, my mistake. Nevertheless, no evidence that this part is significant enough to be ITN worthy, the content in the article about it is way less than the first one. If it's ITN worthy, people should improve the article to demonstrate that. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Yadlapati Venkata Rao

[edit]
Article: Yadlapati Venkata Rao (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 this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 — DaxServer (t · c) 09:17, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Expanding Russian invasion of Ukraine bulletpoint

[edit]

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.


As of right now, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine bulletpoint in the "In the news" section needs a bit of elaboration. As it stands, it simply states "Russia launches an invasion of Ukraine", and appears to be equal in significance to the closing of the Winter Olympics (which links to three articles: the competition, the closing event, and the city of Beijing). It would seem as though there should be a link to the "Occupied territories of Ukraine" article as well, so my recommendation for new phrasing:
* Russia launches an invasion of Ukraine, and occupies several territories of the nation.
Thoughts? -- RobLa (talk) 03:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This sort of discussion is usually conducted in WP:ERRORS FWIW. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So why not update the ITN blurb itself to eliminate "the static display of old news" – ?? Why force the reader to search for something relevant and informative under the small-type titles "navigation  • Main page  • Contents  • Current events" high on the left side of the page? Continued display of the egregiously outdated RU-Ukraine ITN blurb does not serve readers and is a loathsome lapse in editorial judgement. – Sca (talk) 23:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand your suggestion correctly, the outdated content had already been commented out. I removed the redundant wikitext (with no visible effect) and replaced it with current news which will update itself without constant maintenance. (This comment applies to the portal only. I'm leaving any updates to the main page or its transclusion to others.) Certes (talk) 12:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – It seems that the point being made here is that the Russian invasion should have its significance pointed out. If that's not it, then this edit suggestion is unclear in its objective. Considering that the suggestion being made here is that the Russian invasion should have its significance pointed out, then adding statements like "Russia occupies several territories" or "Russian encounters widespread resistance" is entirely illogical, as they don't state what's being suggested that it should be stated. Honestly and logically, what this suggestion asks to be added is that "Russia launches an invasion of Ukraine, triggering worldwide social repercussions". I mean, essentially that is, "disrupting the world." That's how you honestly speak about its significance, not by making up other fill-up stuff that's not you mean to point out. 85.245.162.134 (talk) 09:19, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You make an excellent point. However, I would want an article about the "worldwide social repercussions" to link to. Perhaps International sanctions during the Russo-Ukrainian War? Although the consequences and assessment section of that article could use flushing out more. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. OP's suggested blurb seems a good upgrade to current one, and given the current pace of ITN, the war isn't going to be pushed to ongoing anytime "soon" (aka: within one or two days) Flameperson (talk) 15:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Currently all major cities seem to be in Ukrainian hands. In any case, the situation is very fluid amid ongoing Russian–Ukrainian information war and we should be cautious about any claims beyond the current blurb. If the situation changes dramatically based on reliable third-party sources, we can reconsider. Brandmeistertalk 19:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose ITN is not a news ticker, and in the comments you have various proposals of different events to emphasise (effect on Ruble, taking of some cities, experiencing resistance) and it's still early in the proposal -- future comments may emphasise Belarusian involvement, Western sanctions, stock markets crashing, or dozens of other major effects that have already happened or will happen. What if a city gets taken back? What makes any one of these factors more important than the other? I think we got the perfect hook the first time, and it not needing an update is not a problem. The underlying event here is the Russian invasion of Ukraine. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:12, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
President ordered Russia's nuclear forces put on high alert
[edit]

Unless I am mistaking, I think this level of open declaration of threat level has not been done since the Cuban crisis. Even if nothing comes out of it, and even if the USSR did have this level of alert as recently as the 80s, I think this uptick should still be noted in the ITN. 2A02:2F0E:DE07:BF00:B19A:8EBA:F556:7C1B (talk) 12:10, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that this is like a DEFCON1. 2A02:2F0E:DE07:BF00:28EE:4F79:A71B:62CC (talk) 14:06, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nuke-saber rattling. – Sca (talk) 14:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please... DarkSide830 (talk) 15:03, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please? – Sca (talk) 16:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Me? - Floydian τ ¢ 13:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would wait a bit more until it becomes clear. Right now it seems to be just putting nuclear weapons on high alert - until he either drops a nuke in Ukraine or threatens to do so openly, we shouldn’t put anything there. If he starts a global thermonuclear war I think we should just try and not die instead of updating ITN. Juxlos (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think even the ex-KGB commissar now at the Russian helm would stupid enough to start a nuclear war. – Sca (talk) 16:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of us here didn't think he'd seriously invade Ukraine either. WaltCip-(talk) 16:31, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Russian invasion entry should be updated to include reference to this and possibly the ruble crashing as well. All would be ITN-worthy on their own. Oscar666kta420swag (talk) 04:19, 2 March 2022 (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.

February 27

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports


(Closed) Pakistan Super League final

[edit]

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: 2022 Pakistan Super League Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In cricket, Lahore Qalandars win their maiden Pakistan Super League title by defeating Multan Sultans in the final. (Post)
News source(s): Sky Sports
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Article looks fine and ready to be posted. MasterOfMetaverse (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The league is now a big cricket event and is covered extensively in cricketing world including the ICC itself this time. USaamo (t@lk) 02:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per the comments stated by USaamo. Fade258 (talk) 07:40, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not ITN worthy, we shouldn't be posting every country's T20 league finals. I'm not a fan of posting IPL which has a way bigger international audience than the PSL. Also article quality is insufficient, match report is poorly aourced and links to lots of dab pages. Infobox violates MOS:FLAG, as "team colours" aren't needed in infobox. Background also needs a copyedit as it has some awkward phrasings. And the league stage section should give a summary of all their matches in the league stage, rather than overdetailed match reports of the two matches they previously played against each other. If article quality is not fixed, then the importance is a moot point, the support votes above don't appear to have considered article quality. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per Joseph. Not ITNR, btw. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 10:59, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Doesn't attract the same attention as the IPL, which is the only domestic T20 League I would consider significant enough to post.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not ITNR and shouldn't be. Tradediatalk 18:04, 3 March 2022 (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: Sonny Ramadhin

[edit]
Article: Sonny Ramadhin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Cricketer, Guardian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: International cricketer, but article needs significant work Joseph2302 (talk) 09:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Nick Zedd

[edit]
Article: Nick Zedd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reforma
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American filmmaker Thriley (talk) 22:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not Ready for the usual reason. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:49, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there a database of films that can be used as a reliable source for Zedd’s films? I know IMDB isn’t ever used, but is there something similar? It may be difficult to find sources for every film of his otherwise. Thriley (talk) 06:15, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Much of the prose unreferenced (Zero footnotes in 'Early life' and 'Personal life and death' sections. Even his death is unsourced for an RD nom?!Now, there is a footnote, with a {bare URL}, though. Oh, well... --PFHLai (talk) 03:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)). The long, unreferenced list in the filmography section may need to be trimmed down to keep only those items that are verifiable (Selected Filmography). --PFHLai (talk) 12:18, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Antonov An-225

[edit]

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: Antonov An-225 Mriya (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Antonov An-225 Mriya (pictured), the world's largest aircraft, is destroyed during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. (Post)
News source(s): Radio Free Europe (in Russian, English translation), Dmytro Kuleba, Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs, OSINT Canada
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Per blurb, destruction of world's largest aircraft in service. Mjroots (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - news is spotty if it was destroyed or just damaged, and in the latter case, the potential to restore. Further, this is part of the ongoing invasion blurb. --Masem (t) 16:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even with that confirmation, this effectively part of, and overshadowed by the current invasion blurb. It would be the wrong thing to be focusing on at ITN while there's other invasion stuff still going on. --Masem (t) 16:42, 27 February 2022 (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) 2022 eastern Australia floods

[edit]

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
Pedestrian tunnel flooding in the suburb of Tanah Merah, in south Brisbane
Article: 2022 eastern Australia floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 16 deaths during the 2022 eastern Australia floods (Post)
News source(s): see article, AP, Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
 --Caltraser5 (talk) 11:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It IS a flood prone region! See 2010–2011 Queensland floods, and 1974 Brisbane flood, and several other articles. HiLo48 (talk) 01:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I didn't even know that. Thanks for telling me! Kline | yes? 19:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article quality not quite there yet, but it's important to recognise that this event has pretty much usurped the extended coverage of Ukraine (at least in Australia). JMonkey2006 (talk) 20:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's a poorly named article. And a totally over-hyped event. The floods are impacting only a tiny fraction of eastern Australia. They are still restricted to flood plains, which is where floods are supposed to happen. The fact that Queensland, and Brisbane in particular, went through some appalling (non-)planning stages in its history, and allowed a lot of houses to be built on those flood plains might be the more newsworthy aspect of this. HiLo48 (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the US many major inland port cities are in floodplains like Saint Louis, Memphis, Cincinnati, Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Kansas City, New Orleans, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Houston, Miami (okay that one's not inland) and Baton Rouge and the river can get tens of kilometers wide in floods. New Orleans is in a bowl that's below sea level except for the very center. In China they called the Yellow River and/or Yangtze the river in the sky or something like that, the Yellow deposited so much yellow silt that it'd build a natural groove-topped ridge and flow in the groove with the boats higher than the cities and would break out within centuries and kill hundreds of thousands of people each time. So within millennia the river would wiggle around like a snake and flood everything in an extremely flat strip cone of hyperfarmable silt up to hundreds of miles wide. Edit: Except the Shandong Peninsula and nearby high spot were too high so it would always bypass them to the left or right. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A very different situation. Most of the development I am speaking of in Brisbane has occurred in the past 50 years. The dangers were well known, but officially ignored by planners. HiLo48 (talk) 03:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just checked on that claim of 7 deaths. Sourcing in the article is poor. It has separate sources for separate deaths. The claim of 7 is original research, apparently adding up separate claims. My own adding up only gave me 6 deaths. HiLo48 (talk) 03:31, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The floods are impacting only a tiny fraction of eastern Australia. I live in eastern Australia, and it's hardly rained at all here for three months. The title gives a completely false impression. HiLo48 (talk) 23:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, it was originally named "2022 South East Queensland flood" before it was moved earlier today in a violation of WP:CRYSTAL: see this diff. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a far more accurate title, so I have moved it back. No idea what that means for this proposal. Do we rename this too? The real point is that this is NOT about as significant event as the old title implies. HiLo48 (talk) 23:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hilo you probably live in either Sydney or Melbourne, which is actually west of SEQ/Northern NSW, and we are farther east of you. So title of the article is accurate.--Caltraser5 (talk) 23:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It seems we need a better name for that chunk of Australia which is SE Qld and NE NSW. "Eastern Australia" is not a good choice. Are you seriously suggesting Sydney is not in eastern Australia? HiLo48 (talk) 23:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sydney is on the east coast, but to many people from SEQ it is south-west of us, and the area affected by flooding is more than just SEQ, Gympie is not really part of SEQ it's part of the wide-bay burnett region and the northern rivers of NSW often experiences the same weather as SEQ does, and that's definitely not part of SEQ.--Caltraser5 (talk) 00:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're not actually discussing this. I repeat - It seems we need a better name for that chunk of Australia which is SE Qld and NE NSW. "Eastern Australia" is not a good choice. HiLo48 (talk) 00:43, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know if you come up with a better title--Caltraser5 (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I must point out that Caltraser5 has Edit warred over the title of the article being used here, and has not gone near the Talk page to discuss it. HiLo48 (talk) 02:10, 28 February 2022 (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.

February 26

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Ralph Ahn

[edit]
Article: Ralph Ahn (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety; Rolling Stone; KNBC
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 06:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 25

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports


(Posted) RD: Eleonore Schönborn

[edit]
Article: Eleonore Schönborn (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Diocese of Vienna
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Another one who arrived at deaths in 2022 with a red link. I began translating the German article, just to have a bit more than that, but then realised that she was a great woman, not just the mother of a famous son, and was 101 years when she died. Grimes2 worked miracles expanding. Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2022 Sumatra earthquake

[edit]
Proposed image
The Raya Kajai mosque in West Sumatra has collapsed
Article: 2022 Sumatra earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 8 people are killed in the 2022 Sumatra earthquake (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At least 8 people are killed and 6,000 displaced by the 2022 Sumatra earthquake
News source(s): see article
Credits:
Article updated

Nominator's comments: Kind of surprised this isn't nominated, although the Russian invasion of Ukraine dominates the news. Banedon (talk) 05:18, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment This is probably personal, but as a Sumatran (Batak) native, I'd really just suspend this in favor of raising awareness on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Not that I'm opposing nominating this, but at least we can suspend until the Ukrainian invasion news item has enough main page time.--Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 05:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jeromi's views noted, the article is actually really good for a recent disaster, and we haven't had an earthquake for a while. Kingsif (talk) 08:03, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Russian invasion of Ukraine will still be on the mainpage as a blurb. Realistically it won't likely rolloff to ongoing before another development results in a new nomination. Baurach86 (talk) 08:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The invasion will still be highly sought after. We don't want accusations of "biases", hence, let the news roll. PenangLion (talk) 09:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Being consistent with my idea that only natural disasters that cause a notorious number of casualties are ITN-worthy. And that there was a Russian invasion in Ukraine has nothing to do here. PS: and I wish the affected editors and their families are well. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 09:44, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support - I dont see the reason why this shouldnt be on the mainpage. The state of emergency has been declared in the West Pasaman Regency and there are more than 6,000 estimated refugees. If thats not a disaster worthy of being on the mainpage I dont know what is Nyanardsan (talk) 11:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Based on this, added altblurb. Kingsif (talk) 12:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is widely-covered, I feel I have to say, from Reuters all the way down, but obviously nothing is beating Kyiv et al to the top spots. Kingsif (talk) 15:20, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wire services "print" copy for every random event around the world in the hopes to get ad reveune from eyeballs it != notability. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:46, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"all the way down" Kingsif (talk) 20:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just a friendly reminder that slow/fast news cycles are irrelevant towards whether an article should be posted on ITN or not. — Chevvin 18:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The picture was swapped at 21:11 but I started writing my post before then, taking some time to figure out where the mosque was. It's a good picture so thanks for putting it up. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lionel James

[edit]
Article: Lionel James (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 this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Undersized American football player at 5 feet 6 inches (1.68 m) and 171 pounds (78 kg). —Bagumba (talk) 02:59, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Landy

[edit]
Article: John Landy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC Australia, The Age, 7News
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 Craig Andrew1 (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of Wikilinks in the article. Many of the tags refer to content well sourced in the articles those links take a reader to. There is already a source used at one point in the article (Other acomplishsmets) which could be reliably used to source many of the claims in the article. It is https://about.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/file/0024/15828/landy.pdf This is from the University of Melbourne, a top ranking university. I seek help in making better use of that source please. HiLo48 (talk) 02:14, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi HiLo48. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. This means that Wiki articles, including links to articles, cannot substitute for inline citations to sources that pass WP:RS. PROVEIT is an excellent tool for adding citations if you need help. Thank you for your work on the project. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:39, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What's wrong with it? HiLo48 (talk) 22:11, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 24

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Sports


(Attention) RD: Vitalii Skakun

[edit]
Article: Vitalii Skakun (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Ukrainian marine and combat engineer. TJMSmith (talk) 04:55, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Sally Kellerman

[edit]
Article: Sally Kellerman (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 this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: She played Hot Lips Houlihan on M*A*S*H – Muboshgu (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

[edit]

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: 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, AP
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The invasion of Ukraine is a large topic in the news and the events that are transpiring are being reported on minute-by-minute. Kellis7 (talk) 3:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted/Updated) Update blurb: Russia-Ukraine

[edit]

