Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/October 2024
This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.
October 19
[edit]
October 19, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
RD: Yehuda Bauer
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of Israel
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Czech-born Israeli historian and scholar of the Holocaust. Thriley (talk) 06:15, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now The 2 citation needed tags need to be taken care of (particularly the uncited paragraph). Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- DoB unsourced. Three {cn} tags in prose. Long list of unreferenced bullet-points after the prose. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 20:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Thelma Mothershed-Wair
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:1813:3939:3F14:36B (talk · give credit)
- Updated by CAWylie (talk · give credit) and Strattonsmith (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American activist and member of Little Rock Nine. 240F:7A:6253:1:1813:3939:3F14:36B (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose no infobox, Early life uncited, wikipedia article is only reference in Little Rock Nine. Scuba 17:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Article is orange-tagged. Schwede66 15:02, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- Someone has removed the tag, but not because the article is now fine. I've tagged unreferenced parts individually. Schwede66 20:57, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thelma Mothershed-Wair#Little Rock Nine needs more sourcing, please. --PFHLai (talk) 20:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Michel Klein (veterinarian)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Monde
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ForsythiaJo (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
French veterinarian and animal rights activist often seen on television. Needs expansion. Thriley (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. The stubbiest of the stubs. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment He was 103. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- and? does that mean he should be posted? I don't know what the point of this comment is. Natg 19 (talk) 03:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. He was the French counterpart to David Attenborough or Marlin Perkins. They where celebrities and TV icons of their time, and influenced generations of people for animal welfare, zoology and conservation with a lasting legacy. Just because he survived 20+ more years and amlost nobody under 30 remembers him is no reason to disregard him. 47.67.225.78 (talk) 12:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose since article is currently a stub. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 contribs 14:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article has been expanded since the nomination was originally posted… it’s not a huge article but it’s of reasonable quality. RachelTensions (talk) 17:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's still a stub though, it hasn't really been expanded. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 contribs 07:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- When first nominated this article was about 6 words long, so yes it has been significantly expanded. RD criteria isn’t looking for a perfect article, a short article of decent quality and sourcing is just fine. RachelTensions (talk) 12:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's still a stub though, it hasn't really been expanded. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 contribs 07:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose not only is it a stub, with only 1 notable reliable reference it fails WP:BIO citation guidelines. Scuba 17:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well this is just patently untrue. The sources cited in the article are from BFM TV (France's largest news channel), Le Monde (a French newspaper of record), Le Parisien (another large French newspaper), Le Point Vétérinaire (a widely regarded French veterinary industry publication), and Canadian Veterinary Journal (a peer-reviewed scientific journal). Almost every statement in the article is sourced and all sources easily meet WP:RS. RachelTensions (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. It is notable that the "support" arguments are about the topic, while the "opposition" just argues about the lenght of the article, as if that relies to the noteworthyness of the news of his death. 47.67.225.78 (talk) 08:51, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- It is important to note that when people support or oppose a nomination at ITN, it is not based on importance because anybody with a Wikipedia article is notable enough to be featured on RD. However, ITN has quality standards for what gets posted, which include sourcing and length. Hope that explains why people are currently opposing the nomination. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 23:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. It is notable that the "support" arguments are about the topic, while the "opposition" just argues about the lenght of the article, as if that relies to the noteworthyness of the news of his death. 47.67.225.78 (talk) 08:51, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well this is just patently untrue. The sources cited in the article are from BFM TV (France's largest news channel), Le Monde (a French newspaper of record), Le Parisien (another large French newspaper), Le Point Vétérinaire (a widely regarded French veterinary industry publication), and Canadian Veterinary Journal (a peer-reviewed scientific journal). Almost every statement in the article is sourced and all sources easily meet WP:RS. RachelTensions (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The article is no longer a stub at 1868 characters. Thriley (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unreferenced date of birth. Schwede66 14:58, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- Citation added RachelTensions (talk) 15:03, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- That citation gives the year of birth only. I've hidden the rest. Schwede66 20:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- My apologies; I must have looked at the wrong source. My edit got reverted and upon checking again, I see that I got that wrong. Schwede66 20:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Citation added RachelTensions (talk) 15:03, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 20:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
2024 America's Cup
[edit]Blurb: Team New Zealand wins the America's Cup yacht racing competition for a third time in succession. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Team New Zealand wins the America's Cup yacht racing competition for a third time in succession by defeating the Royal Yacht Squadron.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Schwede66 (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
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.
The article needs some TLC and I hope that somebody can attend to it; personally, sailing doesn't spin my wheels. Schwede66 01:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The event is known and branded as the 37th America's Cup. JoltColaOfEvil (talk) 22:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Needs major update; lots about qualifying, background, challengers, but very little about the cup races themselves and no aftermath or results sections, nothing about the coverage of the event. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready. Unfortunately I agree with Abcmaxx - this needs to be updated. The 'cup match' section - i.e. the actual event - has just two sentences of prose, and those are in future tense! Needs a couple of referenced paragraphs explaining what happened during each stage, the final outcome etc. Modest Genius talk 11:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait the actual target, the cup match, has yet to be included in the article. Scuba 17:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment For reference, see the previous 2021 America's Cup § Cup match (more text after table)—Bagumba (talk) 05:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality and suggest that there are far too many ITN sports. The Americas Cup, prestigious as it may be among sailors, is not world news. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Orbitalbuzzsaw: This is not the venue to debate changes to WP:ITN/R. —Bagumba (talk) 15:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Yemeni civil war (2014–present)
[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.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cfr.org/index.php/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/war-yemen, Various
Credits:
- Nominated by Wafflefrites (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Comment — Are you seeking to add the Yemeni civil war to ongoing? If so, you will need to provide continuous and significant coverage. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment assuming this meant ongoing it would be difficult to keep up to date and keep there considering the challenge of reliable information about it 27.96.223.193 (talk) 22:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support in principle but oppose on quality This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This is a very slow event, with the pages showing far less than expected of close-to-daily updates to merit a slot in ongoing. It needs to be something that has news coverage nearly every day and stays updated to reflect that. --Masem (t) 00:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. Bitspectator ⛩️ 00:58, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose only 5 edits to the article the article this month and most of them are just fixing typos. Looking through the first page of edits that date back to June I don't see a single substantial edit that has added any new newsworthy events... "ongoing" would suggest that there are frequent newsworthy events, so frequent that they'd otherwise overwhelm ITN if not for the fact that they'd already be covered by the topic's "ongoing" placement. RachelTensions (talk) 01:05, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support the idea, oppose in practice Yes the war in Yemen is just as relevant and valid as the war in Sudan or in Israel, however, almost nobody is editing it, and there really hasn't been any significant development coinciding with it's nomination. Scuba 04:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose there has been an ongoing truce since
20212022. There have been no new battles as far as I am aware Abo Yemen✉ 11:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Abo Yemen: Shouldn't the article make this clear then and even be called Yemeni civil war (2014–2021) if its now only a low-level insurgency? Abcmaxx (talk) 22:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- The article does mention the truce, but that doesn't mean the war is completely over as the truce is between the houthis and the internationally recognized govt but not the other factions like al-qaeda, for example Abo Yemen✉ 04:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Abo Yemen: Shouldn't the article make this clear then and even be called Yemeni civil war (2014–2021) if its now only a low-level insurgency? Abcmaxx (talk) 22:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support notability but oppose on quality The article does not make it clear how intense the fighting is currently, does not show if anything has happened since 2021, and if Abo Yemen's comment above is true then the article should really make this clear. Background and introduction of a complex geopolitical situation is welcome, but the article really does not describe much of the actual war itself. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
October 18
[edit]
October 18, 2024
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Rick Nolan
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Former US Congressman. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 21:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article in good shape, fixed last cn tags. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support other than a few minor issues with prose the article looks good. Scuba 17:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ginés González García
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Nación, CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by Cambalachero (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Minister of health of Argentina during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cambalachero (talk) 18:32, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm working on this article, improving its content and sources. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- work done. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks decent, no glaring issues. Scuba 15:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 02:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Internet Archive cyberattack
[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.
Blurb: The Internet Archive suffered a DDoS attack that made its services unusable since October 9, compromising the data of 31 million users. (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, NBC, Forbes,
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
- Created by MountainDew20 (talk · give credit)
- This story was already nominated when it occurred, and rejected from ITN. Being over a week old makes it stale news, so even less likely to be posted. I recommend withdrawing this nomination. Modest Genius talk 14:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose and best withdrawn per above. Rejected, stale, and the page is in no shape to be posted anyway. Estreyeria (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose duplicate rejected and stale nom as per Modest Genius. GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 14:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
October 17
[edit]
October 17, 2024
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Andrew Schally
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:DC9A:82E2:FE53:A327 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Polish-American endocrinologist and Nobel laureate. 240F:7A:6253:1:DC9A:82E2:FE53:A327 (talk) 23:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready as there is too much uncited content. Schwede66 14:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Rigathi Gachagua impeachment
[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.
Blurb: Kenyan Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua (pictured) is impeached in a landmark vote. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Rigathi Gachagua (pictured) is impeached as the deputy president of Kenya by the parliament.
Alternative blurb II: In Kenya, deputy president Rigathi Gachagua (pictured) is impeached by the parliament.
News source(s): france 24
Credits:
- Nominated by Sportsnut24 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by MAL MALDIVE (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Support Seems fine. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 08:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- There probably should be at least a paragraph or more explaining why he was impeached, not just that he was. There's no clear indication what brought the impeachment charges. --Masem (t) 11:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. As far as I can tell, this is domestic politics with no broader impact, and the deputy president has few powers anyway. There's little coverage in international media. It's possible that I'm missing some wider significance, but if so it isn't explained in the article, this nomination or the France 24 article provided above. Modest Genius talk 14:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support notability, oppose on quality impeachments are rare and notable events, however, really there should be a comprehensive article called Impeachment of Rigathi Gachagua which outlines all the background, issues, causes, aftermath and reactions accordingly. Abcmaxx (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Modest Genius. It also seems like local news to me. It may have been notable if it was the president who was impeached. LiamKorda 17:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per abcmaxx Ion.want.uu (talk) 20:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: Only the deputy president. C F A 💬 03:12, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - not a head of state LocoTacoFever (talk) 21:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support notability, oppose on quality per Abcmaxx. I would also be satisfied with further expansion of the current target article in lieu of an independent article; either could work. FlipandFlopped ツ 16:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft oppose deputy president, not president. Unless I'm missing something this isn't really a major geopolitical event. Scuba 17:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Philip Zimbardo
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Legacy
Credits:
- Nominated by TheCorriynial (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Philip Zimbardo died on 14th, but announced today. Philip Zimbardo, a psychologist conducted the now mostly discredited Stanford Prison Experiment in 1971 which at the time was studying the effect on situational variables on participants' reactions and behaviors. The experiment is now an example of what not to do in psychological studies. He's also been involved in several other studies in more recent years and is also a writer. TheCorriynial (talk) 23:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support The article seems fine. And his experiment sounds just like Wikipedia, showing "...the ease with which ordinary people could be led to engage in anti-social acts by putting them in situations where they felt anonymous, or they could perceive of others in ways that made them less than human, as enemies or objects..." Andrew🐉(talk) 08:27, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's no fun in solitary... (you don't even get access to your bucket).Martinevans123 (talk) 08:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: I have added/tweaked a couple of references. Good article and clearly notable subject. UndercoverClassicist T·C 08:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Looks good. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, as the article is well-sourced and notable. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 14:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems all right to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose 30–40% of Philip Zimbardo § Works missing ISBN, ISSN, or some citation. A few even display "ISBN" with no subsequent ID.—Bagumba (talk) 04:41, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- These details are not needed as there's an {{authority control}}. For example, the first entry is "Influencing attitude and changing behavior: A basic introduction to relevant methodology, theory, and applications (Topics in social psychology), Addison Wesley, 1969". This is already quite adequate but, if it should still be doubted then one can just uses the authority control to find an entry like this. The entry is quite uncontroversial and so does not require an extraordinary level of referencing. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Readers on mobile, which accounts for at at least half the viewers, dont see that, and it's anyways a WP:LINKFARM on where an item might actually be verified. ITN is as much a drive to get pages enhanced. If the info is, in fact, readily available, adding it should be straightforward, and an improvement. In any event, feel free to establish a wider consensus for a looser standard. —Bagumba (talk) 10:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- These details are not needed as there's an {{authority control}}. For example, the first entry is "Influencing attitude and changing behavior: A basic introduction to relevant methodology, theory, and applications (Topics in social psychology), Addison Wesley, 1969". This is already quite adequate but, if it should still be doubted then one can just uses the authority control to find an entry like this. The entry is quite uncontroversial and so does not require an extraordinary level of referencing. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. Clear ready with exception for the Works section, which has been updated (by me). No further reason to hold up the posting. – robertsky (talk) 01:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Mitzi Gaynor
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:
- Nominated by Staraction (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American actress, singer, and dancer. Article likely needs more citation work. Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article is barely cited, some of the CN tags are dated to 2012... that's bad. Scuba 21:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article does need work as the nominator mentioned. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Toshiyuki Nishida
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Japan Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Japanese Actor.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft oppose Filmography missing sources, career is lacking prose. Scuba 21:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose unsourced honors and filmography. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
October 16
[edit]
October 16, 2024
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
(Posted) RD: Sukh Dev
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gujarat Samachar (India)
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit), Aumnamahashiva (talk · give credit), Tachs (talk · give credit) and Pravega (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Indian scientist. Article seems to be alright. Ktin (talk) 01:14, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. Scuba 02:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems fine to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 12:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Yahya Sinwar
[edit]Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Hamas de facto leader Yahya Sinwar reportedly killed in an Israeli operation. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Yahya Sinwar, the acting leader of Hamas, is killed in an Israeli operation.
Alternative blurb II: Yahya Sinwar, the acting leader of Hamas, is killed in a firefight with Israeli forces in Gaza.
News source(s): Bloomberg
Credits:
- Nominated by mike_gigs (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Confirmed killed by IDF via Bloomberg ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- If confirmed by RS, I would support this.VR (Please ping on reply) 17:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support covered by all major sources by now Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 17:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. I think all Wikipedias will add it on the main page. A.WagnerC(alt) (talk) 17:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Quality seems okay and RSs have confirmed the death with photos in addition to the Israeli claims. The internal leader of Hamas for nearly a decade, and more recently the overall leader. Killing of major leaders in wars merit posting even though the war might be in ongoing (e.g. Nasrallah's death despite the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict being stickied). ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support if confirmed by Hamas and RS + a better blurb is used (came here to nominate it, found it already nominated) Abo Yemen✉ 17:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note His article is in decent shape, but as of this comment it has not been updated to state definitively that he is dead. Support Blurb on updating and confirmation from sources other than Israel. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, but strongly oppose blurb. This is covered by ongoing Israel-Hamas war. We have consistently not blurbed the large scale killing of civilians in Gaza, and we should remain consistent and not suddenly decide to blurb this.VR (Please ping on reply) 17:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb per VR. Combatant dies in combat in a conflict that we have listed under Ongoing already - despite Sinwar being a notable figure, this isn’t a unique/unusual situation in the way the assassinations of Haniyeh/Nasrallah were (and iirc, Nasrallah was posted before the Israel-Hezbollah conflict was in Ongoing). The Kip (contribs) 18:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, though - article seems sufficiently cited/updated. The Kip (contribs) 18:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Pending further confirmation, Support Blurb as article in decent shape (bit too much proseline but not a blocker) and clearly a major event in the Gaza situation. Side unrelated comment as i see no reason for the separate death article to load up on repeated BG and excessive reactions, but that's beyond the remit of ITN outside of avoiding a blurb that links to it. Masem (t) 18:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I will make this more explicit since alt blurbs use it, I Oppose including the killing article as the featured one. It's typical of the slicing and dicing of news stories to far too much detail for and encyclopedia, with excessive BG and reaction sections, when the actual events are all of four paragraphs. Some of that reaction is likely better in the context of the larger conflict, but making the event standalone, particularly when it was less of an organized plan and more a chance happenstance, it's not a good summary of the news as we should be writing. — Masem (t) 18:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Confirmed now by Israel, headline news now and significant enough in its own right, rising above routine updates in the ongoing Israel–Hamas war. Brandmeistertalk 18:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've added an altblurb with a link to the article on his death. As nominator, I am pretty indifferent to blurbing since I agree it is covered by ongoing, but he is also a very high ranking individual. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 18:25, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Added an altblurb. Current wording implies the operation was to find and kill him, but it seems the encounter was happenstance. I'm indifferent about blurbing as well. Bitspectator ⛩️ 18:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Pachu Kannan (talk) 18:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb vs RD - Yes, it's part of a conflict/war that's listed in Ongoing, but when the leader of one of the side in the conflict/war is killed, it's very much significant on its own and on top of the Ongoing. And yes, we very much posted the killing of Hassan Nasrallah. If Russia managed to take out Zelenskyy or Ukraine managed to take out Putin, are people seriously suggesting we wouldn't blurb that? -- KTC (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb per Patar Knight FlipandFlopped ツ 18:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support with blurb maybe we should make a page about his killing and make that the target article. Scuba 19:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb, but wait pending further conformation. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 19:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb—De facto leader of Hamas and the Gaza Strip since 2017, thereby making him a very significant political figure whose death is highly consequential. Kurtis (talk) 19:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Kurtis He's only been the head of Hamas for a few months, since Haniyeh's assassination. The Kip (contribs) 20:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- But he's been in charge of the Gaza Strip since 2017. He's also the presumed mastermind of the October 7th attacks. Sorry, probably should have worded that more carefully. Kurtis (talk) 08:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Kurtis He's only been the head of Hamas for a few months, since Haniyeh's assassination. The Kip (contribs) 20:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD and neutral on blurb since he was a serving head of government making him one of the few that should qualify in theory for RDB IMO This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hamas in no way is a government body. Masem (t) 20:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hamas was, at least, the de facto authority in the Gaza Strip prior to the beginning of the war. We would certainly post if the Prime Minister of Kosovo was assassinated. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hamas in no way is a government body. Masem (t) 20:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Sure, the conflict is in ongoing, but Sinwar was one of the principal leaders—arguably, the foremost leader—of one of the conflict's main belligerents. This is a notable enough update in the conflict to merit a blurb. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 20:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb II. Primary leader of one of the war’s two main belligerents dying is pretty significant. Altblurb II makes it clear he wasn’t assassinated, while other blurbs could lead readers to believe he was like Haniyeh or Nasrallah. Jone425 (talk) 21:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb as confirmed by WP:RS. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 23:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted altblurb II. I've made some changes to the links, expanding the boldlink to cover "killed in a firefight" and linking "Israeli forces in Gaza" to Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip. ITN admins, feel free to copyedit for consistency. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 23:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Matia Chowdhury
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New AgeDhaka Tribune
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
- Updated by GreenRedFlag (talk · give credit), CosmLearner (talk · give credit) and Kelisi (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bangladesh Politician.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready While the article all the necessary details, but, they need to be written in a more neutral manner. Example:
Matia's boldness, leadership, and courage shine through her frontline participation (...) Her fiery speeches and unwavering attitude (...)
ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Can you take a look at this Please.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:07, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- So far I got this link https://www.bssnews.net/news/69972. GreenRedFlag (talk) 09:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Tina Kaidanow
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Koha
Credits:
- Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, everything looks sourced. Suonii180 (talk) 22:44, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Article is a bit short but there is a sufficient amount of good references. Vida0007 (talk) 12:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Adequately sourced, ready for RD. FlipandFlopped ツ 18:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Is there a source for the DoB shown in the intro and the infobox, please? The footnote should be in the main prose. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 10:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- The year is sourced. I didn't hold this as any more significant than any other Cn, though I know some posters do. —Bagumba (talk) 10:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- I got the unreferenced date hidden for now. --PFHLai (talk) 12:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- The year is sourced. I didn't hold this as any more significant than any other Cn, though I know some posters do. —Bagumba (talk) 10:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 10:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed, RD posted): Liam Payne
[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.
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.
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: English singer Liam Payne (pictured) dies at the age of 31 (Post)
Alternative blurb: English singer Liam Payne (pictured), previously of One Direction, dies at the age of 31 after falling from a hotel balcony in Buenos Aires.
Alternative blurb II: English singer Liam Payne (pictured) dies at the age of 31 after falling from a hotel balcony in Buenos Aires.
News source(s): CNN, ABC News, CTV News
Credits:
- Nominated by RachelTensions (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- Strong support blurb Alrighty, here we got a relatively young sudden death from an unusual circumstance (fall of the balcony due to possible intoxication see enwiki article). 1D was definitely an influential band during the 2010s and being a member of said and the circumstances of his death does merit a blurb.
In terms of article, there's 2-3 cn tags and the filmography/awards section needs some ref work first.--TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC) - Support blurb Definitely notable, on pretty much every big news site in the world already. Article needs some work with refs but other than that looks fine. harrz talk 22:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Are you supporting RD or a blurb? If you are supporting RD, note that anyone with an article is considered notable, and the focus is on article quality.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post
. Natg 19 (talk) 22:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)- I'm supporting a blurb - sorry, I misunderstood the nomination. harrz talk 22:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Are you supporting RD or a blurb? If you are supporting RD, note that anyone with an article is considered notable, and the focus is on article quality.