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: 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russia invades Ukraine. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Russian president Vladimir Putin announces military action in Ukraine.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Russia attacks Ukraine.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Russia launches an invasion of Ukraine.
News source(s): AP, BBC, Guardian, Reuters, DW, France24, AlJazeera
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Per the AP release, it seems like a full invasion. Juxlos (talk) 03:24, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Well, this is it. CNN and others are reporting explosions near Kiev and Kharkiv, and Kramatorsk is reported as under attack. The Kip (talk) 03:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - but surely needs to be stronger. "Russia invades Ukraine". "Russia and Ukraine at war". "Russia attacks Kiev". Nfitz (talk) 03:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Wait Support in principle, but we are in the opening moments of hostilities here. Let's get an idea of what is going on and how reliable sources are characterizing this. If they label it an invasion, so should we. We may also end up with a new article dedicated to the war, as opposed to the current bolded article that is mostly focused on the political aspects of the crisis that is likely transitioning from diplomacy to open war. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not even agencies like AFP and AP know exactly what's going on right now. All they know is that Russia is doing military invasion in Ukraine, where and how is still to be reported. No reason to rush past the agencies. Juxlos (talk) 04:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved to support per my above comment near the top. This is clearly a large scale invasion and is being almost universally labeled as such by RS sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've put an alt blurb to state exactly what Putin has said. Yes, most Western sources call this an invasion, but per Ad Orientem above, we've already got part of this story in ITN, lets make sure it is covered neutrally. --Masem (t) 04:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair, but make sure that the admin is alert. Reports are coming in of Russian landings as far away from Donbass as Odessa ([3], [4]) - that's a full invasion, not a regular military operation. Juxlos (talk) 04:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not going to lie, the alt blurb is incredibly vague for people with little to no context ("announcing military action" is very different from launching an unprovoked, full-scale military invasion of a sovereign country). It also gives an unnecessary amount of weight to the Russian nationalist narrative (WP:Mandy). Wikipedia is not, and should not be, a mouthpiece for Russian propaganda. Blade Jogger 2049 Talk 04:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
COMMENT Just woke up WHAT THE F*CK IS GOING ON???? Daikido (talk) 04:24, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle Russia's definitely attacking Ukraine & it looks like it's an invasion. I oppose the 1st alt blurb & have added a 2nd alt blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 04:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT3 which I just added and is the way the intro sentence of the article is phrased. This is an invasion. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support NYTimes headline is "Russia attacks Ukraine". LATimes headline is "Putin orders attacks on Ukraine". AP headline is "Putin announces Ukraine military operation, explosions heard". There are plenty of reliable sources for there being an active attack. The current blurb about "deploys troops to the region." is out of date. --GeorgeSonOfJohn (talk) 04:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is some posturing, all. Since yesterday, when it (apparently) became inevitable that this would happen, I have been asking myself what we would have done when Hitler invaded Poland. And, if that would have been a shambles of a response, what we would have liked to have done. I mean, throw out COVID, Russia has outstaged that. Do we hastily post a benign "Russia attacks Ukraine" line and leave it? Do we start a new article, separating the, er, new war from the 2014-present and 2021-present tensions articles, and post that as updates? Do we list the main cities as they fall or repel? Do we start a box? Do we, on the backend, siphon off part of the current events and MILHIST, those dedicated nerds, projects and ask users we trust to basically focus on this coverage for us? I know the mad scramble of current events articles, and am a little terrified of the collision of war and the internet age, where nothing is real until you've updated your status about it (Wikipedia, of course, included). This is, obviously, urgent, but in trying to find a blurb to agree on, nobody seems to have asked what it should say, what the history book headline will be. Kingsif (talk) 05:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think there is any kind of special intervention needed. The self-organizing military and event projects will do just that, as for "the headline" newspapers will handle that with the historical record justifying which stuck. Gotitbro (talk) 09:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Gotitbro: Fair, though we are in an unfortunate position where we are outpacing newspapers and users still demand catchy titles - I advocate against coining, of course. What I meant was that there are the most stoic broadsheets that use lines like "Russia invades Ukraine", and the most extreme tabloids that write things like "COMMIE PUTIN personally MURDERS innocent Ukrainians, including WOMEN and CHILDREN, in the worst WAR in all of EUROPE this CENTURY!" and obviously we are not going to get close to that example, but there is a happy medium (skewed broadsheet) that includes some detail without hyperbole, rather than just taking a bland detached position. Kingsif (talk) 10:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted ALT3 per overwhelming consensus here. Discussions on the precise wording can continue, but "invasion" is widely used by reliable sources.. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting support --RaiderAspect (talk) 05:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Even simply Russia invades Ukraine would suffice here.  Nixinova T  C   05:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment AP literally says "Russia attacks Ukraine". Doesn't get any more clear than that. Therefore support current blurb for now. We can update it later if it's needed. Scaramouche33 (talk) 05:29, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting support, shocking and horrible. I wish Ukraine solidarity and the best, they don’t deserve this. BastianMAT (talk) 09:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting support, quite a shocking and surreal turn of events. As per above, I am genuinely mortified that this has occurred. Wishing nothing but the best to Ukrainian Wikipedians, and the Ukrainian people, in this difficult and challenging time. Ornithoptera (talk) 09:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ongoing As I write, the previous blurb about the Donbas has been replaced by "Russia launches an invasion of Ukraine." The trouble with this is that it's not stable. The target article started with an edit war over its very existence and there are still massively disruptive edits like this and so the quality of the article is quite uncertain. The situation seems quite fluid and the launch is obviously just the start of something. But we've had an article, Russo-Ukrainian War, since 2014 and this seems to be the latest phase in this conflict. Our instructions say that "The Ongoing line is for regularly updated articles which cover events that remain in the news over a longer period of time." As we can expect many developments and updates, we should put this back into Ongoing with a link to the broadest article. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • This asks for some flexibility and out-of-the-box thinking. I support the blurb, but we can do better. What we need is a box, which not only gives the blurb (with its one link); but with a "for background on this, see: Russo-Ukrainian War for the situation since 2014, 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis for the build-up to the invasion, Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic for the disputed territories, and War in Donbas for the situation prior to the 24 February invasion". Give people easy, direct access to the major articles surrounding this invasion and giving background to it, which is the thing we should be good at (more so than the immediate "what happens now"). Obviously the format and the suggested articles need tweaking, but this is what the readers want right now, and this is what we as an encyclopedia can and should offer them. Fram (talk) 10:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Such an approach would be sensible. Looking at the top views indicates that our readership is going to about 20 different articles for this topic. What they are not reading now in significant numbers is our article about the Superbowl as that happened over a week ago. We can give up space from such stale blurbs to give more space to this crisis, as we did for Covid. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need. We don't want or need up to 20 (or more) articles linked from the front page, when our readers can go to one article, and then access whichever others they might want from there.Tlhslobus (talk) 13:15, 24 February 2022 (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.

February 23

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Health and environment

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Antonietta Stella

[edit]
Article: Antonietta Stella (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Opera Wire
Credits:

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

 TJMSmith (talk) 00:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mehdi Hasan (Pakistani journalist)

[edit]
Article: Mehdi Hasan (Pakistani journalist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DAWN, The News, Human Rights Commission of Pakistan
Credits:

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

 Ainty Painty (talk) 07:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: The Amazing Johnathan

[edit]
Article: The Amazing Johnathan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone, Daily Mail
Credits:

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

 Craig Andrew1 (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Anna Karen

[edit]
Article: Anna Karen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Independent
Credits:

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

 Spicy Veggie (talk) 16:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Suisse secrets

[edit]

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: Suisse secrets (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Suisse secrets, documents relating to US$108.5 billion of offshore investment, are leaked. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, DAWN, NY Times, Al Jazeera
Credits:
 Ainty Painty (talk) 02:39, 23 February 2022 (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: Rehman Malik

[edit]
Article: Rehman Malik (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Geo TV, The News, Duna News
Credits:

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

 Ainty Painty (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 22

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Judith Pipher

[edit]
Article: Judith Pipher (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [7]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Canadian-born American astrophysicist and observational astronomer. TJMSmith (talk) 00:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mark Lanegan

[edit]
Article: Mark Lanegan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SPIN
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Screaming Trees, QOTSA, solo career – Muboshgu (talk) 19:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was playing Scraps at Midnight only the other day. Damn. Never got to see Screaming Trees live, but did have the pleasure of seeing Mr Lanegan a couple of times. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 20:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I never saw ST live either, but I did see him perform with QOTSA more than a few times. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:46, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Saw ST once whilst very drunk at a festival, but saw him twice with the Gutter Twins and around 4-5 times solo. Last time was the tour with Duke Garwood in 2018. Oh, man. Black Kite (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, the collab section needs a few sources and a cruft-tidy. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 20:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looking much better now! – Muboshgu (talk) 20:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Marked ready. I'm on my phone, but I can't see any major issues. Black Kite (talk) 22:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joan Croll

[edit]
Article: Joan Croll (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sydney Morning Herald
Credits:

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

 Oronsay (talk) 02:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 21

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) Separatist republics

[edit]
Proposed image
Articles: International recognition of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic (talk · history · tag) and 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Government of Russia officially recognized separatist Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Government of Russia officially recognizes the separatist Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics in eastern Ukraine, and orders Russian forces to enter the territory.
Alternative blurb II: Russia officially recognizes the breakaway self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk republics in eastern Ukraine, and orders its military forces to enter their claimed territory.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In an escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian crisis, Russia officially recognizes the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk republics in eastern Ukraine, and orders its military forces to enter their claimed territory.
News source(s): Reuters, AP, BBC, Guardian, DW, France24, PBS
Credits:

 Andrei (talk) 21:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it." – Sca (talk) 00:36, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since we all care so much, we should not be presenting this as a done deal, as the nominated title suggests. This is clearly a disputed and ongoing situation and the final outcome is far from clear. This issue has been ongoing for 8 years now while the latest crisis was the threat of a general invasion of the Ukraine which still has not happened yet. We should await further developments, while maintaining the ongoing entry. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the first direct incursion of Russian troops on Ukrainian soil (that we know of) since the invasion of Crimea in 2014. We can update the blurb if necessary, but for now, this is a significant occurrence regardless of the whole situation being unsettled. The Kip (talk) 04:46, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If you read Donetsk People's Republic, you'll see that much of the population has been quite integrated with Russia for years now – the people there get Russian passports, pensions, &c. So, this is more of a political development than a military one because the population already considers itself Russian and the Republic already has a functioning government and administration. Here in the UK, we're very used to such separatist and devolution issues in Scotland, Northern Ireland, Brexit, Gibraltar, &c. Life goes on... Andrew🐉(talk) 10:21, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    So, what's happened now is that the ongoing entry has been moved to a blurb section with some details of the latest escalation. There's a couple of issues with this. One is that the bold linked article has years of history and proseline so it's hard for the reader to pick out the latest developments. And, as the situation is still quite fluid, daily updates are likely to be needed. And that's what ongoing is for. Compare with the Covid-19 ongoing entry. In the UK, the big news is that the Queen has got Covid while the government has announced the ending of all restrictions. These are very much in the news but ITN just lumps it all into the ongoing entry. But, of course, it doesn't much matter because our readers make their own choices regardless. The crisis article is down at #41 in the top read list while numerous other articles are getting more readers – Ukraine (#3); Putin (#6); Donetsk People's Republic (#7); Donbas (#11); &c. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — Probably the most concrete development in this story for a while, also I think the sending in of troops should probably be included. Llewee (talk) 23:51, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis seems like it should be the bolded article, and §Recognition of the Donetsk and Luhansk people's republics by Russia looks sufficiently updated. The real news isn't Russia's recognition of the territories but its use of that as a pretext for invasion, which the International Recognition article doesn't even mention. —Cryptic 00:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per above. Redoct87 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The event is significant, but the headline is very misleading, and plays into Russian propaganda. Something along the line of Russia invades eastern Ukraine or Russian troops enter Ukraine. Surely the invasion of Ukraine is more significant than the legal shenanigans. This is a bit of a moving target though, as the invasion started after the article was nominated. The proposed target seems inappropriate as well - either 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis or Russo-Ukrainian War. Nfitz (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With rewording and retargeting, I no longer oppose. Though I don't know why the wording is "deploy troops into the region". There's a simple word for deploying troops into a foreign country - invasion. Nfitz (talk) 05:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is where NPOV tone and voice has to be careful; we cannot take sides here, and while most Western gov'ts are considering it an invasion, Russia is calling it something else. We should not take either position, so stating that Russie deployed troops is neutrally worded. The article can go into detail on reactions. --Masem (t) 05:18, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Surely "invasion" (or "occupation") is neutral point of view (if it isn't, we need to rewrite some WW2 articles). Non-NPOV would be to "enhance the ethnic cleansing". Nfitz (talk) 14:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"invasion" is the POV term from those countries that have denounced this action like the US and France, but as there is nowhere close to universal outrage over this, we can't use that term in wikivoice. --Masem (t)•
How can it possibly be A POV issue? Russia has illegally occupied sovereign Ukrainian territory, again. Describing it as anything other than an 'invasion' of a sovereign country in total breach of international law has serious NPOV issues in my view. Feel free to disagree of course, But this isn't just about how the US or France views it. 91.96.161.13 (talk) 15:45, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there anywhere in the Anglosphere where there isn't universal outrage? It's far more than 2 countries! Good grief, even the Germans have declared sanctions, despite their reliance on Russian gas. Nfitz (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia should be impartial and dispassionate in tone. Calling it an invasion at this point would be favoring one view of the events. Over time, that is how this might come to be seen, but per RECENTISM we should be far more careful on initial language. --Masem (t) 23:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Stephen: -- why are you spelling "recognizes" the British way? All proposed blurbs spelled it the American way. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 05:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The target article (the crisis) appears to be British English, so the blurb following that makes sense. --Masem (t) 05:15, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, fair point. 'Twas just curious. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 05:15, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, aligned to the article, and the same thing in fewer words. Stephen 07:25, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This happened overnight so I didn't see it before it was posted. I like the current 'deploys troops' wording, which seems neutral. Well done on settling on appropriate wording. Modest Genius talk 12:27, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support curent blurb. Oh boy, here we go again. Scaramouche33 (talk) 06:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - I noticed the ongoing section for the crisis seems to be de-listed. PenangLion (talk) 07:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting comment – I agree with Masem that we must maintain an NPOV tone. However, the phrase "deploys troops to the region" states something that's been going on for months. Granted, "orders its military forces to enter their claimed territory" in Alt2 turns out to have been an overstatement, but perhaps we could go with something like "positions its forces near their claimed territory." – Sca (talk) 13:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support. I think the blurb as it stands is fine, and we should remain with that one. It's not inaccurate to say that they deployed troops to the region, that's a factual and neutral way to put it. Bringing in terms like "claimed territory" adds a degree of editorializing in, which as ever should be left to the article... It's near impossible to give all details of a complex situation like this one in a single sentence, so we shouldn't try.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:46, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, let's delete "claimed" from my suggested fix and go with it. (See above change.) – Sca (talk) 13:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PS: In the existing blurb clause "and deploys troops to the region," and erroneously implies that they began sending troops there only after recognizing Donetsk & Luhansk. – Sca (talk) 15:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support So much for the "international dick rattlers fading away over time".--WaltCip-(talk) 13:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – FYI, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is quoted in Der Spiegel today as saying, "Russian President Putin is now waiting for a provocation "to provide a pretext, possibly, to occupy the entire Ukraine." This topic isn't fading away. – Sca (talk) 14:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There are significant discussions on sanctions. The news will probably be relevant for at least a few months, and again, do we really need to delist the event from Ongoing when a blurb related to this article is posted? Can we do both? PenangLion (talk) 14:27, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Why duplicate it? – Sca (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's still an ongoing event, and the crisis's article is one of two covered for the blurb. PenangLion (talk) 15:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    When the current blurb scrolls off, we will likely read it back as ongoing. We just have limited space so avoid duplication of links and stories. --Masem (t) 15:32, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The presence or otherwise of this story in Ongoing doesn't really affect the overall space, to be fair, since Ongoing exists on its own line anyway. So it's more of a content decision. I can see the argument that it's confusing for readers to have the item there one day and gone the next, just as the situation has heated up. Presumably most will see that it's now a bolded story above, but I do think there is some case for restoring it to Ongoing now. Probably I'm neutral, leaning mild support for that suggestion.
(Unsigned.)

(Posted) RD: Paul Farmer

[edit]
Article: Paul Farmer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Miami Herald, NPR
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Was confirmed by Partners in Health; am sure more mainstream news services will add stories shortly and will add those to the nom. updated with news link. Article needs some work with referencing. Have resolved referencing issues. SpencerT•C 17:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mekapati Goutham Reddy

[edit]
Article: Mekapati Goutham Reddy (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 this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: C class and sourced — DaxServer (t · c) 11:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 20

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Sports


(Posted) RD: Christian Herwartz

[edit]
Article: Christian Herwartz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Society of Jesus
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: A worker-priest who created religous exercises not in a retreat but on the streets, and welcomed everybody to live with their spiritual community regardless of nationality, faith and reason, and held public peace prayers. - And had no article yet. - Peace. Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Franz Grave

[edit]
Article: Franz Grave (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Diocese of Essen
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Auxiliary bishop of Essen, working for Latin America and structural change in Ruhr area - no article yet Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:58, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Shakuntala Choudhary

[edit]
Article: Shakuntala Choudhary (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): India Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian social worker. Have not had a chance to work the article. Will get to it later tonight. Ktin (talk) 16:51, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jamal Edwards

[edit]
Article: Jamal Edwards (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Guardian
Credits:

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

 Spicy Veggie (talk) 22:33, 20 February 2022

(Posted) 2022 Winter Olympics closing ceremony

[edit]
Articles: 2022 Winter Olympics (talk · history · tag) and 2022 Winter Olympics closing ceremony (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude, with Norway finishing on top of the medal table. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude, with Norway winning a record number of 16 gold medals to top the medal table.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude in Beijing, China.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude in Beijing
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: The closing ceremony starts in about 20 minutes. I'm unsure about the image of the Beijing National Stadium, which was already posted with the blurb on the opening ceremony. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The blurbs link to the opening ceremony, not the closing ceremony. Clumsy copying. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That’s a very lame reason to oppose an ITNR item.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The nomination was made before the event had taken place (and the page was started 6 years ago!). Even now, the first section, Theme and Concept, is written in the future tense, has no source and makes a vague prediction that "somewhere during the closing ceremony will re-create a moment...". The blurb errors indicate that the article requires much careful and close checking to avoid such blatant errors. The main point is the Olympics is over but, as ITN has been showing it as ongoing for some time now, it does not seem necessary to do more than remove that entry. And that has been done. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That's still not a reason to oppose the ITNR. If the article can be improved in time, it still qualifies as ITNR. Just that it has a long way to go and if its not improved in a few days, I think it would be pointless to post it with the ongoing already removed. --Masem (t) 17:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Take a look at the second section, which is just one sentence, "Dancers lightened the emblem as Frank Mortenson's brand new record for the 2022 Olympics, "It's a Lovely Day Tomorrow" written originally in 1938 by Irving Berlin, was played." Again this has no source and I can't find any evidence that it's actually true. The word "lightened" is ungrammatical. And Mortenson is a red link now. If the song was written in 1938, it's not "brand new". There's no quality here; not even close. And the ceremony didn't make any flag-waving point about Norway did it? From what I saw, it was Italy that got most of the attention as the next host country. If we blurb about Norway then that would be misrepresenting what happened at the ceremony. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:36, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That's why as noted below, if we do post, the blurb should just be "The Olmypics closed" and not recognize any record. And yes, the target article is woefully out of shape for posting. No one is disagreeing on that. But if it got into shape, it is an ITNR to be posted. --Masem (t) 17:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I always strive for a brief blurb without mentioning the most successful nation but without any success so far. I, therefore, proposed three different blurbs this time so that everyone is happy and no objections are made on those grounds.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that the ceremony in 2018 was not posted due to similar quality issues. There is therefore no guarantee that this will ever meet an acceptable level of quality. As the event was mostly a formality, I reckon that we should move on. The talk has been that Putin has been waiting for the Olympics to end, as the starting gun for his Ukrainian adventure. We may soon have some real news... Andrew🐉(talk) 18:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I wonder where do you get that information from and why he didn't wait until the end of the previous meeting in Beijing for his military adventure along the Black Sea.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    So, the day after the Olympics ends, Putin holds an extraordinary council meeting to agree to violate the Minsk treaty by tearing away two more chunks of Ukrainian territory. This timetable was planned in advance with Macron and Scholz. That's what's in the news now. Q.E.D. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:56, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Checking back on this on the following day, I see that the first two sections are unchanged; still no sources and even the howler of "lightened" is still there. There's a picture though so I checked that out. It appears to be a copyright violation of this! Tsk. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb, record should be in blurb. Kingsif (talk) 14:12, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose mentioning the medal count, this is not a competition in how many medals each nation gets (at least nominally). I've now removed the link from Ongoing. --Tone 14:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment According to Article 6 in Charter 1 of the Olympic Charter, which states "The Olympic Games are competitions between athletes in individual or team events and not between countries.", we shouldn't highlight the achievement of the most successful nation. However, those supporting it have always formed a majority in such discussions and we regularly post an extended blurb, so it'd have been unwise for practical reasons not to propose an extended blurb from the beginning. As for the record, we posted the previous record of 14 gold medals set by Canada at the 2010 Winter Olympics.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle but oppose both blurbs, and any blurb listing country with the most medals. We had this debate for the Summer Games last year, and we don't post the country with the most medals, as it is inconsistent with the Olympic charter quoted above. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • You know what, perhaps it's more probable to get the most successful nation out of the blurb this time, given that it's not the US and people probably won't fight to get it there in order to show the superiority of their country.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 19

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

International relations

Law and crime

Sports


(Posted) RD: Richard Shepherd

[edit]
Article: Richard Shepherd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, ITV
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Longtime UK politician. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Gary Brooker

[edit]
Article: Gary Brooker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: The constant leader and guiding light of Procol Harum, famous forever for "A Whiter Shade of Pale" but made so much more incredible music. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just one spot left in the first paragraph of the Career section that I stuck a tag on, after which consider me a support. Personally I don't believe discographies need citations because the albums themselves are verifiable by anybody. - Floydian τ ¢ 23:55, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Charley Taylor

[edit]
Article: Charley Taylor (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Member of Pro Football Hall of Fame. —Bagumba (talk) 11:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joey Beauchamp

[edit]
Article: Joey Beauchamp (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: English footballer. Article is in good shape. Black Kite (talk) 11:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Emile Francis

[edit]
Article: Emile Francis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; NHL.com; Associated Press
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 09:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing removal: COVID-19 pandemic

[edit]

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: COVID-19 pandemic (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)
Nominator's comments: Instead of having the general COVID-19 pandemic article at ongoing, I think instead we should list specific events that happened during the pandemic like the Canada truck protest. The COVID pandemic article is not updated as often these days. It should be removed and replaced with major events associated with the pandemic. Interstellarity (talk) 20:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
'Extremely strong support' = support. – Sca (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2022 (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: Jean-Luc Brunel

[edit]
Article: Jean-Luc Brunel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Disgraced talent scout, Epstein associate, suicide in prison. Kafoxe (talk) 17:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Tom Veitch

[edit]
Article: Tom Veitch (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gizmodo GamesRadar CBR BleedingCool
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: notable comics author, particularly for Dark Empire jonas (talk) 03:20, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 18

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

  • Canada convoy protest
    • The Ottawa Police Service makes over 100 arrests, including the arrest of protest organizer Pat King. Police accuse protestors of assaulting officers with one person being arrested after allegedly throwing a bicycle at a horse with a mounted officer on it. (CBC News) (MSN)

Sports

(Closed) Storm Eunice

[edit]

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: Storm Eunice (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Europe, 17 people are killed in Storm Eunice (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Europe, fifteen people are killed in Storm Eunice (pictured). A windspeed of 122 miles per hour (196 km/h) is the highest ever recorded in England.
News source(s): BBC, BBC South
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Significant European Windstorm, causing much disruption in Ireland, UK, France, Belgium, Netherlands and Germany Mjroots (talk) 18:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see the need, honestly and respectfully. I would understand if it was the highest wind gust ever recorded in Europe (although I wouldn't support it either), but not when we are talking about a specific country when it's a natural disaster that affects many more nations. Also I don't recall seeing other blurbs about storms mentioning these types of records. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On Sunday BBC reported 16 storm fatalities, DW 12. – Sca (talk) 13:19, 20 February 2022 (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: Boris Nevzorov

[edit]
Article: Boris Nevzorov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TASS
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Russian actor, died of COVID-19. Kirill C1 (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jim Hagedorn

[edit]
Article: Jim Hagedorn (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Incumbent U.S. representative, cancer. Kafoxe (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 17

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

  • Panama-flagged car carrier MV Felicity Ace is abandoned approximately 90 nautical miles southwest of the Azores following a severe fire onboard. The ship's entire 22-man crew safely evacuates using lifeboats. (CNN)

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Surajit Sengupta

[edit]
Article: Surajit Sengupta (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): India Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian soccer (football) player. I am working on edits to the article. Edits done. Article is a reasonable start class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. In the meantime if someone has the powers to mark the article patrolled, I would appreciate that since I do not have those rights. Seems patrolled now. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 05:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Martin Tolchin

[edit]
Article: Martin Tolchin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American political correspondent for The New York Times. Co-founder of The Hill and PoliticoThriley (talk) 02:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 16

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Sports


(Posted) RD: Lorinda Cherry

[edit]
Article: Lorinda Cherry (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LWN.net, heise.de
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Bell Labs computer scientist who developed some of the original Unix utility programs. Death coverage is a bit thin, but the article has decent detail about her work. Joofjoof (talk) 01:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment we do not have an exact date of death in the article. However, that's not required; for procedural purposes the date the death was announced can suffice. And we no longer "sort by date of death" on the front page, so it certainly doesn't matter for that purpose. The article certainly could be better, but is probably good enough -- it is fully referenced. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 01:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There are some quotes without context in the article, such as: "Cherry's work on approximate parsing and Aho's on fast pattern search turned out to be just the right foundation for an English style-appraiser suggested by Professor William Vesterman of Rutgers. That in turn was elaborated into Writer's Workbench by Nina MacDonald and others in the Human Performance Engineering Department."[5] Who said this quote? Should be paraphrased into the article not quoted directly. SpencerT•C 02:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. AGF'ing LWN.net is RS. --PFHLai (talk) 22:51, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jack Smethurst

[edit]
Article: Jack Smethurst (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Sky, MEN
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: British actor best known for playing a racist shop steward in the controversial but popular TV sitcom Love Thy Neighbour Martinevans123 (talk) 19:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Gail Halvorsen

[edit]
Article: Gail Halvorsen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Salt Lake Tribune
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Known as the "Berlin Candy Bomber" for his involvement in Operation Little Vittles following World War II; Congressional Gold Medal recipient, among other honors Ryan Reeder (talk) 18:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Chennaveera Kanavi

[edit]
Article: Chennaveera Kanavi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian Kannada language poet. Article requires significant work. But, it is worth investing time imo. I will get to it later tonight. Edits done. Rater.js says the article is B-class, but, I think it might be a C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD and good to go. Ktin (talk) 17:33, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Yahgan language becomes extinct/dead

[edit]

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: Yahgan language (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Yahgan language becomes extinct following the death of Cristina Calderón as its last native speaker. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Yahgan language becomes dead following the death of Cristina Calderón as its last native speaker.
News source(s): France 24
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This nomination highlights the language extinction and is an alternative for the blurb discussion below. I don't remember that we've ever posted a language extinction, and the fact it was a language isolate makes it more significant. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality as the Yahgan language is orange-tagged with multiple issues, because it needs a lot more sourcing. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The Yaghan language isn't an extinct language, but rather is a dead language (as defined in the article) as of Calderon's death. An extinct language is a language with no longer any speakers, and given that there are people who are speaking Yaghan thanks to Calderon's tireless work, including Calderon's daughters, however not as a their native language, thus making it a dead language instead. The article itself does not refer to the language, nor even the culture, as dead, due to Calderon's hard work in preserving the Yagan language and cultural traditions. Ornithoptera (talk) 10:12, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • That also raises the issue of the France24 article listed does not say that the language is extinct following her death, so that raises an additional concern. The conclusion is garnered from something that is indirectly gleaned from reading between the lines rather than something explicitly stated by the news article being used as its source. Ornithoptera (talk) 10:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - It's a bit of a wobbly nomination given there are no previous examples to this. Personally I would like to support the nomination, but on the basis that there hasn't been any similar ITNs about language-extinctions, I'm abstaining the vote until a consensus has been generally reached. Cheers, PenangLion (talk) 10:14, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The category Category:Languages extinct in the 21st century shows that more than 50 languages have gone extinct in just the last twenty years. It does not appear to be as unique of an event even when accounting for the isolate bit. Moreover the article has maintenance tags all over. Gotitbro (talk) 10:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Orange-tagged article, and I really don't see the lasting significance of this. Kafoxe (talk) 14:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unclear if it's accurate as written. One anthropologist said, The younger generation know the language but not to the same degree that Cristina does,[17] Perhaps it's more nuanced, like she was the last full-blooded, fluent speaker—but that seems too narrow to blurb. RIP.
Preceding comment posted by Bagumba. – Sca (talk) 16:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Ornithoptera, Gotitbro, and Bagumba. Dead rather than extinct takes some of the air out of this, in my opinion, and personally this is kind of like posting a species extinction. They, sadly, happen to a frequent degree, and just the acknowledgement of this is what is news. And, like a species extinction, this is somewhat hypothetical, as in Calderón is the last known native speaker. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:04, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per not that rare and Calderón being posted to RD. Kingsif (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – According to our article, 20 years ago there were 1,685 Yaghan in Chile, a total that by 2017 had declined a bit. Apparently all, or nearly all, have gone to Spanish as their mother tongue. Since that process has been under way for many years, this announcement does not seem to have notable significance or impact, though it may be of interest to ethnologists. Also, not widely covered. – Sca (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RD This is mostly a recent death. It's weak as a blurb because, currently, there's not much news coverage out there. There has been quite a bit of coverage of the language's fading status in recent years – see Atlas Obscura, for example. Of course, just listing the woman's name in RD doesn't provide any context or clue but that's a general failing of the current RD format. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A language going extinct sounds like a pretty big deal. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 00:18, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think, to respond to this, the species extinction comparison is a good one. When white rhinos go extinct, there will be lots of media and lots of people caring because white rhinos are big and beautiful, were pretty common, and humans are a cause of extinction. The language comparison would be French going extinct and a massacre being partially responsible. That would get posted. But lots of species go extinct quite regularly, actually, and when it is microbial life that few humans have ever witnessed, very isolated, and there were only about 1000 examples that just died by natural causes, nobody really cares. That is this. Kingsif (talk) 08:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted RD) RD/Blurb: Cristina Calderon

[edit]
Article: Cristina Calderón (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Cristina Calderón, the last native speaker of the Yahgan language, dies at the age of 93. (Post)
News source(s): France 24
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Last known native speaker of the Yaghan language and last full-blooded Yaghan person, I have been updating and sourcing portions of the article that have been unsourced previously, should be relevant for RD. This is my first RD nomination so if I get something wrong just let me know! Ornithoptera (talk) 00:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic

[edit]

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: Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Reuters
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The Freedom Convoy has been nominated multiple times, being voted down each time (except for a pulled blurb). In these discussions, some have proposed an ongoing about protests over the pandemic. The main COVID article doesn't contain much about protests, and the section about it in the article only has a short few sentences and a link to the protest article. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 17:20, 16 February 2022 (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: Luigi De Magistris

[edit]
Article: Luigi De Magistris (cardinal) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): L’Unione Sarda
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Italian Roman Catholic Cardinal, short but sufficient article for RD Josey Wales Parley 16:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PFHLai taken care of now Josey Wales Parley 08:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the new footnotes there, Joseywales1961. This wikibio is now READY for RD to me. --PFHLai (talk) 08:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dorce Gamalama

[edit]
Article: Dorce Gamalama (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [19]
Credits:

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

 Nyanardsan (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Sandy Nelson

[edit]
Article: Sandy Nelson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [20]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: 1960s hit drummer. Article seems well sourced with no major issues. peter sellers is my best friend 14:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Bappi Lahiri

[edit]
Article: Bappi Lahiri (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian music composer. Ref issues for awards, discography. Death section is missing Sherenk1 (talk) 04:23, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2022 Petrópolis floods

[edit]
Article: 2022 Petrópolis floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 146 people are killed by mudslides and floods in Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (Post)
News source(s): DW, AP, BBC, Agência Brasil, R7
Credits:

 Nave do Conhecimento (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is probably better as a blurb as it appears to be damage and loss of life from the amount if rain over a short 3 hrs, not a prolonged period. Article needs expansion. --Masem (t) 19:38, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Change made. Nave do Conhecimento (talk) 20:45, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PFHLai I'm not sure if this happens with US or UK outlets, but Brazilian news sites often update the same post/link with a different title. I had that problem while updating Murder of Moïse Mugenyi Kabagambe too. Tet (talk to me) 14:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Tet, I have encountered cases where a news agency would update the contents of its online reports without changing the URL. However, when the death toll is part of the title and/or part of the URL, they will need new ones when there is an updated death toll. And then, sometimes, we have bad edits (example) where contents in our wikipages got changed without new source materials added as references to support the new info, producing citation errors that need to be fixed on sight. --PFHLai (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 15

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Peter Merseburger

[edit]
Article: Peter Merseburger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Prisma and others
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: influential German journalist, famous for tv controversies, correspondent from Washington, D.C. and London, biographer of Willy Brandt and others - and had no article until today Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Charles Juravinski

[edit]
Article: Charles Juravinski (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; The Hamilton Spectator; Global News; McMaster University
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 09:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ronald Lou-Poy

[edit]
Article: Ronald Lou-Poy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times Colonist (Victoria); University of Victoria
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Death announced on this date; date of death not specified. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Former president of Honduras Juan Orlando Hernández arrested

[edit]

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: Juan Orlando Hernández (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The former president of Honduras Juan Orlando Hernández, who was in office between 2014 and 2022, is arrested on a drug trafficking warrant after the US files a request formally for his extradition. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Honduran police arrest Juan Orlando Hernández, former president of the country between 2014 and 2022, on drug trafficking charges.
News source(s): teleSUR
Credits:
Nominator's comments: He was arrested on a Supreme Court warrant only a few weeks after he left office. Don't know if this should be posted now or we should wait until he is convicted or extradited to the US? Viva Nicolás (talk) 03:47, 16 February 2022 (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: PJ O'Rourke

[edit]
Article: P. J. O'Rourke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [21], [22]
Credits:

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 21:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Deep Sidhu

[edit]
Article: Deep Sidhu (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV, India Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Start class and fully sourced Venkat TL (talk) 17:01, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 14

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime


(Closed) Canada convoy protest

[edit]