- Support blurb If it was a typical death of natural causes which was not unexpected, probably not notable enough within his field to get a blurb. However, in this case the highly unusual nature of death + the "shock" of death at a young age, generate excess levels of news coverage and push it across. FlipandFlopped ツ 22:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose until sourcing issues are fixed. I've added refs for the two cn tags but the filmography and Awards and nominations sections still need more refs.Suonii180 (talk) 22:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)- Forgot to specify that I would support both RD and blurb once sources have been added. Suonii180 (talk) 22:45, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Suonii180:
Fixed filmography section. There's three left for awards section that I'm working on.Everything's sourced now. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Suonii180:
- Support now that sourcing is fixed. Suonii180 (talk) 23:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Forgot to specify that I would support both RD and blurb once sources have been added. Suonii180 (talk) 22:45, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Not notable enough to get a blurb. --CommanderShepardX (talk) 23:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @CommanderShepardX: The argument for a blurb in this case isn't if Payne was 'notable enough' it's more about the uncommon circumstances surrounding his death and the fact he was relatively young. See argument below. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Per Flipandflopped. OctaviusSlockpit (talk) 23:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb - Going to go against the grain here. Once the article issues are addressed the article should definitely go on RD, but as big as One Direction was, I'm skeptical that a blurb is warranted. Usually we'd reserve it for the biggest of the big, and while One Direction was big in their day I'm not sure if he'd count in this case. I don't want to go OSE here and all but many other arguably more deserving people only got an RD mention and not a blurb, so him getting a blurb would seem unfair, even arguably Anglocentric. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: To be fair, the argument for a blurb in this case is mainly directed towards the manner of his death which is unusual especially for someone at the age of 31 not about how influential he was or for being a 1D member. When someone old dies and gets nominated for a blurb, there's the 'old person dies, what's new' argument. Now that we have a younger, relatively popular singer who dies at the age of 31 after falling from a hotel balcony...I think that's the blurb of the story. Also: "If the person's death itself is newsworthy for either the manner of death or the newsworthy reaction to it, it may merit a blurb." Also the article's in good shape now in terms of quality. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb — Not a significant figure. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
As we all know, no one but Trump is significant to you...LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 23:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)- I'm not sure what this insinuation is supposed to mean. I have opposed virtually every ITN nomination about Trump since he was indicted in New York. If Trump were to die, I would support a blurb, as I would for any current or former head of state. That is the standard. Payne, who I had not heard of until I received news of his death, was not transformative to the field of music. If ITN wants to reflect a global audience, it needs to be selective about who appears. His death is undoubtably tragic, but it would take a truly notable person for me to seek a blurb. In addition, I do not voice my support for a blurb unless I believe that the discussion is leaning against one, which has not happened in quite some time. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @LilianaUwU Knock it off. See my note on your talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- See my argument above. The discussions for a blurb in this case isn't about how 'significant' he was it's more about the manner of death. "If the person's death itself is newsworthy for either the manner of death or the newsworthy reaction to it, it may merit a blurb." TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nobody is saying he is a significant figure. It is the circumstances of death that are newsworthy. With respect, it is not really helpful to just say "oppose because I don't think Liam Payne is an impactful artist". Whether he is an impactful figure or not is a bit of a red herring, because his nomination is about the death. FlipandFlopped ツ 02:25, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb - "If the person's death itself is newsworthy for either the manner of death or the newsworthy reaction to it, it may merit a blurb." I would say is applicable here. Thechased (talk) 23:46, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb per Flipandflopped. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 23:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb The manner of unusual death is notable enough to be blurbworthy. I added an altblurb specifying his former band and his manner of death, as that is bringing this major attention. DrewieStewie (talk) 23:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Blurbable Often enough, in music history, death makes legends. Not just out of the personally tragic main character, either. The background, the aftermath and everything. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb and Alt Blurb This is both supported and notable, shockingly and sad news as a fan of one direction. Royiswariii | D-GENERATION X | u can talk me :) 00:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb No indication of how they were a great/major figure (fame from being in 1D doesn't count), and while the death was unusual, initial reports do not show signs of this being an attack, only perhaps an incident while being intoxicated. --Masem (t) 00:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Intoxication plays a huge part in most of the most VH1ed rock or rock-adjacent tales of woe. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Which would make this not an "unusual" death, in that regard. To contrast, while Prince died from drug overdose (also common in musician deaths), we posted him more on the basis of him being a great figure, not the death itself. --Masem (t) 00:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I never considered Prince great. Michael Hutchence, neither. Nor Robert Johnson. The devil's in the details. In Prince's case, the devil was fentanyl, bloody fentanyl (a pandemic many considered "hot" at the time, like oxy in the oxy days, crack in the crack days or hooch in the hooch days). InedibleHulk (talk) 00:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Which would make this not an "unusual" death, in that regard. To contrast, while Prince died from drug overdose (also common in musician deaths), we posted him more on the basis of him being a great figure, not the death itself. --Masem (t) 00:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Dying by falling off a hotel balcony at a young age is uncommon especially when it happens to someone of his background. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Dying unintentionally from various reasons while intoxicated is very common among young adults. --Masem (t) 00:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, but how many wasted young adults were global megastars first? Quite a few. Still not a routine occurrence. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Payne was not a common young adult to be fair. Per InedibleHulk. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well, per you, the balcony aspect even sets him apart from the usual hotel figures. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- "not routine" is not the same as "uncommon". Many people in the entertainment industry that have achieved success at a young age make poor choices, such as DUI, becoming addicted, etc., and in a few of those cases, has resulted in their deaths. It's tragic that we lose that talent, but it happens with enough regularity that's its not uncommon, just not "routine" in that we can expect one every X days (as we've called mass shootings in the US) "Unusual" in the past typically refers to things like assassinations and murder, and even then we typically expect the victim to have been a rather significant figure. Masem (t) 01:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Way more rather significant figures are murdered than fall off balconies. I had no idea who Sophie was either, but yeah, good cautionary tale about trying to photograph the moon while sober. Not exactly famous, though, especially in VH1 circles. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Payne was not a common young adult to be fair. Per InedibleHulk. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, but how many wasted young adults were global megastars first? Quite a few. Still not a routine occurrence. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Dying unintentionally from various reasons while intoxicated is very common among young adults. --Masem (t) 00:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Intoxication plays a huge part in most of the most VH1ed rock or rock-adjacent tales of woe. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Per the other supports. Centuries123 (talk) 01:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb: Sophie died in a very similar circumstance and not a single person suggested blurbing her death. It's clear that people are only blurbing because he was a member of One Direction (and no offense but he was one of the less popular members with a not-so-prolific career post-breakup). And being a member of One Direction is not an indication for being blurbed in my opinion. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 01:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think there might be a slight difference between someone who never even had a #1 versus a member of one of the worlds biggest boybands. 2A01:4B00:AD37:D300:ED97:E32E:2A7B:1E12 (talk) 19:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, support RD. Payne is a celebrity, but not notable enough to merit a blurb in ITN. He was a single member of a band, not a stand-alone. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 01:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Blub Not a notable figure. Not a notable death. Cause of death certainly not enough to override the first two. Suggestion of a blurb is a newsworthiness-blind act of vandalism against the intent and value of ITN. The Daily Mail exists for this; not ITN. Dr Fell (talk) 02:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- "It is an act of vandalism against the intent and value of ITN to post something that is in the news, because I personally this death is perfectly ordinary despite every major news organization in the world reporting it"... uh huh, ok. Please refrain from ridiculous or farfetched accusations of vandalism and stick to WP:AFG. FlipandFlopped ツ 02:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- The figure in question is not noteworthy enough for an ITN blurb. Death by misadventure does not change that. Presumed public "shock" does not change that. Coverage by celebrity gossip sites does not change that. ITN is not TMZ. Dr Fell (talk) 16:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- "It is an act of vandalism against the intent and value of ITN to post something that is in the news, because I personally this death is perfectly ordinary despite every major news organization in the world reporting it"... uh huh, ok. Please refrain from ridiculous or farfetched accusations of vandalism and stick to WP:AFG. FlipandFlopped ツ 02:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, neutral on blurb. Definitely going to support RD – he is a well-known figure after all, and his article looks ready to be posted. As for the blurb though, I am still conflicted: I agree with the talking point that was raised by Thechased, but I also agree that outside One Direction, his solo career is not notable enough to be posted. Vida0007 (talk) 02:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb Per Bait30, they put it quite well. Ornithoptera (talk) 02:43, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose blurb, support RD. In no way notable or important to the extent needed for blurbing. Nixinova T C 02:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- We're blurbing the death (uncommon manner of death/young age) rather than the "importance" of Payne. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- We didn't blurb George Baldock though. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- We're blurbing the death (uncommon manner of death/young age) rather than the "importance" of Payne. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb He was an extremely popular singer and he died in a very unusual way which I think deserves to be post on the main page. LiamKorda 03:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose blurb not a serving head of state or government This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Being a head of state or government has no bearing on whether an RD qualifies for a blurb. RachelTensions (talk) 06:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- It is one of the very few cases in which the death as an event has a notable enough impact to potentially qualify for a blurb. Were it up to me it would be the only one. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- This kind of reasoning is why many people are getting angry at ITN and our process. AusLondonder (talk) 09:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- It is one of the very few cases in which the death as an event has a notable enough impact to potentially qualify for a blurb. Were it up to me it would be the only one. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Being a head of state or government has no bearing on whether an RD qualifies for a blurb. RachelTensions (talk) 06:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb. With all due respect to Payne, I think Harry Styles is the only member of One Direction that would even come close to meeting the requirements we generally have for blurbing. One Direction, while a big thing for a time, was really fairly fleeting in popularity in all reality, and Payne didn't really have the sort of solo career that would make him alone noteworthy enough for a blurb, tragic death or not. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb. Bedivere (talk) 03:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support very famous and influential person. 27.96.223.193 (talk) 04:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Very well known singer dying young and unexpectedly. –DMartin 04:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, wait on blurb. Wait until we find out the specific nature of the death. All we know right now is that he fell, which isn’t particularly unusual. If it wasn’t either suicide or accident, then a blurb would be warranted. Jone425 (talk) 05:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb WP:ITNRDBLURB: "For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident) or where the events surrounding the death merit additional explanation (such as ongoing investigations, major stories about memorial services or international reactions, etc.) a blurb may be merited to explain the death's relevance." He was a member of what was one of the best-selling bands of all time, the fact that he died so early and unexpectedly is shocking, and per The Independent, his death is currently being investigated. Rest in peace Jaguarnik (talk) 05:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb he was well known but wasn't at all the most notable of his band (Styles has a much more successful solo career. We didn't post the murder of XXXTentacion, a 20 year old who topped Billboard albums three months earlier - an event covered in books and documentaries for six years since. How is an accident/suicide more unusual than that? Unknown Temptation (talk) 06:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- The two are not comparable, XXXTentacion was an artist that was barely notable at the time of his death; Payne was a member of the biggest boyband since The Beatles. RachelTensions (talk) 06:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also not to compare, but I think musical artists being victims of a homicide is a bit more frequent than them falling off balconies of hotels while *possibly* being intoxicated. As I mentioned w/ James Earl Jones's discussion, I'm not a fan of "I oppose John Doe's blurb because Jane Doe didn't get one" as I find it a bit unproductive IMO and without merit. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Biggest boyband since the Beatles? That is a wild statement: New Kids on the Block, Take That, Backstreet Boys, NSYNC, Boyzone, Five, A1, O-Zone, Westlife, BTS? Abcmaxx (talk) 07:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's also how XXXTentacion was a Florida man murdered in Florida (Broward County all the way) and Payne was an Englishman felled(?) abroad. Bit of that "international intrigue". Who's investigating the investigators and so forth. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'd like to see the working-out for the assertion that homicide kills musicians more frequently than [possible] intoxication. How many of the fabled 27 club were murdered? How many of 60s/70s classic rock? Even among US rappers, we have Mac Miller, Lil Peep and Juice Wrld dying of drugs in recent memory. Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- It seems the
falling off balconies of hotels
part wasn't asserted enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- It seems the
- I'd like to see the working-out for the assertion that homicide kills musicians more frequently than [possible] intoxication. How many of the fabled 27 club were murdered? How many of 60s/70s classic rock? Even among US rappers, we have Mac Miller, Lil Peep and Juice Wrld dying of drugs in recent memory. Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- The two are not comparable, XXXTentacion was an artist that was barely notable at the time of his death; Payne was a member of the biggest boyband since The Beatles. RachelTensions (talk) 06:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose blurb A creation of TV's and Cowell's ruthless industry, may have been popular among the boyband's teenage fanbase but was not relevant for years nor was One Direction in any way transformative, if anything it was just another artificially created copy-paste boyband. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD and leaning support on blurb. Article is well written and sourced. As per ITNRDBLURB, I think the manner of death fits the criteria we have given he was a part of a fairly well known and influential band (I understand, never listened to any of their music but there seems to be a big worldwide fanbase) so I think this one just creeps over the line for blurbing. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb The readership spike is big – bigger than Maggie Smith and over 10 times Alex Salmond. So, this is quite outstanding as these things go and the article seems adequate. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think this more of a sad indictment of modern interests. If a popular contestant on Love Island were to sadly befall the same fate would we blurb that? We didn't blurb George Baldock, a former Premier League footballer, that had a huge spike in readership after his tragic death. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- George Baldock's spike was about half a million which is not in the same league. This guy was about five times larger at about two and a half million. My rule of thumb is that getting over a million is the blurb level of fame and impact. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Checking on day #2, we find that the readership has climbed to new heights of over 3.5 million while other related topics dominate the top 10, with over 10 million aggregate views in a single day. Yahya Sinwar is an also-ran in this company while his killing article gets comparatively little attention. ITN, of course, indulges a personal preference for politics rather than pop culture but our readers don't care and vote with their views. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- George Baldock's spike was about half a million which is not in the same league. This guy was about five times larger at about two and a half million. My rule of thumb is that getting over a million is the blurb level of fame and impact. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think this more of a sad indictment of modern interests. If a popular contestant on Love Island were to sadly befall the same fate would we blurb that? We didn't blurb George Baldock, a former Premier League footballer, that had a huge spike in readership after his tragic death. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb widely known. probably many more people have heard about his death than the number of people who've ever heard about a random tiny pacific micronation let alone its elections that regularly get posted here Kasperquickly (talk) 07:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's actually filmed in Majorca. But tend to agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- How small does a nation have to be to be insignificant in your opinion? Elections are ITN/R for a good reason. If it suffers a natural disaster is that less significant than a mediocre musician tragically dying? Abcmaxx (talk) 07:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am not talking natural disasters. And the reasoning for elections are sloppy. Elections in the USA are important. Elections in Japan are important. Elections in Nigeria are possibly important. Elections in the central african republic are NOT Kasperquickly (talk) 08:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Why would elections in Nigeria be more important than in the Central African Republic? Where are you drawing this arbitrary line? What about all the countries in between the two? Also going back to topic, if only fame and what people recognise was an indication of what to post then we might as well only post celebrity gossip and top-level footballers, such the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial, Kardashians latest product launches and forget about space exploration or gang wars in Haiti, which by your logic is too small and far away a country by your standards. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- it's not about being far away, it's the geopolitical improtance, you're either feigning ignorance or your actual ignorant if you think elections in CAR or Micronesia are just as important like those in Germany or Indonesia.
- /thread. Kasperquickly (talk) 11:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- We consider general elections in all sovereign states to be notable see WP:ITNR (along with other general topics). Personal opinions of editors on the level of importance assigned to any of these is not relvant and a change if felt should be sought at ITNR (though consensus is unlikely to change). About the usage of phrases like "/thread", please realize that Wikipedia is WP:NOTAFORUM (edit: I realize you have been warned against making forum comment several times already, a block has also followed for personal attacks (including usages of kek, r-word); a continuation of this is not going to bode well for you). Also familiarize yourself with the relevant ITN and ITNR policies, we do not post based on "geopolitcal" considerations, never have. Though this is now going off-topic from a RD-blurb about a musician. Gotitbro (talk) 11:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- yep, kek is a known nazi word only nazis use (wikipedia says so, must be true), and retarded is a word only sexists and racists use (wikipedia says so, must be true).
- seriously man, touch grass. Kasperquickly (talk) 19:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Why would elections in Nigeria be more important than in the Central African Republic? Where are you drawing this arbitrary line? What about all the countries in between the two? Also going back to topic, if only fame and what people recognise was an indication of what to post then we might as well only post celebrity gossip and top-level footballers, such the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial, Kardashians latest product launches and forget about space exploration or gang wars in Haiti, which by your logic is too small and far away a country by your standards. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am not talking natural disasters. And the reasoning for elections are sloppy. Elections in the USA are important. Elections in Japan are important. Elections in Nigeria are possibly important. Elections in the central african republic are NOT Kasperquickly (talk) 08:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb, this is how I find out that he died. His solo career was still quite big when not compared to Harry Styles for example Strip That Down reached number 3 in the UK and number 10 in the US and so arguably had a more successful music career than Louis Tomlinson. Sahaib (talk) 07:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb He was a member of a popular band, not a musician with a successful solo career. And One Direction most definitely do not have the massive impact of The Beatles, The Rolling Stones or Pink Floyd so that we consider a blurb for the death of an individual band member.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose blurb The circumstances of the death are dramatic and tragic, but purely in terms of his importance, he was one of six members of a famous, but not music history-changing band, as Kiril above me points out. A lot of fans, but probably even more people who roughly remember One Direction and that some guys sang together. With Harry Styles my answer would be yes, but this way I tend to be against it. --Clibenfoart (talk) 08:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Correction there was five members (four when Zayn left). Sahaib (talk) 08:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- As stated above, the main argument about this blurb is more revolving around the circumstances of his death (fall from balcony, young age, possible circumstances surrounding the fall, etc.) Had he died in a more common way like a car accident or as Rambling Man mentioned, something relating to drugs or even homicide, then yes this would be a clear case for RD with a strong opposition against blurbing. However, falling off a hotel balcony while being *possibly* intoxicated at the young age of 31, well, that's not that common hence the blurb nom. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- So why didn't we blurb Jackmaster, Sophie, George Baldock, or XXXTentacion by that reasoning? Abcmaxx (talk) 09:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb He was a member of popular band no doubt, but that's all. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb the unusual circumstances make this blurbable. 2A02:8071:6362:54A0:14D1:B266:31D4:FD5D (talk) 09:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb : no sense giving the impression that en.wp rewards rich white people with blurbs because they fell off wagons and balconies while trashing other people's property. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 09:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Is that a serious comment? Maybe ITN is broken... AusLondonder (talk) 10:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- In the interests of civility, I would advise you strike this comment. While the voting criteria at ITN isn't strictly policy based, this isn't a gossip forum either. Gotitbro (talk) 11:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Was that Wild West wagons or water wagons?? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posting RD, the article is fine. It does not seem a consensus for a blurb will develop here. --Tone 09:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb - not a Michael Jackson or Prince level artist. Sheila1988 (talk) 09:41, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb It's in the news on a global basis, we do a disservice to our readers to pretend otherwise simply because he was a pop culture figure. Per WP:ITNRDBLURB: "For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident)...a blurb may be merited." I think it's merited, his death was cleary unexpected and unusual. AusLondonder (talk) 09:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not sure he'll make it into List of unusual deaths. So unconvinced over blurb. I guess Kurt would have got one. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Been a while since I have been at this forum, but voting seeing the split vote. Initially I too was opposed to a blurb posting, but considering the unusual death this should make it a good candidate for a death blurb (unlike the usual ones we post of notable figures in old age of natural causes). The band's popularity is well known and Payne is inextricably linked to it (I do not this is a case of imputation). Gotitbro (talk) 11:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb As much as those who are in support of the blurb claim that they think this person should blurbed because of the manner of his death, it's not really believable that this is the full story. The full story is that he is a somewhat well-known and rich white person from an English-speaking country. To the best of my knowledge blurbs were not even discussed for Sophie, Jackmaster, George Baldock or XXXTentacion. This is exactly the type of death that Recent Deaths was created for. Chrisclear (talk) 11:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please don't claim to read other editor's minds and then ascribe false narratives to them. That's clearly uncivil. AusLondonder (talk) 12:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- These examples are indeed unusual deaths but from what I can tell the notability is limited individually or through any musical group. Payne is a prominent member of globally one of the best known bands in recent times, which Britannica surmises as such: "One Direction, British-Irish male vocal group whose stylish good looks and bright pop-rock sound captivated young fans around the world in the early 2010s."
- While the band has not been recently active, the question arises would we not blurb a tragic death (god forbid) of a prominent member of a band such as the BTS? Gotitbro (talk) 13:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- All deaths can be argued as tragic, even those from natural causes. The mertic we consider is whether the death is unusual, and while there aren't that many deaths from falling off balconies, deaths resulting from misfortune while intoxicated (as implied by reports) are not. Masem (t) 13:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, what I meant was unusual. Foul play or major accidents should not be the only criteria therein. I think suicide is suspected as well here, does that make more notable as a death or is a mysterious falling off more in line with the RD interpretation. Gotitbro (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- XXXTentaction was way more influencial in terms of his music style, which cannot be said for Liam Payne who despite his huge albeit brief popularity, his influence on any genre of music was neglible. XXXTentaction also has a whole article about the manner of his death, so I cannot see how this tragic accident is more notable than that at all. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, what I meant was unusual. Foul play or major accidents should not be the only criteria therein. I think suicide is suspected as well here, does that make more notable as a death or is a mysterious falling off more in line with the RD interpretation. Gotitbro (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- All deaths can be argued as tragic, even those from natural causes. The mertic we consider is whether the death is unusual, and while there aren't that many deaths from falling off balconies, deaths resulting from misfortune while intoxicated (as implied by reports) are not. Masem (t) 13:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, Oppose Blurb His popularity, and the popularity of the boyband he was in, dropped heavily after the 2010's. It was a flash in the pan of popularity whose only staying power was nostalgia. Scuba 13:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb per Kiril Simeonovski, SashiRolls and Chrisclear. Also support LilianaUwU. Assessment of AusLondonder remains unchanged. Cheers, SerialNumber54129 13:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Serial Number 54129: Huh? AusLondonder (talk) 14:26, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support me? Why? LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 18:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb per most above. Far from transformative in their field, nor are they particularly distinguished within even their group. I'd argue popularity of the deceased doesn't necessarily necessitate a blurb unless under suspicious circumstances, and to me it's clear what happens is no deeper than a few sentences long. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also, a quick question, what does it exactly mean for a death itself to be notable? Any respected figure dying of any means could have an argument of "tragic and unexpected death", such as a heart attack, cancer, stroke, or heart disease, when those are some of the most common forms of death. This clause should really only be used if there's reason to suspect their death was actually unusual and would be notable on its own, for instance Alexei Navalny's death in a Russian prison as an opposition leader, as opposed to a simple case of someone dying the way most people die. From what I gather, the means of death here wasn't plausibly caused by a third party and beyond the perceived tragedy there wasn't much to Payne's death than that. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb The comet blurb is very stale already, so might aswell blurb this one. 51.154.145.205 (talk) 16:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Supporting blurb The comet passage we currently have in ITN is very stale, apparently dating back to September. This is a major news topic and unusual death. Freshen up the feed. RachelTensions (talk) 17:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb While 1D were big, they weren't earth-shatteringly so, and he was not the most famous/notable member of it regardless. The Kip (contribs) 19:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb—One Direction were huge in the 2010s, and Liam Payne's death was extremely sudden and tragic. It's easy for those who didn't grow up in the 2010s (i.e. people like me) to say that 1D isn't iconic like Queen or Nirvana, but the fact is that they were iconic to many legions of fans during their existence, and the band leaves behind a major legacy of its own. Kurtis (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb, very notable individual and huge news story. —Jonny Nixon (talk) 00:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb The only way this would get a blurb is under "death as the story" and, besides being tragically young, this doesn't meet that. Deaths that meet such a "news in itself" threshold would be more the likes of Michael Mosley, where the manner of death is particularly unusual and where there is news coverage of the manner of death itself (and not just because the person was whatever level of famous) - which IIRC we didn't post anyway. Kingsif (talk) 01:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Admin comment At this point, it's a dead heat, both by strength of argument and numerically. Unless this changes, this won't get blurbed. Schwede66 02:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- That very much depends what you're counting. The number of !votes here is about 55. Meanwhile, the number of readership views of this and related topics is currently running at about 10 million per day. It's clearly the dominant topic. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- At this point, I would support disposing of ITN altogether. When someone dies of old age, the discussion is full of "manner of death not notable" oppose votes. When someone dies an unnatural death at a young age, suddenly the manner of death doesn't matter anymore... Unless the only "notable" cause of death is murder. Not to mention how discussions which are undecided after 2 days get closed regularly (IMO the only reasons to close an ITN discussion should be an AfD nomination or the OP withdrawing. They get archived after a week anyway, it's not like they would go on forever.). TVShowFan122 (talk) 18:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- @TVShowFan122: there is a discussion at WP:VPP about amendments or changes to ITN: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: In the news criteria amendments. Natg 19 (talk) 20:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- TVShowFan122, I don't know if you've got your wires crossed, but the 'contrast' of the two situations you describe actually sounds like the same argument being applied in both age-range cases. If a person is not massive enough for a blurb just because it's them, and their death is not remarkable enough it would be news even if it wasn't them, then RDs are not elevated from RD to a blurb. Why would we scrap ITN because of... remarkable consistency in the RD line... Kingsif (talk) 23:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) 2024 SCO summit (heads of government)
[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.
Blurb: The two-day summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Council of Heads concluded in Islamabad, Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, VOA, Al Jazeera, DW, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Oppose Seems like some run-of-the-mill summit to me. Nothing really noteworthy coming out of it nor that much mainstream coverage. Plus of course, the citations are missing publishers and accessdates. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:19, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support it is far from a "run-of-the-mill" summit. That's just living in denial of a static geopolitical world order, particularly with 2024. Of course, that depends on the quality of the ARTICLE/UPDATE. Plenty has gone up without the referencing excuse.Sportsnut24 (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality for now The summit has received sufficient mainstream coverage for ITN. However, the article currently does not have much detail about the summit. Notably, a list of the summit's results is missing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Routine summit that hasn't made any major announcement and there's no indication of long-term impact. We wouldn't post summits of equivalent regional bodies (African Union, ASEAN etc.). Besides, the article is terrible, just two sentences of prose and some uninformative bullet points. It would be embarrassing to post that in ITN. Modest Genius talk
- Oppose We generally do not post these types of summits (even stuff like the G7 or G20), unless significant reform measures are signed for individual country ratification. --Masem (t) 11:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose As not seeing evidence of any noteworthy developments at the summit. If someone can demonstrate that is not correct I'd happily reconsider. I'd personally support posting more regional summits as long as something of relevance takes place. The article is obviously not fit for ITN, either. Also we shouldn't post a redirect, the article is at Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. AusLondonder (talk) 12:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above arguments. Scuba 12:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Google searching "2024 SCO Summit" and then NYT, BBC, CBC, Le Monde, Moscow Times, yields no articles. On the other hand, I found a single WAPO article, and it is being more closely followed by Asian media outlets such as the Times of India or the Chinese government-owned newspaper Global Times. Even those articles, though, only really detail that the event happened and make vague, generally non-notable reports ("commitment to cooperation", "new efforts to combat climate change", trade partnerships, etc). On the whole, this is simply not global front page news at the level required by ITN. FlipandFlopped ツ 18:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Business as usual, just with more dictators (proportionally) and less information. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:49, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per all above. The Kip (contribs) 18:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
October 15
[edit]
October 15, 2024
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
|
(Posted) RD: Garbis Aprikian
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): RTL (France)
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Born in Egypt as an Armenian, he moved to Paris for studies and remained there, conducting an Armenian mixed choir for around 50 years and bringing Armenian music to France. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Robert Fulford (journalist)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC.ca
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Wellington Bay (talk · give credit) and Connormah (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Canadian journalist. Article seems to almost be there. Ktin (talk) 01:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- This looks promising; only two citation needed tags. Flibirigit (talk) 11:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ready. All information cited. No other concerns noted. Flibirigit (talk) 13:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems good enough to me now. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 11:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Mike Jackson
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times
Credits:
- Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article is a FA. Updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Featured article, influential person. -insert valid name here- (talk) 01:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Well written article and well cited. He deserves credit and recognition for backing Captain James Blunt refusing to follow the American order at Pristina airport, which averted the Third World War. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 11:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Atul Parchure
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times Now Times of India Hindustan Times
Credits:
- Nominated by TNM101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Filmyworldwiki (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Well known Marathi and Hindi film and television actor, death has been acknowledged throughout the industry. Has a verifiability tag but should be resolved soon. TNM101 (chat) 13:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- We don’t post stubs. Schwede66 12:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Stub. Scuba 12:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article is a stub. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Still merely 150 words of prose. Too short. --PFHLai (talk) 21:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: George Negus
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1], [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk · give credit), ClaudineChionh (talk · give credit), Flipandflopped (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Happily888 (talk) 04:39, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Comment, not yet, sourcing could be improved.ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)- Support, good collective effort to improve it. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 13:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, nationally iconic but also internationally relevant. Article is in good enough shape in my opinion. Daniel (talk) 13:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft support only seeing 3 CN tags, which I feel is near the acceptable limit, but still below it. Scuba 12:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support I have updated the article to address the remaining CN tags. Should be ready now IMHO! FlipandFlopped ツ 02:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems good to go. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Death date Is there a source that confirms the exact date he died? Family statement are not necessarily issued ASAP the same day. I dont have access to the subscription-only citation.—Bagumba (talk) 04:27, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bagumba: I checked all the accessible sources again (some of them have been updated) but none of them confirm a date of death! If we can't confirm the date does that make it ineligible for RD? @Jkaharper: do you have full access to The Australian? — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 04:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- The death is verified, it's just that we shouldn't use an exact unverified date. "Circa" or something similar would be more accurate, not sure other MOS options ("reported"?) A case where the actual death turned out to be months earlier comes to mind (exact name escapes me). Some families need privacy until the right time. —Bagumba (talk) 04:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- I was thinking of Fritz Peterson (nom). Announced death in April 2024, with no specific date mentioned, but sources eventually came out that he died in October 2023. Sequence mentioned on his page. —Bagumba (talk) 06:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bagumba: see Jkaharper's edit summary 1251498836|here. Happily888 (talk) 06:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Happily888: Interesting, if I go to that url, and I don't have a subscription, the free preview shows
The pioneering journalist, one of the three original members of 60 Minutes and the inaugural host of ABC’s Foreign Correspondent, has died at the age of 82
, with no mention of "Tuesday". Have they since updated their page to remove the exact day? Or is that preview different from what's actually in the paywalled article? Do we trust the exact date if this is the only site mentioning it (WP:RSBREAKING)? Could they just have mistakenely assumed it was the same date as the family statement? I'd recommend just using {{circa}} for now, unless there's more clarity. —Bagumba (talk) 07:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)- Bagumba: I'm inclined to go with "circa". — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 12:55, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bagumba and ClaudineChionh: Yes, usually the previews on these sites differ from the article content. If you open the URL from a mobile browser view you should be able to scroll down and read the full first paragraph which hasn't been changed, which includes the Tuesday date information. Additionally, the family statement suggests that the death date was the same date as announcement, with media reports such as 10 News First The Project Mediaweek on Tuesday stating that Negus died "today" and the family statement starts with
Today, our incredible father and partner George passed away
according to ABC News Variety Daily Telegraph, showing that that URL is correct. Happily888 (talk) 14:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)- Ok, I'm less concerned with those sources, esp. if the family wrote "today". —Bagumba (talk) 16:42, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Happily888: Interesting, if I go to that url, and I don't have a subscription, the free preview shows
- The death is verified, it's just that we shouldn't use an exact unverified date. "Circa" or something similar would be more accurate, not sure other MOS options ("reported"?) A case where the actual death turned out to be months earlier comes to mind (exact name escapes me). Some families need privacy until the right time. —Bagumba (talk) 04:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bagumba: I checked all the accessible sources again (some of them have been updated) but none of them confirm a date of death! If we can't confirm the date does that make it ineligible for RD? @Jkaharper: do you have full access to The Australian? — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 04:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Post Date seems resolved.—Bagumba (talk) 05:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bagumba May I get "ITN credit" too? (I'm not obsessively chasing bling, I promise!) ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 22:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- @ClaudineChionh: Apologies for missing you.—Bagumba (talk) 05:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bagumba: No problem, Stephen sorted it out. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 05:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- @ClaudineChionh: Apologies for missing you.—Bagumba (talk) 05:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bagumba May I get "ITN credit" too? (I'm not obsessively chasing bling, I promise!) ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 22:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
October 14
[edit]
October 14, 2024
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
(Posted) RD: Barbara Owen (organist)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Organ Historical Society
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American organist, who also was into organ building, voicing and consulting, and a musicologist who headed the Boston chapter of the AGO and its organ library at the Boston University. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Photo RD (or Usual) Story checks out. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 11:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Janet Nelson
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Royal Historical Society
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Martinevans123 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Serial Number 54129 (talk · give credit) and Flipandflopped (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
British medieval historian. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support She was 82 and born March 28 (that's a palindrome). It's now '24 and that was '42 (that's another palindrome). Article looks well-cited (that's what's significant). InedibleHulk (talk) 20:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Question, Though In British historiography, is it proper for an infobox to say a woman dissolved her spouse in 2010 or divorced him? InedibleHulk (talk) 20:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please see Talk:Janet Nelson#Marital status, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Also (quite insignificantly), I didn't mean to imply Wilson was her dad's surname earlier. There's a tradition in this ex-dominion wherein we introduce couples as "Blank and Blankette Exampleson" (skipping the redundancy) and I thought we got it from "you guys", but I guess not, whatever and fine. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sure we both have all sorts of traditions about names. And then there's... WP:MOS... Martinevans123 (talk) 21:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Also (quite insignificantly), I didn't mean to imply Wilson was her dad's surname earlier. There's a tradition in this ex-dominion wherein we introduce couples as "Blank and Blankette Exampleson" (skipping the redundancy) and I thought we got it from "you guys", but I guess not, whatever and fine. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please see Talk:Janet Nelson#Marital status, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support three of the books in the works section were not cited, so I updated the article to include that. Should be good to go. FlipandFlopped ツ 03:15, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft support some of the books are missing ISBN codes, but the article looks fine. Scuba 21:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Feel free to add. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ready for 36 hours now. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is indeed ready to be posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Generally expect most of Janet Nelson § Works to have ISBN, ISSN, etc.—Bagumba (talk) 04:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Even though the 7 remaining books all have either an external link to Google Books or a linked article? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Now added anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Even though the 7 remaining books all have either an external link to Google Books or a linked article? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 10:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Nadeem al-Wajidi
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Millat Times Baseerat Online Amar Ujala The Inquilab
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Khaatir (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Indian Islamic scholar. Khaatir (talk) 14:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support however I believe the list of the books should be trimmed but that's more of a cleanup thing. Regards, Aafi (talk) 05:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Aafi Following this, 12 books have been retained out of the original 20, and these 12 are also selected from a list of approximately 50 books. Regards, Khaatir (talk) 02:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Everything looks good besides the lack of ISBN for his books. Scuba 12:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is good enough to be posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 09:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Europa Clipper launches
[edit]Blurb: The Europa Clipper probe is launched (pictured) by NASA on a 6-year journey to the Jovian moon Europa. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Europa Clipper spacecraft is launched (pictured) to investigate Europa, an icy moon of Jupiter
News source(s): CNN, Sky, Space.com
Credits:
- Nominated by Jone425 (talk · give credit)
Major interplanetary probe launch, and significant coverage from non-science focused sources. Seems to be getting a similar level of attention to Polaris Dawn, if not more. First orbital probe dedicated to exploring a single non-Earth moon. Jone425 (talk) 22:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This also should probably mention JUICE too. That said this was also an unremarkable launch (existing rocket, no hitches) and the probes won't get TO Jupiter until 2030, so maybe this isn't this time to post? Not sure. Masem (t) 22:35, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- JUICE launched last year, so I'm not entirely sure why it'd be mentioned here. As for waiting, that could be a good idea but this seems to be a fairly significant launch and lines up with previous ITN launch posts (JUICE being one of them). Jone425 (talk) 22:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I misread that these were launched at the same time, they're sorta joint missions to explore Jupiter and its all moons.