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: Canada convoy protest (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Canada invokes the Emergencies Act in response to protests against COVID-19 public health measures in Ottawa and at border crossings with the United States. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Canada invokes the Emergencies Act in response to protests and blockades against COVID-19 vaccine mandates and restrictions.
News source(s): BBC NYT SMH CBC
Credits:
Article updated
Nominator's comments: First time that Canada has used the national Emergencies Act or its predecessor, the War Measures Act, since the October Crisis in 1970. Previous non-ongoing ITN nom was about a municipal declaration of emergency. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If this wasn't about North America, it would have been closed as duplicate by now. But because Canada is next to the US, it's getting special privilege as the only thing allowed to be doscussed for a third time at ITN....... Joseph2302 (talk) 18:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CONSENSUS isn't a vote count people who just read the headline and reacted with "oppose" without considering the new information are making an WP:IDONTLIKEIT vote and should absolutely be ignored. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do not misrepresent, at no time neither I nor the rest of us who have opposed the repeated nominations in these protests (far from a "civil unrest", by the way) have done so using IDONTLIKEIT, but very clearly you do consider that our oppositions are not valid because "you do not like them". _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:53, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When the municipal emergency was nommed, you said, "We will talk about it if it happens at the national level, but I don't think it will come to this end." As a provincial emergency, "Stop wasting our time." National level now, just "another no." InedibleHulk (talk) 21:59, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The emergency is still reduced to a very specific provincial and local level, even though we are already at a national reaction level. We are not facing a "the whole country is besieged by truckers". In fact, let us not forget that it still has to be authorized by the Parliament. We are dealing with an "invocation", not "approval"/"application". _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:56, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With all due respect, you're being oblivious. This invocation of unprecedented power is said to precisely disable targets along the world's largest land border, spanning any and all confederated provinces. The NDP has already signaled parliamentary approval, and willful ignorance of the law holds no weight. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it seems that there are no more problems at the border, for now. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 23:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Twitter no longer supports my browser, but if that's only about the Ambassador Bridge, feast your eyes out west. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:42, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — Declaring a state of emergency due to civil unrest (not due to a natural disaster) in a developed country is a significant and newsworthy event for ITN. STSC (talk) 19:19, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not worthy I think. Are we playing whack a mole? Why does this keep coming back. Venkat TL (talk) 19:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't have an opinion on this entry and personally don't think that Wikipedia should be pretending to report the news at all, but responding to some of the points: this keeps coming back because it's the top news story basically everywhere across Canada and has been for several weeks. The invocation of the Emergencies Act is significant because the statute that it replaced was viewed retroactively by many scholars as a declaration of martial law, and the new statute is basically unchanged except for compelling an after-the-fact review of the government's actions. As others have said, it is only the second time in Canadian history that such a nationwide suspension of civil liberties has been activated, other than during both world wars. It's difficult and dangerous to draw parallels, but this action is somewhat equivalent to the US President unilaterally suspending the 2nd through 10th amendments to the Constitution. It doesn't mean that Trudeau Jr. is about to send in the tanks like his father did against the FLQ, but he now has the power to do so. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support When this was first nominated I certainly believed the article was not ready. Now that the emergencies act has been declared, the highest power the Canadian government can invoke, as well as the fact that the protests are no longer Provincial, and that weapons were seized at the blockade in Alberta and the considerable economic loss (almost $1B CAD), I believe the article is extremely notable. It might be difficult for US-centric editors here to fathom but this is officially a really really big deal and is definitely the Country’s January 6th moment. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:42, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm sorry but that's just ridiculous. January 6th was considered by a large portion of the population (both at the time and still) as an attempted subversion or perhaps complete overthrow of a democracy. This hardly rises to that level. If it is "Canada's January 6th" than Canada's January 6th shouldn't be posted. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:56, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Opposing this on the grounds that it's covered by COVID-19 Ongoing at this point is silly. It's become a singularly significant event in Canada that happens to have been inspired by COVID-19. We posted the UK "Marbury v Madison" [23] despite objections that it was covered by Brexit Ongoing. 2607:F470:E:22:2C01:FB8D:E209:78A9 (talk) 21:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Even the pandemic is only a provincial and territorial emergency, this stands out (iffy article quality, though). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Would it be possible to get the body of the article to properly contextualize the importance of invoking the Emergencies Act? The body of the target article doesn't mention or elaborate on the historical weight (i.e., that this is the first time it's been invoked since its passing in 1988), even though it states that in the lead without an inline source (there are sources in the article to support it, they're just not attached to the statement in the lead or any such statement in the body). I'm leaning support this time, but I feel like the article should first contextualize why invoking this is historically of weight, which I feel like should also be mentioned in the blurb if possible? This is generally a "pending some better updates". ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 22:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose with prejudice Four nominations of this article within the last few weeks is bordering on vexatious. Enough. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    They're four separate events, from four nominators, related to an ongoing movement. Some older votes were just waiting for something federal, unusual or "really dramatic" like this one. Acceptance trumps prejudice? InedibleHulk (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    As Trudeau stated this was to be a very narrow and tailored application of the E Act as to remove to blockage of roads, this isn't the big bombshell of martial law that some were expecting (or as some conservative news commentators are claiming). It could still go that way, but as noted above trying to compare this to Jan 6 is a huge misstep. --Masem (t) 00:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I compared it to the pandemic in the relevant country, brother. There are levels to emergency here, and this one "goes to eleven", one more. Those few hours in Washington do pale in comparison, even as an alleged insurrection, everything just seems brighter and bigger on American screens. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose with prejudice. I don't see why the Canadian protests are particularly notable compared those taking place in other countries around the world. I would be more open to (but would not necessarily support) an ongoing nomination for Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, I agree with Ad Orientem, with four nominations in the past couple of weeks, this is now beyond ridiculous. Chrisclear (talk) 00:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well then perhaps you'll be able to identify in advance the fifth unique person who finds these unprecedented events in Canada newsworthy and warn them ahead of time to not upset your sensibilities. Furthermore, objecting without considering the new information and instead simply stating "I opposed this already" is basically worthless. if you think the first ever invocation of the Emergencies Act in Canada, a NATO member G7 country, is not significant, then please explain otherwise your oppose would be rightly ignored as WP:IDONTLIKEIT by any admin evaluating consensus. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:27, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"The first ever invocation of the Emergencies Act in Canada" is notable in Canada and is notable as a factoid. However, just because Canada did something for the first time doesn't mean it's ITN worthy. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We posted Justin Trudeau's election and reelection. That's a fun bit of man-on-the-street gotcha trivia: "Name the current Canadian Prime Minister." If this once-in-a-lifetime historic event doesn't make it, I better not see another typical quiet election night result overblown on the main page again! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:43, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My point was just because something was done for the first time doesn't make it ITN level. How does countering with a routine event disprove my point? DarkSide830 (talk) 02:49, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm saying brand new, manner of government changes in the English world are more newsworthy than routine changes in House seating arrangements. We post the latter, so should definitely post the former. And I forgot to include his 2019 reelection. Remember how it gripped the world? I doubt it. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:01, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning Oppose. WP:VNT has tainted this event and it's corresponding article, and highlighting it in my mind goes against the premise of In the News to highlight the best of the encyclopedia, with absolutely no offense intended towards the editors who have kept this article in great shape. - Floydian τ ¢
  • Strong oppose - 4th time here. I don't really need to say much when I've already loaded my reasons for the previous 3 nominations. Unless something dramatic occurs, I don't think it needs an ITN. Cheers, PenangLion (talk) 03:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    What exactly does something dramatic look like to you? Fire? Upturned cruisers? Blood and gore? Tanks? Tearful resignation speech? Broken storefronts? British children's choir? Black helicopters? Suicide bombing? Monsters? Your last three votes have been nothing but acknowledgment of opposition to mentioning the convoy's small beginning (by four people, not including you). That's not heavy/strong/loaded, say more. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Does the protest really differ from any other typical COVID-19 related protests? People are arrested, they're retreating, I repeat the word, retreating. When Trudeau evacuated for safety reasons, people were hyping up like Canada is collapsing. When Trudeau declared "some emergency-powers" people here are panicking like Trudeau is going to start another Tiananmen at Canada.

    Let alone there are similar protests in New Zealand. My previous three votes are done without clear elaboration (I sincerely apologize if I did not post a 5 million-word article for my reason) because I don't think I need to elaborate further that my opinions shared the same points made by the people who opposed it. Even if it's important enough, the most critical part of this event is over.
    - The comparison regarding January 6 and this event being similar doesn't make sense when one, this protest was made by only a small proportion of people that most Canadians don't even agree with, two, January 6 was the first time in history that people had breached the grounds close to the Capitol. It is considered a coup d'etat, something that hasn't been seen seriously since 1797. Is this a coup? No. Is this going to threaten democracy in Canada? No. It is about some angry people refusing to take vaccines. Using the American bias doesn't make any sense when there are comparable incidents from the States related to this event yet they're not in ITN.
    I sincerely hope nobody nominates this again for the 5th time. It's becoming a recurring joke for desperate nominations. Per Ad Orientem. PenangLion (talk) 09:09, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The protests are perhaps not that different from other COVID-19 ones but further developments and the enactment of a wartime act do indicate notability beyond COVID. The already present link in Ongoing to the pandemic might have sufficed but it doesn't even mention this protest (or others) in the linked [main] article. This seems akin to the Kazakhstan protests to me and a blurb or ongoing would seem apt. Gotitbro (talk) 12:40, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy close per Alsoriano97 and Joseph2302. Enough is enough. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 13:08, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and close. Already rejected, and nothing fundamental has changed.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:10, 16 February 2022 (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: Raees Mohammad

[edit]
Article: Raees Mohammad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPNcricinfo, The News
Credits:

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

 Ainty Painty (talk) 12:10, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to be tagged with {{deadlink}}? --PFHLai (talk) 18:19, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The one dead reference has been tagged as such. No idea was a "dead page link" is, as that seems like made up terminology. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think they mean "redlinks", which don't need to be removed. User should stop making rules that aren't valid for RD criteria. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:46, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:REDLINKS are fine. Let them be, or turn them blue! --PFHLai (talk) 02:27, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Khayal Zaman Orakzai

[edit]
Article: Khayal Zaman Orakzai (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Nation, Dunya News, Pak Observer
Credits:

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

 Ainty Painty (talk) 14:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 13

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


(Posted) RD: Halyna Sevruk

[edit]
Article: Halyna Sevruk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LB.ua, official announcement from the Sixtiers Museum
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Ukrainian artist. GGT (talk) 23:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Aled Roberts

[edit]
Article: Aled Roberts (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Nation Cymru
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Welsh politician and Welsh language Commissioner  The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 19:55, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ivan Reitman

[edit]
Article: Ivan Reitman (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 this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Director of many beloved '80s and '90s comedies, most notably GhostbustersJOEBRO64 03:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stop being disruptive. --WaltCip-(talk) 13:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I don't think a blurb has been proposed. As of right now this is just an RD nom. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is the type of RD that would draw a blurb by popularity but I fully agree that Reitman is not the type of transformative figure in Hollywood to merit a blurb. He was beloved and a name behind several recognizable names but that's mostly it. --Masem (t) 04:51, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No one is proposing or has even mentioned a blurb, stop that nonsense. Spman (talk) 06:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If Masem and I hadn't stopped that nonsense, someone would have proposed it, trust me. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:59, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No they would not have, stop. Spman (talk) 12:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Super Bowl LVI

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Super Bowl LVI (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: The Los Angeles Rams defeat the Cincinnati Bengals in Super Bowl LVI (MVP Cooper Kupp pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In American football, the Los Angeles Rams defeat the Cincinnati Bengals in the Super Bowl (MVP Cooper Kupp pictured).
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 03:00, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This proposal would be better without that comment. It's an ITNR event, so will be posted without people having to hype it up, as soon as article quality is up to scratch. Claiming it to be "one of the largest sporting events in the world" is highly debatable, and one of the reasons we have ITNR. HiLo48 (talk) 05:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Half the time, items don't even get nominated in that timeframe, but besides that, I very much recall many objections to posting less than ~30 hours after nom (let alone event), especially the "it was posted while America was asleep because the admin knew Americans would oppose" accusations. As said below, a TROUT offence, since we all know it would have eventually (and probably very quickly compared to other items anyway) been posted. Kingsif (talk) 13:53, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support - I've always felt that Fuzheado had an itchy trigger finger when it came to ITN posting, but in this case, the article is good enough for volunteer work.--WaltCip-(talk) 18:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment these ITN articles should be timely. It would be actively harmful to our readers to tie this article up in bureaucratic objections for days and days until it's no longer of interest to the reader. As said above, "Good enough." There is nothing even slightly inaccurate in the article as far as I see, but if you see something inaccurate, please point it out specifically and somebody will fix it right away. Jehochman Talk 18:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sigh, not again User:Fuzheado has a history of making bad calls at ITN and they really need to stop doing this before they get a topic ban from doing so, which frankly I would impose right now. There was no consensus to post this and there is no rush to do so - why not wait until it's fixed? Black Kite (talk) 18:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Well it's up now, and moreover, the ITN picture is of the game's MVP. It would look a bit silly of us to pull it. WaltCip-(talk) 18:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is why I haven't suggested pulling it. We really need Fuzheado to stop fucking about with ITN, though. They posted SuperBowl 54 without any consensus either [24] as well as the significant number of other issues. [25] [26] [27] etc. Black Kite (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Your recollection appears to be off. For SuperBowl 54, it was marked as ready by Muboshgu after noting all CN tags were addressed, with pings to the opposers. [28] Pawnkingthree added an additional support. [29] I posted it, and it was immediately post-posting supported by TRM [30]. This is not "without any consensus." - Fuzheado | Talk 19:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    While I agree that the posting was somewhat premature, in that there were clear outstanding opposes and orange tags for missing citations, it was almost there at the time because the article is became "ready" about half an hour after it was posted. As such, I would award a mild WP:TROUT to Fuzheado but nothing more than that in this instance.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The missing citations have been added, but the WP:PRIMARY issue has not been resolved. BilledMammal (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It was not a serious enough issue to hold up posting.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You've been told repeatedly by numerous editors that WP:PRIMARY has not been violated, both here and at the article talk page. Time to WP:DROPTHESTICK.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    And numerous editors have disagreed. 1300 words sourced to a single primary source is a clear violation of WP:PRIMARY, particularly since there are secondary sources that we can integrate into the article. BilledMammal (talk) 20:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that we allow up to 700 words to be used in summarizing plots of films using the film itself as a source without any problem, using this many words from a third party source is absolutely no way a PROMARY violation as long as no interpretation is done (eg such as suggesting one team dominated the whole game and the other team only scored on a few lucky drives). --Masem (t) 20:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The exception at MOS:PLOT only applies to fictional works. BilledMammal (talk) 21:43, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, when it comes to ITN, there kind of is a rush. How stupid would it look if we posted the results of a major sporting event two or three days later? It's not even actually "in the news" anymore at that point. Mlb96 (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Noting the reinstatement of this unsourced paragraph, meaning that we another citation needed issue, in addition to the ones in the international media coverage section, as well as primary sourcing issues. BilledMammal (talk) 18:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's already been fixed. Several of us agree with you on this specific issue. If that text is restored again, please report it as edit warring or tendentious editing. Jehochman Talk 20:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support Event meets ITNR and is the biggest event of this sport in the world, just wanted to make sure this is consensous. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 21:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support. I think this is alright. Agree with Amakuru in that a WP:TROUT might be in order. That said, I am not really following this WP:PRIMARY argument. In my mind match summaries are like book summaries, right? i.e. MOS:PLOT. Though I can see the Fiction vs Non-fiction argument, the game itself is the source for the summary. I see that that is the same thing that has been done in Super Bowl LV. Where there are additional facts being introduced outside of the match summary e.g. Out of 110 Super Bowl teams, Kansas City became just the third to finish the game without scoring a touchdown, joining the Miami Dolphins in Super Bowl VI and the Los Angeles Rams in Super Bowl LIII. This statement is sourced to a separate source, like it should. I think overall, we are a-ok here. Ktin (talk) 23:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    My main objection per WP:PRIMARY was be cautious about basing large passages on them. The earlier SB page that you mentioned had more than play-by-play refs. At some point, maybe I'll add some secondary sources and use their analysis to trim some minutiae.—Bagumba (talk) 00:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2022 German presidential election

[edit]

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: 2022 German presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Frank Walter Steinmeier is elected for a second term as President of Germany by the Bundesversammlung. (Post)
News source(s): CNBC, Politico
Credits:
Nominator's comments: ITN/R jonas (talk) 23:32, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. Seventy-seven percent of Russia's 6.6 million sq. mi.. of territory is in Asia, 23 percent in Europe. (Russia's population distribution is approximately the opposite.) The proportion of Turkey's territory in Europe is miniscule (or minuscule, if you prefer). – Sca (talk) 15:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

  • It's completely irrelevant how big is Germany. All sovereign countries should be treated equally.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:07, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Amakuru: I suppose you would also oppose Prince Charles's accession to the powerless British throne.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    But he would also become head of state of 15(?) other countries around the world. So there is a bit of a difference due to that, no? 91.96.25.198 (talk) 14:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    And also monarchies aren't really comparable to this because they have cultural and historical significance, and typically change hands far less frequently than heads-of-state in countries with a parliament style democracy. In either case they are not ITN/R, and are assessed on their own merits. IMHO the merits of this one are lacking, and the position has no real significance beyond some domestic ceremonial duties. Furthermore, the suggestion that we do it because it's Germany, while we wouldn't do the same thing for supposedly "less important" countries is systemic bias.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I support the election of a head of state of any country in the world. We recently posted the president of Italy, the president of Macedonia in April 2014, the previous president of Italy in January 2015, the president of Austria in May 2016 and so on. It seems like either too many mistakes were committed in the past or it's not true that we don't post the election of ceremonial heads of state. Anyway, there's no systemic bias at all.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:59, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Per Kiril Simeonovski, this may be done as was done for re-election of prsident of Italy. Alex-h (talk) 14:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – In addition to its population, Germany's GDP ($4.6 trillion) ranks first in Europe and the EU, ahead of the UK ($3.4 trillion) and France ($3.1 trillion). – Sca (talk) 15:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    To echo Kiril above, the GDP of Germany seems entirely irrelvant to this discussion. 91.96.25.198 (talk) 15:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The only thing that makes it slightly more noteworthy to me is that this is 'only' the 4th time a President has been elected for a second term, first time for someone of the social democrats. If it were the first woman elected to the office, it probably would have swayed me though. But the position overall being entirely ceremonial, i don't see this as important enough to post. It will have no effect on anything, within Germany or internationally. The assembly could quite literally elect a sack of rice and it would have the same effect, not to disparage the highest office within one of my home countries. The sack of rice would only need some arms to pin medals and be the final signatory of laws they have no veto power over. Just to illustrate the point. 91.96.25.198 (talk) 15:16, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The anonymous IP user immediately above is listed as having contributed four posts, all here and all today. – Sca (talk) 15:29, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The registered user above is assuming bad faith for no reason and has no understanding how variable IP adresses work. I have zero contributions every day because my IP changes. 91.96.25.198 (talk) 15:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC) [reply]
In the interest of editorial transparency, I suggest you become a registered user, like most eds active here are. – Sca (talk) 15:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be treated like a human being by the likes of you? No thank you. And just to make clear, the IP does not change by my choice, just how my ISP operates. I could also note how you have made 394 edits in 2022, only 10 of which to articles and only one to an article talk page. Or maybe we could both stop irrelevant mudslinging and assuming bad faith, get over our dislike and get back to the matter at hand? 91.96.25.198 (talk) 15:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Such hostile comments are counter-productive. WP:NPA Please consider registering as a user. – Sca (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They have no obligation to create an account. And claiming NPA when you've called them useless/inexperienced for being an IP is somewhat hypocritical. Especially when all you seem to do is make sarcastic/pointless comments on here. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NPA! – Sca (talk) 18:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a personal attack to say you're committing a personal attack for attacking the IP for being an IP! IP editors are human too! -- RockstoneSend me a message! 03:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Casting unfounded aspersions is very much a personal attack as well. I am not sure if you are aware of the edit count tool, but for someone with that kind of a statiscitc, criticism of others seems a bit rich. And in regards to your posting at ITN, quantifiable evidence does suggest you are doing what Joseph suggests you are doing and i am not sure you want people to look through your contributions in more detail to actually show it in diffs. Folks like you are the exact reason why i do not want to make an account. But rest assured, you are far from the only one to conduct themselves in such a manner. (ec) 91.96.162.242 (talk) 03:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've never said any IP user had an "obligation to create an account." I only suggested that the person at issue "consider registering as a user." No aspersions intended; just a suggestion. Adieu. – Sca (talk) 13:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then let us put it off to a misunderstanding. And i personally took no offense at your suggestion to make an account. My issue was you insinuating i was an SPA and my entire purpose of being here was somehow nefarious(i actually voted for Steinmeiers party with my 2nd vote in the last general election, not that it matters), which is usually the implication of being an SPA, no? But if you did not mean to say that, i will take your word for it. If you would allow a suggestion, please be more 'diplomatic' about how you phrase things in future to minimise the chance for misunderstandings. Have a good day anyway. 91.96.162.242 (talk) 16:10, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. And Schönen Tag noch to you as well. – Sca (talk) 13:39, 16 February 2022 (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.

February 12

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


(Posted) RD: Valerie Boyd

[edit]
Article: Valerie Boyd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post; Associated Press; Grady College at University of Georgia
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 20:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Beryl Vertue

[edit]
Article: Beryl Vertue (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian; Variety; The Independent
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 01:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Frank Beckmann

[edit]
Article: Frank Beckmann (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Detroit Free Press; The Detroit News; WXYZ-TV, WJR-AM
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 22:56, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2021 FIFA Club World Cup Final

[edit]

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


Article: 2021 FIFA Club World Cup Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, Chelsea defeats Palmeiras to win the 2021 FIFA Club World Cup. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sports
Credits:
 Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 19:59, 12 February 2022 (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: Hugo Torres Jiménez

[edit]
Article: Hugo Torres Jiménez (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News, Confidencial
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Major Sandinista figure, died in prison. Article is thoroughly referenced. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Rahul Bajaj

[edit]
Article: Rahul Bajaj (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian industrialist; article is currently very short but fully cited. Tube·of·Light 14:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Freedom Convoy 2022

[edit]

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: Freedom Convoy 2022 (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Le monde (fr), Al Jazeera
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This was posted (and pulled) a few days ago. As some of the opposition was related to the specific blurb, I am re-nominating this as purely ongoing. Like the Ukraine story, there is no blurb that I support as nominator, but it is certainly "in the news" internationally now. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 01:03, 12 February 2022 (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) 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis

[edit]

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


Article: 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: "Ongoing" nomination. It's not clear to me how much of this being in the news is Western propaganda, but it is undeniably in the news. Unless there is an actual invasion, I don't see any blurb I would be willing to support, hence the nom is for ongoing. The article looks good enough. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 00:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
'Extremely strong oppose' = oppose. – Sca (talk) 14:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise, 'Extremely strong support' = support. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 17:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
'Strong support' = support. – Sca (talk) 14:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Things have been heating up, especially within the past few weeks and days. Might as well. Redoct87 (talk) 03:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. There's consensus that this is an ongoing high-priority international news topic that warrants posting, whether or not war breaks out. The "failed verification" tags have been addressed as of the posting. Sandstein 08:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-Posting Support -- things are getting extraordinarily tense. It definitely deserves to be posted. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 11:02, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's In The News, not In The Things That Will Happen. Headlines in at least English language media for multiple times past few weeks. Would be weird to not at least put it there. Juxlos (talk) 14:00, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support – Continues to lead almost every prime RS site, with some offering multiple articles. Today's examples include AP, BBC. The looming question: What's Putin's game? – Sca (talk) 14:04, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • War is now imminent. See here: "Satellite imagery obtained by CNN shows that a large base at Yelnya, which held Russian tanks, artillery and other armor, has been largely emptied, with the equipment apparently being moved much closer to the frontier in recent days.

Large amounts of weaponry were moved to the base late in 2021 before disappearing -- including some 700 tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and ballistic missile launchers. Social media videos since show some of that equipment on trains and roads much further south in the Bryansk region, which is close to Ukraine."

"Meanwhile, heightened activity in the Kursk and Belgorod Oblasts, which border northeastern Ukraine, has added to concerns. "We are seeing a massive influx of vehicles and personnel in Kursk," Konrad Muzyka, an expert in tracking military movements with Rochan Consulting, warned on Twitter." Count Iblis (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OTOH, maybe it's just Товарищ Putin's idea of a publicity stunt on steroids. You know, the doping thing. – Sca (talk) 20:00, 13 February 2022 (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.

February 11

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: Lars Eighner

[edit]
Article: Lars Eighner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American writer. New York Times obit published on 11 February. Thriley (talk) 06:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments: With 400+ words, this is not a stub, and is not disqualified by article size. However, this needs re-structuring. A few things were only mentioned in the intro and not mentioned nor elaborated in the main body of the article. And there is no personal life section, info usually found in the personal life section are now in the career section; or perhaps it should be re-name 'life & career'. For a publishing author, info on his books should be in the career section (and a bibliography, which is missing!), not just in the intro. Materials need to be better allocated in this wikiarticle. --PFHLai (talk) 09:58, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 10

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


RD: Mary Ellen Duncan

[edit]
Article: Mary Ellen Duncan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Howard Community College Facebook
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Academic administrator and teacher. TJMSmith (talk) 16:57, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Manuel Esquivel

[edit]
Article: Manuel Esquivel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://caribbean.loopnews.com/content/former-belize-pm-sir-manuel-esquivel-has-died
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Prime Minister of Belize, 1984-1989 & 1993-1998. Almost 400 words of readable prose -- it would be nice if someone familiar with Belize can expand this wikibio, particularly on what he did while he was PM -- I don't think this wikibio should get on RD till this glaring gap in coverage is filled. Thanks. PFHLai (talk) 09:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Stefan Żywotko

[edit]
Article: Stefan Żywotko (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Polsatsport, TVP, Interia
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Polish football manager who won two African Champions League titles. Article should be ready to go. NorthernFalcon (talk) 06:13, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Olsen Filipaina

[edit]
Article: Olsen Filipaina (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New Zealand Herald; Reuters; ABC News (Australian Associated Press)
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 22:25, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: 2022 Winter Olympics

[edit]

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: 2022 Winter Olympics (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, NYT
Credits:
Article updated
Nominator's comments: The current blurb is about the opening ceremony which is no longer in the news. And that article has had orange banner tags for over a day now and so is lacking in quality. Coverage has now moved on to the numerous events, stars and scandals such as the latest Russian drug mystery. We should reflect this change in emphasis by running the ongoing entry instead. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:00, 10 February 2022 (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.

February 9

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

Sports


(Posted) RD: Peter Neilson (politician born 1954)

[edit]
Article: Peter Neilson (politician born 1954) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NZ Parliament
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: This wikibio of the three-term MP of Miramar, New Zealand and cabinet minister from the 1980s is almost 500 words long. Footnotes look adequate. The political career section probably can be elaborated further, but it overall looks ready for RD to me. --PFHLai (talk) 10:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Attention, please.) RD: Javier Gonzales

[edit]
Article: Javier Gonzales (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.sfreporter.com/news/2022/02/09/former-santa-fe-mayor-javier-gonzales-dies-at-55/
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: This wikibio of the 42nd Mayor of Santa Fe (2014-2018) already has 900+ words. It could use some tidying up and re-distribution of materials, perhaps details should go to the main body, leaving general statements or highlights in the intro. And there is 1 {cn} tag in the "Early life and education" section. It's almost ready for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 10:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Susan Shaw

[edit]
Article: Susan Shaw (conservationist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Bangor Daily News, Ellsworth American, Austin American-Statesman
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Huge name in marine toxicology, pretty high-quality article. Star Garnet (talk) 05:49, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ian McDonald (musician)

[edit]
Article: Ian McDonald (musician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, Rolling Stone
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: He co wrote "21st Century Schizoid Man" and Epitaph; as Robert Fripp might say - what more reason does one need? Discography needs some sources and cleanup; I'm working on it now. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support pending - I was going to nominate this when I heard the news, but looked at his article and was too daunted to take it on. Looks like it has seen significant improvement in those 12 hours. Only thing that jumps out at me is the mostly-unsourced discography (which I still think we should be able to use the album sleeve as a source... anybody can obtain it to verify themselves). And kudos for honing on the King Crimson works and not his later pop rock ;) - Floydian τ ¢ 15:41, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discography isn't unsourced (or, to be more accurate, unverifiable), it merely didn't have inline citations (AFAIK everything not with a direct inline cite was cited in the body anyway). However, I've popped some in. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:27, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was just heading off the inevitable ITN regulars perennial comment. Pending striked, good to go. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:16, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jim Angle

[edit]
Article: Jim Angle (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fort Worth Star-Telegram; Lubbock Avalanche-Journal; Fox News
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 09:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Betty Davis

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Azita Raji

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Jeremy Giambi

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

February 8

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 8 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Robert Mulcahy

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support Looks ready, well sourced. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 20:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This wikibio is now 400+ words long and technically long enough to not be considered a stub and thus qualify for use on ITN/RD. However, the thin "Career" section makes me think what he did in his career to deserve all the accolades in the "Awards and honors" section. This article was only used as ref for the school he had attended? Can more be written on his tenure as Rutger's AD? What happened in Meadowlands during his 19 years running NJSEA? Shall we mention that he was at one time the governor's chief of staff? How did he get himself knighted and inducted to a Hall of Fame? This wikibio, imho, is technically ready for RD (except for that bare URL in refs), but it's a disappointing read, and I wish the coverage of the subject's life were a little more elaborated. --PFHLai (talk) 01:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 18:49, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Luc Montagnier

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment. Combining nominations. Retaining the nom for 2/8. Updating nominator to Template:U. Ktin (talk) 18:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article needs some work. Seeing how Montagnier co-discovered HIV and was instrumental in linking HIV to AIDS, I can see how this could merit a blurb, but article needs to be fixed. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:41, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There are at least 10 {cn} tags in this wikibio that need to be resolved before the nom can proceed. This wikibio is also oddly structured: The first section is about "History of the discovery of HIV", with no info on his earlier work on retroviruses before HIV, except stating that people at his lab at Pasteur Institute had "extensive experience with retroviruses". The second section on "Personal life and death" has 3 sentences, and has little on early education and nothing on how he got to Pasteur Institute and involved in the field of retroviruses. After a short list of Awards and Honors, a "Controversies" section then takes up the second half of the wikibio. It looks like much work is needed to get this wikibio balanced and referenced for use on ITN/RD. --PFHLai (talk) 13:12, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Unfortunately, I am not too knowledgeable on medicine / medical research other than currently reading Jennifer Doudna's The Code Breaker book. Do we have anyone knowledgeable on this topic who can step in and help? Thanks. Ktin (talk) 18:25, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I am tagging the only person who I have run into and might be knowledgeable on this topic, Template:Ping. Pardon the cold ping. Please see if you can help. Ktin (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I met him once, briefly, in the late 1980s. Sadly, the article needs some work. A few of the {cn} tags can be sourced to Template:Cite book but the topic remains controversial, and will need some careful (diplomatic) editing, because of the important role Robert Gallo played in the discovery of HIV and his not being recognised by the Nobel Committee. Montagnier's comments, made in his dotage, about the origins of the covid coronavirus should not be given such prominence in my view. I don't know what the policy is on selecting ITN articles. Are ones with such obvious issues acceptable? Graham Beards (talk) 19:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yup. These issues are not acceptable for the article to move to the homepage, unfortunately. The article needs to pass hygiene expectations (referencing, citations, reasonable comprehensiveness of coverage etc.) Usually, we do have editors who can help with some work on the article. But, this one seems a tad difficult. With that, this might have to go stale. RIP Montagnier. Ktin (talk) 04:25, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article is not well sourced, along with other problems. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 20:07, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Gerald Williams

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Bamber Gascoigne

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

"Give us some easy RDs, you big bottom-boil!" Vyvyan333 (talk) (cont) 11:29, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Pulled) Freedom Convoy 2022

[edit]