And while we do normally wait for arrive at destination for ITNR, that's 6 years down the road so it could also be reasonable as a non-ITNR to post the launch as to highlight the mission, as we did for JUICE Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/April 2023. — Masem (t) 01:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)- Worth noting that the "normal" is just "ITN/R criteria." The number of blue boxes I see indicates we do post plenty of ITN that isn't ITN/R. That said, I've continuously felt that the criteria list needs to stop shrinking (at this rate its arrival at Jupiter may no longer be ITN/R come 2030!) and could stand to add a few more, particularly "the successful departure of any spacecraft to a destination beyond the Earth-Moon system." Over the past 5 years there have been just 9 such launches; 5 to asteroids, (3 NEO, 2 main belt/beyond) 3 to Mars, and 2 to Jupiter; given the limited launch windows, those Mars launches were close enough to each other we could usually roll them into one FP item, too. Nottheking (talk) 22:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I misread that these were launched at the same time, they're sorta joint missions to explore Jupiter and its all moons.
- JUICE launched last year, so I'm not entirely sure why it'd be mentioned here. As for waiting, that could be a good idea but this seems to be a fairly significant launch and lines up with previous ITN launch posts (JUICE being one of them). Jone425 (talk) 22:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, in your face Arthur C. Clarke. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:00, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Support Very important mission, and largest interplanetary mission built by NASA. Elios Peredhel (talk) 23:06, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article in good shape. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Obviously a very notable event, why isn't this ITNR? - azpineapple | T/C 01:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's ITNR at arrival, just not automatically posted at launch. —Cryptic 05:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Europa is going to get some well-deserved scrutiny, it appears. Jusdafax (talk) 02:01, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support major probe. Scuba 04:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good, very notable and prevalent in the news Hungry403 (talk) 05:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - but there's problems with the blurb. The blurb currently says "on a 6-year mission to the Jovian moon". The flight to Europa is 5.5 years, but I believe the mission at Europa is at least 4 years. Perhaps the blurb should say "on a 6-year flight ..." Nfitz (talk) 05:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Swapped 'mission' out in favour of 'journey', but I can change it to 'flight' if that's more appropriate. Jone425 (talk) 07:11, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The launch seems unremarkable compared to the Starship catch and ITN is only running three blurbs currently. The real challenge for this mission is the intense radiation at the destination -- see Vulnerable transistors... We'll just have to wait and see how that goes. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's no mention of the launcher in the blurb, and only a fleeting reference in the target article. It's the spacecraft that's notable here. Nfitz (talk) 17:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's no mention of the launcher in my comment either. The event here is the "launch" and both blurbs use the verb to indicate this. The relevant section of the article has zero prose about the event and, instead has a lot of stuff about might-have-beens and also uses the future tense repeatedly. This is an inadequate update for what we'd be reporting here.
- Editors seem to be supporting this because they think it's a potentially important mission, not because we have a good report on something that has happened. Whether the mission turns out to be significant will not be known for years and it might never happen. That's why ITN/R recommends posting on arrival rather than departure. See WP:CRYSTAL.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 20:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's no mention of the launcher in the blurb, and only a fleeting reference in the target article. It's the spacecraft that's notable here. Nfitz (talk) 17:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Hungry403. Double sharp (talk) 10:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support. Major mission and the article is in decent shape. However there isn't much in the way of updates, just a statement that it launched. Yesterday I removed two entire sections that were many years out of date, and refrained from nominating because of the limited update. Several parts of the text are still in past tense or refer to potential future launch dates, not the actual one. This certainly should be posted, but I would prefer it if the other outdated statements were fixed. Altblurb added. Modest Genius talk 11:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose we've already established via many people's opinions of the Starship launch and catch that most users here think even revolutionary rocket catches out of mid-air are not significant. This is significantly less significant and in the news than a single run of the mill rocket launch such as the one that launched Europa Clipper. Ergzay (talk) 12:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- The importance here is the spacecraft and where it is going, not the launcher. Modest Genius talk 13:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- When the spacecraft reaches it's destination and missions is accomplished then we can blurb about it. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think we should do both. Two blurbs six years apart isn't too much to ask. Modest Genius talk 12:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- The spacecraft hasn't achieved anything though. No discoveries made. That comes in 2030 when it arrives. Ergzay (talk) 06:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- When the spacecraft reaches it's destination and missions is accomplished then we can blurb about it. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- The importance here is the spacecraft and where it is going, not the launcher. Modest Genius talk 13:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. It is a major interplanetary mission and it is being covered by WP:RS as a major interplanetary mission. The altblurb is fine. Nsk92 (talk) 16:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Point of order: say eg "Jupiter's moon" not "Jovian" in a blurb, the avg person-on-street doesn't know what that means (no they don't ask them if you don't believe me you are the outlier not them) --Slowking Man (talk) 16:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. The largest, heaviest, and most expensive interplanetary craft ever built. It is going to a place of extremely high astrobiological interest and has a fair chance of detecting life. If this doesn't deserve a blurb, then nothing relating to uncrewed spaceflight ever will. Agile Jello (talk) 16:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Per above. Both the Starship flight and this are extremely notable events in spaceflight and should be blurbed. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:45, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, per all above. Altblurb is better IMO. Alexcalamaro (talk) 18:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Altblurb While not ITN/R, the successful departure of a mission to an interplanetary voyage is an incredibly rare and notable thing, with just 9 across the past 5 years... And the Outer solar system is rarer still, with just 11 missions launched across the past 51 years. (all missions that have gone past Jupiter have flown by Jupiter as well)
- It's ITN/R when it arrives (assuming editors don't strip all spaceflight criteria from ITN/R by then...) but that won't be until 2030. Obviously this departure will have long-since fallen off of the front page by then!
- That said, maybe the AltBlurb could do without the first comma in it. Nottheking (talk) 22:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed the comma. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: at this moment, it is just another rocket launch. It's significance will be once it carries out its intended mission. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 22:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support due to the immense scientific interest in Europa as or right now. The outcomes of this mission - sea or not - will almost certainly be very impactful. I'd like a blurb that better explains this, if possible. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Added image for the launch from the page itself. Elios Peredhel (talk) 08:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: It was launched on a Falcon Heavy after all. Kcmastrpc (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Altblurb per Notttheking and Slowkingman. Avoiding the term "Jovian" makes the lede more practical & understandable to the average main page reader. FlipandFlopped ツ 18:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb per above. The Kip (contribs) 18:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb. Very notable mission with a high-quality article. -insert valid name here- (talk) 18:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb Per above. Rynoip (talk) 21:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for arrival or data return. Launch itself is relatively routine. –DMartin 04:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: there are approximately five times as many support !votes as oppose/wait !votes, and the article has been updated. That seems sufficient to post. Marking as ready and pinging @Admins willing to post ITN: . Modest Genius talk 17:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 23:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Thomas J. Donohue
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Axios
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nomcom. Nothing of note is wrong with the article. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:28, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Economics
[edit]Blurb: The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James A. Robinson for their studies "of how institutions are formed and affect prosperity". (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James A. Robinson for their studies of global inequality.
Alternative blurb II: The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James A. Robinson for their studies of how institutions are formed and affect prosperity.
News source(s): The New York Times Noble Prize press release
Credits:
- Nominated by PrinceofPunjab (talk · give credit)
Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Both Johnson's, and Robinson's article are not ready and need some work. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 13:28, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think the articles are good enough. If one needs work it's the Acemoglu's. It's a big article thank god and but theres some low quality stuff there like turkish users that keep adding his high school to his "school of thought" category in the infobox 🤦♂️ P.S. added another alt blurb without the quotes since it's a verbatim citation that doesnt need quotes IMO Kasperquickly (talk) 14:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Almost there but not yet there Johnson article is missing references and Robinson article still has a banner above it.--ReyHahn (talk) 16:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, not a true Nobel. 2804:388:4101:7F22:1:0:2B66:205B (talk) 17:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is an ITNR item, so the importance is not in doubt. We're only assessing the updates and article quality. Modest Genius talk 18:21, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Acemoglu's article is in very good shape. Johnson's article is bit light but does meet our minimum requirements. Robinson's is somewhere in between but also good enough to post - the tag is yellow level, which does not disqualify from ITN (only orange and red tags do). I do question what sort of 'institutions' are being referred to in the blurb - could that be clarified? Modest Genius talk 18:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb2 seems to be the way to go.--ReyHahn (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Modest Genius: You're raising a great question on what sort of 'institutions' are being referred to. After taking a quick look at some of the articles, it seems like 'Institutions' is the right target article as it contains a few sentences in which the work of the three authors is explained in the context of how institutions contribute to economic growth (see
... Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James A. Robinson agree with the analysis presented by North. They write that institutions play a crucial role in the trajectory of economic growth because economic institutions shape the opportunities and constraints of investment.[15] Economic incentives also shape political behavior, as certain groups receive more advantages from economic outcomes than others, which allow them to gain political control. A separate paper by Acemoglu, Robinson, and Francisco A. Gallego details the relationships between institutions, human capital, and economic development. They argue that there institutions set an equal playing field for competition, making institutional strength a key factor in economic growth...
). Linking to institutional economics would be inappropriate as the field is much broader, and the article does not even mention any of the authors (in fact, their work falls within development economics instead).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:03, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Articles look good enough for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- All three biographies have unreferenced paragraphs. Stephen 22:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- oppose articles are NOT updated. Just the one line in the lead.
- update Acemoglu's article is updated a bit more, although could further update.Sportsnut24 (talk) 01:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posting. All articles are in a good shape. For awards, there is only as much as can be said without going into excessive details, so it is fine. --Tone 09:15, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Tone: I don't think the choice of the blurb was right. We usually use the wording in the statement of the Nobel Committee, which is 'for studies of how institutions are formed and affect prosperity'. There's no notion of 'research on global inequality', and this is largely original research by The New York Times.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
October 13
[edit](Posted) RD: Donald J. Hall
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KSHB
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Engineerchange (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Chvy350sb (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Well-known Hallmark executive. --Engineerchange (talk) 15:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article's existence he doesn't have three reliable, major and noteworthy sources cited and fails WP:BIO criteria. We have 4 primary sources, a Forbes profile which could've been simply bought, and three local news sources. Scuba 15:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- You can nominate this article for WP:AFD if you disagree with its existence. Natg 19 (talk) 17:01, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Even with a two minute WP:BEFORE search, there are clearly more sources that could be used. Most are local to Kansas but they are recognized newspapers so that is sufficient. An AFD would be pointless here. Masem (t) 17:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- You can nominate this article for WP:AFD if you disagree with its existence. Natg 19 (talk) 17:01, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support The article meets our minimum editorial standards... all of its claims are cited by reputable sources, even if "just local ones and Forbes". Whether he is majorly noteworthy beyond the local level is not relevant for discussion here, because this is not the place to take up a WP:GNG fight. Barring the article being nominated at AFD (which I think would resolve in a snow close anyways per Masem), this should be posted. FlipandFlopped ツ 03:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Brush up on WP:BIO, local sources don't count as major reputable sources. They need something with a circulation beyond one metro area. General rule of thumb is they need to be on the perennial reliable sources list. Scuba 21:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 20:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) New marathon world record for women
[edit]Blurb: In women's marathon, Ruth Chepng'etich (pictured) sets a new world record with a time of 2:09:56 to become the first woman to break the 2:10 barriers. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Kenyan Ruth Chepng'etich breaks the women's marathon world record at the Chicago Marathon.
News source(s): BBC, CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by UCinternational (talk · give credit)
UCinternational (talk) 11:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose And dont even get me started how everyone knows that these no skill pure performance sports have been dominated by doping since the early 1960s Kasperquickly (talk) 11:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment/Support When I heard the record was broken, it's not as though I expected it to be by 50%... Bitspectator ⛩️ 13:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Incorrect information, almost 2 (two) minutes faster, not 34 seconds! Randy Kryn (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- And even if it was 34 seconds, so what? It's still the fastest a woman has run a marathon in history. nableezy - 15:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yep, I've accidentally looked at the men's section of the world records article as opposed to the women's (Kenyan names are hard for me like that)
- Still I dont think this deserves posting. Going by that same article ,the previous record in the same category has been set up just half a year ago. The one before that was achieved half a year before that. And the one before that 4 years before. And this is just for the records in that one particular (maraphon) type of race just for people identifying as women. Why stop there? Let's start posting 100 meter and 200 meter races. For men. And women. And also all the other records in all the other sports. And this page would be nothing but a continuous tally of world records in frisbie throwing and horse football and base jumping. In addition to the all important parliamentary elections in sealand and micronesia. Kasperquickly (talk) 15:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Im pretty sure a new world record in the 100m race would get posted pretty quickly. Maybe even in record time. nableezy - 18:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- And even if it was 34 seconds, so what? It's still the fastest a woman has run a marathon in history. nableezy - 15:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - but add at the Chicago Marathon to the blurb. nableezy - 12:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, almost two minutes off the previous record is a huge increase, almost two minutes faster than all of the other women who ever ran the distance. Add Chicago Marathon and nationality to the blurb. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Since she broke the previous world record by nearly two minutes rather than 34 seconds as mentioned above. Both the record article and the bolded article are in good shape. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 13:35, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support broke it by a considerable margin. Scuba 15:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support add the Chicago Marathon and Kenyan nationality in the blurb. Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Theoretically support the alt blurb since this is an important record, but oppose on quality for now since Chepng'etich's article needs more references. The alt blurb is based on the blurb that was used when Tigist Assefa previously set the world record. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is a huge milestone in women's sports. Rager7 (talk) 21:28, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per above. Rynoip (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The ALT blurb is similar to the format used for the last 2013 posting.—Bagumba (talk) 04:03, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb. Breaking a major world record, and the linked article is of good quality. -insert valid name here- (talk) 01:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, major record. BilboBeggins (talk) 18:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb Dosen't happen every day, and happened at a pretty big event. Normalman101 (talk) 00:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 01:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Donal Murray
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Irish Examiner
Credits:
- Nominated by 139.164.154.34 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ButcherStreet (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and Tristan 24 février 2011 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Irish Roman Catholic prelate. 139.164.154.34 (talk) 07:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Almost ready article is fine except for the DOB is no entirely sourced as the source given for it only mentions the year and not the date or a month. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 13:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose no content from 2009 to his death, article's revision history supports my theory that this was made in 2009 and barely touched. Scuba 21:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Starship Flight 5
[edit]Blurb: SpaceX successfully catches the Super Heavy booster on the launchpad during Starship flight 5. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CNN, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by PrecariousWorlds (talk · give credit)
One of the most tremendous engineering feats in all of history, and one of the most amazing and incredible spaceflights ever. It's hard to understate just how significant this is for the future of space exploration. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support for inherent significance. This will be in engineering textbooks for decades to come. WhatisMars (talk) 12:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support as an incredible engineering feat that is pivotal for human colonization of space. Quite literally no one has returned a booster stage to earth in one piece before today. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- You might mean two stages :D WhatisMars (talk) 12:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Let’s go! Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- You might mean two stages :D WhatisMars (talk) 12:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Starship has successfully landed off the coast of Australia. This is the first fully successful test flight of Starship PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I believe this is the second fully successful flight - IFT-4 also completed all objectives. Miralitt (talk) 21:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Many firsts were achieved with this specific launch and landing/booster catch. Kind of an understatement but this mission was truly historic, and is important to note as groundbreaking while it’s still newsworthy. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Not thrilled with the huge table to outline the detail of the flight. There are a few key events, but we don't need it to that level. --Masem (t) 13:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, I wonder if there is a way to collapse groups of table rows into significant milestone fold outs. Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is more a case to just cut it down to a few key points into prose, like the time it launched, the time it was caught, etc, those noted by independent sources. — Masem (t) 16:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, I wonder if there is a way to collapse groups of table rows into significant milestone fold outs. Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The enthusiasm of the nominator got me curious, but as someone who hasn't been following SpaceX, this article is difficult to understand. It doesn't clearly explain what the "catch" actually was and how it worked. The Orbital Launch Mount Tower A seems important, but that link in the lead takes me to an article about the whole starbase, which doesn't help much. Zagalejo (talk) 14:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah I think the article needs a section on the actual objectives of catching the booster and its significance for the future PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed, most readers won't have a clue what this is about Kowal2701 (talk) 17:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not disputing the article prob needs work: link to Auntie Beeb is to the point. First rocket stage makes roundtrip back where it came from, tower thingy plays game of catch with it Slowking Man (talk) 17:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Caught the booster at the pad. Scuba 14:40, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - Another spaceflight, another ITN nomination. Clearly a great engineering feat but personally I don't see these unmanned space flight achievements as being up to the required level for ITN. Nigej (talk) 16:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- There should be a separation between Elon Musk's statement and SpaceX's actions. In this case, this is objectively a new milestone in spaceflight because this demostrated that both of the rocket's stages can be reused, making the entirety of the rocket reusable, and is a prime goal of the Starship development program. WhatisMars (talk) 16:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- A new milestone would be sending someone to Mars. I'd support ITN for that. Nigej (talk) 17:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- That goes without saying, but we have three Nobel prize winners in ITN, an event that happens without fail every single year and isn't especially newsworthy. It's also something that basically no news media agencies cover. It's clear that the bar for getting into ITN is exceedingly low. Ergzay (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- In what nation, User:Ergzay, do the media not cover the Nobels? The news has been full of it lately around here watching local and international channels - the local papers too. Nfitz (talk) 22:34, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- America for one. Google searching for just "nobel prize" I find some minor articles buried. Whereas this spaceX landing is listed as a top news item on both CNN, and Fox News on their front pages, neither of which mentions any nobel prizes. Also I'd note that each nobel prize award got its own separate entry rather than simply combining them. Most of the ITN section is now about nobel prizes. Ergzay (talk) 22:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Which part of Americas? I see articles from Canada, the USA, and Brazil. one, two, three. Lots of other examples in each nomination as well. Nfitz (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Articles exist, my point was they are not prominent. But anyway, Nobel Prizes have a special exception to the normal rules for ITN content. So even if they wouldn't normally be posted they're posted anyway. Ergzay (talk) 01:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Which part of Americas? I see articles from Canada, the USA, and Brazil. one, two, three. Lots of other examples in each nomination as well. Nfitz (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- America for one. Google searching for just "nobel prize" I find some minor articles buried. Whereas this spaceX landing is listed as a top news item on both CNN, and Fox News on their front pages, neither of which mentions any nobel prizes. Also I'd note that each nobel prize award got its own separate entry rather than simply combining them. Most of the ITN section is now about nobel prizes. Ergzay (talk) 22:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- In what nation, User:Ergzay, do the media not cover the Nobels? The news has been full of it lately around here watching local and international channels - the local papers too. Nfitz (talk) 22:34, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- That goes without saying, but we have three Nobel prize winners in ITN, an event that happens without fail every single year and isn't especially newsworthy. It's also something that basically no news media agencies cover. It's clear that the bar for getting into ITN is exceedingly low. Ergzay (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- A new milestone would be sending someone to Mars. I'd support ITN for that. Nigej (talk) 17:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- There should be a separation between Elon Musk's statement and SpaceX's actions. In this case, this is objectively a new milestone in spaceflight because this demostrated that both of the rocket's stages can be reused, making the entirety of the rocket reusable, and is a prime goal of the Starship development program. WhatisMars (talk) 16:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It's proof of concept for a more efficient space program. So what? It's no more ITN worthy than every last incremental press-release-worthy improvement out there, whether in controlled fusion, desert reclamation, particle colliders, quantum computing, skyscraper building, telescope power, dark matter detection, and so on and so on. The same level of technological breakthrough would have justified at least two dozen James Webb Space Telescope ITN postings and at least one or two a year ongoing improvements to the various gravitational wave telescopes out there. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- You describe small incremental changes yet dismiss this as only a small incremental improvement when it's unprecedented in the history of spaceflight. Minor discoveries by JWST which are a dime a dozen is not this. Ergzay (talk) 21:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I was not talking about minor discoveries by JWST (which, by the way, has a good number of major discoveries to boot). I am talking about the astonishing engineering breakthroughs needed to get the JWST to work. The cryocooler, the gold-coated beryllium mirrors, the five layer sunshield, all were completely unprecedented. And LIGO's custom giant mirrors, quantum squeezing, ultra precise lasers, and so much more, have all have been major triumphs of cutting edge physics and engineering. But as they can't be boiled down to a geewhiz video, they are easy to disparage by someone who thinks I was just talking about "minor discoveries". I wasn't. Every one of those developments, and dozens more, in those two projects alone (and across numerous technologies that I gave a very very short list) has been unprecedented and utterly astonishing. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 21:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you're getting at here. There will never be a time in history, other than today, where the first stage of a rocket booster is caught for the initial first time. Also, JWST was blurbed when it launched, and when it delivered its first imagery. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- What was astonishing about JWST was not its engineering breakthroughs but how much it cost. Cryocoolers are standard things that exist in industry, gold plating of metals is also nothing special, the sunshield was made of mylar a common material. So no, nothing there is unprecedented. Ergzay (talk) 22:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think the point they were getting at was more: right, now how many of those have been stuffed in a rocket, sent up to L2, then unfolded by computer control, and the instruments incl. mirror cooled and kept at 40 K? Then started snapping pics? In fact one instrument has to be kept at 7 K. Note beryllium is quite brittle, and the mirror itself had to be unfolded! Also the shield has to help keep the stuff that way not only from the Sun but the Earth and Moon which are still much hotter and radiate lots of photons that heat the scope. (Crash thermo 101 review heat goes hotter -> colder also energy = conserved, always has to go somewhere) Note also vacuum is a perfect insulator (think Thermos) so the cryo has to work by boiling off coolant into space, to exhaust the heat somewhere, no air to convect heat away. (All space tin cans w/ onboard bipedal monkeys have to too, ISS uses ammonia)
- For a little perspective: Total lifetime JWST cost projection: $9.7 bil in 2021$, adj to 2023$: $10.8 billion. Using {{inflation}}, nothin up my sleeve here. A smidge >1% of yearly US military spending in 2023 (and/or Medicare, which is slightly higher). (Take note of how often in discourse "cost" is invoked for things like science, vs how often for The Troops™ or for cops) ~3% 2023 US spending on "non-alcoholic drinks" ($328 bil, source internets). Not tap water, this is all drinks sold @ retail excl. booze. (Imagine putting a 1% soda tax on sugared drinks only—things that are not only completely unnecessary but actively terrible for public health—for health & science research! Let's not even get started on booze) .04% 2022 US GDP. Slowking Man (talk) 17:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- There is a reason JWST cost such an incredible amount (and was delayed for such a long long time). Multiple engineering breakthroughs that had to be discovered, tested, developed, invented, and then tested again. (And again and again because it was space.) The MIRI cryocooler had to get down to single digit kelvins. It uses an incredible thermoacoustic system custom invented for JWST, not some off-the-shelf industry standard. The mirrors were made out of beryllium (not standard) and then gold plated (yes, atomic vapor plating is standard) to an incredible precision (not stanard), and then aligned and adjusted after deployment (extremely not standard). The sunshield was a tennis court sized five layer shield, specially coated, specially spaced, so that excess heat would be steered out the gaps, and then it had to be folded up before launch and unfolded just so after launch. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 18:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- We've had cryocoolers that do way below single digit kelvins for many decades. (There's black and white videos of liquified helium from way back.) Casting/machining things out of beryllium has been done before. Precision of machining is based on your tools so that is also standard. You're arguing that the spacing of a piece of metalized plastic is an engineering breakthrough? It didn't even have to be precise (that's why the spaces were visibly large to make up for the creases/crinkles in the material). Ergzay (talk) 12:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- (This is going off into sidetrack but space is a much more hostile environment from a nice comfortable lab, everything has to withstand launch stresses, the "cold soak" and often constant warming-cooling cycles, radiation (how many labs are located entirely at the business end of a running particle accelerator), as-hard-as-it-gets vacuum. Also you would like to be able to point the scope at diff things, also also want to minimize vibrations (will mess up observations). On JWST they used a gyro w/out moving parts b/c Hubble's kept wearing out and failing. Also all needs to be light as possible, launching mass costs $$$ but still mounted on a single structure that can bear all load stresses --Slowking Man (talk) 16:53, 15 October 2024 (UTC))