Template:Archivetop Template:ITN candidate

  • Support Per WaltClip. This is not a local news story - it has been national news in Canada, sparked international headlines, and the situation has evolved significantly since last nomination. The range of the protests have expanded to shutting down/restricting access (depending on the point in time) to two international border crossings, Ambassador Bridge and Sweetgrass–Coutts Border Crossing, and the GoFundMe aspect has drawn international headlines - particularly with US politicians diving into the situation. My own feelings about how useless the COVID-19 ongoing as-is, aside - this has evolved far beyond some people waving signs around in Ottawa. Reframe and rewrite the blurb to focus on more notable events if necessary, but the state of emergency in the capital of a G7 country (as repeatedly stated by the media) is just scratching the surface of this situation - do not oppose this simply because of the wording of the blurb. Canadianerk (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request Suggesting promotion is contingent on hurting or killing people is stupid and reckless, akin to double-dog daring; stick to level of coverage, please. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree. We have posted far less consequential protests in the past in S. Korea, Romania and France. Why the sudden raising of the bar here? -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're asking me, you're asking a tinfoil-hatted muppet, but I think the global COVID restrictions have made us all a more domestically violent people, if even only in thoughts and words. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:26, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage in the media is insufficient for posting a blurb for a protest related to the pandemic when it’s been posted to the main page for almost two years. Also, it’s very strange to argue that we’re raising the bar when we’ve already rejected multiple other similar events with even wider coverage at some point simply because the pandemic appears on the main page. However, it was a huge mistake that the box on the pandemic was removed from the top of the ITN section because we could’ve easily added a link to Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in order to accommodate this and other similar events. Of course, there are exceptions if a protest turns violent or results in a government change, but then the consequences make a strong argument for posting, not the protest itself.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Let's put the box back up. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:07, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I assumed we were talking about the minimum casualties bar (seemingly set at two by your vote). I agree these are COVID-related complications. But I could see an exception made if enough people agree the inflated coverage, big honking trucks and Canadian content set this dissimilar event apart. Ignoring other cases works for recent deaths. Why not everything? I'll support the box. Just not bloodshed. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I deliberately mentioned "casualties" and "Trudeau's resignation" to hint at the exception and keep this alive. I could've easily dismissed it by arguing that COVID-19 pandemic in ongoing is enough but decided to give it a chance in case something happens compared to other similar protests.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I appreciate your efforts at flexibility. All I intended by listing three other differences was that physical violence and federal politics aren't the only ways for activists to be noticed. Cheers! InedibleHulk (talk) 18:55, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Canadianerk, though the blurb should have some mention of what the protests are in reaction to. Morgan695 (talk) 17:11, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Declaration of emergency in a G7 capital because police can't clear out thousands of protestors occupying the downtown core for over a week. Protests have now also spread to multiple international crossings with the US. Blurb needs to mention cause of protests as mentioned above. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per discussion. An extended prominent and newsworthy protest. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting As noted, this is a top story as it is not "just" a protest, but an extended civil unrest that has disrupted the capital of a G7 nation. It is being covered around the world. Arguments of "the nomination was SNOWED last week" and "it's local" don't hold weight. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-Posting Comment Not pushing for a...pull, I guess, but I feel this was sorta railroaded. As much as the fact that this is "extended", "disruptive", and in "the capital of a G7 nation, I fail to see how that alone makes it deserving of posting. Many of the protests we post involve mass arrests or firing on protesters. As far as I can see no one has been killed, and all of 14 people in a protest of potentially tens of hundreds have been arrested. The idea that this specific event will fuel others is speculative, and it certainly isn't the first noted protest recently, much less since the start of the pandemic. As for the claims that other protests globally or even domestically were caused by this, that is speculation. I would, at the very least, lean Neutral on this and more likely oppose than support such a posting unless there was serious fallout (either solidly more arrests, shooting, or resignation of key officials within the Federal Government of Canada). Just my two cents, but I think this needs to be said in regards to posts like this going forward (because we know this won't be the last nomination of this type). DarkSide830 (talk) 20:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:U, I posted it because (a) it's in the news, (b) it has substantial RS coverage, (c) it has a high quality article, and (d) the opposition is not convincing. There is no WP:MINIMUMDEATH requirement for posting, nor does it need to be connected to any past or future events which would be WP:CRYSTAL assumptions anyway. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:07, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I get it, it's just simply a matter of myself not being as convinced as others about some of these criteria. That I why I chose not to vote, I simply figured that I could at least add a little something worthwhile to the debate. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull, nothing actually happening, embarrassing, clearly did not have consensus. Abductive (reasoning) 21:20, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:U, as I said, most of those opposing votes have no weight. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    So, if I proposed posting 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis. and then everybody said, "but nothing's happening", they have no weight because they all said the same thing? Just embarrassing. Abductive (reasoning) 21:51, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    So now people agreeing with each other has no weight? I thought that was the definition of trying to acheive a consensus... but yet again, another North American article is given favourable treatment.... Joseph2302 (talk) 23:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting concern. The blurb is vague. Is it referring to Mayor Jim Watson's declaration of a state of emergency in the city? There has also been discussion of Premier Doug Ford declaring a provincial state of emergency. It would be good to clarify who is doing the declaring. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull. Not a significant event; while coverage has been broad, it is a localized protest that has had no real impact outside of inconveniencing the city it is being held in. I also don't believe that consensus was reasonably assessed - per Wikipedia:In the news#Significance it is Template:Tq, and given that I don't believe the closer presented sufficient reason to decide that Template:Tq. BilledMammal (talk) 23:28, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull per above. Not of sufficient significance, and it doesn't look like there is consensus for it. Slightly confused as to why Oppose votes have been deemed to have "no weight". It's just a subjective decision like most others.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:34, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:U, WP:ITSLOCAL and "it was SNOWED a week ago" have no weight – Muboshgu (talk) 00:56, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:Ping WP:ITSLOCAL doesn't appear to apply here; it's an argument to avoid in deletion discussions, as locality doesn't affect notability, but it can affect significance when we are considering an article inclusion ITN. As for the sole argument that referenced the previous WP:SNOW discussion, their position was not that this should be rejected because it "SNOWED a week ago", but because they do not believe there has been any change in significance since then, which is an appropriate argument and should not be given no weight. BilledMammal (talk) 01:56, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:U, when I say ITSLOCAL, I'm referring to what it says above. #Please do not... Template:Tq And, WP:CCC, so relying on a close from last week has no relevance either. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    See Template:Diff2. BilledMammal (talk) 02:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull Not significant per above. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 00:16, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull delibrately ignoring one set of people is not objective. Not enough evidence has been given of a significant impact of this to gain an actual consensus for posting (if you actually ibjectively look for a consensus rather than declaring half the votes as apparently invalid). Joseph2302 (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You've already opposed, so you're effectively !voting twice. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope, complaining about the method of how something is posted is different from supporting/opposing the nomination in the first place. They are completely different, stop trying to use bureaucracy to annoy. Joseph2302 (talk) 04:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You'll notice that none of the other editors who used a bolded "Pull" had previously expressed an opinion on the nom. Pawnkingthree (talk) 10:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I did not deliberately ignore a set of people, I deliberately ignored votes that have no policy basis, which is how consensus is formed. It's not a vote count. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Major protests generating international headlines and influencing anti-public health sentiments in other parts of the world. [34] Clearly no longer just a local story. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Local news arguments and last week's situation should be discounted (not all Opposes). One is not true and the other is irrelevant. Significance is explained in various article sections. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Although I obviously see articles biased to my location local to this protest, it has seen numerous articles about it in numerous international news sources within the current 24-hour cycle, such as Al Jazeera, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, Washington Post, Times of India, New York Times... I could go on. However, I think that it may be worth discussing adding Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic to ongoing if there is such a divide over singling out the Canadian one. - Floydian τ ¢ 01:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Using the DM should automatically disqualify this, but even then, this is a COVID story, and thus covered under the COVID ongoing, it does not need any more special attention as much as any other COVID story presented over the past 2-some years. --Masem (t) 01:18, 9 February 2022 (UTC)x[reply]
      • Mangeshkar's death was a COVID story, too, no DQ. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:25, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Of course it wasn't. It was about her contribution to Bollywood and Indie's entertainment industry and the recognition of it in her death. And in this case, at least myself and others are acknowledging if this turned violent or caused a major political shift like Trudeau's resignation, that would make it a blurb as that goes beyond a simple COVID story. But right now its typical - beyond the fact its not in the US and in a major city center - of demonstrations that have gone on for the last two years rejecting mask and vaccine mandates from COVID. --Masem (t) 01:31, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also to remind editors: we don't care how much coverage a story gets (as we are not a news ticker) only that it is in the news to quality for posting. There are lots of stories that get widespread international coverage on the day-to-day that do not make sense for ITN to cover as the topic likes encyclopedic significance (but can be covered at the Current Events portal). --Masem (t) 01:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • How does one determine the significance of a story without looking at how much coverage it is getting? Just use our own personal biases? Pawnkingthree (talk) 01:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • We consider 1) what's already in the box such as ongoing stories and 2) consider what are enduring stories that likely have long-term encyclopedic impact rather thhan news impact. That requires using news as sopurces but not necessarily the same weight that news gives the topics. And we also should work to eliminate systematic bias resulting from the majority of news sources heavily covering Western events. --Masem (t) 01:55, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good for people deciding to post this. I recommend once this drops out of the blurb timeframe, the Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic should be considered to be added to ongoing. 188.27.42.181 (talk) 01:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Until it inspires something of meaningful historical note. Also, as a minor note: the state of emergency was declared on February 6, not the 8th. So, this nomination is under the incorrect date, as I understand it? I don't know if that matters anymore now that it's already on the front page right now. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 01:54, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Is the liberation of France meaningful or minor? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:13, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The point above is that protests related to covid, unless they turn violent or create direct political results, are effective covered by the covid ongoing. I would agree that if world wide protests grew to a size similar to the BLM protests of 2020, then there might be something more, but these collectively still aren't very big and haven't changed politics yet. --Masem (t) 19:25, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You're projecting things. Parasol's major point was only about waiting till it inspired something of meaningful historical note, which I believe The New York Times suggests this potential French revolution already is, by virtue of fitness to print in America. If you don't want to answer my question and only interrupt, that's fine, I'll assume you chose "minor". InedibleHulk (talk) 19:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Then you are talking about speculation about something major happening from this, which ITN also does not use as a metric. Even if major RSes suggest it is a major effect, we are still looking for something more significant and quantifiable. --Masem (t) 19:55, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I already told you what we (not you) were talking about. Meaningful historical note. If you can't pay attention, don't play along, and don't invent other people's positions (opponents or proponents). InedibleHulk (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping For me? I do not believe it of meaningful historical note yet. The NYT article also points out similar protests in Paris over the summer. One confirmed copy-cat in a city that has a history of protests against restrictions doesn't move my position at the moment. I may change my mind by the time the Paris protests officially commune on Friday, depends. These other mentioned calls to action in the article are promising candidates for changing my oppose here. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 01:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for elaborating on that. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:51, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I will make one last comment here. I saw support votes with good rationale and opposing votes that dismissed this as "local" and "parochial", or by not meeting a certain threshold of casualties and PM resignations. If another admin wants to pull this, they can. I will not as I think there is still a consensus in favor, though it is weaker now than it was when I posted it. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:20, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull -- This should not have been posted, there was not consensus at the time of posting. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 03:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is clear that there is and was no consensus to post this, with the consensus only being seen by giving no weight to certain !votes despite no policy or guideline based reason to do so. However, the posting admin is unwilling to withdraw this and that raises the question of where to take this next; the normal location would be WP:AN, but that process is too long for ITN. BilledMammal (talk) 04:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pulled, the tide has turned on consensus for this story. Stephen 04:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-pulling comment – Significance trumps coverage. – Sca (talk) 13:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Significance can only be determined by coverage; there is no other source of evidence. I can only know about things by reading them. --Jayron32 13:25, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No, ITN only requires a minimum bar of coverage for inclusion, the rest of it becomes a matter of discussion and consensus of where the topic fits into our goal as an encyclopedia, to cover topics from across the globe and from all areas of interest, and to avoid systematic biases that come from 24/7 news coverage of politics, entertainment, and sports that primarily favor the Western world. Using "Significance being proportion to coverage" is the road to ITN being a news ticker. Of course, the more coverage something has, the better quality article I expect to see. And we still have Current Events portal linked into the box for all other major news stories. --Masem (t) 13:30, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Please stop inventing things I never said, and then contradicting the thing I never said, and then pretending like that somehow contradicts me. I would have hoped you were better than that. What I said was that I need to read sources to learn about the significance of things. The coverage of an event is where I learn about its significance. To ignore the source material (coverage) seems counter to Wikipedia's core ethos. I don't matter. My opinion doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is what I can demonstrate by evidence in reliable source material. --Jayron32 15:13, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Further the affiant sayeth naught. 'Cuz it's all been said before. Bonne journée, mes amis.Sca (talk) 14:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is amazing how stark the differences of schools of thought are between Template:Noping and Template:Noping, and how they alternately dominate the discourse surrounding ITN nominations, depending both on local consensus and the presence of participants. I'm reminded of the stark dichotomies of Plato vs Aristotle. WaltCip-(talk) 15:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't hear anyone suggest that Canada was a third-world country. As far as I recall, this (3,700-word) discussion was about a contrived truck traffic jam in Canada and its perceived significance elsewhere. – Sca (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unless we're planning to post every time any city declares a state of emergency, posting this based on the state of emergency is a WP:BIAS in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that Ottawa (being the capital of Canada) declaring a state of emergency due to civil unrest (not due to a storm or flood, etc.) is a significant event in a developed country like Canada. STSC (talk) 19:23, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping "Significance trumps coverage." could you please link to the relevant policy which cites that criteria? Thanks. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep pulled. Are we supposed to post every little thing that happens in every city in every country, just because a state of emergency has been declared? I don't think so. This is essentially a traffic jam in Ottawa, and unless they overthrow the entire government of Canada, this has no significant impact on any country. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 17:23, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support re-posting - This is the powder keg issue of the year for Canada with reverberations large and small. I understand there was some deliberate look-away by the media at the beginning but even international sources now cover this extensively.CoatCheck (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep pulled Just because a state of emergency has been declared in one city does not mean that this event is significant enough to post on ITN. If there was actual rioting with large scale damage to property or people, I would reconsider. Chaosquo (talk) 19:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You seem to be judging this very complex story solely on the proposed blurb, not even the pulled one. I ask you click the link and reconsider after reading at least some of everything else beside the (unprecedented) state of emergency. Not mandatory, though! InedibleHulk (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The event is also globally significant because of the vaccination issues involved. It really concerns all other countries and I think they would be observing closely such impacts of implementing the vaccination policies during this pandemic. STSC (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This has been true throughout the pandemic, though. All sorts of momentous things have occurred which under normal circumstances, as isolated events, would merit posting but which become ongoing and widespread in these highly unusual times. This is why we have the sticky ongoing link to COVID-19 (and earlier, the special box, which I opposed removing) and we don't keep posting individual stories.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
4,300 words. – Sca (talk) 20:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – The AP, in an update filed around 19:50, reported that Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec and Prince Edward Island have announced plans to roll back some or all Covid precautions – Sca (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Ontario doesn't care! InedibleHulk (talk) 21:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    WOW! WaltCip-(talk) 21:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comments above were made when there was only one proposed blurb. The altblurb was added on 9 February 2022‎ at 23:55 UTC, with diff Chrisclear (talk) 04:28, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re-post the posting admin was correct in their assertion that opposed based on "not internationally significant" are invalid as we have specific guidance against that consideration. The posting admin was also correct in dismissing opposes based solely that the previous nomination had been closed (laughably in just four hours by someone who was later involved in opposing this nom). If WP:CONSENSUS is not just a !vote count, then there was conensus to post at the time it was done. Conseqeuntially pull !votes contesting that the original consensus was invalid are themselves invalid and thus there is still strong consensus to post this item. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re-post with copycat protests in New Zealand, France, and Australia ([35]), this is worth posting. Banedon (talk) 02:22, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both proposed blurbs The first blurb specifically mentions a state of emergency in Ottawa. However the States of emergency in Canada article shows that various parts of Canada have entered a state of emergency quite frequently, with 2015 being the most recent year when this did not take place. It's a quasi-routine action taken by the executive branch of government. If anything is to be posted, then it should be the reason for the state of emergency, not the state of emergency itself.
  • The second blurb mentions that the Canadian protests are inspiring similar protests worldwide. This claim is highly dubious. The non-Canadian protests are barely mentioned in the Freedom Convoy 2022 article, and the sources provided allude to causation, when it's merely spurious correlation. While there may be some truth to this claim, similar protests have been taking place for months in other countries. I don't see why the Canadian protests are particularly notable compared those taking place in other countries around the world. I would be more open to a nomination for Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Chrisclear (talk) 05:01, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the six sources currently crammed in the middle paragraph of "Other protests" vouch for inspiration, if not causation, often using forms of that word (in various languages). Pedestrian protests are old hat. Canada got the convoy ball rolling, at least in this era. And disaster emergencies are normal. But protest emergencies are new. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing out those six sources, four of which I overlooked previously. However I'm struggling to see why a "convoy protest" is more notable than a pedestrian protest. Chrisclear (talk) 05:01, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Trucks are larger, louder and harder to move than people. Truckers are also somewhat notorious for their ability to take a seat and withstand boredom for the long haul. All fine attributes for real extended persuasion, in my eyes. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:15, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a comment, the alt blurb (relating the dropping of mandates) is improper correlation with causation. While news sources reported the dropping of mandates and mention the convoy in the same article, I've not seen any specific statement that specifically states the mandates were being dropped due to the convoy. There's a possiblility that may be the case, but we can't jump that leap of logic. So it is is bad synthesis for us to even approach that. --Masem (t) 05:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I said "as", suggesting only correlation, nothing like "because". InedibleHulk (talk) 05:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is leading to synthesis given the lack of space for context, it creates the impression to the reader "B happened because of A". --Masem (t) 05:22, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand what you mean by space for context. If you can add it, go ahead. We can't be held responsible for people who read too fast or replace the written conjunctions in their heads, though, that's on them. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:09, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Is Template:Tq any clearer, with a comma between A and B? InedibleHulk (talk) 06:25, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, however then I (and maybe other editors too?) would question the notability/significance of a sub-national government deciding to end vaccination mandates. Chrisclear (talk) 06:36, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    They're four governments, each with a separate monarchy, equal to the federal government's under the Crown. Canada is hard to explain sometimes. I give up for now. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose second blurb because it implies the provinces dropped the vaccine mandates due to the protests, when it is readily evident to anyone who does any research that the vaccine mandates were on course for being dropped anyways. I don't like the first blurb either simply because of its emphasis on the "state of emergency". There are many municipal states of emergency in Canada every year (e.g. Toronto declares one every time a bad snowstorm hits); the previously linked article States of emergency in Canada only bothers listing provincial ones because municipal emergencies are not newsworthy, as this one is. I am not opposed to a blurb about the protests that sticks to the facts, for example: "Anti-vaccine mandate protests in Ottawa, Canada, inspire other protests across the country which shut down major highways and international border crossings." However, I'd like to point out that these protests are not dissimilar from the 2020 Canadian pipeline and railway protests, which did not get posted to ITN. NorthernFalcon (talk) 06:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archivebottom