- Gyros without moving parts have been standard parts on aircraft and personal electronics for many decades before JWST chose to adopt them. Ergzay (talk) 18:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I never said they weren't—I was contrasting w/ Hubble, which did use mech gyros (I think like six or eight?), which wore out and needed servicing missions (which themselves aren't free), to illustrate one contributing factor to costs. And the scope needs a bit more precision than that from a laser ring gyroscope in a large aircraft. Positioning error adds up a bit over say, 10 billion light-years. Also it sounds like the JWST gyro is a single pt of failure? Guessing the tolerances and testing on that were very intensive (again, adds to cost, but if your gyro breaks and your billion $ scope becomes quite a bit less useful... Slowking Man (talk) 01:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Gyros without moving parts have been standard parts on aircraft and personal electronics for many decades before JWST chose to adopt them. Ergzay (talk) 18:56, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- And to boot, the MIRI cryocooler is intended to last at least five years, and preferably twenty or so, without human or even robot intervention. All in all, User:Ergzay, your comments are simply nuisance and noise, focusing on things well-known and dead-easy that had to be re-imagined and redeveloped in order to be used on the JWST, and then pointing out the completely obvious well-known dead-easy parts and pretending there was no need for actual breakthroughs to go beyond what was already known. One as might as well say this launch was no big deal because heck, I once caught a toy rocket using a butterfly net as a kid. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 18:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- (This is going off into sidetrack but space is a much more hostile environment from a nice comfortable lab, everything has to withstand launch stresses, the "cold soak" and often constant warming-cooling cycles, radiation (how many labs are located entirely at the business end of a running particle accelerator), as-hard-as-it-gets vacuum. Also you would like to be able to point the scope at diff things, also also want to minimize vibrations (will mess up observations). On JWST they used a gyro w/out moving parts b/c Hubble's kept wearing out and failing. Also all needs to be light as possible, launching mass costs $$$ but still mounted on a single structure that can bear all load stresses --Slowking Man (talk) 16:53, 15 October 2024 (UTC))
- We've had cryocoolers that do way below single digit kelvins for many decades. (There's black and white videos of liquified helium from way back.) Casting/machining things out of beryllium has been done before. Precision of machining is based on your tools so that is also standard. You're arguing that the spacing of a piece of metalized plastic is an engineering breakthrough? It didn't even have to be precise (that's why the spaces were visibly large to make up for the creases/crinkles in the material). Ergzay (talk) 12:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- There is a reason JWST cost such an incredible amount (and was delayed for such a long long time). Multiple engineering breakthroughs that had to be discovered, tested, developed, invented, and then tested again. (And again and again because it was space.) The MIRI cryocooler had to get down to single digit kelvins. It uses an incredible thermoacoustic system custom invented for JWST, not some off-the-shelf industry standard. The mirrors were made out of beryllium (not standard) and then gold plated (yes, atomic vapor plating is standard) to an incredible precision (not stanard), and then aligned and adjusted after deployment (extremely not standard). The sunshield was a tennis court sized five layer shield, specially coated, specially spaced, so that excess heat would be steered out the gaps, and then it had to be folded up before launch and unfolded just so after launch. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 18:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think the point they were getting at was more: right, now how many of those have been stuffed in a rocket, sent up to L2, then unfolded by computer control, and the instruments incl. mirror cooled and kept at 40 K? Then started snapping pics? In fact one instrument has to be kept at 7 K. Note beryllium is quite brittle, and the mirror itself had to be unfolded! Also the shield has to help keep the stuff that way not only from the Sun but the Earth and Moon which are still much hotter and radiate lots of photons that heat the scope. (Crash thermo 101 review heat goes hotter -> colder also energy = conserved, always has to go somewhere) Note also vacuum is a perfect insulator (think Thermos) so the cryo has to work by boiling off coolant into space, to exhaust the heat somewhere, no air to convect heat away. (All space tin cans w/ onboard bipedal monkeys have to too, ISS uses ammonia)
- I was not talking about minor discoveries by JWST (which, by the way, has a good number of major discoveries to boot). I am talking about the astonishing engineering breakthroughs needed to get the JWST to work. The cryocooler, the gold-coated beryllium mirrors, the five layer sunshield, all were completely unprecedented. And LIGO's custom giant mirrors, quantum squeezing, ultra precise lasers, and so much more, have all have been major triumphs of cutting edge physics and engineering. But as they can't be boiled down to a geewhiz video, they are easy to disparage by someone who thinks I was just talking about "minor discoveries". I wasn't. Every one of those developments, and dozens more, in those two projects alone (and across numerous technologies that I gave a very very short list) has been unprecedented and utterly astonishing. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 21:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- You describe small incremental changes yet dismiss this as only a small incremental improvement when it's unprecedented in the history of spaceflight. Minor discoveries by JWST which are a dime a dozen is not this. Ergzay (talk) 21:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Major breakthrough with the booster catch (a first). Huge step forwards towards fully reusable rockets. 174.112.0.237 (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Needs work As an engineering milestone, it's more impressive than Boeing's Starliner snafu. But the article's lead devotes most of its space to a spat with the FAA and seems to need re-balancing now. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: not sure why every single advancement in spaceflight needs to be blurbed. 128.91.40.237 said it best. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 18:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is not just a "advancement". It's a landmark event in the history of spaceflight. Ergzay (talk) 21:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Semantics. And WP:PUFFERY. And WP:BLUDGEON. The most generous description by the New York Times is "a feat of technical wizardry". CNN's highest praise was "its most ambitious Starship test flight yet". Associated Press called it an "engineering feat" and "boldest test flight yet". Reuters called it "another novel engineering feat". These are descriptions worthy of DYK, not ITN. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 00:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's a cringe statement. 130.245.192.6 (talk) 02:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I'm not following. Are you arguing that because the media is hyping it too much that that somehow makes ineligible for inclusion in the ITN section? If so I really don't understand the purpose of the ITN section. Is it not supposed to cover things that are notable and "in the news"? I cannot find your criteria anywhere in the ITN rules. Ergzay (talk) 12:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am saying that it is one remarkable step among many on a long path, but it gets ridiculously disproportionate hype, between "space" and "Musk". The press release hype does not belong in this discussion, but it's what we get right from the beginning: "One of the most tremendous engineering feats in all of history" from the nominator. Rank balderdash. "This will be in engineering textbooks for decades to come" from the first comment. Silly piffle. But this wildly exaggerated hype is supposed to be a reason to support. Remove it, and you're left with mildly interesting development, whose value will be determined way down the line from now when actually interesting spaceflights occur. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 18:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Fully and rapidly reusable rockets would be one of the biggest advances in human history (by making large-scale space access affordable) and the first-ever booster catch is a major step towards that. I'm sure it will be in engineering textbooks decades from now. 174.112.0.237 (talk) 02:11, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- The significance of this event has absolutely nothing to do with "Musk". I dislike the man plenty myself (even if I used to like him). This is not "press release hype". It's the widely believed opinion of basically everyone in the industry. And yes it is absolutely one of the most tremendous engineering feats in all of history and hes it absolutely will be in engineering textbooks for years to come. Why would you remove it other than "I don't like it"? Ergzay (talk) 12:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- No, I'm saying that not even these reliable sources are calling this some sort of landmark achievement in science and engineering. I'm saying the media isn't hyping it enough. Most of their descriptions are essentially "whoa this is neat". Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 20:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think your own source stating "a feat of technical wizardy" is a bit beyond "whoa this is neat". And necessarily a journalist is not an engineer. Ergzay (talk) 12:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- It is a bit beyond. But only a bit. It is far far short of the ludicrous, ridiculous, exaggerated hype we are getting here for Support. As in, no it is not "one of the most tremendous engineering feats in all of history". I'll concede maybe in all of 2024. And it will not be in "engineering textbooks" whatsoever, except maybe a photo or something, whatever strikes the textbook publisher's hype department's fancy. For the most obvious of reasons: the textbook is about the basics of the subject. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 18:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think your own source stating "a feat of technical wizardy" is a bit beyond "whoa this is neat". And necessarily a journalist is not an engineer. Ergzay (talk) 12:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am saying that it is one remarkable step among many on a long path, but it gets ridiculously disproportionate hype, between "space" and "Musk". The press release hype does not belong in this discussion, but it's what we get right from the beginning: "One of the most tremendous engineering feats in all of history" from the nominator. Rank balderdash. "This will be in engineering textbooks for decades to come" from the first comment. Silly piffle. But this wildly exaggerated hype is supposed to be a reason to support. Remove it, and you're left with mildly interesting development, whose value will be determined way down the line from now when actually interesting spaceflights occur. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 18:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Semantics. And WP:PUFFERY. And WP:BLUDGEON. The most generous description by the New York Times is "a feat of technical wizardry". CNN's highest praise was "its most ambitious Starship test flight yet". Associated Press called it an "engineering feat" and "boldest test flight yet". Reuters called it "another novel engineering feat". These are descriptions worthy of DYK, not ITN. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 00:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is not just a "advancement". It's a landmark event in the history of spaceflight. Ergzay (talk) 21:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above Ion.want.uu (talk) 20:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment One thing to remember, is that this test program is iterative. On each flight they plan to do a bit more. This is the 5th test flight. We did blurb Starship flight test 1, where both the stage 1 booster and stage 2 Starship spacecraft blew up after launch. The next 3 flights were also nominated. I would have thought that both Starship flight test 3 and Starship flight test 4 would have been possibly significant enough to blurb. In test flight 3, the booster exploded prematurely, but not before releasing the Starship spacecraft which did finally make it to space before exploding on re-entry. In test flight 4 both the booster and spacecraft successfully soft-landed in the ocean. For today's flight, the advances were that the booster sucessfully landed for the first time (with the capture by the launch tower) and the spacecraft soft-landing was more accurate, with less heat damage to the spacecraft. It seems to me that after the flight 1, the first sucessful launch (flight 3) was the most significant, followed by the first successful soft-landings (flight 4). So if those weren't blurbed, this shouldn't be either.
- But at the same time, what is the line? The first successful landing on land (or ship) of the Starship spacecraft? The first orbital flight (those so far have been sub-orbital)? The first crewed flight (maybe Polaris-3?)? The first test landing attempt of Starship HLS on the Moon? The first test landing attempt on Mars? The first successful flight to lunar NHRO? The first Artemis 3 propellant flight? The launch of the Artemis 3 Starship HLS? There's many, many steps to this - and that doesn't include the obvious ITN items relating to the crewed portion of Artemis 3 moonshot. Perhaps we should lay out what these steps are in ITN/R so we don't have these last-minute discussions, where many don't appear to be fully aware of what is actually being done, or what the significance of an individual flight is. Nfitz (talk) 21:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'll also note that many people who oppose these posts don't seem to even understand what is significant int spaceflight and what is insignificant. Like in the previous nomination several people mentioned making it to orbit as being significant and landing Starship being less significant versus that. That showed a clear lack of understanding of the subject matter on what is and what is not significant. Ergzay (talk) 21:14, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's all just so otherworldly. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:29, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Speak for yourself. (As in, your comments, while meant to clarify, are borderline personal attacks.) I oppose (strongly). And I also agree this was a spectacular, significant development for spaceflight. But I am not one of those people who think a play-by-play on the ongoing greatest moments in the development of spaceflight is all that ITN-worthy. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 21:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- No one is arguing for a play-by-play. But if an event happens that has never happened before in history, do you not consider that sufficiently "in the news"? Ergzay (talk) 22:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The argument for test flight 2 being blurbed is that because less engines failed, it once again was the most powerful launch. In a program like this, isn't every flight something that has never happened before in history? Tomorrow SpaceX launches the largest interplantery probe ever built; do we blurb that? 2 hours after that SpaceX will land Crew-8 after it's record-breaking 7-month spacelight to the ISS - never before has a 4-person flight (or an American flight) lasted this long. Nfitz (talk) 22:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- That argument for test flight 2 is a pretty poor one. It's still the same rocket. It gaining some thrust to make it again the most powerful is not notable. The rocket will be making further upgrades in the future to increase thrust further, also not notable. I'm not sufficiently knowledgable to know if you're making a correct statement that Europa Clipper is the largest interplanetary probe ever built. Even if that was the case however, I would not blurb about the launch. I would blurb about its arrival to Jupiter however. As the blurb would focus on the science it will do. It's launch isn't notable until it's actually capable of doing the mission. If a disaster occurred however I would blurb about it. Crew-8 as the number implies is just another crew rotation, nothing notable there. Ergzay (talk) 22:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The argument for test flight 2 being blurbed is that because less engines failed, it once again was the most powerful launch. In a program like this, isn't every flight something that has never happened before in history? Tomorrow SpaceX launches the largest interplantery probe ever built; do we blurb that? 2 hours after that SpaceX will land Crew-8 after it's record-breaking 7-month spacelight to the ISS - never before has a 4-person flight (or an American flight) lasted this long. Nfitz (talk) 22:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- No one is arguing for a play-by-play. But if an event happens that has never happened before in history, do you not consider that sufficiently "in the news"? Ergzay (talk) 22:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Will landing Starship be significant User:Ergzay? It certainly won't be the first spacecraft to land - they've been doing that since the 1960s. It won't be the first reusable spacecraft to land. And it won't be the first to land on legs. I'd argue that making it to orbit, and the booster landing in this novel way would be more significant. Nfitz (talk) 22:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Landing the Starship upper stage would be significant yes, but we're over a year a way from that at least. To make a comparison, it would be at least equivalent to the first landing of the Space Shuttle, though likely even more important than that. There's only one orbital rocket in history that's landed vertically before, Falcon 9, and we definitely put that in the news section (assuming we had that section back then).
- Making it to orbit is not at all significant, almost to the point of irrelevance. The vehicle already has the performance to do so. They've simply been refraining from doing so. I would oppose any attempt to put an in the news segment for a Starship reaching orbit, similarly for it releasing its first payload into orbit. The notable events coming up that I see deserving of being in this section is, this grab with the chopsticks, a future grab with the chopsticks of the Starship upper stage, the first landing on the moon of Starship, and the first landing on the moon with humans. Ergzay (talk) 22:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- IMO the first ship landing will be notable, first manned flight will be notable, first HLS lunar landing will be notable, of course the Artemis missions will be, and if the unmanned Mars missions go ahead in 2 years I could see that meeting the threshold PrecariousWorlds (talk) 04:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'll also note that many people who oppose these posts don't seem to even understand what is significant int spaceflight and what is insignificant. Like in the previous nomination several people mentioned making it to orbit as being significant and landing Starship being less significant versus that. That showed a clear lack of understanding of the subject matter on what is and what is not significant. Ergzay (talk) 21:14, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support but the article needs a bit more work still to reflect current events. It's still too focused on the FAA fiasco before the launch. Maybe wait a couple days before adding this as an in the news event. Ergzay (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per above. Rynoip (talk) 21:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom and above supporters. Jusdafax (talk) 03:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per
Nfitz,Bait30, and Nigej, another SpaceX test flight. Most if not all of these test flights are testing new capabilities, as SpaceX works on a software-style iterative process, so they may be "firsts", but don't feel they are especially significant. When Starship gets to the moon, that is newsworthy as a new moon landing. For now, this is just a cool feat. Natg 19 (talk) 05:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've not opposed this, User:Natg 19. I've been discussing it and asking questions. I've come to the conclusion that this is ITN, and not just another SpaceX test flight. And not just another rocket to land after launch - and this one is absolutely massive, the biggest in history - far more powerful than a Saturn V. And the capture technique is completely novel. Nfitz (talk) 18:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for my mischaracterization, struck that. Natg 19 (talk) 21:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - We don't need a steady drip feed of updates about this project. The amount of puffery surrounding it is quite unreasonable. The technical achievements are impressive, but attempts to spin each individual test as a revolutionary advance in space flight run rapidly into the field of excessively specific superlatives. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but you really do not understand the significance here. This landing was absolutely a revolutionary advancement in spaceflight. There is no "spin" here. It's really evident that there's an overall lack of education on spaceflight matters on the general side of Wikipedia. Nothing like this has ever been achieved in the history of humanity. This is not "puffery". This article is a reasonable post describing the significance. Ergzay (talk) 12:34, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose like all the other partial test flights. As I've commented on the previous nominations, if/when Starship successfully puts a genuine payload into orbit we should post. Not each incremental improvement in the test flights. SpaceX is getting there, which is good for them, but it's not an operating launch vehicle yet. Modest Genius talk 12:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- But putting a payload in orbit is NOT significant... This flight was not "incremental". It was revolutionary. I would be against putting the flight where they achieve orbit in ITN because that is not notable. Ergzay (talk) 12:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- What a bizarre view of significance. You don't think it's important for a orbital launch vehicle to actually launch something useful to orbit? A photogenic booster landing is all very well, but Starship hasn't achieved its purpose yet. It's still a work in progress, and ITN shouldn't post each step of that progress, only when the goal is actually achieved. Modest Genius talk 15:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Boeing's Starliner mission ultimately failed, yet we still blurbed the launch. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nonsense. Starliner successfully transported two astronauts to the ISS, at which point it was posted in ITN. That they didn't use the same spacecraft to come down again is irrelevant, especially as that was months later than the nomination. Starship hasn't successfully launched anything yet. Modest Genius talk 15:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- The significance is that this is a landmark event in the history of spaceflight. A single in-development rocket reaching orbit is a development milestone but not a significant event for history. This catch of a rocket out of midair is something most people thought impossible but was achieved. It's also the largest rocket in history, twice the thrust of the Saturn V rocket that took humans to the moon, yet it's first stage was caught out of mid air. The thing is 9 meters wide and 70 meters long. It's the size of a ~20 story building.
- The rocket is already capable of orbit (it had significant visible fuel reserves left, but shut down early to avoid going into orbit). So reaching orbit is just about reaching a confidence point that they're sure they can get it back out of orbit and not leave the largest ever piece of space debris in orbit and also a regulatory point to be allowed to do so.Ergzay (talk) 12:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Boeing's Starliner mission ultimately failed, yet we still blurbed the launch. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- What a bizarre view of significance. You don't think it's important for a orbital launch vehicle to actually launch something useful to orbit? A photogenic booster landing is all very well, but Starship hasn't achieved its purpose yet. It's still a work in progress, and ITN shouldn't post each step of that progress, only when the goal is actually achieved. Modest Genius talk 15:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- But putting a payload in orbit is NOT significant... This flight was not "incremental". It was revolutionary. I would be against putting the flight where they achieve orbit in ITN because that is not notable. Ergzay (talk) 12:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per support comments above. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose per all the opposing opinions expressed above. This is just an another nomination of SpaceX flight be touted as the "first time in the history to do (...)". We have already have posted many stories about this company's flights and I don't think we should it anymore unless something really Big happens in the future. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 13:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- The booster catch is one such "something really big" event and should be posted. 174.112.0.237 (talk) 14:28, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- This achievement actually is a really big deal. It's easy to become disillusioned with all the partisan politics surrounding Musk, but the fact is we've witnessed history being made. Reusable large first-stage boosters are the predecessor to putting payloads into space being economical (at scale). We aren't getting off this planet without reusable launch systems. I'd encourage folks to put Musk's politics aside and perhaps read this article. Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- No one is "getting off this planet" ever except maybe to do some dangerous work like research and mining, prob a lot of it on one-way trips. You can already get a good simulation of a place like the Moon or Mars: it's called Antarctica or the ocean floor. For better realism, you must also carry your closed atmosphere around, have a running particle accelerator pointed at you at all times, and rely on only infrequent resupply stuff & no such thing as "emergency evac". Get some nasty trauma, DVT cardiac arrhythmia cancer autoimmune thing mental/psych w/ev yall are handling it w/what you got, no one is coming to rescue you. What's your training look like for "one of your crew develops bipolar type I, tries to take over as dictator and tries to kill anyone who resists"?
- And this is still "easy mode" haven't even turned down the grav yet, how do osteoporosis & muscle wasting sound? Go ahead and book a trip to those places no one is stopping you Slowking Man (talk) 17:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Exactly how was "history made?" This wasn't the first time a vehicle was propulsively recovered in a vertical landing; after all, SpaceX has done that over 300 times already. (and even that wasn't the first time it was done) It wasn't the first propulsive recovery of a vehicle in the Starship program either; they've accomplished that with the upper stage already. The only way it's a "first" is to heavily qualify it, as the first ever vertical recovery via a method they invented just for this program. This is equivalent to saying "This is the first time anyone has changed the channel on television using my new invention, the 'Fing-longer'."
- The claims to Starship being a "big deal" hinge upon its long, long-term claims that it will "Colonize Mars." While that objective would most certainly be newsworthy, this particular accomplishment hardly finishes proving it'll be a success & they have all the difficult steps out of the way... And the overall results of the mission have cast further doubt on that ever happening... So to act like this is "making history" based upon it fulfilling that far-off dream would be premature, and as would posting it to ITN. Nottheking (talk) 20:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Starship is a "big deal" because of its extremely low cost of payload to orbit, not that it will eventually assist in colonizing Mars. That cost is estimated in various sources as dropping the cost of payload to orbit by one or two orders of magnitude enabling all manner of things like holidaying in low earth orbit for the price of an expensive cruise and entirely revolutionizing the space economy. Starlink now having 6000+ satellites in orbit is the tip of the iceberg here. And yes if you can get things to orbit cheaply you can go out and explore the moon, Mars and other celestial objects as well for dirt cheap compared to current prices, and maybe eventually colonize Mars. One of the _key_ questions about the entire vehicle though was whether it could be recovered via this completely outlandish recovery system. So yes it's making history. Ergzay (talk) 05:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- No one is "getting off this planet" ever except maybe to do some dangerous work like research and mining, prob a lot of it on one-way trips. You can already get a good simulation of a place like the Moon or Mars: it's called Antarctica or the ocean floor. For better realism, you must also carry your closed atmosphere around, have a running particle accelerator pointed at you at all times, and rely on only infrequent resupply stuff & no such thing as "emergency evac". Get some nasty trauma, DVT cardiac arrhythmia cancer autoimmune thing mental/psych w/ev yall are handling it w/what you got, no one is coming to rescue you. What's your training look like for "one of your crew develops bipolar type I, tries to take over as dictator and tries to kill anyone who resists"?
- I'd argue that this is, as you said, a really big story. Scuba 15:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support After discussing this I've come to the conclusion that this is ITN, and not just another SpaceX test flight. This rocket is monstrously huge - the biggest ever, far bigger than Saturn V. Making this rocket reusable changes spaceflight forever. And then there's the completely new and incredible way of it landing - being caught in mid-air by something akin to chopsticks, rather than ever touching the ground. There's significant international coverage - it's even on the top of the fold this morning in the biggest national paper here. Nfitz (talk) 18:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Theoretically support since this seems like an important accomplishment, but oppose for now since the article's body needs more prose about the flight & the catch. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree on the article needing more improvement I already rewrote the header. The article already existed before the launch so it was mostly dedicated to chronicling events leading up to the launch. Editors welcome. Ergzay (talk) 13:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Catching the booster is a very important accomplishment, but the article needs more prose about the actual flight (2 sentences and a table isn't enough). Otherwise, might be a good candidate for ITN
- IMO, notable Starship flights for ITN are: first ship catch, first ship to ship prop transfer, HLS demo, Crew Starship. Stoplookin9 Hey there! Send me a message! 02:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - Successful test flights really aren't especially ITN-noteworthy. Apollo 9 was an extremely important test flight in the lunar program, but it was not the Moon landing -- in fact, it didn't even leave Earth orbit, let alone go to the Moon. Similarly, we should have care to address an iterative program such as Starship based on the actual landmark achievements and not the technical ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WaltCip (talk • contribs) 14:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. People opposing this are failing to understand the significance of this flight. This is the largest and most ambitious rocket ever flown, and if it works as intended it will completely revolutionize spaceflight and even humanity as a whole. This flight basically validated the design of the rocket and provided us with one of the most impressive feats of engineering ever seen. Agile Jello (talk) 16:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- You said it yourself: if it works as intended. Whether it ever will is something there's been legitimate doubt about, (Elon Musk has already confessed that the payload claims are out of reach, and it appears on top of carrying less than Falcon Heavy, it's slower & more expensive too) so celebrating it as the success now would be premature. If it actually makes a successful orbital mission & turnaround that proves those lofty claims as anything more than hypberbole? Then yes, that'd actually merit being newsworthy. Nottheking (talk) 20:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Elon Musk did not confess that the payload claims were out of reach. And no reputable source has ever claimed it will carry less than Falcon Heavy. The "if" in the previous poster's claim was talking in the past tense before this flight happened as this flight validated the design of the first stage enabling at least partial reuse.
- And as I've already explained elsewhere, the vehicle is already capable of making a successful orbital mission, they've just elected to not enter orbit (a couple of meters per second shy of it) for safety reasons as the design is fleshed out. Making orbit would not be more notable/in the news versus this mid-air rocket catch feat.Ergzay (talk) 06:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- You said it yourself: if it works as intended. Whether it ever will is something there's been legitimate doubt about, (Elon Musk has already confessed that the payload claims are out of reach, and it appears on top of carrying less than Falcon Heavy, it's slower & more expensive too) so celebrating it as the success now would be premature. If it actually makes a successful orbital mission & turnaround that proves those lofty claims as anything more than hypberbole? Then yes, that'd actually merit being newsworthy. Nottheking (talk) 20:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Another few months, yet another incremental Starship test flight that goes a bit further than the one before. It became the general consensus that posting IFT-1 had been a mistaken, and IFT-2, IFT-3, and IFT-4 weren't posted.
- SpaceX is taking a highly iterative development strategy here, which means that every few months we have another flight, that often (but not always) manages to bag a "first," and the company's marketing arm milks it. While impressive, catching a booster (while the upper stage still experienced the burn-through that marred IFT-4 while being too heavy to carry an actual payload) was visually impressive, it was pretty small in the big picture of things. Most push to highlight efforts here aren't based upon actual achievements, but by highlighting the lofty promises of what it might do in the future. This wasn't landing a person on Mars; this was like step 5 in a 10,000-step road to that.
- That's the big takeaway here: the overall calculus/state of Starship isn't changed by the result of this uncrewed test. To put this in ITN would be basically to make ITN a "ticker" for Starship. Nottheking (talk) 20:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nonsense. This mid-air catch absolutely changed the overall calculus/sate of Starship. Yes SpaceX is taking an iterative development strategy, but that doesn't mean you can simply ignore every single thing that happens along the way until you reach a random mundane "Starship delivered a payload to orbit". You choose to ignore all the major news items and instead focus on the mundane in the hopes maybe that that too will be avoided from being put into ITN.
- And yes landing a person on Mars would be certainly ITN, but there's many other events in spaceflight history that also are relevant to being ITN. Up thread they're even celebrating the launch of a spacecraft, something relatively mundane and everyday. Ergzay (talk) 06:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- What changed? For the past few years, their plan has been to do exactly this as one single element in their overall system. They succeeded in completing one single step in something that will require a lot of other steps that "have never been done before" in order to actually accomplish its objectives. For instance, no one has ever transferred cryogenic propellants in deep space, or even used a cryogenic propulsion system more than about a week post-launch. (e.g, all long-duration rocket stages have been either solid or hypergolic propellant)
- Most "support" !votes have boiled down to claiming this has "changed the game," in spite the fact that for SpaceX, this is just a natural continuation of the game plan they've been following for at least the better part of a decade. So your claim that the "overall calculus/state" was "absolutely changed." The most that could be really said there is that... It didn't fall further behind schedule?
- Also trying to compare this to the launch of an outer-planet probe (something that has only happened 11 times in history, and about twice a decade) is uninformed at best, (and one others have used disingenuously) because it just plain doesn't match up. That's akin to calling the completion of a new "world's tallest building" (something that happens every few years or so) just "you completed a structure; that happens every day."
- So again, what changed? I don't see any real arguments beyond superlatives over how this is a "first," and nothing on the ramifications. Nottheking (talk) 22:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- The what changed is they achieved something most people thought was impossible or a wild-eyed rant by Elon Musk when he first proposed it. I myself thought that this was a fanciful idea and debated exactly this on places like Reddit. I thought they would fall back on some kind of normal landing system just as they fell back on many other design concepts. I was sure there was going to be an impressive explosion with significant pad damage. Instead they literally caught a rocket falling through the sky out of midair with massive articulating arms, all broadcasted live, and they made it look easy. The only people who really seemed to believe it was possible were the hardcore Elon Musk zealots who believe anything the man says. (I can bring up sources of well known respected industry experts doubting it if you'd like.) Propellant transfer is an impressively difficult problem but it's not the level of magic and observableness that this mid-air catch of a rocket was. As to your 11 times in history, there's only been 5 starship launches in history and less successes, and if you arbitrarily limit the criteria sufficiently everything becomes a unique event. Outer solar system vs inner solar system probes only really differ in the time they take to get there via successive gravitational slingshots.Ergzay (talk) 00:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support; I usually scoff at these Starship noms, but this IS a fairly massive step towards making reusable rockets a reality. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. It's better to look at the aerospace organizations' statement about the flight: AIAA Statement on Fifth SpaceX Starship Test Flight (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) and NSS Praises Fifth Test Flight of SpaceX Starship (National Space Society). Based on these statements, it is clear that IFT-5 is a transformative event in spaceflight. Most of the opposes here are made from uninformed editors that are blinded by the hate towards SpaceX and using their power and votes to keep this discussion round and round and round until it's too late to put it on in the news. 130.245.192.6 (talk) 18:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is a strategy that I've paid attention too during other test flights of Starship. I noticed that when talking about Starship, other editors use lingos such as "scoff", "yet another", and "aren't especially ITN-noteworthy", whereas for other non-SpaceX launches, the words are much more meadow and polite. It might be editors are blocking Starship news towards in the news section is a way for them to vent the hate towards SpaceX, towards Elon, and somehow this will make them feel better as a result. But it is important to separate SpaceX and Elon, and Starship and Elon.
- This test flight is important because it will signal that new rockets that is designed full reusability in mind is practical and competitive on the market. Starship to spaceflight is like the HMS Dreadnought to the navy in the 20th century. Pre-dreadnought and Dreadnought, Expendable and Reusable launch vehicle. 130.245.192.6 (talk) 18:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging all opposed editors: @Nigej, @Bait30, @Natg 19, @GenevieveDEon, @Modest Genius, @PrinceofPunjab, @WaltCip, @Nottheking. I don't like doing this, but I felt that statements from established aerospace organizations might make you reconsider your position that this is a "trivial" test flight. 130.245.192.6 (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not in the slightest. Of course organisations dedicated to rocketry and spaceflight paid attention to this launch. I would be astounded if they didn't. That doesn't make it any more or less suitable for ITN. I also strongly dislike the accusation of bad faith above - we're all expressing our sincere opinions. See WP:AGF and don't hound users who disagree with you. For what it's worth, I think the support !votes have been sensationalist and buying into hype. Modest Genius talk 18:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I cannot assume good faith when people say things like:
- The same level of technological breakthrough would have justified at least two dozen James Webb Space Telescope ITN postings and at least one or two a year ongoing improvements to the various gravitational wave telescopes out there.
- Semantics. And WP:PUFFERY. And WP:BLUDGEON.
- To put this in ITN would be basically to make ITN a "ticker" for Starship.
- Most if not all of these test flights are testing new capabilities, as SpaceX works on a software-style iterative process, so they may be "firsts", but don't feel they are especially significant. When Starship gets to the moon, that is newsworthy as a new moon landing. For now, this is just a cool feat.
- when the Europa Clipper launch is not subjected towards that level of scrunity. Bad faith is obvious and can be seen. You will not say these things if you are talking to people in real life. 130.245.192.6 (talk) 18:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nobody (especially myself) said anything that could possibly be interpreted as technological engineering breakthroughs needed to get JWST and LIGO on-board were ITN-worthy, again and again and again. I was objecting to the ridiculous hype surrounding the launch's achievement. Such hype was then used as a basis for ITN-support. And I also strongly object to the completely uncalled for personal attacks coming from some supporters here, who seem to think that the opposition just has to be based on some kind of space-program ignorance. For the record, I grew up with the Apollo program, I watched Neil Armstrong take his small step/giant leap live on TV, I had endless model rockets and space posters and all. (Heck, I was also an eyewitness who saw Solo shoot first!) Career-wise I've alternated between academia and industry, including one stint working for NASA as a bona fide rocket scientist. So I've seen quite a few engineering breakthroughs in the space program, just none that were as photogenic or as easy for the non-involved (aka ignorant masses) to comprehend as the Starship catch. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- I cannot assume good faith when people say things like:
- Also Not in the slightest. This is a test flight with some success. As noted below, the article itself is also not up to standard. Wasn't there some damage? Let's have a nomination when something really significant happens, not just a gee-wizz we've caught something in mid air. Nigej (talk) 19:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also not in the slightest. "Established Aerospace organizations" have not been super-sensationalist... And while they were involved, this is a given as it was a spaceflight; those are always a big deal, (even if not ITN) and still don't happen every day.
- The hype has mostly been channeled by the mainstream media, (which is a bit infamous for not understanding a lot of what they talk about, as is quickly evidenced in nearly every press briefing NASA holds...) which has mostly given in to how much SpaceX leans into the PR side of things: SpaceX makes a big deal about it, with a lot of noise, and pressures news organizations to give them a lot of free press over it. It's how the company (like all other "tech-startup" types) have always worked.
- Also worth noting that most of the "support" !votes have been... Largely just conveying the same hype, without any objective analysis of the facts. For instance, no one's mentioned the serious anomaly suffered by the upper stage, which had a mission to test fixes to the TPS burnthrough that resulted in the partial failure of IFT-4. (as a refresher, the heat shield proved insufficient to keep an upper flap from partly melting, resulting in IFT-4's touchdown being several kilometers off-target; however while IFT-5's upper stage managed to touch down )It's been telling that a lot of the messaging from SpaceX is to retroactively imply that there was zero importance to the outcome of the upper stage, which is a tactic they've done after... Well, almost every single partial/full failure. (e.g, the complete failure of IFT-1 due to an improper launch facility was handwaved as a "we meant that" even though it rendered a test that cost them several hundred million dollars pointless)
- And it's not going to be alone. Ostensibly IFT-6 will come along, (probably sometime early 2025) and it will very likely do something that is also in the "never actually been done before" category. And SpaceX & the mainstream media will hype it up as a huge "game changer," even though again, it will... Just affirm the same game plan SpaceX has been following (if behind-schedule) for around 7 years now. And a lot of people buying into that hype will argue that it's unfair to not consider it "major history being made" when it gets nominated for ITN as well. Because this is how it played out four prior times already.
- So from an objective standpoint, it's a single, iterative step forward; it's one step down, 10,000 or so to go. Was it cool to look at and makes for a jaw-dropping 10-second clip? Sure, but that's not "ITN," that's "trends on social media." Considering that ITN would be on the same level of covering social media fallout from a scandal like the Mr. McMahon documentary or the Pokémon leak. Or even (to go with an analogy used a few times around here) like asserting that each new Beta test for a wildly new version of Windows launches, and not just the final product releasing.
- It's also worth noting that I'm writing this because... Someone opted to ping everyone they disagreed with to imply an accusation of bad faith. Not the most resounding position to ground an attempted educational, scholarly debate over; again, that's more social media/reality TY-esque sensationalism, and in that form almost a form of ad hominem. Nottheking (talk) 22:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- They didn't just imply bad faith, they straight up accused it lol.
I cannot assume good faith
andBad faith is obvious and can be seen
. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 01:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- They didn't just imply bad faith, they straight up accused it lol.
- Not in the slightest, sorry. My opposition rationale is unchanged. In fact, I think my Apollo 9 comparison might have been overly generous. This is closer to the unmanned Apollo tests like AS-201. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Incidentally, pinging me to get me to change my !vote and thereafter accusing me of bad faith is not necessarily against Wikipedia policy - however, it's a shockingly poor persuasion tactic. Imagine walking into Starbucks demanding a free coffee and then calling the barista a loser and an idiot before they've even said yes or no. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- I am not changing my vote because what I said above is my own personal opinion. In fact, I am now changing it to strongly oppose. I also don't appreciate you pinging all the opposing votes. Here, in the ITN/C, we respect everyone's opinion. But that doesn't seem to be the case here. You are not assuming good faith. You and a couple of other editors are accusing every opposing user of either being Elon haters or not knowing anything about space. That is not a good attitude to have when trying to convince someone to agree with you. What you should have done was have the article mention what you think makes it that impactful and significant as you claim it is. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not in the slightest. Of course organisations dedicated to rocketry and spaceflight paid attention to this launch. I would be astounded if they didn't. That doesn't make it any more or less suitable for ITN. I also strongly dislike the accusation of bad faith above - we're all expressing our sincere opinions. See WP:AGF and don't hound users who disagree with you. For what it's worth, I think the support !votes have been sensationalist and buying into hype. Modest Genius talk 18:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging all opposed editors: @Nigej, @Bait30, @Natg 19, @GenevieveDEon, @Modest Genius, @PrinceofPunjab, @WaltCip, @Nottheking. I don't like doing this, but I felt that statements from established aerospace organizations might make you reconsider your position that this is a "trivial" test flight. 130.245.192.6 (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- (Admin comment) I'm surprised to find that the pertinent prose in the target article is unreferenced. Schwede66 19:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Glad someone finally noted that. I had been agruing about that for a long time, but the "chief editor" of this article opposes and ignores 47.67.225.78 (talk) 08:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose per Blaylockjam10. I waited for a bit before voting because I was hoping the article would be a bit more developed by now, still seems relatively the same. I will support it if the article improves. Very impressive catch nonetheless. Hungry403 (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support the first catch of the booster for a fully reusable rocket system and the first on target deorbit of it's upper stage are incredibly consequential events in human history, let alone qualifying as news. The idea that a marathon being record broken is more significant news than this is absurd. TaqPCR (talk) 02:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per nottheking and Modest Genius. Every successful SpaceX test launch is of course impressive and will inevitably be commended with praise, but we are not a personal SpaceX updates ticker operating on behalf of Elon Musk. We can post when all of these test launches add up to a more finalized product... a more major landmark event. I also note that I am disappointed in the wonton nature in which some are accusing other editors of bad faith simply for expressing skepticism about posting individual test flights in principle. Please, please stick to WP:AGF. FlipandFlopped ツ 03:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- This flight was not "every successful SpaceX test launch". I did not participate in previous Starship ITN discussions (other than flight 4 discussion which was the first successful landing, but did push my opinion very hard). If there was actual risk of us becoming a SpaceX updates ticker then sure I would agree with you, but only the very first flight, a year and a half ago which was a pretty large "failure", actually got an entry. So we're already going against NPOV by only including launch failures.
We can post when all of these test launches add up to a more finalized product... a more major landmark event.
- Several people have said something similar to this, but when is that exactly? First orbit is nowhere near as impressive as this landing. As time goes on launches will be come more ho-hum resulting in even more people pushing against their inclusion (just as you just did with the argument that the ITN section shouldn't become a SpaceX updates ticker). First lunar landing? That's several years away.
I also note that I am disappointed in the wonton nature in which some are accusing other editors of bad faith simply for expressing skepticism about posting individual test flights in principle. Please, please stick to WP:AGF.
- Then don't make arguments that imply that proponents are "operating on behalf of Elon Musk". Ergzay (talk) 18:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ergzay, Nowhere in my above comment did I say that any Wikipedia editors are "operating on behalf of Elon Musk". You conveniently cut out the prior part of the sentence where I stated my position in principle that posting individual test launches would render ITN a SpaceX updates ticker, which is something Elon/SpaceX should be operating and not Wikipedia.
- Engaging in belligerent, harassing responses to every single oppose voter and continuing to make sweeping accusations of bad faith over an ITN nom is inappropriate. You have made dozens of comments, almost all of which were berating editors with the opposing view. I strongly advise you cease this behaviour and that you do not continue to reply to me, nor to anyone else in this manner, or else this matter will inevitably be escalated to ANI. FlipandFlopped ツ 22:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- The implication was fully there that by proposing SpaceX launches be in ITN that editors were operating on behalf of Elon Musk. I'll at least admit that you apparently did not think you were implying that. Secondly, responding to oppose posters and trying to educate them is not disallowed here. I am not harassing anyone (though lots of editors are accusing people of harassing them by responding). Nor am I alleging bad faith. I fully believe that they actually believe what they are writing. I'm alleging ignorance on the part of many editors to this dramatic moment of spaceflight history and trying to educate them. If I'm doing that in a way that doesn't perform that very well, well I only have myself to blame. On ANI notices, I've been brought there before and have yet to ever had ANI rule against me. I'm quite good at following just within the rules. Ergzay (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- No one is saying that responding to comments is "against the rules" or worthy of a block, but it does seem to qualify as WP:BLUDGEONing, which is highly discouraged. Natg 19 (talk) 00:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- The implication was fully there that by proposing SpaceX launches be in ITN that editors were operating on behalf of Elon Musk. I'll at least admit that you apparently did not think you were implying that. Secondly, responding to oppose posters and trying to educate them is not disallowed here. I am not harassing anyone (though lots of editors are accusing people of harassing them by responding). Nor am I alleging bad faith. I fully believe that they actually believe what they are writing. I'm alleging ignorance on the part of many editors to this dramatic moment of spaceflight history and trying to educate them. If I'm doing that in a way that doesn't perform that very well, well I only have myself to blame. On ANI notices, I've been brought there before and have yet to ever had ANI rule against me. I'm quite good at following just within the rules. Ergzay (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per the dissenting opinions. I don't think every single SpaceX launch needs to be posted on the main page. LiamKorda 04:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's only been a single Starship launch on the main page and there hasn't been a Falcon launch on the main page in years. Ergzay (talk) 22:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. This discussion is absurd: every major news outlet in the world is running headline stories about this (I'll add The Economist to the long list already shared), yet this prevailing argument seems to be that this is "just another launch" so they shouldn't be doing that? ITN is judged on significance, and catching a 275 ton rocket the size of the Statue of Liberty plummeting to Earth at 4000 km/h with a pair of chopsticks is doubly significant: it's a magnificent feat of engineering in itself, and (as the Economist above states) it clears the final obstacle to access to space that's orders of magnitude cheaper that anything we have today. Subsequent test flights will not be nearly as momentous, in fact the next big event will be when the test flights end and commercial service starts. Jpatokal (talk) 06:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Kcmastrpc (talk · contribs) put it well: "There will never be a time in history, other than today, where the first stage of a rocket booster is caught for the initial first time." Ylee (talk) 09:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Support, but work needed -> oppose. The topic is more than newsworthy, but the article has some shortcomings. Apart from the bias described, especially because of the constant use of often dubious YT videos as source, describing what is seem (original research) or what some commentator guesses. Second thought: Now it's too late for a news item, after almost a week has passed. Be quicker with the next flight test, if that achieves similar breakthroughs. 47.67.225.78 (talk) 11:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)- "be quicker" they nominated it the day it launched. TaqPCR (talk) 18:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- I meant deciding. It still is an open discussion here. 47.67.225.78 (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah and we got a bunch of supports from people who edit articles about technical topics and a bunch of opposes from people who seem to near exclusively update sports articles minus a few who edit sports and politics talking about how it's not notable because it didn't put a payload into orbit. I suppose they got their way, we have yet another successful falcon heavy launch sending Europa clipper on its way and apparently that's more notable even though it's just cruising till 2030. TaqPCR (talk) 21:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- I meant deciding. It still is an open discussion here. 47.67.225.78 (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- "be quicker" they nominated it the day it launched. TaqPCR (talk) 18:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I'm glad this discussion wasn't closed early by people who simply didn't want to hear about it. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Conspiracy theories about the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season
[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.
Blurb: Conspiracy theories spread in the aftermath of Hurricanes Helene and Milton. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Hurricane Milton makes landfall in the U.S. state of Florida, followed by conspiracy theories and misinformation.
Alternative blurb II: Violence against recovery workers spreads after Hurricane Milton makes landfall in the U.S. state of Florida.
News source(s): Washington Post, New York Times, Associated Press
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Dan Leonard (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Belbury (talk · give credit), Cowlan (talk · give credit) and BootsED (talk · give credit)
- Oppose local american news Kasperquickly (talk) 06:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. People make statements news at 11. DarkSide830 (talk) 06:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. WP:SNOW Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please don't invoke WP:SNOW after only 3 votes and 19 minutes since nomination. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Tsk tsk... trying to influence the weather by organizing a conspiratorial flashmob snowdance... :) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 07:24, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose local news and we don't post conspiracy theories. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 06:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Suport altblurb2 The article is very comprehensive and well cited, and this is a major news story around the globe. Many nominations are rejected because they do not have an aftermath section or the impact after the event is disputed; here we a clear case of side effects of the hurricane which has spawned into a story of its own. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose US local news and there is already a Milton story on the main page now. I have not seen this making headlines around the world which an another user is claiming. LiamKorda 07:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose and snow close this is going nowhere. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think we need to amplify the blathering of idiots. Black Kite (talk) 09:24, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
October 12
[edit]
October 12, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
RD: Lillian Schwartz
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ARTnews
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:FD73:1B35:1B3F:3F59 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit), Strattonsmith (talk · give credit), TellusFan (talk · give credit) and Asparagusstar (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Noted American visual artist. 240F:7A:6253:1:FD73:1B35:1B3F:3F59 (talk) 06:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support besides a lack of ISBN codes for her publications the article looks good and is properly cited. Scuba 21:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Multiple unreferenced paragraphs, and awards/publications section needs refs. SpencerT•C 04:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ka (rapper)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Pitchfork, The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by ModernDayTrilobite (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Rapper and firefighter. Died on the 12th, death was announced today. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 23:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- The discography section is unreferenced. Schwede66 18:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose needs citations in discography. Scuba 21:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article appears to be fully cited. toweli (talk) 21:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 03:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Tylee Craft
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:AD2F:6B55:B4EB:821E (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jumplike23 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jumplike23 (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and PrinceofPunjab (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Football player for the University of North Carolina. 240F:7A:6253:1:AD2F:6B55:B4EB:821E (talk) 12:21, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose There is no prose about his life prior to the year 2020.ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 13:59, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Changing my vote to Support now, but, a simple line such as "Craft was born on [date] in [city], [state] and he went to [school name]" would be nice. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft support As mentioned there is no mention of his pre-collegiate career, but what is in the article is properly cited. I've seen far worse athlete articles. Scuba 21:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above. Prior to 2020 he was a teenager in high school, and unlikely to be engaging in any highly noteworthy activities. I do not think this is necessary for the article to be posted to RD. FlipandFlopped ツ 14:21, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've placed three citation needed tags. Schwede66 19:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Still no source for date and place of birth and place of death. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 03:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @PFHLai, I have resolved all three cn tags, please take an another look. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 13:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the new refs. --PFHLai (talk) 21:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lilly Ledbetter
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:AD2F:6B55:B4EB:821E (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American activist who sued Goodyear for gender discrimination. 240F:7A:6253:1:AD2F:6B55:B4EB:821E (talk) 12:21, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is in great shape. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per above. Rynoip (talk) 19:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Three cn tags. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Appear resolved. —Bagumba (talk) 05:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 05:03, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Tito Mboweni
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SABC News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:550C:B8BE:A7FB:50AC (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gevaarlik (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Former financial minister of South Africa. 240F:7A:6253:1:550C:B8BE:A7FB:50AC (talk) 03:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose multiple paragraphs without any source. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 06:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose chunks of article aren't sourced. Scuba 14:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jackmaster
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Real name Jack Revill, Scottish DJ who tragically passed away after complications following a head injury. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Waitunsourced DOB, otherwise looks fine. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 06:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's a source for it here although the NYPost is marked yellow on WP:RSP. Black Kite (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Each instance of citing the NYP has to be reviewed to make sure they aren't just making something up. In this case the article in question looks fine so it should probably be cited. Scuba 15:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- As Scuba mentioned above, NYPost can be cited with some precaution and DOB is a non controversial statement about the subject. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Black Kite, PrinceofPunjab, and Scu ba: I've added it to the article, is it now good enough to have your support votes? Abcmaxx (talk) 08:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping Support article looks good now. Scuba 21:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is good to go now. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Black Kite, PrinceofPunjab, and Scu ba: I've added it to the article, is it now good enough to have your support votes? Abcmaxx (talk) 08:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's a source for it here although the NYPost is marked yellow on WP:RSP. Black Kite (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: can this be posted? Abcmaxx (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- What do we do about the uncited discography? Schwede66 19:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Schwede66: added a ref there. Abcmaxx (talk) 01:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted with a thanks to Abcmaxx. Schwede66 03:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Baba Siddique
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Economic Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Indian politician.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Positions held and Personal life sections are completely unsourced, Political career section needs more inline citation. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft oppose bad prose, personal life is only a sentence and is uncited. Article needs a touchup before posting. Scuba 21:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: G. N. Saibaba
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Indian Express
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Batthini Vinay Kumar Goud (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Professor and human rights activist.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article appears alright to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems quite good. Rynoip (talk) 21:33, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
(RD posted) RD/Blurb: Alex Salmond
[edit]Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Former first minister of Scotland Alex Salmond (pictured), a prominent figure in the Scottish independence movement, dies at age 69. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Former first minister of Scotland Alex Salmond (pictured) dies at the age of 69.