February 7

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 7 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Bruce Owen

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Abhijatabhivamsa

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Jerome Chazen

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) Cyclone Batsirai

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • I'm more interested in the choice of picture, which is worth 1000 words. Here's some alternative views which also show Madagascar.
Andrew🐉(talk) 13:36, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As of 15:30, BBC, Guardian, AlJazeera, DW and our Madagascar article said "at least 10." ReliefWeb, a UN organization, said "at least 20." – Sca (talk) 15:36, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hat

  • It should be noted that we post lots of blurbs about events where no one dies. There is no requirement that a certain number of people die before it becomes main page worthy. The Winter Olympics, for example, was posted, and I'm not aware of any deaths there. If you wish there to be such a standard, please start a discussion somewhere and establish consensus for your new standard. --Jayron32 11:51, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think I need to clarify that I was referring to natural disasters and attacks on people… _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 12:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Where would you put that number and why? WaltCip-(talk) 13:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There are no standard number of deaths for "natural disasters and attacks on people". I did not qualify the types of articles in my response because I wanted to be as inclusive as possible. There are no standard number of deaths at all on any kind of article, which would include "natural disasters and attacks on people". If you wish to establish such a standard, start a discussion and get a consensus for it. Otherwise, there's no valid, policy-based reason to object to a standard you made up that doesn't exist. --Jayron32 15:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • For God's sake...you are long time users in Candidates, are you really surprised by what I am saying? In all nominations related to disasters, their viability has been questioned depending on the number of deaths and damages they cause. And it doesn't matter if this is written as a standard or not. Considering the inclusion of, for example, an earthquake that only results in the death of one or two people, rips away the sense of notability/ITN worthy of MP. I will not open a debate on something that is always under debate in every nomination of this type. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 15:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You have stated there is a "minimum standard" that this nomination does not meet. You did not specify where that minimum standard is, thereby making your argument 100% conjecture. WaltCip-(talk) 16:16, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    As WaltCip says, can you show me the place where I can read about this minimum standard you keep alluding to? I'd like to apply it fairly myself, but first I would need to read about it so I know what it is. --Jayron32 16:25, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can show you where I say that these "standards" are not written: a few lines above. Even in Law, there are things that are done as a "standard" even if they are not written. By custom, as a result of consensus. And this is the case: nominations related to disasters tend to prosper or not depending on the number of fatalities they cause. You can look it up for yourselves in the previous nominations that have taken place, in many of them you have even participated in the debate. I can't be any clearer than that. This debate is ridiculous. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:26, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hab

FYI, AlJazeera attributes 20+ toll to unnamed "officials" – officials of what it doesn't say. – Sca (talk) 13:48, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 6

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 6 Template:Cob


(Closed) RD: Don Johnston

[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Abot

(Posted) RD: Syl Johnson

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: George Crumb

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Hans Neuenfels

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) 2021 Africa Cup of Nations

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Ronnie Hellström

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD Blurb: Lata Mangeshkar

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Template:Reply please help to stop vandalism at the article. 2402:3A80:684:F7B3:4D8C:9491:DC34:DAC2 (talk) 07:33, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U Please help to fix remaining few new issues. 2402:3A80:684:F7B3:4D8C:9491:DC34:DAC2 (talk) 16:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is done. Please have a look. Ktin (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indian vocalist. India's greatest Bollywood "playback" singer (Encyclopedia of India), Credited with having the world's most recorded voice (Dictionary of Women Worldwide), Legendary Indian playback vocalist (see Filmi), hailed as the supreme voice of Indian popular music and the Queen of Bollywood (Donald Clarke), Prolific megastar playback singer central to Hindi film music for the past four decades. (Encyclopaedia of Indian Cinema), legendary Indian playback singer noted for her distinctive voice and a vocal range that extended over more than three octaves. (Britannica). Gotitbro (talk) 14:11, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Missing coverage in the wikiarticle? Please add to the wikiarticle. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 14:17, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose I think we need to be much stricter with including deceased in blurb. Lately it seems to me that we have the standard too low. Even if she was perhaps India's most important singer (I don't dispute that), I don't think she is someone who has had the international impact that the people who may have previously been included may have had. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:27, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD but Oppose blurb on quality - The article is in poor shape to give the reader the impression that this is field-defining figure; her career is just a step away from proseline and while there's some attempt at a bit of legacy, it really doesn't give any impression beyond being one with a record-number of recordings (which itself alone is not transformative in the field). There's probably more that can be written and fixed up to make this better for this purpose from bios to get this to a state that a blurb would be then appropriate, but the article should be in better quality for that reason. But for a standard RD, we're fine. --Masem (t) 14:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. All the Template:Citation needed tags have now been filled. I truly believe the article is good to go to homepage at this point. Of course it is not a WP:FA or a WP:GA but meets minimums imo. Ktin (talk) 15:01, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose due to insufficient international notability; the same reason that Betty White shouldn't have been posted. We need to be more choosy in regard to which entertainers are blurbed. Jim Michael (talk) 15:06, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Not challenging your opinion. BBC CNN CNN Dawn The West Australian Sydney Morning Herald Straits Times Deutsche Welle New York Times -- all of them seem to disagree. Ktin (talk) 15:13, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U and Template:U see above the international coverage from major news and media around the world. Thank you. 2402:3A80:684:F7B3:4D8C:9491:DC34:DAC2 (talk) 15:50, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That merely shows international media coverage, due to many fans in many countries. Thousands of entertainers, including Sarah Harding, Michael K. Williams & James Michael Tyler, received that - no-one suggested blurbing their deaths. That's very different from international notability, which is indicated by winning major international awards. Jim Michael (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Reply Previously held Guinness World Records, Bharat Ratna from India and Legion of Honour from France.2402:3A80:684:F7B3:4D8C:9491:DC34:DAC2 (talk) 16:02, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With due respect, there is no necessity for "major" international awards whatever that means. Ktin (talk) 16:04, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For an entertainer, having major entertainment awards (such as Academy Awards, BAFTAs, Palme d'Ors, Grammys & Tonys) from multiple countries should be the bar for a blurb. Over 99% of enterainers shouldn't be considered. Popularity shouldn't be enough. Jim Michael (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will let you re-read that comment and the examples that you have given (Academy Awards, BAFTAs, Palme d'Ors, Grammys & Tonys) to understand how biased your view seems to be. Ktin (talk) 16:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you're implying that because they're all awards from the Western world that I must have a pro-Western bias. Winning major relevant awards from multiple countries in other parts of the world would also be valid, but she doesn't have those. She has great popularity & success in her home country & has fans in many others. That makes her a domestic figure with some international popularity. I opposed Betty White being blurbed for the same reason. Jim Michael (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A point is that our article should use sources to explain why having multiple international awards is why she is a highly regarded entertainment figure. Simply by virtue of having many international awards and pleading to "well, that's important!" is not really good enough for helping our readers to understand why we single these people our for blurbs. (Also, we absolutely should ignore Guinness records and other superlative aspects unless documented as part of a person's legacy). --Masem (t) 16:45, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have been a bystander here when you all have been bickering about US vs the UK biases all these days. If you now want to emphasize that this article can not make it to the homepage as a blurb because she has not won an Academy award or a BAFTA -- this is frankly ridiculous! Ktin (talk) 16:54, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Article is good. Alex-h (talk) 16:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb on significance, I haven't yet had time to evaluate quality. The influence playback singers had isn't easily understood if you're unfamiliar with Bollywood. Mangeshkar, by all accounts, was the leading playback singer in Bollywood for decades, with a reach far beyond just India. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. The linked BBC article in the nom gives multiple convincing reasons for why her body of work merits a blurb and not just a RD (e.g. state funeral, national days of mourning, length/amount of work). Also, in respect to internationality, besides India, she was widely popular in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and among overseas South Asian diaspora. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 20:18, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Notability is clear and article quality is decent. Given the length of the article the referencing is actually rather impressive for a change. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:42, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 23:08, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The obits did not disclose any transformative impact, superior musical technique or the like. It seems that she was famous for being ever-present in the consciousness of the Indian public, which I don't think is sufficient to simply be an icon for being everywhere. Also, as Masem noted, the biography is basically just a list of songs and doesn't explain how they changed the landscape of the field at all. Bumbubookworm (talk) 23:47, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb She has been the voice of 1.5 billion human beings for more than seventy years. Her voice accompanied a whole subcontinent from birth celebrations to funerals. Her singing technique has set the standard for all singers of her time and those who came after her. Singing in high pitch was not the common standard in indian classical music before her and she was even criticised for it early in her career. It's highly probable that if someone has listened to just one Hindi song that it was one sung by her. Her fans were in the diaspora and she was heard in the Soviet Union, the Middle East, Subsaharan Africa and South East Asia for decades when Indian cinema was the only foreign cinema available in those regions. Is she doesn't get a blurb then no other indian artist will ever deserve to get one. She was by far the most popular celebrity in India across four generations. In terms of notability for an artist we haven't done better and probably never will Varoon2542 (talk) 11:33, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb, Oppose Photo She was a highly influental figure in India. However, I belive that the photo for the opening ceremony of Beijing 2022 is much more important. Hcoder3104 (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: We don't pick photos by importance. We pick photos by the topmost blurb for which there is a photo available. As this is currently the topmost blurb, it is the one that gets the photo. If we get another blurb with a valid photo, we'll update the photo at that time. See Wikipedia:In_the_news#Pictures, which has the text Template:Tq --Jayron32 18:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Pull COVID-related event, like those in Ongoing. And yes, the blurb itself neatly omits the cause, setting and circumstances. But the underlying article sure doesn't. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:11, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 5

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 5 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Raymond A. Jordan

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Ibrahim Sutar

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: John Honderich

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

February 4

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 4 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Jason Epstein

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Yale Kamisar

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Ashley Bryan

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) Ongoing: 2022 Winter Olympics

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

I think the best approach here is to post the opening ceremony, when it rolls off the box, we put ongoing. Provided the articles are ok, of course. --Tone 08:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose that article the chronological summary is just a list with no sources. Unless it's actually fixed to have some summary text in it (days -2 and -1 have already happened, so could have more written about them), then we shouldn't post that poor quality article. Also, I know this comes around every Olympics, but why not just post 2022 Winter Olympics instead, since that article is decent quality and has links to all the other sports? This is what we do for e.g. the COVID-19 ongoing (rather than postimg a messy summary page). Joseph2302 (talk) 08:36, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Giving no opinion of it, I believe the idea is that the event is so big that the main overview article cannot be appropriately updated or reflect the day-to-day ongoing nature, so the simpler text summary is used for the ongoing status. Kingsif (talk) 12:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We had a similar issue with the Summer Olympics, the chronological summary is not a good article to link to on the front page. My proposal was to link to the main event article, and then put the medal table into brackets, since thats what most people will be interest in while the event is going on. It was eventually added during the Summer Games. jonas (talk) 00:59, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support on these conditions: We can place that in the ongoing section, but the link should be 2022 Winter Olympics. Dunutubble (talk) 14:26, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for main article. Albrecht (talk) 14:55, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as well as support posting now vs after the Opening Ceremony. The Games are already going on, waiting until the ceremony is unnecessary and arguably incorrect. To me the chronological does pose the biggest updates possibility, but it may be more helpful to viewers to link to the main 2022 Olympics page, and also agree per Joseph that the state of the article is a plus here. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Opening ceremony of the 2022 Winter Olympics

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Just Beijing would be the correct form for a major world city like that, right? I could be mistaken. --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:13, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose it could be. If my reading is correct I think either is fine. BSMRD (talk) 10:29, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think, considering the item as well as link style, this is not just an event in Beijing, but a major world event hosted by China, so mentioning China is worthwhile. Kingsif (talk) 12:56, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yugo. – Sca (talk) 15:07, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your cordial collegial comments. – Sca (talk) 16:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 3

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 3 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Donny Gerrard

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Christos Sartzetakis

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Thank you, Alsoriano97. Nicely done! This wikibio looks READY for RD to me. I took the liberty to cross out the previous "oppose" from Feb.6th. Thanks, again. --PFHLai (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mike Moore (baseball executive)

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Dieter Mann

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

RD: Trude Feldman

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Blurb posted) Blurb/RD: Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Jesus Christ. This is clearly an example of "death as the main story." Calidum 18:27, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but people around here seem to think that suicides don't qualify as "death as main story", as evidenced in previous nominations. I want to know if we're being consistent or not. WaltCip-(talk) 18:39, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think there's a difference where someone kills themselve because they feel suicidal through depression etc. and someone blowing themselves (and others) up because they were about to be captured by a(nother) country's special forces. -- KTC (talk) 22:00, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hat

Template:Hab

February 2

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 2 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Bill Fitch

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Plaine Savo massacre

[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

* Comment Go for it, though I'm not sure it would progress much, per Sca's comment. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 13:24, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

RD: Monica Vitti

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) Megaflash

[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

  • DYK is for new or 5x expanded articles but lightning is a large and established vital article. And DYK has a surfeit of material – it's running 8 new hooks every 12 hours. Whereas ITN is stale, taking an average of over two days to get out each new blurb, which is over 30 times slower. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:42, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This record is really only significant to people interested in meteorology. ITN is focused almost solely on important national/international sports events, awards, and events with impact (deaths of leaders, elections, disasters, etc). The general consensus amongst ITN people is that we don't post met records here as they are either not important enough to the general populous or can be attributed to climate change. NoahTalk 11:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and comparing this to the tornado outbreak which left dozens dead is rather insulting to the people affected by it. These records are trivialities, have only been recorded since the last few years (so basically the largest lightning since, what, 2010 or so?), and have no actual importance. Fram (talk) 11:38, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It would be nice to have a meteorological story that is not a disaster/death story. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. An incremental increase to an obscure record. The previous holder was 709 ± 8 in 2018; it's unclear what (if anything) we learn from extending that to 768 ± 8 km in 2020 (but only certified yesterday). The inability to write even a brief article on this particular event or even the broader record of longest lightning bolt is symptomatic of this factoid very little impact. Modest Genius talk 12:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Obscure trivia. What's next, a main page blurb for a slight increase in the hamburger speed eating world record? Sandstein 12:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, that'd get my click. WaltCip-(talk) 12:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose From the article, and I quote, "According to the United Nations' WMO, on April 29, 2020, a bolt 768 km (477.2 mi) long was observed in the southern U.S." We're a few days late, I'm afraid. Over 600, actually. --Jayron32 12:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's unfair and not how science works. Yes the event happened in 2020, but the researchers had to analyse the data, write up the paper, and go through peer review plus verification of the record by the WMO. The result was only published on 1 Feb 2022 (in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society), and announced in a press release on the same day, so is definitely not stale. Modest Genius talk 12:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, then why doesn't the article say that? If someone were reading the article, looking for a recent event about lightning, it should have a recent date, not one from 2 years ago. So now, my reason is "Oppose... article does not contain the correct date for the recent event". If the event is the publication of the research, then that date should be evident in the article. Fix it if you want it posted. --Jayron32 13:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree the article update is not sufficient, just half a sentence. I don't want it posted - I !voted oppose above. I was disagreeing with your reasoning, not the !vote. Modest Genius talk 13:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

RD: Shintaro Ishihara

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

February 1

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2022 February 1 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Remi De Roo

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Robin Herman

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) 2022 Guinea-Bissau coup d'état attempt

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose the coup seems to have failed, so no long lasting effects of it. Thus, not ITN-worthy in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, leaning oppose. At present this seems like a potentially significant event that didn't happen. If it snowballs into something more significant, or details emerge of a major loss of life, I'll be willing to consider. But the facts available now do not indicate an ITN-level event. Modest Genius talk 12:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, I created the article and have written everything the article currently holds, I could have nominated it too but just like Joseph says the coup failed and it has no significant long lasting effects. We don’t even know who did it, ”armed men” that the president suggested has no connection with military but gangs, it is currently not ITN worthy unless something more significant comes out of this story. But in terms of geopolitical analysis, it is worrying with all these coups in West Africa. BastianMAT (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Beneath the impactfulness radar. [38] [39] [40]Sca (talk) 13:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted) RD: Bud Clark