News source(s): The Times, Sky News
Credits:
- Nominated by Vacant0 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- Support Woah, this is how I find out? At first glance article seems good to go, I might even suggest to consider a blurb here given his importance in the Scottish independence referendum/movement. The Kip (contribs) 16:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Now that it's being discussed, support blurb - the Scottish independence referendum was one of Europe's most notable political events in recent memory, and the impact of the movement Salmond sat at the top of was significant across the continent. Easily a transformative figure in British and European politics. The Kip (contribs) 21:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, needs blurb - Notable politician and minister of Scotland. Difficultly north (talk) Time, department skies 16:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support either blurb or RD. The article is in good shape so this can go up quickly. Thryduulf (talk) 16:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, easily. I'd suggest a blurb too, as he was incredibly important in the Scottish and British political landscape. CoconutOctopus talk 16:58, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb per above. Transformative figure in the history of Scotland. Davey2116 (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support a blurb - responsible for a political realignment in not just Scotland, but the rest of the UK too. Definitely one of the most important characters in 21st-century British history. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 17:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality there's many unsourced paras and lines. Oppose blurb on notability he was a subnational politician. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready for RD for the usual reason. Oppose blurb We almost never blurb subnational politicians and Scotland rejected his calls for secession. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Scotland is not subnational. RachelTensions (talk) 04:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- What criteria of statehood does it meet? Is it legislatively independent? Does it control territory? Is it a member of international organisations like the European Union or the United Nations? Yes, Scotland is a country. But it is a subnational country. AusLondonder (talk) 06:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- "subnational country" is quite the oxymoron RachelTensions (talk) 20:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- What criteria of statehood does it meet? Is it legislatively independent? Does it control territory? Is it a member of international organisations like the European Union or the United Nations? Yes, Scotland is a country. But it is a subnational country. AusLondonder (talk) 06:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose RD until the article is referenced sufficiently and oppose blurb, he wasn't known internationally well enough to warrant it. Suonii180 (talk) 17:57, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'll just note that, of course, Salmond did sit in the Scottish Parliament, but he was also the leader of the SNP twice, the leader of the Alba Party and an MP for two constituencies: all political positions in the wider UK. He was not "just" a subnational politician: he was a large figure in British politics before and after his stint in the devolved assembly. See: the Conservative 2015 general election billboards where Salmond was used to sway voters away from Labour in case of a Lab-SNP coalition. That election saw the SNP win all but 3 House of Commons seats in Scotland, by the way. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 18:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD once all referencing issues are addressed. Oppose blurb. Mjroots (talk) 18:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, Oppose blurb Well referenced however, not transformative in his field since he lost the referendum and aside of that,t a regional politician in comparison as Scotland is a small part of the UK. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 20:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- @The C of E: he was clearly transformative for both the Scottish National Party and Scotland. In 1992, the SNP only had 3 seats but under his leadership they became the largest party in Scotland in 2007. It does not matter that the 2014 independence election failed (with 44% voting yes) as since then Scottish politics has been dominated by calls for a second Scottish independence referendum. Sahaib (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Sahaib: A second referendum that has no endorsement beyond a shrinking independence movement, especially when the 2014 referendum was "once in a lifetime". He lost the big vote, therefore not transformative in his field. He is simply just a regional politician who had a little success nationally but did not cause any lasting significant change within the UK. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 20:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- @The C of E: whilst support for the SNP may be in decline (they still got 30% of the vote in the 2024 United Kingdom general election in Scotland compared to Labour's 35%), support for independence has remained quite stagnant since 2014 per opinion polling on Scottish independence. The lasting impact as mentioned is transforming the SNP from a fringe party to a major party and putting Scottish independence on the political agenda where it remains to this day. Sahaib (talk) 20:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's not on the agenda given the previous crawl-backs from Sturgeon and Salmond's Alba party aren't making that much in terms of waves. No denying, he is a notable regional politician and justifiably should get an RD on the quality of the article but he did not have any lasting national impact (ie. lost the referendum and not had much further national impact since) so therefore a blurb would not be suitable in my opinion. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 21:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- @The C of E: whilst support for the SNP may be in decline (they still got 30% of the vote in the 2024 United Kingdom general election in Scotland compared to Labour's 35%), support for independence has remained quite stagnant since 2014 per opinion polling on Scottish independence. The lasting impact as mentioned is transforming the SNP from a fringe party to a major party and putting Scottish independence on the political agenda where it remains to this day. Sahaib (talk) 20:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Sahaib: A second referendum that has no endorsement beyond a shrinking independence movement, especially when the 2014 referendum was "once in a lifetime". He lost the big vote, therefore not transformative in his field. He is simply just a regional politician who had a little success nationally but did not cause any lasting significant change within the UK. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 20:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- @The C of E: he was clearly transformative for both the Scottish National Party and Scotland. In 1992, the SNP only had 3 seats but under his leadership they became the largest party in Scotland in 2007. It does not matter that the 2014 independence election failed (with 44% voting yes) as since then Scottish politics has been dominated by calls for a second Scottish independence referendum. Sahaib (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb, changed both Scottish and British politics significantly. Sahaib (talk) 20:13, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb dare I say he was the most important person in Scottish politics for a while. Scuba 21:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb subnational leaders are almost never blurbed. Not serving at time of death. Good argument for OLDMANDIES This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:12, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- I like how I had an edit conflict with you and it turns out I basically said the exact opposite of what you said haha. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 23:15, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- He was not a subnational leader; Scotland is widely accepted to be a country & nation within a wider multinational state. RachelTensions (talk) 04:24, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's subnational in that is is not a sovereign state. It is like Greenland within the Kingdom of Denmark. AusLondonder (talk) 06:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb: Despite his highest office being that of subnational leader, he was clearly an important figure in UK and even European politics. And he was still active in Scotland politics up to his death so this isn't just a case of "old man dies". Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 23:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. I hope I do not come across as boorish in this comment. If this nomination was from anywhere other than the Anglosphere, the nomination would have been met with a barrage of "not transformative", "have hardly heard his name", "no major world impact" comments. And, then after languishing for some time it would be tagged with Admin attention / evaluation required and that would be that. I sincerely wish these discussions would be different. See our discussion on M. S. Swaminathan if you'd so wish to. Do not reply to this comment showing me an existent but not followed segment of WP:ITNRDBLURB, I am just showing a mirror to this group. I truly believe we will be better off posting more often to the homepage. Sincere condolences to the departed. Ktin (talk) 23:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Personally, if the New Caledonian independence movement has a figure of equal stature I’d consider blurbing them as well. The Kip (contribs) 23:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- For me the criteria for RDB is only if the death per se is notable (i.e. death of a serving head of government causing a political change, or an assassination, etc). Though personally I'd be okay with doing away with RDB entirely except for serving heads of state/government. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- How do you measure "stature" of pro-independence leaders? Isn't it simply that you know more about Salmond because you're English-speaking and don't know New Caledonian leaders because you're not French-speaking? AusLondonder (talk) 07:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- For me the criteria for RDB is only if the death per se is notable (i.e. death of a serving head of government causing a political change, or an assassination, etc). Though personally I'd be okay with doing away with RDB entirely except for serving heads of state/government. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sitaram Yechury seems a better Indian equivalent as a major national politician. It's easy to compare the standing of such figures with our readership -- just look at the all time views for their articles. They have each had about two million readers over the last 10 years. Salmond's spike is the largest. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- By that logic, we should be blurbing Ratan Tata views here (while I understand the politician vs business leader distinction). Will remind this group that we did not. Ktin (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Personally, if the New Caledonian independence movement has a figure of equal stature I’d consider blurbing them as well. The Kip (contribs) 23:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb, unknown outside of the UK. Abductive (reasoning) 05:05, 13 Octo[[Death of Benito Mussoliniber 2024 (UTC)
- Hardly, given the impact of the Scottish independance movement on other similar movements across Europe. He literally died after giving a speech in North Macedonia, and had a show on Russia Today; neither of which are the UK. CoconutOctopus talk 06:49, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hardly known. Blurbs should be reserved for people whose death alone could support a Wikipedia article, such as Killing of Osama bin Laden, Death of Diana, Princess of Wales, Death of Benito Mussolini, you know, deaths that might be interesting to readers. Abductive (reasoning) 09:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Whilst I'm not claiming that Salmond should have a blurb, I'm pretty sure the story is "interesting" for those in Scotland (and Scots elsewhere). Black Kite (talk) 14:06, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hardly known. Blurbs should be reserved for people whose death alone could support a Wikipedia article, such as Killing of Osama bin Laden, Death of Diana, Princess of Wales, Death of Benito Mussolini, you know, deaths that might be interesting to readers. Abductive (reasoning) 09:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hardly, given the impact of the Scottish independance movement on other similar movements across Europe. He literally died after giving a speech in North Macedonia, and had a show on Russia Today; neither of which are the UK. CoconutOctopus talk 06:49, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Recent deaths is sufficient as a former leader of a non-sovereign state. While undoubtedly significant in Scotland and the UK, he had very little international significance. I'm not seeing widespread, substantial coverage outside of the UK. AusLondonder (talk) 06:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability He is clearly a highly influential person due to this close association with the Scottish independence movement. "Unknown outside UK" arguments should be disregarded because an item cannot be opposed just because the event is only relating to a single country. But, article have many cn tags that needs to be resolved before it is ready to be posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Picture We don't really need a prose blurb as the details of the death aren't remarkable and the subject's name is distinctive. But we have a good picture of his fairly famous face and so should use it. The current picture of Han Kang has been up for 24 hours and so it's time for a change and the viewing figures indicate that the stories are of similar significance to our readership. And we should get on with it rather than dithering because the "comet of the century" is coming. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Halley's is still "the comet of the century" to me, but yeah, Picture When Ready. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:00, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment For those that claim he was important, there is no standalone section in the article that gives any impression of what his legacy or impact was on Scotland, so trying to wade through the text there to make that determination is impossible. You cannot just hand-wave the claim of importance and not have it clear as day on the article that that is justified. There are a few statements in the death section that lean in the right direction, but that alone doesn't give enough of a summary with actual impact to justify a blurb. --Masem (t) 12:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also as a comment, there are far too many non-support !votes talking about lack of knowing who he was or that Scotland's too small to consider for a blurb. That is absolutely not how we judge the posting of any blurb (RD or not) on ITN. --Masem (t) 12:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I was shocked by the news and thought this should be a blurb, because he was a highly visible sub-national leader due to the referendum - just like Carles Puigdemont is not just any other Catalan leader and Nigel Farage is not just any other Eurosceptic. But I can't see another situation where an independence leader who lost a referendum would be posted. Was there any suggestion that Jacques Parizeau, whose referendum would have changed the face of North America, should have been posted in 2015? Unknown Temptation (talk) 12:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- In fact Puigdemont went further and declared independence which came to nothing but sent Catalonia into the abyss. And, even so, I think he would hardly be a successful candidate for his death to be psoted as blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb I think a lot of people here are severely under-estimating he importance of the First Minister. It's of more power and prestige than American governors and doesn't really have much of an equivalence except that they wield influence similar to that of sovereign countries of similar size to Scotland, even if Scotland is not independent in itself. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 15:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- We do not post RD blurbs just because of the government position a person did, but what accomplishes they did while in that position. Not saying this doesn't exist for Salmond, but it needs to be far better explained in the article with sourcing. Masem (t) 15:54, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- California economy: larger than the entire UK's. California state budget (don't bother with link one of those essentially untouched in decade+ articles) fiscal yr 2023 (rounded): solely state general fund: $235 billion; total all funds & incl. transfers from Uncle Sam: $468 billion. (£1 (2023) (US$1.24)) Full total getting to around third of total UK budget it looks like. Surely influential CA govs should get blurbed then. (CA independence mvmt leaders? Let's wait and see... Note those transfers incl plenty of fed tax $ paid by people & entities in CA) Slowking Man (talk) 18:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose RD on quality The article has a few CN tags that should be fixed first. No opinion on blurb. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 17:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)- Support RD now Looks good enough for RD now. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 20:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb,
oppose on qualityArticle currently has six cn tags.Would support blurb due to his importance in the Scottish independence movement. Article does establish his importance in such a movement / impact in Scottish/UK politics. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC) - Comment @MonarchOfTerror: @TDKR Chicago 101: I don't believe that the article has any cn tags now. Sahaib (talk) 07:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb - I'm not inherently opposed to sub-national figures getting blurbs, but Donald Dewar was the truly epoch-making figure in Scottish politics. Salmond was a contentious figure, and his more recent forays with Alba show that he couldn't carry the movement with him. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- RD posted—Bagumba (talk) 05:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
October 11
[edit]
October 11, 2024
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
|
(Posted) RD: Mike Bullard (comedian)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Toronto Star
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Wellington Bay (talk · give credit) and Abebenjoe (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Canadian stand-up comic and broadcaster. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support He was 67 and not exactly funny in the traditional sense, but generally a fine complement to his guests. One uncited claim about a non-notable radio show that misses the pun, which can easily be deleted (if not verifiable). Aside from that, sure. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've since easily deleted it. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- The radio show was notable - particularly given that the article later says he was fired from it due to his criminal charges. I've readded it with a source. Wellington Bay (talk) 19:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I meant "non-notable" in the doesn't-have-an-article way, but good work in the now-has-a-source sense! InedibleHulk (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Well cited article, no problems from a glance. Rynoip (talk) 21:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 04:52, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
(Needs review) RD: Ward Christensen
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Ycombinator News, Mastodon
Credits:
- Nominated by Kcmastrpc (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The co-founder of the world's first BBS and creator XMODEM was found dead on October 11th. Likely needs additional verification before posting. +++ATH0 Kcmastrpc (talk) 18:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Article looks okay now to me I think? /me holds up off-hook phone handset in memory \n<CR> --- NO CARRIER
- (yes I know that's more IRC) Slowking Man (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Article looks like a work in progress; not ready for the main page. Somebody might want to give this some structure. Schwede66 18:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for reviewing @Schwede66, I've reorganized the article a bit and added structure. LMK if there's additional work I should do. Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Article is a stub currently. Rynoip (talk) 21:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's really not, there are no stub tags or categories present. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This rolls off INTC today, but I'm not even sure it would make it on the ticker. Sad really, considering he was the co-founder of what could be considered the predecessor of what we all use today to communicate. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready. This is a bio without any biographical detail other than career and death, plus an unreferenced date of birth. Nothing on education, say. This is an example of a stub that manages to exceed the usual character count barrier where we generally assign start class. Schwede66 19:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- You saw that I removed the DOB on the infobox after you tagged that, but the DOB in the lead wasn't CN-tagged so I overlooked that. I'm not sure why you wouldn't remove that as well instead of drive-by CN tagging after you'd tagged the infobox. He is credited with co-creating the first dial-up BBS, which is covered in the article, which is more than career and death, but I'm sensing an aversion to posting this for some reason and I'm not sure what it is. Either way, dropping it. What a weird hill to die on. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Kcmastrpc, I tagged it so that someone who is interested in the topic can add a reference. You may perceive that as "drive-by tagging" but I see that action as working collaboratively with other editors. And no, I didn’t check the edit history. Schwede66 21:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- You saw that I removed the DOB on the infobox after you tagged that, but the DOB in the lead wasn't CN-tagged so I overlooked that. I'm not sure why you wouldn't remove that as well instead of drive-by CN tagging after you'd tagged the infobox. He is credited with co-creating the first dial-up BBS, which is covered in the article, which is more than career and death, but I'm sensing an aversion to posting this for some reason and I'm not sure what it is. Either way, dropping it. What a weird hill to die on. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Kiril Marichkov
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Bulgarian News Agency: Bulgarian Rock Legend Kiril Marichkov Dies at 79
Credits:
- Updated by Jaguarnik (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bulgarian rock musician. Jaguarnik (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support I don't see any problems. Scuba 01:58, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks fine to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The second box in the Discography section is unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 15:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- A paragraph in the "life and career" section covers that information, and I feel it's unnecessary to repeat references for something that has already been covered in the article. Jaguarnik (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. I've added new footnotes to the box to avoid the appearance of unsourced materials. --PFHLai (talk) 22:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 Nobel Peace Prize
[edit]Blurb: The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded to the Japanese atomic bomb survivors group, Nihon Hidankyo. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded to Nihon Hidankyo "for its efforts to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and for demonstrating, through witness testimony, that nuclear weapons must never be used again".
Alternative blurb II: The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded to the Japanese atomic bomb survivors group Nihon Hidankyo "for its efforts to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons".
News source(s): The Washington Post, The Guardian, Noble Peace Prize press release
Credits:
- Nominated by PrinceofPunjab (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ReyHahn (talk · give credit) and VersedVoyager67 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
The winner's article needs expansion as it is currently barely more than a stub. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:29, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- It went from a stub to be full of sources in Japanese which makes it hard to assert their validity.--ReyHahn (talk) 10:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready. The article currently has only one paragraph of prose content, with the rest being bullet points and the lead. It needs some substantial expansion. Hopefully the Nobel win has generated some English-language sources, which can be used to do so. Modest Genius talk 11:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Still not ready. Three days later, there are now a whole two paragraphs of prose and some more bullet points. That's not sufficient expansion. Modest Genius talk 12:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Make that five days and no further progress. Modest Genius talk 10:46, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Still not ready. Three days later, there are now a whole two paragraphs of prose and some more bullet points. That's not sufficient expansion. Modest Genius talk 12:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've added altblurb2, as the amount of the Nobel committee quote in the altblurb was far too long, and this new one cuts to the chase while also briefly summarizing the group. --Masem (t) 12:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting, why does literature not have the reason?Sportsnut24 (talk) 01:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. We are nearing a week, at this point, even if the article is a blurb saying "Donuts good, nuclear bad", the fact we have announced all other Nobels, including the fake economics one, but not this is simply ridiculous. complainer 08:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Question 3 out of the 4 current "In The News" blurbs are Nobel Prizes right now... can/should they be condensed into one, or should we delay adding more until we have a better variety of "news"? Right now the "In The News" box just looks like a Nobel Prize news feed RachelTensions (talk) 12:11, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
|
Mildsupport in the light that the current problems with the references are minor and not subjected to WP:BLP.--ReyHahn (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)- Support the article looks good. Scuba 02:01, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready yet. History section only covered activities up to 1965, then barely anything since then. Looking at the ja.wp article, there are more contents that should be covered before it's ready for main page. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:26, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is that any history about the organization is only found in Japanese sources, including what is already in the article.--ReyHahn (talk) 06:44, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Can't we just cannibalize the Japanese wiki's article? Scuba 15:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- For users like me that have no idea on how to read Japanese or what Japanese sources are reliable, it is very difficult to asssess the notability of the content.WP:NOENG says that we should ask for translations when there is some apprehension about its content, which is very cumbersome when there are so many non-English sources. To be clear: it is an issue but the current article is (at least to me) fine enough for a blurb.--ReyHahn (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:NOENG just says that English language sources are preferred. In most cases a machine translation is fine unless it's a contentious subject, BLP, or whatever claim you're citing seems too left-field to be accurate. RachelTensions (talk) 04:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Is this reply directed to me or another user? I support the blurb as I said this is not subjected to WP:BLP.--ReyHahn (talk) 08:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm just clarifying your statement that
"WP:NOENG says that we should ask for translations which is very cumbersome when there are so many non-English sources"
because it seemed like you interpreted WP:NOENG to mean that we need to ask for a human translation of any source we wish to cite in an article. RachelTensions (talk) 08:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)- Thanks, fixed wording.--ReyHahn (talk) 08:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I can read Chinese, which gives me an advantage in assessing and comparing our en.wp content with ja.wp page because I can read kanji. In ja.wp, there's a history section with bullet points highlighting their activities from 1967 to 1996 which is absent in en.wp. There were also blurbs about membership numbers in this organization in circa 2000. This is why I stated the en.wp isn't ready for main page yet. Side note, has our volunteer base dwindled to the point that we don't have a Japanese-English editor who is willing to check the Japanese sources for us? OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I asked for help in Wikiproject Japan and got not response. If that history is not covered elsewhere in Enlgish it is not notable enough. Anyway missing history is not a reason to decline an ITN. I--ReyHahn (talk) 18:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Missing 3 decades of this organization's work does fall under WP:ITNQUALITY's
not omitting any major items
. This isn't a decline (and that's a strawman argument by the way), but rather it's not ready yet. Modest Genius also reiterated above that it's still not ready. OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)- Notability is key here. Missing 3 decades is not a sufficient argument to not merit an ITN. This problem happens frequently with Nobel laureates, some laureates do something of extreme importance at the beginning of their career and nothing of notability later. If anything in those 3 decades is notable, it would have been mentioned by the Nobel prize or in English articles already.--ReyHahn (talk) 11:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Missing 3 decades of this organization's work does fall under WP:ITNQUALITY's
- I asked for help in Wikiproject Japan and got not response. If that history is not covered elsewhere in Enlgish it is not notable enough. Anyway missing history is not a reason to decline an ITN. I--ReyHahn (talk) 18:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I can read Chinese, which gives me an advantage in assessing and comparing our en.wp content with ja.wp page because I can read kanji. In ja.wp, there's a history section with bullet points highlighting their activities from 1967 to 1996 which is absent in en.wp. There were also blurbs about membership numbers in this organization in circa 2000. This is why I stated the en.wp isn't ready for main page yet. Side note, has our volunteer base dwindled to the point that we don't have a Japanese-English editor who is willing to check the Japanese sources for us? OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:09, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, fixed wording.--ReyHahn (talk) 08:28, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm just clarifying your statement that
- Is this reply directed to me or another user? I support the blurb as I said this is not subjected to WP:BLP.--ReyHahn (talk) 08:15, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:NOENG just says that English language sources are preferred. In most cases a machine translation is fine unless it's a contentious subject, BLP, or whatever claim you're citing seems too left-field to be accurate. RachelTensions (talk) 04:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- For users like me that have no idea on how to read Japanese or what Japanese sources are reliable, it is very difficult to asssess the notability of the content.WP:NOENG says that we should ask for translations when there is some apprehension about its content, which is very cumbersome when there are so many non-English sources. To be clear: it is an issue but the current article is (at least to me) fine enough for a blurb.--ReyHahn (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Can't we just cannibalize the Japanese wiki's article? Scuba 15:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is that any history about the organization is only found in Japanese sources, including what is already in the article.--ReyHahn (talk) 06:44, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article may be short, but it conveys sufficient information to the reader about what the group does, it appears to be cited, and it has been updated to reflect the Nobel Peace Prize. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per all above. Article is not that bad. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support a bit brief for my liking but this is already sufficient enough to be blurbed/posted. Vida0007 (talk) 01:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Nobuyo Ōyama
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Japan Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Tofusaurus (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Japanese voice actress known for being the voice of Doraemon and Monokuma. Death occurred on 29 September but news was only released today. Tofusaurus (talk) 05:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Article looks fine to me for RD. For the unaware Doraemon is a natl institution in Japan, which is why *glances* she has obit on en-lang CNN. Haven't looked but I would not be surprised if ja:Main Page has an "ITN blurb" equivalent for her, unless they have a project rule against stuff like that. Equivalent for native en speakers would be something like Mel Blanc if he had died in the Internet era. (If the name doesn't stick out for you I would bet my life you know (at least some of) his voice(s). BTW look at his grave if you haven't: oh yeah he had the sense of humor you likely expected.) --Slowking Man (talk) 18:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait There is no prose about her life before 2015 and her career. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:07, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sadly the quality isn't good enough, there are large gaps in the biography, given the long filmography and there's no mention of the screenwring, singing, or essayist career that the lede mentions. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
October 10
[edit]
October 10, 2024
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Victoria Roshchyna
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): UPI
Credits:
- Nominated by Blaylockjam10 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Ukrainian journalist who died in Russian captivity. Death reported on October 10. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 13:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support no problems with the article at a glance. Rynoip (talk) 21:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Fleur Adcock
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:550C:B8BE:A7FB:50AC (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Chocmilk03 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Noted New Zealand poet. 240F:7A:6253:1:550C:B8BE:A7FB:50AC (talk) 03:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think article is ready to be posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Peter Cormack
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:189C:4A1A:9ED4:16C1 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Fats40boy11 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Former Hibernian, Liverpool and Scotland midfielder. 240F:7A:6253:1:189C:4A1A:9ED4:16C1 (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose there are multiple cn tags and some paragraphs are without a footnote, plus, the quote on the style of play subsection needs to be edited and shortened. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Internet Archive Breach
[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.
Blurb: The Internet Archive is DDoSed and hacked, resulting in 31 million accounts compromised. (Post)
Alternative blurb: After a series of DDoS attacks and security breaches, 31 million accounts on the Internet Archive are compromised.
Alternative blurb II: 31 million accounts are compromised on the Internet Archive, after a sequence of attacks and data breaches.
Alternative blurb III: 31 million accounts are compromised on the Internet Archive, after a sequence of attacks and data breaches made by a Palestinian hacker organization.
News source(s): Bleeping Computer Forbes Newsweek Wired
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by NikolaiVektovich (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kasperquickly (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Weak oppose Interesting, horrible, and kind of significant, but it has no real world impact and there's no in-depth coverage of this Personisinsterest (talk) 23:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support 31 million accounts being breached isn't anything to scoff at. Scuba 23:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality Several cn tags and an update orange tag under Operations section. I also feel that the section talking about the breach could be expanded to reflect more on the significance of this event and maybe have more reactions about it if possible? Agreeing w/ Scuba, 31 million accounts being breached is significant. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality 31 million accounts is a significant breach, but the article needs improvement before it can be posted to ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:06, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose If it isn't notable enough for its own article, it isn't notable enough for ITN. –DMartin 01:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds like you're in support of a Wikipedia that's more of a popularity contest than "the sum total of human knowledge". RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 01:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not saying it isn't worthy of its own article. But until it has one it shouldn't be featured in itn. –DMartin 06:38, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds like you're in support of a Wikipedia that's more of a popularity contest than "the sum total of human knowledge". RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 01:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment After reading the first article to appear in my news feed, any concern for user privacy appears to be a red herring. That sort of talk mainly appeals to hackrboiz and their ilk. I was left with lots of questions about the status of the site's data and whether compromised data can be restored from backups. That has far greater impact. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 01:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support big breach of one of the world’s biggest websites. 31 million is not a small number either Ion.want.uu (talk) 02:43, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Statement: IA estimated traffic rank is ~180 (assuming something like that is meant by "world's biggest websites"), which isn't nothing, but is a ways below such sites as Douyin, ok.ru, VK.com, Cricbuzz, Detik.com, and Figma. Asking for curiosity any of those have any past security issues that got ITN blurbed? Not to mention Tsyndicate which...uh apparently per a brief search is controlled by cybercrime/malicious actors and used for malware! And is blocked by things like Google Safe Browsing for that reason! Yet still in top 50 sites globally by traffic! Important WP article missing here for people looking for something to do! (IOW basically what GeorgeMemulous wrote below) --Slowking Man (talk) 17:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose In the grand scheme of data breaches, 31 million accounts is not a surprisingly large number and while it may SEEM bad, it's really just hashed passwords which means all that was leaked was usernames and emails. I'll be seeing more spam in my inbox in due time. Also, where's the main article for this? Kline • talk • contribs 02:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose And it is not 31 million accounts, but 31 million records, which could be 31 million users but also could consider multiple records per person. Significant difference. Also, 31 million is tiny compared to past breaches which have easily exceeded 100 million. --Masem (t) 03:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Interesting. Unusual (why the internet archive), and ofcourse the archive is one of the best websites on the internet ever. Also i dont wanna get accused of trolling or wahtever but this page is such a slog these days, I can bet you 99% of the news here - about elections in Micronesia and the winners of a tourney of horse football - most people not just not care about those, but actively roll their eyes whenever these get posted. This piece of news however is actually fresh and interesting. Kasperquickly (talk) 03:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose — 31 million accounts is not significant. ITN is not for interesting facts but significant news. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance This is a pretty substantial take down of such a large website. However, I have to oppose on quality as the article on the IA is full of CN tags and has an orange-tagged section as needing an update. I would also oppose ALT3 as it is just factually untrue; the group claiming to have carried out the attack is based in Russia and has never claimed to be Palestinian. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:16, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability and quality. Larger companies have suffered more severe data breaches and many of those are forgotten today. Hey, do you recall when every American's social security number was leaked earlier this year? It hasn't crossed my mind in a long time even though a social security number is far more important than an Internet Archive password. MoneyGram which handles over 150 million records suffered a breach containing more sensitive information literally 2 days ago and it hasn't appeared in even the lower ITN, but the Internet Archive is more important to Wikipedia so even when it suffers a "routine" and ultimately less severe and important breach than we've seen many times this year, it gets coverage on Wikipedia. The Internet Archive is more likely to be affected in operation by the intellectual property lawsuits it's fighting. Also there's only one paragraph in the source about the breach. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose does the average person know what the Internet Archive is? I only know of it from trying to archive references for Wikipedia. This breach is barely covered by major news sources, mainly only tech websites. Natg 19 (talk) 18:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support as others mentioned, 31 million accounts having their data breached is newsworthy. Not to mention, this disruption affects people who enjoyed archived record significantly. Rager7 (talk) 04:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This is one of the multiple data breaches that major companies and governments face every year. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - Very bad news for the Archive, but not a particularly big story in the wider world. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Kasperquickly. Also could use a decision, even if the result is no consensus. FlipandFlopped ツ 18:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Murasoli Selvam
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Abishe (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Prominent newspaper editor of current Tamil Nadu state party-led government Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. Abishe (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft Support article is teetering on a stub, but it is properly cited. Scuba 15:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I think some part of the article needs to be rewritten in more neutral tone and trimmed in some other parts as currently it reads as far too praiseworthy with words such as "illustrious", "passionately", and "pivotal and instrumental" among others. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 07:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ethel Kennedy
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Wife of Robert F. Kennedy and mother of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. dies at age 96. Davey2116 (talk) 15:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks fine Scuba 15:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Well sourced, no tags. Jusdafax (talk) 15:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready. Thriley (talk) 16:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. Would support photo RD down the road too. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support It was only yesterday that I was reading her article and was surprised at the line
"She is the oldest living member of the Kennedy family"
. Alas, that is not true anymore. Her article is ready to be posted and I also support a photo of her being posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC) - Support Photo RD immediately "down the road". InedibleHulk (talk) 16:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on procedural grounds but strongly oppose a “photo RD” which is not a thing, and she certainly does not qualify for a blurb This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 17:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 00:49, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Literature
[edit]Blurb: The Nobel Prize in Literature is awarded to Korean writer Han Kang (pictured) for her "intense poetic prose exposing fragility of life". (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Nobel Prize in Literature is awarded to Korean writer Han Kang (pictured) for her "intense poetic prose that confronts historical traumas and exposes the fragility of human life".
Alternative blurb II: The Nobel Prize in Literature is awarded to Korean poet and novelist Han Kang (pictured).
News source(s): The Hindu, The New York Times, Noble Prize press release
Credits:
- Nominated by PrinceofPunjab (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ccmontgom (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
The winner's article needs some work before it is ready to be posted. Also, I am not sure whether to include her distinction as first Asian female Nobel laureate in Literature in the blurb or not. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 13:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- The pulled quote from the Nobel committee for the reason in the current blurb looks odd. I know we need this but the way the statement reads in full by the committee is a bit too long for us to use, so may need some more creative selection of parts. Masem (t) 13:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
For the nature of her work it might be ok, as it is hard to describe.I am more worried about lack of references or citations to blogs.--ReyHahn (talk) 13:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Here is how some major news organizations are reporting her win:
- ...for her ‘intense poetic prose’ exposing fragility of life (The Indian Expresss),
- ... for her intense poetic prose (Wall Street Journal),
- ...was honored for her “intense” prose and historical focus (The Washington Post),
- ...for ‘poetic prose on historical trauma’ (Financial Express)
- Which one do you think would be most appropriate for the blurb? ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Nobel Prize in Literature is awarded to Korean author Han Kang for her prose about the fragility of life. I think that's fine... VSankeerthSai1609 (talk) 16:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Since the actual words are "for her intense poetic prose that confronts historical traumas and exposes the fragility of human life", either repeat that (even in part) or don't "quote" anything. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Needs some work, mainly references. Also, I suggest for literature Nobels we go with simple "X is awarded Nobel Prize in literature" because the descriptions are typically something very poetic and not as obvious as in the scientific awards. We can say whether the person is a writer or poet or both, though. --Tone 17:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- A poet is a writer (who writes poetically). I think you mean "novelist", and yeah, I'll add it. I don't think it's worth arguing about whether Nobel Prize citations are ever "very" poetic, because that's subjective. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality - multiple CN tags. The Kip (contribs) 18:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - CN tags now removed; please could someone double-check. As for the blurb, they usually get a bare description like "X wins Nobel", but winners of other prizes get brief descriptions of their work. E.g. the current ones read "The Nobel Prize in Chemistry is awarded jointly to Demis Hassabis (pictured) and John M. Jumper for their work on protein structure prediction and David Baker for his work on computational protein design.", "John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton receive the Nobel Prize in Physics for their research in machine learning with artificial neural networks.", and "Victor Ambros and Gary Ruvkun receive the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their discovery of microRNA." So the altblurb looks preferable. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 03:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support' the page was improved greatly since yesterday.
There is still a whole section of her books that is not well referenced but it is not as key as it is just missing primary sources to her Korean books.--ReyHahn (talk) 07:02, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Now it is good to go.--ReyHahn (talk) 08:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posting. Great work with finding the references. --Tone 08:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Tone: maybe it is better to change Hassabis picture for Kang, Hassabis only won 1/4 of the prize.--ReyHahn (talk) 09:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think we are cycling of images of the laureates. Other editors have this covered :) Tone 09:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
October 9
[edit]
October 9, 2024
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Leif Segerstam
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WFMT
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Martinevans123 (talk · give credit) and Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Composer of 371 symphonies, conductor of major opera companies and orchestras worldwide, leading positions in Austria, Germany, Sweden and his native Finland, teacher of notable conductors. - This article was mainly there, even with plenty of sources, only: many of them are in Finnish or Swedish, and all of the many archived ones don't work. I feel that by now we have enough accessible sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:53, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Looks well sourced. Cannot see any issues. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support @Admins willing to post ITN: It looks like this article has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 12:47, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, agree. 10 hours left to post before it falls off here. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 16:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lily Ebert
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
No sourcing issues, long enough. Mooonswimmer 01:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Very notable, and the article looks pretty good. High Admiral JMT (talk) 06:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Looks good. I also cropped the subject's image. Cheers. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is in a great shape. It appears ready to be posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks good Scuba 15:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:31, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: George Baldock
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SDNA
Credits:
- Nominated by Mwwv (talk · give credit)
- Updated by HomerPap17 (talk · give credit) and Unknown Temptation (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Football player. Could use some more work on sources. mwwv converse∫edits 20:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment there's much much more about his time at MK Dons than his seven years at Sheffield United, even though half of that SUFC times was his only time in the Premier League. This usually happens when an editor is writing about a player for their favourite club, but then leaves Wikipedia/doesn't care when the player moves club. Probably not a big enough issue to nix posting the page, but it certainly stands out. Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Part of the reason may be that he meant a lot to the Dons fans, given he was a local player who came through the academy and was one of the best players. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Currently two cn tags. However neither are what I would call particularly controversial claims of fact. I think it's good enough. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Fixed the cn tags. Article overall looks in good shape sourcing wise. Fats40boy11 (talk) 05:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is good enough to be posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks fine. Scuba 15:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - without a doubt, this is ready for RD Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unreferenced place and date of birth. Schwede66 09:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- In fairness, both were already referenced in the first line of the main prose of the article so I didn't think extra refs in the infobox were required. I've cited it in the infobox now and removed the 'citation needed' tags in any case. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think what Schwede66 meant to write was that the referencing needed fixing there. The two footnotes linked to sources that gave different DoBs. I have taken out "Hugman", which stated "26 January 1993" as the DoB, and replaced with the obituary on The Times, which shows "March 9, 1993", same as the DoB shown in the other existing footnoted sources. --PFHLai (talk) 15:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- In fairness, both were already referenced in the first line of the main prose of the article so I didn't think extra refs in the infobox were required. I've cited it in the infobox now and removed the 'citation needed' tags in any case. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan–ATLAS)
[edit]Blurb: The bright comet C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan–ATLAS) makes its closest approach to Earth on 12 October. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Bright comet C/2023 A3 (Tsuchinshan–ATLAS) is visible to the western sky after sunset on 12 October and onwards.
News source(s): guardianNYTSky & TelescopeBBC
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by C messier (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
The second brightest comet visible from the Earth the last 50 years. It already graced the southern skies the previous weeks, now it makes it closest approach to Earth on 12 October, before emerging in the western sky. --C messier (talk) 19:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait until October 12. I personally think it can be post-worthy, but we can't make news out of what hasn't occurred yet. — Knightoftheswords 19:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
It won't be really be visible October 12. Wait a few days? Nfitz (talk) 20:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait until October 12, hopefully this doesn't end up like the 2nd moon where the consensus was to post when it actually entered orbit and then everyone just forgot to nominate it again Scuba 22:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I was just about to nominate 2024 PT5 and forgot lol High Admiral JMT (talk) 23:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I checked the status of 2024 PT5 on that date but there was still no good picture at that time and nothing much more to say. A renomination therefore did not seem sensible. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait as others said, we won't know if the comet would be visible until on that day (October 12th). Rager7 (talk) 00:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comets are unpredictable, but not that unpredictable. It won't vanish in two days and up to now it has been quite predictable. On 12 October it will be quite low in the sky, near Venus, and set early, while the tail curves back to the Sun. After the 14th will be an easy to see object (although the moonlight will interfer). C messier (talk) 04:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Bright comets are ITN/R, the article seems ok and there's a wide choice of pictures. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Already is gaining much attention. Can be posted. High Admiral JMT (talk) 06:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait but Support. Another interesting astronomy news. The 2nd moon was totally forgotten about, but let's see if this will make its close approach on that day. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article meets the standard and I think this can be posted now. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait. No reason not to wait until it is visible. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Not sure what took us so long. Schwede66 07:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The posted blurb should be changed from "visible to the western sky" to "visible in the western sky". "Visible to the western sky" is not a common idiom, according to my googling anyway. Adpete (talk) 04:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted to RD) RD: Ratan Tata
[edit]Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Indian Business magnate (industrialist or tycoon) and philanthropist and former chairman of Tata Group, Ratan Tata dies at the age of 86. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Ratan Tata Highest Indian civilian honours award winner (Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan), and International Honor Awards winner , dies at the age of 86.
News source(s): BBC, Aljazeera, CNN, The New York Times, the GuardianHT
Credits:
- Nominated by The Herald (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Spworld2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Indian industrialist, philanthropist and former chairman of Tata Group. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose RD currently on quality. The Philanthropy section is under sourced and written in a way that edges on POV. In terms of a blurb, there feels like there needs to be more about the legacy or impact he's had (not just having buildings named after him) , while the awards and honors implies that direction, the article needs to be more explicit, otherwise this seems like any typical business leader anywhere in the world. (To contrast, I would think we are comparing to someone like Bill Gates as a major figure in the business and philanthropy fields, and this article doesn't currently give that impression.) Masem (t) 18:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Still not ready The Philanthropy section still reads as POV/promotional writing, and relies a bit too much on primary sourcing for these types of claims. --Masem (t) 12:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD Article need quality improvement for posting. Pachu Kannan (talk) 19:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb OLDMANDIES. Not a serving head of state or government This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ummm, okay? I don't see anyone saying that this was a nomination for a blurb. Tube·of·Light 05:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- It was when it was posted This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ummm, okay? I don't see anyone saying that this was a nomination for a blurb. Tube·of·Light 05:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD Article looks good enough now. Rynoip (talk) 22:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support The article just needs slightly more grammatical revisions before posting. Rager7 (talk) 00:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Article looks to meet basic expectations for homepage / RD. Anything else with NPOV or tone should be taken up by orange tags on the article page to get editors attention. For now this is ready. Ktin (talk) 03:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Shouldn't there be a blurb here? 2409:40C0:101E:59D2:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 06:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready. Several sections still needs to be sourced. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems fine now. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support It is a major event, and the article seems fine. User:VSankeerthSai1609
- Oppose blurb as he wasn't a world transforming figure.
- Oppose alternative blurb and blurb. He wasn't awarded the highest civilian honor and the phrase in brackets can be removed.User:VSankeerthSai1609
2401:BA80:A30F:5D1C:DCB7:5373:D5BE:66F7 (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb but Support RD for the article is clean enough now to post in RD. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 18:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, support RD per above. The Kip (contribs) 18:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted to RD and feel free to continue the blurb discussion. Schwede66 18:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb amongst the biggest sirs in Indian business 💪💪💪 Kasperquickly (talk) 08:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Iwao Hakamada
[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.
Blurb: The acquittal of Iwao Hakamada, the world's longest serving death row inmate for more than 45 years, is finalized as Japanese prosecutors decide to not appeal against the verdict in the retrial. (Post)
News source(s): The Associated Press, Nippon TV
Credits:
- Nominated by UCinternational (talk · give credit)
Note: we also posted the news about him in March 2014. --UCinternational (talk) 13:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Cool trivia but I don't see how this would fit into the narrative of ITN. Perhaps more suitable for DYK? TwistedAxe [contact] 14:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose dyk not itn Scuba 14:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ineligible for DYK. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose minor status quo update to what we already posted on the acquittal. Similar to why we don't post inauguration of elected leaders when we already posted the results. Masem (t) 15:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose since he already got his day on the front page per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 15:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - more finalization of a procedure than anything else. I would like to note however a decade later, that in ITN's current environment, his acquittal would likely not even be posted, nor nominated. — Knightoftheswords 19:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Chemistry
[edit]Blurb: The Nobel Prize in Chemistry is awarded jointly to Demis Hassabis and John M. Jumper for their work on protein structure prediction and David Baker for his work on computational protein design. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, The New York Times, Nobel Prize press release
Credits:
- Nominated by PrinceofPunjab (talk · give credit)
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
All three winners' articles look good enough even though Jumper's article is bit short and they need to be updated. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 10:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Except for a few statements in Baker's personal life, all articles are good to go for quality purposes. --Masem (t) 12:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- For Hassabis, date and place of birth are unreferenced. Schwede66 18:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- fixed. Masem (t) 18:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The statement in Jumper's aritcle that AlphaFold is the first machine learning algorithm to be able to accurately predict the 3D structure of proteins is unreferenced. --C messier (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- This has been fixed. Ktin (talk) 03:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. The three articles pass basic hygiene checks for homepage. Good to go. Can someone create a composite image on a photo editing software? Ktin (talk) 03:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Do we need a picture of all three winners or would a picture of both Hassabis and Baker be enough? ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article about a notable prize is now ready. 64.114 etc 04:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Support per Ktin and 64. 2605:8D80:401:9506:71A2:F7E:99F4:3379 (talk) 04:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support I agree with K. This is a good article. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:28B8:4402:8321:8CA1 (talk) 04:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Posting. --Tone 12:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Lee Wei Ling
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/lee-wei-ling-daughter-lee-kuan-yew-dies-aged-69-4667096
Credits:
- Nominated by Robertsky (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Daughter of Lee Kuan Yew, sister of Lee Hsien Loong (both Prime Ministers of Singapore). There are portions that may still require citations. – robertsky (talk) 00:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support but not ready: Some sections have missing citations and the article in general needs to be expanded or reworked. Will support RD in principle. Tofusaurus (talk) 06:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support as of now article looks in decent enough shape. Scuba 14:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is good enough now. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:18, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Looking for a footnote(s) in the main prose to support the date and place of birth as mentioned in the infobox and intro. Help anyone, please? --PFHLai (talk) 14:18, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I'm not massively happy about that "Administrator of Lee Kuan Yew's will" paragraph either. BDP applies, and I'm unsure that it's even sourced properly. Black Kite (talk) 14:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
October 8
[edit]
October 8, 2024
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Health and environment
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
RD: Edward Vaughn
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Michigan Chronicle
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Civil Rights Icon.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The early career section is almost entirely unsourced. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 17:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose needs sources. Scuba 23:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Tim Johnson (South Dakota politician)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP, NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American politician, U.S. senator from South Dakota (1997–2015), dies at age 77. Davey2116 (talk) 03:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Needs sourcing work. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 17:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose needs citations. Scuba 23:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Pulled) RD: Bernard Tissier de Mallerais
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Croix
Credits:
- Nominated by Ad Orientem (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Dissident Catholic bishop. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Almost Support would like to see ISBNs for bibliography which I can do myself, but article is in decent shape sourcing wise. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support seems alright to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support no problems with the article. Scuba 18:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted to RD Bibliography now fully referenced or with ISBNs. SpencerT•C 00:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Pulled Pulling my own nom as it has been orange tagged by Qwirkle and cannot be linked on the main page while so tagged. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Luis Tiant
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Admittedly, needs a lot of work. Hopefully can be improved by the end of the week, to get listed at RD. Natg 19 (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose yeah, article needs work Scuba 14:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose much of the early years and career sections are unreferenced. C messier (talk) 19:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose quite a bit of unsourced information. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Arie L. Kopelman
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WWD
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Strattonsmith (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Thriley (talk) 17:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article seems good enough Rynoip (talk) 09:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support no problems I can see at a glance. Scuba 14:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Taye Atske Selassie elected President of Ethiopia
[edit]Blurb: Taye Atske Selassie is elected President of Ethiopia, succeeding Sahle-Work Zewde. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Taye Atske Selassie is appointed President of Ethiopia, succeeding Sahle-Work Zewde.
News source(s): Bloomberg Barron's (AFP)
Credits:
- Nominated by Varavour (talk · give credit)
There probably should be an article for the 2024 Ethiopian presidential election. Varavour (talk) 14:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft support with new blurb there was no election, Selassie was appointed to the office. But still, this is a new head of state and ITN/R Scuba 14:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Ethiopia is a parliamentary republic and the role of the President is largely ceremonial. Does that still qualify it for ITN/R? Scaramouche33 (talk) 16:10, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- no, not automatically. It can be discussed under the criteria of newsworthiness and relevance. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Change of head of state, ITN/R applies. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. New head of state, and a recurring item. 64.114 etc 19:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support change of head of state is ITN/R regardless of system of govt This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Support per others. 2605:8D80:400:BBDB:BC17:A461:397B:9102 (talk) 21:52, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Oppose on quality - Selassie's article isn't much longer than a stub. The Kip (contribs) 22:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Has nobody noticed that the article is a stub? Schwede66 22:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Support Recurring item, new head of state. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:E4DE:FA24:70FD:A760 (talk) 22:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Oppose on quality. Article really needs some expansion; at the moment it contains very barebones information on his life and career. ArkHyena (it/its) 23:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose the Prime Minister of Ethiopia is the holder of power, the president is just ceremonial and appointed. Secretlondon (talk) 06:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Even though it is ceremonial it is still a change of head of state Rynoip (talk) 09:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality as per above. The article is currently barebones. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 06:17, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Change of head of state regardless if he is ceremonial or if he is appointed Rynoip (talk) 09:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on both the quality and importance. He is purely ceremonial head of state without almost no power. LiamKorda 10:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- We've posted Death of Queen Elizabeth II and Coronation of Charles III though, and those are much more ceremonial than in the Ethiopian system (a system which is not that rare either). Abcmaxx (talk) 12:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- But those were rare historical events (Death and coronation of a British monarch). Those events are the first ones in seven decades. Also, Death of the Queen Elizabeth is not a fair comparison since we are not talking about the death of a head of the state. Plus, the president of the Ethiopia is appointed to this position rather than indirectly elected through electoral college like some other countries that also have ceremonial head of state like Pakistan, Germany and India. LiamKorda 13:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Elizabeth II was the head of
over aabout three dozen states and Charles III now "rules"them all except Barbadosover a dozen. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)- That fact makes her death and his coronation even more important since it concerns more than a dozen countries and therefore is not at all comparable to this nomination. LiamKorda 14:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Everything is comparable, but yeah, they're certainly different. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- That fact makes her death and his coronation even more important since it concerns more than a dozen countries and therefore is not at all comparable to this nomination. LiamKorda 14:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Elizabeth II was the head of
- But those were rare historical events (Death and coronation of a British monarch). Those events are the first ones in seven decades. Also, Death of the Queen Elizabeth is not a fair comparison since we are not talking about the death of a head of the state. Plus, the president of the Ethiopia is appointed to this position rather than indirectly elected through electoral college like some other countries that also have ceremonial head of state like Pakistan, Germany and India. LiamKorda 13:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- We've posted about the President of Singapore, who is similarly ceremonial. So It looks like there is precedent regardless. –DMartin 21:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Like I said above, the president of Ethiopia is appointed to his position. Singapore’s president despite being ceremonial in nature is elected through a direct election. This nomination is just like a job posting. LiamKorda 05:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- We've posted Death of Queen Elizabeth II and Coronation of Charles III though, and those are much more ceremonial than in the Ethiopian system (a system which is not that rare either). Abcmaxx (talk) 12:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support notability The position is not entirely ceremoniał but in part, the president has executive powers vested in the Council of Ministers chaired by the prime minister. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability but neutral on quality Head of state of a regional power. Article doesn't have any glaring problems, but is quite short. –DMartin 21:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Support New head of state, a type of recurring item. Ready to post! 72.143.234.123 (talk) 01:37, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support per many others. 74.49.190.204 (talk) 02:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Admin comment It doesn’t matter how many editors vote in support. Without someone putting in the effort and expanding the bio beyond stub status, it is not going to be posted. Schwede66 06:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Selassie's article is a stub. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Physics
[edit]Blurb: John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton receive the Nobel Prize in Physics for their inventions that enable machine learning with artificial neural networks. (Post)
Alternative blurb: John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton receive the Nobel Prize in Physics for their research in machine learning with artificial neural networks.
News source(s): The Guardian The New York Times Nobel Prize press release
Credits:
- Nominated by PrinceofPunjab (talk · give credit)
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Hopfield's article needs some work, but Hinton's article is in good shape. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 10:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support (for Hopfield) I just removed all nonsense from Hopfield article and cited what can be cited.--ReyHahn (talk) 11:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- We even have images now if you want to make it an image blurb.--ReyHahn (talk) 17:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support For once, quality of both awardees are good and updated, no need for major hair pulling rush to get ready for posting. --Masem (t) 11:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Could somebody with photo editing software please produce a combined mugshot for those Nobel recipients? Schwede66 19:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Schwede66: added image of both laureates using images from their respective infoboxes. Licensing info might need tweaking but I tried my best. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, not sure what the correct way is when we've got a mix of two different licenses. But the individual images have suitable licenses and that's what's important. Thanks for your help! Schwede66 21:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Schwede66: added image of both laureates using images from their respective infoboxes. Licensing info might need tweaking but I tried my best. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on quality. 64.114 etc 21:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Support on quality per 64 etc. 2605:8D80:400:BBDB:BC17:A461:397B:9102 (talk) 21:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Posted – Schwede66 22:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support articles look good. Scuba 03:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
October 7
[edit]
October 7, 2024
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
(Posted) RD: Amaury du Closel
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Radio France
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jmanlucas (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
French conductor and composer who will be remembered for promoting the music of composers who were silenced by totalitarian regimes in the 20th century. Stubbish article expanded and referenced more. There could be more detail from the sources found, if someone has the time to add it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:11, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Hera mission launch
[edit]Blurb: The space mission Hera (pictured) launches from Cape Canaveral on 7 October 2024 at 14:52 UTC. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The space mission by ESA, Hera (pictured) launches from Cape Canaveral on 7 October 2024 at 14:52 UTC.
News source(s): [3]
Credits:
- Nominated by High Admiral JMT (talk · give credit)
- Created by MANARAJu (talk · give credit)
A new space probe launched. Rather famous for being the first mission to rendezvous with a binary asteroid. High Admiral JMT (talk) 08:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality More references are needed. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I feel we should wait under Dec 2026 when this reaches its destination and meets ITNR. The launch itself seemed fairly routine/trivial Masem (t) 21:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft oppose This launch should be posted, however, the article in it's current state isn't ready. Scuba 03:47, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Brian Hastings
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Former world record holder Kiwi cricket batter Brian Hastings dies
Credits:
- Nominated by Schwede66 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Paora (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Have gone through the article and added missing citations. Looks in decent shape now. Schwede66 21:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Almost Ready. The first paragraph in the career section needs to be sourced. After that, the article looks good to go. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is now good to go. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 08:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 15:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lore Segal
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, ABC News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:4C5F:E789:5E5F:4B18 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Austrian-American novelist, teacher and short story writer. 240F:7A:6253:1:4C5F:E789:5E5F:4B18 (talk) 06:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article seems alright to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 15:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Hurricane Milton
[edit]Blurb: Hurricane Milton (pictured) is upgraded to a Category 5 hurricane. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Hurricane Milton (pictured) is upgraded to a Category 5 hurricane by the National Hurricane Center.
Alternative blurb II: Hurricane Milton (pictured), one of the fastest-intensifying and most intense Atlantic hurricanes on record, approaches Florida.
Alternative blurb III: Historic evacuations commence in Florida in advance of Hurricane Milton, the most intense Atlantic hurricane since 2005.