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archive top It's the sort of wide-scale unrest event that I would expect to at least be debated at ITN. 188.27.42.181 (talk) 16:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the appropriate formatting for an ITN blurb nomination(under the "show" tab when you open the edit window); and propose an appropriate blurb, along with news sources to demonstrate it is in the news. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note that we already have COVID in ongoing. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was planning to add the ITN template, but not sure whether the request is for a blurb or ongoing. It looks to be an ongoing event (since 10 days ago), so think ongoing would be okay for it. But someone feel free to suggest a blurb. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Closed) Tom Brady tweets his retirement

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:Archivetop Template:ITN candidate

Template:U "Please do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." There is no global relevance requirement. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per the ITN instructions above: "Please do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." WaltCip-(talk) 15:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the reason. The topic relates to a niche interest (a particular sport) within a particular country. When we post about individual people, it's people who are important to all of society in their country, such as very prominent political leaders. A Mandela or Thatcher this person is not. Sandstein 15:31, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is patently untrue in every sense. The NFL might be a niche interest to the world but it is not a niche interest to the USA in terms of popularity, and certainly is not a niche sport. Moreover, you need only look through ITN's dense archives to note that we do not limit ourselves only to political leaders with outsized societal impacts. WaltCip-(talk) 15:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a death blurb. Mandela and Thatcher do not apply here. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your opinion and am not trying to talk you out of it, but we only don't do things here until we do. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think that we've ever considered sporting retirements worthy of ITN (after all, we haven't blurbed the deaths of some very significant sportspeople, let alone their retirements), and whilst I'm aware this is quite important locally (Brady is probably the only current AmFoot player I could name) I'm somewhat unconvinced that it rises to the level of ITN. Black Kite (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There's precedence from Ferguson and Tendulkar. Say what you want about "lack of international competition/notability," but for what that's worth, Ferguson only managed a national team for two years and cricket is fairly unknown outside a handful of Commonwealth states. This is on their level, or that of a Gretzky or Jordan retiring. The Kip (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very much understand that; however, one of the prior arguments against Brady was that he's "irrelevant" outside the US because NFL-only. Going by similar logic, Ferguson's "irrelevant" because he spent the vast majority of his career with a single English team. Now, that logic is awful, but others were using it, somehow. The Kip (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What should he do to announce his retirement? Take out a full page ad in newspapers? How he announces it is immaterial. Retiring from singing is a very different thing than retiring from a sport, which requires certain physical abilities. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
People in sport often go on to work in the same sport as administrators, coaches, commentators, managers, etc. See Ray Illingworth for a recent example. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:49, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Managing/coaching/broadcasting are not participation in the physical action on the field, which is difficult to return to especially at an advanced age. 331dot (talk) 15:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retirement means no longer working rather than changing position. In any case, see Brett Favre – a similar long-service quarterback who "retired" and then played again. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then you should communicate that to the English speaking media of the world, who use the word to refer to stopping the professional playing of a sport. Michael Jordan also famously retired (much earlier in his career), played another sport, and then returned. If Brady comes back(doubtful given everything else he does and his retirement statement) that would likely be newsworthy as well. Favre was younger than Brady is now at the time. 331dot (talk) 17:06, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Curious that you want more postings but are opposing this one. 331dot (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Preceding "huge" post made by a user whose contributions to Wiki total four – all in the last two days. – Sca (talk) 20:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Now that it's official, I can say that this has been newsworthy enough to post, especially with the cricketer and the footy guy having set our precedent on posting noteworthy retirements. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Nothing specific about this really, but in general we shouldnt post retirements because it really is a sport-centric 'thing' that is made a big deal of. We wouldnt post the retirement (or even consider nominating it) for biographies in other areas. People do their jobs, then they die or retire. The reason its a 'thing' in sports is because its a money-making exercise. "So and so comes out of retirement for huge payday" not being an unfamiliar sight in many sports. (leaving aside singers/bands who announce retirement at the drop of a hat for a similar reason). All that said, I wont have any real feeling if it is posted. Brady is certainly in the news, at the top of his game, possibly (certainly acclaimed as such within his lifetime) the greatest in his field. Its big sports news regardless on the same lines as Tendulkar and Ferguson - the only real difference being the wide-spread coverage of the sport in question - but thats not a criteria for opposition. For the future any similar sports-people would have to reach a standard that is rare in any sport. (I know I am arguing into a support, but I will stick with an oppose.) Only in death does duty end (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The existence of a salary cap in the NFL, the fact that Brady is still under contract with Tampa Bay for another year, the fact that Brady's not even the primary breadwinner in his family, and the fact that Tampa will have to pay not only him but several other prominent players on the team to keep the core together at a championship-level..to me, this all makes it extremely, extremely unlikely that Brady will be coming back. 65.24.244.191 (talk) 17:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That we didn't do X thing so we shouldn't do Y thing is a poor argument, that leaves no opportunity for change in the future. 331dot (talk) 16:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above and because of what I said days ago. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:21, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as this time it seems actually official he's retired. He's the GOAT by a long way, and the coverage of his retirement is not just in the US: [41] (that article also just shows how many records he annihilated in his career). The fact that the NFL is a US-focused sport doesn't deter from the fact that this is a significant moment. And ITN should really do more than just post elections and disasters. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Somewhat hesitant oppose. This is borderline, for me, but I believe we ought to have a very high bar for sporting retirements, and like it or not the reach of American football isn't comparable to that of association football, or even cricket. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:50, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Joseph2302. -- Tavix (talk) 16:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, and I say this as a HUGE American Football fan; this is really not the sort of thing we post. Individual retirements shouldn't merit an ITN posting like this; I know I am usually very liberal about what gets posted, but even for me this is a bridge too far. --Jayron32 16:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on principle I think if the arguable greatest of all time in a reasonably noteworthy sport retires, that would merit a post. I'd be happy posting the retirements of Jordan, Gretzky, and Messi. Regarding quality, the article is in reasonable condition but there's a couple of paragraphs that could use a quick pass. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - If this guy's blurb is formally uploaded (which I can't assert my opinions or else I'll get mobbed), this sets a standard where other notable sportsmen in their fields, like Federer, Nadal, Messi, Ronaldo, Axelsen, and many, many other notable athletes of their field has the qualifications and requirements to be listed in a blurb. Notably, Federer, this guy is giving hints on retirement soon, and this guy is far more famous than Tom Brady, while being one of the greatest players in tennis. (PenangLion (talk) 17:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC))[reply]
Template:U We have posted sports retirements before, we posted Sachin Tendulkar and Alex Ferguson. 331dot (talk) 17:29, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Precedent is just a synonym for "times we did the wrong thing in the past". There is no standard, no precedent, that we should ever hold ourselves to. We should adjudge every potential posting on it's own merits, without reference for what may or may not have ever happened before. If we do the wrong thing one time, it should not bound us to doing the wrong thing forever. --Jayron32 17:56, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is a standard and a precedent. You may not like it or wok to change it, but it's still a precedent. And there very much ARE standards for ITN. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you simply stop taking as a precedent what was published in 2013? The standards have changed so much in nine years. It's simply ridiculous. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - There are very few individuals whose retirement is as big of a story as Brady’s, and who have had as big of a career as his, so I think based on that and past precedence of posting two athletes retiring this should be posted. The only other athletes currently I can foresee being posted upon retirement are LeBron James, Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Williams, Messi/Ronaldo, and potentially Sidney Crosby/Alexander Ovechkin, so it’s not like there would be a ton of these posted often if we posted this one. Especially since they will all retire at different time periods so there will not be an influx of retirement blurbs at once. Andise1 (talk) 17:31, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support NFL GOAT, on par with other sporting retirements that have been posted. Career section is thoroughly fleshed out. SpencerT•C 17:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support To heck if American football isn't as possible as soccer of something. Football isn't just some niche sport and Brady isn't just a "very good" player. Easily the top of his field in a sport that is the biggest in one of the most populous countries in the world. Clearly reported in other countries as already indicated. To me, the sport being more popular shouldn't be the benchmark that most make it out to be - Brady's clearly known outside of the realm of American sports and football fandom. I acknowledge that some people don't like sports stories in general, but it's worth noting we have plenty in ITN/R, and I daresay this is bigger news in the sports world than most championships. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • LOL you guys must be ashamed of yourselves. The German ITN beat you to the punch. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, there already is a predecent from before, very famous guy with RS posting it too, and overall a nomination that is relevant. BastianMAT (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now that it's official. GOAT.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 18:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per DarkSide830. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would be supporting in principle but the update to the article appears to be one line and we normally expect more than that.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose from before. In a sport that does not have international competition, the retirement of a player is a non-event in contrast to the retirement of cricket or assc. football players that have played at international events. And even at the international level there are only exceptional people we would consider. --Masem (t) 18:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "international competition" or international relevance requirement. We don't only post sporting events between nations. We get so much criticism for not posting enough, why turn this away? 331dot (talk) 19:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Super-Duper Strong Mega Support - This is one of the few sports retirements we should post. "International competition" is a red herring. He is the best of all time by a wide margin in a major sport. If your best argument is "but it's not cricket or soccer", well, there you go. --Bongwarrior (talk) 19:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. First, the article does not meet the updated content criteria. It has exactly one sentence about this, and I believe the criteria requires more coverage than that. And, even if that is addressed, I share Masem's and Vanamonde's concerns here. I also philosophically echo Jayron32's bridge too far sentiment. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 19:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – even as a huge American football fan, this does not rise to the level of notability required for ITN. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U What is the "level of notability required for ITN"? This is being reported on around the world, including in France and China where American football is little played. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please fix sources / citations: While this conversation is going on -- please can folks knowledgeable of this topic, fix the citations in the article. A few paragraphs require citations. The sections NFL career records, NFL career statistics, awards and honors require sources / citations. That way, the article will be ready for posting if this discussion results in a post. Good luck. Ktin (talk) 19:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not to diminish Brady's argument, but for what it's worth, hockey's pretty big in Europe (Russia, Sweden, Germany, and Finland especially). The Kip (talk)
  • Neither our article nor most of the references I've checked claimed that Brady is the greatest American football player of all time, as claimed again and again and again above - the greatest quarterback, yes, but that's a narrower field.Template:PbMore to the point, I'm only seeing - generously - a one-and-a-half sentences of relevant update to our article, which is far short of Wikipedia:In the news#Updated content. —Cryptic 22:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not fair to compare quarterback to other positions because of how the game works. Almost every play starts with 1 to many seconds of everyone being still on opposite sides of a ball they cannot cross (except one dude on each side is allowed to move without crossing, and one dude of one side is allowed to cross without moving (but only enough to grasp the ball)) This dude then jerks the ball to the quarterback who then HAS to make the identity of the dude who tries to advance the ball unpredictable or the defense would have a huge advantage. Some high school teams discovered a rule loophole where the number of guys the quarterback was allowed to give the ball to approximately doubled to the whole team and just that worked so well that it was quickly made illegal. So no matter how good the guy he gives the ball to is the quarterback is responsible for more yards (of ball advancement towards the goal). As for the ones the quarterback can't give the ball to, the fatties usually stalemate long enough that they don't have much effect, the central fatty doesn't have to be that skilled at ball jerking (if he isn't good at aiming the ball far well he could just have his quarterback hover his hands so close to his privates that he almost touches them (quarterback's allowed to hover his hands between the ball jerker's legs as far forward as he can without touching the jerker or ball before the jerk)). The other defenders only cover part of the field, unlike the quarterback who is involved in two ball givings in every offensive play, or one ball giving then trying to advance the ball himself, he is the most important and popular guy on the team. Punting and field goal kicking only happen because the offense has failed, and a kicking off guy or kickoff return guy rarely helps the team as much as the quarterback. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's also worth noting, more importantly than his stats; he has seven Super Bowl victories as a player. That's more than every franchise in the league, and two more than the next-most-decorated player (Charles Haley). The Kip (talk) 02:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U Le Monde and the South China Morning Post would disagree with you. There is no international relevance/knowledge requirement for any posting. If there were, very little would be posted. 331dot (talk) 01:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but have you looked at their main pages? You can find this piece of news alright - buried deep in their sports pages. E.g. right now the top news on SCMP is Winter Olympics: what is curling? How ‘chess on ice’ works, where it came from, and why there’s so much sweeping. See also, e.g., [42]. Banedon (talk) 03:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
#Please do not... Template:Tq – Muboshgu (talk) 01:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do everyone a favor next time and directly quote that on myself the next time I oppose such a nomination. Banedon (talk) 03:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose One of the fundemental reasons for why we shouldn't post sports retirements is because they are frequently reversed. Rob Gronkowski announced his retirement in March of 2019. He currently plays for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, coincidentally the same team that Tom Brady plays for. The only way to know whether a retirement will stick is to wait, and by that point it's hardly "In the news". —Alpaca the Wizard (talk) (contribs) 01:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • An entirely fair point. However, wouldn't this would just bog us down into the weeds of determining which retirements are likely or unlikely to be reversed? I don't think anyone can make that determination without clear-cut guidelines. Therefore: where do we draw the line? —Alpaca the Wizard (talk) (contribs) 02:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I apologize for not making myself clear. I am not saying that Tom Brady will reverse his retirement. On the contrary, I believe his career is likely over. The point I am trying to make is this: Tom Brady can reverse his retirement, if he so chooses to do so. Unlike some other fields, sports retirements can be reversed. The Gronk comparison was not a direct 1:1 comparison, but simply an example (from American gridiron football) of a prominent player who reversed their retirement. Sportspeople coming out of retirement is so common, in fact, that we have a entire list of people who have. —Alpaca the Wizard (talk) (contribs) 04:05, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (This is long but I tried to explain fully.) There are some sports retirements I would consider posting, but those would have to be the top of their game worldwide. For that, a sport needs to be worldwide - tennis, golf, football, various rugbies, chess... This oppose does not preclude my support of posting a new GOAT achievement in a less-than-global sport, e.g. the sumo grandmasters, but those feel more like winning the Super Bowl than really a person blurb. I will also make a possibly controversial point: this is American news. And no, I am not saying it happened in America, no "do not oppose because it relates to one country" needed; things can relate to one country but still be cared about in the rest of the world. There will be non-American gridiron fans who care, yes, but (for an anecdotal example) there has been no news about Brady on the BBC, which devoted entire segments to Wordle being purchased. It is not news, it is American news. And this is where we try to counter some bias: I hope I will not be challenged by saying that British and American news often impacts other countries, whether it is really that interesting to the other countries or not, while rather important news from 'lesser' countries does not get reported globally. So when an American news item does not travel, it really isn't important. Get back to me when a multi-World-Cup-winning captain, Nadal, or similar, retires. A retirement so significant it will disrupt a global sport is the time for a person blurb in these conditions - we are careful with person blurbs for many reasons, including not over-exaggerating the value of one person. Most of the world would not care if you explained the achievements of Tom Brady to them, while they might about Nadal (here assuming the person has not already heard of either) - "has been mostly the MVP among a couple dozen teams in one country" does not swoon one. Kingsif (talk) 06:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Probably perhaps the only NFL player retirement that would be posted in this decade. Meets precedent set by Sachin Tendulkar. International competition is not a requirement for posting sportspeople blurbs, especially when the sport in question is highly popular in major English speaking countries (i.e. USA, Canada). Even if Brady were to unretire, which is unlikely given his age, it shouldn't be an argument against posting because it is speculative and in the future, and doesn't take away from the present story. Furthermore, given contract timelines, any hypothetical second retirement would not be up for discussion for posting over a year from now. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:37, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archivebottom

  • Post-closing comment -- I'm not sure I agree with the closer that consensus is unlikely to form here. By all indications, consensus is (lightly) in favor. But alas; I'll let someone with more experience than me reopen this if they would like. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 08:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Ec I was writing this in response to the last !vote before/while the discussion was being closed, so figured to add it here. Comment Can I question Brady being equivalent to Tendulkar? I do not think Tendulkar would have been posted if he was only the greatest batsman in Indian cricket history, even with cricket as a national sport - instead, he was posted because he is to many considered the greatest in the world. Every country has someone who is the best in the country at their national sport, which is what you could say Brady's career comes down to (no pro leagues in other countries). So there will currently be around 200 Bradys out there, all considered less important than one of the others depending on which country you are in. And then someone else becomes the best in the country - will we post when Aaron Rogers retires based on a precedent of Brady if this goes through? Will we push through Harry Kane because football is English? As a different line of thought, would we be suggesting posting Brady if Dan Marino had retired during the Wikipedia era - either leaving a precedent to not post or having been posted as the GOAT so we couldn't claim the same of Brady without effectively advocating for retirements to be ITNR? Kingsif (talk) 08:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:U Could you explain the basis of your decision, please? 331dot (talk) 08:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-closing comment, Just wondering, how were the consesus threads on the other two retirement articles? Was there a big difference in those two compared to this one? BastianMAT (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Closed) Wordle

[edit]

Template:Archive-top Template:ITN candidate

  • I dare say most of our readers have never heard of most of the people who appear at RD, or indeed many of the articles that appear at DYK, so this isn't a valid argument. Having said that, I'm unconvinced that it rises to the level of an ITN nomination. Black Kite (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Small
I'm over the hurdle
And into Wordle
Though my progress there mimics
That of a turtle.
Sca (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive-bottom