News source(s): [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
Credits:
- Nominated by Des Vallee (talk · give credit)
- Created by Vida0007 (talk · give credit)
This Hurricane has had incredible effects on the southern United States already, it's already a category 5 hurricane and has caused mass evacuations so far. It is as strong as Hurricane Dean, and is currently the dominating the reporting in the US. It is an important historical event that is occurring. Des Vallee (talk) 23:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait as per usual we wait to see what the impact is, not before it makes landfall. It has a good chance to be posted after that. Masem (t) 23:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- To add, the reason we wait for landfall is that the coverage of damage itself needs to be established as to make sure the quality of the article is going in the right direction. If for some reason Milton just vanished overnight and did no landfall, the article still would need improvements to describe that. It's clear this won't happen, Milton will cause a lot of flooding if not more, but we show know how extensive that is without our article to make sure the quality is established. — Masem (t) 16:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait Unlike Helene, we have a conceivable chance of seeing an objective record being broken, with Milton already having the fastest intensification from TD to Category 5. Otherwise, wait until landfall and actual impacts. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 23:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Wait until the impacts are known, although I would support blurbing this if more intensity records are broken by this storm. (I mean, it's already the 5th most intense Atlantic hurricane as of this writing, I would not be surprised if it would try to break Wilma's record low pressure.) Vida0007 (talk) 00:09, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Changing this to Post-posting support. Well-sourced, and this is definitely the biggest news right now. This hurricane's impacts are now being felt in Florida too, even spawning several tornadoes. Vida0007 (talk) 00:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I believe it is now the most intense in the Gulf of Mexico, and the strongest since Wilma overall. I don't think it's going to reach Wilma's intensity though. It's probably going to be blurbed at landfall anyway. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 00:11, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- SMH. Can we PLEASE wait for impacts in the future? Not gonna request a closure like last time because Milton is already impacting portions of the Gulf Coast and probably will be worthy of posting within 48 hours, but really, we should wait in the future. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think that Milton in particular is different than Helene and the other one I can't remember immediately: Milton is setting records well over 24 hours out from landfall, and I think that warrants having an ITN discussion open. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 00:15, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- ITN is not great for posting of records that routinely get broken (like strongest storms). Its the impact of the storm that matters, because not only that is what gets larger attention, but also a better judge for quality of the article to make sure it covers the bulk of such impacts. — Masem (t) 00:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Seconding what Masem said. And I'm gonna say the forbidden words again: as things stand currently, Milton is a much better DYK candidate than a ITN candidate. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's quite unsuitable for DYK because it's breaking news and so the article will be getting lots of development. The DYK process might take weeks as it has a long pipeline which is overloaded and so is not appropriate for such a topical topic. ITN is obviously the best place to handle this as it routinely covers weather stories and is currently blurbing two others. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Post-Posting Support. I'm pleased with this timing. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think that Milton in particular is different than Helene and the other one I can't remember immediately: Milton is setting records well over 24 hours out from landfall, and I think that warrants having an ITN discussion open. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 00:15, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait Can't we just wait for the tropical cyclone's impacts instead of nominating it as soon as it reaches a certain intensity? Patience is a virtue. --ZZZ'S 00:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support It already seems clear that this is a big one and the preparations are in the news. The article seems reasonably substantial with 65 citations and counting. It's silly to hold back on this so we can continue to blurb a stale sports story from over a week ago. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm unconvinced that there's a reason to bash a sports nomination, especially given that 1 week isn't particularly long ago. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- That blurb has been run for 8 straight days now, which is much more than the typical featured article gets, never mind DYK. But you know the saying "there's nothing as stale as yesterday's news"? Just think how much more that applies when it's last week's news or last month's news, as it is in that case. And then there's diminishing returns too. After our readers have seen the item a few times, then they will starting tuning it out. And so the consequence is that just about no-one is reading that article now. It's done.
- The fix for this is easy; just run new items that are actually in the news. Like this hurricane that is so terrifying that it moved a veteran meteorologist to tears.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 14:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm unconvinced that there's a reason to bash a sports nomination, especially given that 1 week isn't particularly long ago. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support I agree with Andrew Davidson, The article is in a good shape, is making headlines and I think it is good enough time now to post this. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose until we can give Milton a blurb that puts it above all the other category 5 hurricanes that didn't make ITN. So far, all we have is preparations (WP:CRYSTALBALL), the intensity (strongest since 2005), and the speed of intensification (fastest on record from tropical depression to category 5). If we can't, then let's have the patience to wait until landfall. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 11:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)- Support Altblurb 2 proposed, which I think gives it the correct importance. Yes, it's before landfall we're supporting it, but this is a record-setter after all (strongest since 2005, least time between TD and cat 5 hurricane). GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per GeorgeMemulous. Based on the intensification, this particular one is an exception to the rule that we wait for a direct landfall on the mainland U.S. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait It hasn't hit land yet, its a good idea to wait for its effects and any casualty tolls before it is published on ITN. It is also a good idea include Helene alongside it when it makes landfall, as two powerful and devastating hurricanes in a very close period of time is notable. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 13:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Helene's devastation was primarily in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia (U.S. state), whereas Milton's is almost certainly going to be concentrated in Florida. While it is true both will have had significant impacts around Tampa, I think their geographic separation, the fact Helene is gone and stale, and the fact that Milton is so extraordinary means the blurb should only be on Milton. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- As others (and I) have pointed out numerous times in prior TC ITN proposals, we should Wait for impacts or future developments. Category 5 hurricanes are not particularly rare for the North Atlantic basin, and though its RI episode was impressive, I'm not sure if that is truly ITN-worthy. As far as I can recall, the only meteorological record Milton has solidly broken is its extremely unusual motion vector as a C5 hurricane, which is trivial information at best. Milton has not broken any notable meteorological records that may make it ITN-worthy regardless of impacts (e.g. most intense Atlantic hurricane, still comfortably held by Wilma). In regards to abundant news coverage of Milton, this is primarily due to its expected, potentially devastating impacts to the Tampa Bay Area and much of west Florida. Though significant impacts are almost certainly—and unfortunately—going to happen, WP:CRYSTAL applies here until they do happen.
- ArkHyena (it/its) 14:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for landfall, as per usual. Scuba 14:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per GeorgeMemulous. Huge news already due to millions of people ordered to evacuate and the existing documented extreme intensification and strength. There’s no need to wait, per WaltClip, and the article is in good shape per PrinceofPunjab. I strongly disagree with the reasoning expressed by !votes to wait. This is a blurb-worthy ITN story now. Jusdafax (talk) 16:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Already has made a bit of mess in the Yucatan peninsula where it brought rain and winds. (Reminder cyclones don't have to make landfall to do things) Mandatory evacuation orders issued, mass evacuations, some major airports already closed. Seems pretty impactful to me already. Tampa Bay mayor: "you're going to die" The purpose of ITN, and Wikipedia, is to serve the readers, not play Nomic and make up a bunch of arbitrary rules and robotically apply them no matter what. The "real world" is frequently messy and comes in many shades of gray, not stark blank-and-white. (idly wonders whether if an asteroid were predicted on a near certain collision course with a major city, people at ITN would strenuously argue "we have to wait and see what the impacts (heh heh) are first before we post it, can't foretell the future don't know what'll happen for certain") --Slowking Man (talk) 16:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Besides the implied false equivalency between tropical cyclones, where dozens make land impacts every year, and an asteroid strike on a major city, which would be entirely unprecedented in human history, there is the fact that weather forecasts can and do bust. Milton's impacts on Florida are far from "near certain", even if I would state that significant to catastrophic impacts are very likely myself. Weather is messy and it would be bad practice to push a weather event to ITN on the presumption that it will inflict significant impacts before those impacts actually happen. A prime example would be Typhoon Bebinca (2024), which for several days appeared likely (and was explicitly forecast by the JTWC) to make an unprecedented and potentially devastating landfall near Shanghai before dry air halted its intensification. ArkHyena (it/its) 23:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- In terms of a really bad hit true, though a "graze" or two have happened. Fun fact the Tunguska impactor, if merely displaced in time by 6-ish hrs (so the Earth would have rotated to a different spot) would have obliterated St Petersburg (then capital of the Russian Empire) and devastated the Baltic region (by causing a tsunami). (Per article estimated power in megatons which is "big-ass H-bomb" levels to use the scientific term) A premise more alt history stories need to take and run with.
- The Qingyang event also is interesting, unfortunately we don't have much info and could have been other things like storms. Speaking of, a big impact over the 70% of our planet covered by water would cause a tsunami which is decidedly not unprecedented. Look at the Eltanin impact, just don't read that before bedtime
- My broad point was Milton has already caused significant impacts regardless of the future. Mass evacs, disaster declarations etc are impacts. I see now they're closing Wally World, apparently giant megacorps are taking actions with "impacts" (big employer, for one). Just say that in ITN: "disaster declarations evac orders etc are issued for Milton", no predicting the future needed. Slowking Man (talk) 03:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Besides the implied false equivalency between tropical cyclones, where dozens make land impacts every year, and an asteroid strike on a major city, which would be entirely unprecedented in human history, there is the fact that weather forecasts can and do bust. Milton's impacts on Florida are far from "near certain", even if I would state that significant to catastrophic impacts are very likely myself. Weather is messy and it would be bad practice to push a weather event to ITN on the presumption that it will inflict significant impacts before those impacts actually happen. A prime example would be Typhoon Bebinca (2024), which for several days appeared likely (and was explicitly forecast by the JTWC) to make an unprecedented and potentially devastating landfall near Shanghai before dry air halted its intensification. ArkHyena (it/its) 23:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait to see impact. - RockinJack18 16:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait/Oppose Alt Blurb I per above. Sure it's one of the strongest Atlantic hurricanes on record, but people will remember Milton for its destruction more. Oppose Alt Blurb I because there has been plenty of Category 5 hurricanes that didn't make ITN, like Hurricane Lee (2023) and Hurricane Lorenzo (2019). For other Category 5 hurricanes that made it it ITN, it was for its destruction, not its strength. For Alb Blurb II, it can be added to future destruction info. INeedSupport :3 18:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait but noting now my support once it makes landfall. As I am just south of Tampa on Florida's west coast, I probably am going to be offline when it comes in and possibly for some days following. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Best of luck, Ad Orientem. Look after yourself. Schwede66 21:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hopefully you'll be fine. Good luck! INeedSupport :3 02:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Good luck! Hope the best for you. Rynoip (talk) 09:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Best of luck, Ad Orientem. Look after yourself. Schwede66 21:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Andrew Davidson. This is already in the news now, and the scale of evacuation is unprecedented. We can update it if or when things worsen, but there is no hard rule which says we need to delay. Also, on a communal responsibility level, I think we should be blurbing this for our readers now with altblurb2 making clear the severity... believe it or not, there are many who do not check the news and we can do our part in communicating how serious this is is. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I object to the point that blurbing this before it makes landfall is a good idea ignoring notability to inform those in the storm's path. By now I find it hard to believe that anyone in the track of Milton doesn't know what's going on, and those that do probably aren't checking Wikipedia's In The News, and even then, I don't know what's left to do after all the panic buying and evacuations being stalled on the highways. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and I'd bet less than half a percent of Wikipedia's reader base is even in the path. If they weren't swayed by world news headlines, I doubt they'd be swayed by an ITN entry. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 22:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's in the news, and the impacts are already being felt as hundreds of thousands of people are evacuating. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The evacuations arent going to be of much importance compared to the impact.
- Noah, BSBATalk 21:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support once it makes landfall I'm very biased on this one as I'm in its path and it would be a miracle if I still had the ability to log in to cast a !vote after landfall actually happens and the impacts start to become known, but if the storm's impact on Tampa, Clearwater, Sarasota, etc is anywhere near what is forecast, it is all but certain that this will warrant posting. Wishing Ad Orientem and anyone else in Milton's path all the best. Stay safe, and get somewhere safer if you still can. Vanilla Wizard 💙 01:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also support altblurbs 2/3 if posted before landfall as the extraordinary strength of this storm is very much in the news. Vanilla Wizard 💙 15:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support, Category 5 hurricane. TyphoonAmpil [citation needed] 02:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support when it makes landfall but needs better blurb.
- Altblurb 3 proposed. This is the last one that will be made before landfall. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 11:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article quality is very good, front page headlines all over the world for the last few days; we have to remember the basic principle that this is called "In the news" for a reason. Clearly having substantial impact, and if anything changes we can amend blurbs as necessary. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support now - as with Helene, the storm is having an extremely prominent and newsworthy effect already in terms of evacuation and other preparations, and we can update the blurb to reflect the physical impact once that occurs. I do think we've had a problem recently with premature nominations for tropical storms, but this is now very ripe. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is the most support I've seen for a hurricane before it actually makes landfall... except for Hurricane Dorian which somehow made it into Ongoing. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per policy-based arguments and Lieutenant Dan, a bloke with one leg, who has parked his boat in the middle of Tampa Harbour, is going nowhere and says that God has got his back. He has no life jacket and can only swim in a circle. SerialNumber54129 13:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- His name is Dan? Don't you mean "Bob"? (Or more like, "Sink"? Florida Man Dan eh? Boy, oh, Buoy…) --Slowking Man (talk) 14:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait, until landfall. If a blurb must be chosen now, it should be blurb III as the other three relating to intensity aren't of worldwide interest. ✶Quxyz✶ 15:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Normally I push waiting until there's indication of damage, but there's massive media coverage of this already, and it's a once-in-a-century storm that will hit this very urban area. The leading edge of the rain (perhaps the most intense portion) is already hitting the cost. Nfitz (talk) 16:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support – as the impacts in Florida are already occurring as of this writing; and it’ll only get worse. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 16:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I support blurb #3. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 16:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support – as the impacts in Florida are already occurring as of this writing; and it’ll only get worse. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 16:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Quick vote tally:
- 15 saying wait until landfall (6 in the past 24 hours).
- 14 saying support posting now (7 in the past 24 hours).
- 0 saying oppose outright from my knowledge.
- I might be a bit off in my counting, but it seems to be about even. If we post before landfall, it should be posted sooner rather than later so that it isn't immediately outdated. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 16:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @GeorgeMemulous, correct me if I’m wrong, but this is a consensus, not a vote. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 16:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a democracy but the vote tally is still a useful tool for determining consensus. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 16:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @GeorgeMemulous, correct me if I’m wrong, but this is a consensus, not a vote. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 16:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Suggestion Nasa has images of Milton from the ISS that show the scale of the storm, which might be more interesting than the norm image used for hurricanes/typhoons. [11] Masem (t) 16:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Masem: The ISS video doesn't show Milton at its peak nor it shows it nearing landfall. I don't think it's more interesting than the usual image used for hurricanes. INeedSupport :3 21:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support posting immediately Category 5 hurricanes are relatively rare, impact will obviously be severe, and preparations themselves are so serious that they're already noteworthy.–DMartin 22:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well as of ~10 mins ago the eyewall is starting to move onshore, might as well post prior to midnight UTC, unless a consensus is found to ensure sufficient time to rule out the possibility of last-second divine intervention before posting something on ITN. --Slowking Man (talk) 23:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted I've posted with the wording that "Milton ... approaches Florida". We can update that in due course. Schwede66 23:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Landfall is now confirmed by the National Hurricane Center. I suggest an altblurb similar to "Hurricane Milton, the most intense Atlantic hurricane since 2005, makes landfall in Florida." or something of the like. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 00:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Cissy Houston
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Nominated by TheCorriynial (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Mother of Whitney Houston, singer with The Sweet Inspirations which preformed with many acts such as Elvis, and also brief solo career. Issues exist with the article. TheCorriynial (talk) 19:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Article needs ref improvement. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose orange tagged and quite a bit unsourced information. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article needs work. Scuba 14:52, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Zaw Myint Maung
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Week,ABCNews
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Close aide of Aung San Suu Kyi Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:56, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is a little short but it's properly cited. Scuba 15:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Almost there: one CN tag needs a look, and it's generally pretty sparse (his appointment as Chief Minister is mentioned in the lead, but not in the body). UndercoverClassicist T·C 15:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support one cn tag but nothing else major preventing it. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unreferenced DoB. Schwede66 08:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 07:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
[edit]Blurb: Victor Ambros and Gary Ruvkun (both pictured) receive the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their discovery of microRNA. (Post)
News source(s): NYT, Nobel Prize press release
Credits:
- Nominated by Sandstein (talk · give credit)
- Updated by MiRroar (talk · give credit), Liu1126 (talk · give credit), Cfls (talk · give credit) and Intrepidity (talk · give credit)
Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Standard fare for ITN. Putting it up here to discuss whether article quality is adequate. Sandstein 11:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC) / Consolidated with an edit-conflicted nomination by Oceanh (talk) 11:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose for now; the awards sections in both articles are almost entirely uncited.Support Looks good now! Estreyeria (talk) 14:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)- Oppose articles look fine, but neither have a section on winning the nobel prize, I'd be willing to change my vote when those sections are made. Scuba 15:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose until more valid references are added and non-documented personal information is removed. We have to be careful per WP:BLP.--ReyHahn (talk) 16:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait because we should post all of the winners at once. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- We never done such a thing.--ReyHahn (talk) 10:18, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Don't invent new rules. In the past some winners were not even posted, shame on us Varoon2542 (talk) 12:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose both of the bolded articles needs more sources. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
CommentSupport I've added sources for the Awards sections and some other general info in both articles, but there are a few sentences on their research that aren't explicitly sourced, which will likely require citations to their research papers. We should get someone more qualified from WP:BIOL to look at those. I've managed to source the technical parts too. The two articles are now fully cited, so I'm formally supporting. Liu1126 (talk) 12:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)- Support If the Nobel Prize for Medicine is not published before it gets stale, then shame on us — Preceding unsigned comment added by Varoon2542 (talk • contribs) 12:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support nice work! Seems good enough. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. 64.114 etc 00:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Support. Thanks, Liu. Ready to post! 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:F4F3:BC7A:91D8:83C6 (talk) 00:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support per the last four consecutive users. 2605:8D80:401:9506:71A2:F7E:99F4:3379 (talk) 00:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support notable event, you’re good to go. 72.143.234.123 (talk) 01:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support as with others. 74.49.190.204 (talk) 02:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Marking ready. Nice work by the updaters. Good to go to the mainpage. Well done. Ktin (talk) 03:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: We need to post this ASAP to avoid Tuesday's news being the oldest news item and leaving this one stale. This week is frenetic with the Nobel and other news. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I like Ktin's idea Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news#Box_for_Nobel_Prizes. Does anyone want to do this? Natg 19 (talk) 17:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- As I've explained there a box doesn't work because we often have failed to get articles to quality before they are stale. However, we can put List of Nobel laureates into Ongoing for next week or so once these start dropping off the list. Masem (t) 17:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I like Ktin's idea Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news#Box_for_Nobel_Prizes. Does anyone want to do this? Natg 19 (talk) 17:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Masem (t) 17:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Ildar Dadin
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Died on Sunday but looks to have been confirmed today. Article is good length but needs more citations, especially in certain sections. Also needs a "death" section. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose yeah, it needs citations, "Dadin's scheme" section is almost devoid of them. Scuba 15:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready article needs some work in sourcing. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:52, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
2024 Kazakh nuclear power referendum
[edit]Blurb: Kazakhstan votes for its first nuclear power plant (Post)
Alternative blurb: Kazakhstan approves proposed nuclear power plant in referendum
Alternative blurb II: Kazakhstan votes for its first nuclear power plant since their independence from the Soviet Union.
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
- Created and nominated by ShadZ01 (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
ShadZ01 (talk) 11:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: Not notable enough (according to me). High Admiral JMT (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability. There's no way to know if the plant will actually be finished, so ideally it should be nominated then. Also, Kazakhstan isn't under the same international nuclear scrutiny as somewhere like Iran, and this isn't exactly a fusion reactor - nuclear power has been around for many decades, and Kazakhstan is a leading exporter of uranium, so it's not a surprise one gets built. Plus, I doubt it's notable in of itself, beyond being the country's only one, assuming no disaster or international crisis happens, which from a glance at the article seems unlikely with 6 decades of nuclear safety backing it up. As for the steps towards global carbon neutrality, the Ratcliffe-on-Soar Power Station closure from 30 September is sitting in ITN limbo - receiving little attention, with unclear consensus.
- Also, Nuclear power in Kazakhstan states in its first paragraph Kazakhstan already had a nuclear reactor online in the Soviet era, so this isn't really their first. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose we don't usually include referendums unless they're notable enough geopolitically. Scuba 14:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support i think it's important and faily unusual too, a big step from the usual anti nucelar sentiment of the western populace. Kasperquickly (talk) 23:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose We do not post referendums except in some extremely rare cases, this is not one of those cases. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sometimes this gets a little tiring to hear at ITN, but I do think this is an instance of "more suited for WP:DYK". A 5-sec Web glance tells me there are several new reactors globally that had construction begin this year, and more with construction planned to commence in the near-term future. For me, this would lean more towards "ITN stuff" if there had been some long-term global reactor moratorium, and this had been a marked shift, or if KZ was a country known for a past stance of disapproval toward new reactor construction. But to my knowledge KZ just hasn't planned any new construction previously b/c of a mix of economic and political factors and lack of perceived need; please correct if wrong. --Slowking Man (talk) 18:04, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- And under what criterion would this article qualify for DYK, Slowking Man? Schwede66 22:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Idk I don't pay much attention to whatever Byzantine rules they have over there. Life's too short if you ask me. Guessing you need to file your nomination forms in triplicate and ensure you provide at least six notarized copies of the article or else *bzzt* so sorry, no dice? If there's a bunch of arbitrary hoops to jump through or else people making good & useful contributions get denied recognition for their freely given volunteer labor, that's obviously dumb and ought to be tossed. If I were King Of Wikipedia For A Day I'd probably just make DYK something like, nominate whatever, any nom that gets say, 4 or so votes in favor gets run unless some kind of Big No-no were identified (copyright, false info etc). The reading public does not care whether some DYK item happens not to comply with rule 4 clause 14 subsection 3(b)(2) Slowking Man (talk) 01:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- My point is that it's a little tiring to hear from editors who have no idea how DYK works that an article should be nominated there, Slowking Man. Schwede66 04:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Right, good point, importantly, don't want to give nominators wrong impressions. Guess in the future I should put it something like "some Platonic ideal process for recognition and highlighting Interesting Stuff that isn't quite Really Big News (since ITN is pretty space-constrained)" Slowking Man (talk) 01:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- My point is that it's a little tiring to hear from editors who have no idea how DYK works that an article should be nominated there, Slowking Man. Schwede66 04:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Idk I don't pay much attention to whatever Byzantine rules they have over there. Life's too short if you ask me. Guessing you need to file your nomination forms in triplicate and ensure you provide at least six notarized copies of the article or else *bzzt* so sorry, no dice? If there's a bunch of arbitrary hoops to jump through or else people making good & useful contributions get denied recognition for their freely given volunteer labor, that's obviously dumb and ought to be tossed. If I were King Of Wikipedia For A Day I'd probably just make DYK something like, nominate whatever, any nom that gets say, 4 or so votes in favor gets run unless some kind of Big No-no were identified (copyright, false info etc). The reading public does not care whether some DYK item happens not to comply with rule 4 clause 14 subsection 3(b)(2) Slowking Man (talk) 01:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- And under what criterion would this article qualify for DYK, Slowking Man? Schwede66 22:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Support Important, fairly unusual, per Kasperquickly. 2605:8D80:401:9506:71A2:F7E:99F4:3379 (talk) 01:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- Support, also per Kasper. 64.114 etc 01:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Support, important event. Looks good enough. 74.49.190.204 (talk) 02:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support That’s… unusual. Good to go. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:4C8B:D7C5:6DAF:1827 (talk) 03:18, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
October 6
[edit]
October 6, 2024
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
(Review needed) RD: Alejandro Arcos
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jengod (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jengod (talk · give credit) and JTtheOG (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Mexican politician and municipal president of Chilpancingo de los Bravo. Assassinated on 6 October. TJMSmith (talk) 02:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Looking for footnotes in the main prose for date and place of birth and place of death. Hopefully, adding text for these things would bring this short wikibio's word count above 300 and more comfortably into Start Class. --PFHLai (talk) 12:46, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
2024 Tunisian presidential election
[edit]Blurb: Incumbent Tunisian President Kais Saied is declared the winner of the 2024 Tunisian presidential election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Incumbent Tunisian President Kais Saied is declared the winner of the 2024 Tunisian presidential election which was boycotted by the opposition.
Alternative blurb II: Incumbent Tunisian President Kais Saied is declared the winner of the 2024 Tunisian presidential election which was boycotted due to opposition candidates being disqualified.
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by Scu ba (talk · give credit)
- Created by BastianMAT (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: A national election per ITN/R, waited a bit before bringing it here since the article wasn't updated Scuba 16:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb II The election being boycotted should be included but also why. Rynoip (talk) 23:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sincerely asking since I'm uncertain, is it considered a sham election generally by "independent neutral observers"? If so do we blurb those? (In any case that fact should be mentioned in any blurb, I would think) --Slowking Man (talk) 01:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Independent third party election monitors where barred from monitoring due to being NGOs that received foreign funding (a la Russian NGO law). All the opposition parties have called the election a farce, and most media outlets have covered that. All that being said I don't think I've seen a media outlet do their own independent investigation into the fraud. Scuba 12:36, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb II I agree with Rynoip. 64.114 etc 02:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Support alternative blurb 2. Good to post. 2605:8D80:401:9506:71A2:F7E:99F4:3379 (talk) 02:07, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support as this is a general election that deserves to be posted. 74.49.190.204 (talk) 02:32, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support per 74. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:4C8B:D7C5:6DAF:1827 (talk) 03:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb II. ITN/R or not, it does seem the oresident of Tunisia wields enough power to post this election. And I usually don't like to include reactions in such blurbs, seeing as most elections of have some sort, but boycotting by candidates is a big deal in my opinion. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: No prose at present in the results section. SpencerT•C 00:49, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Sefedin Braho
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): A2 News (in Albanian)
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Well referenced although a little short Abcmaxx (talk) 08:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article is currently a stub. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Only 80 words? That's way too stubby for an appearance on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 12:49, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Dave Hobson
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): MSN
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Needs work but long time Congressman.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 15:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose does indeed need work. Scuba 15:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose orange tagged article with only three sources. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:47, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- The first footnote appears at the end of the fourth paragraph of the main prose? So much unsourced materials. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 12:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Johan Neeskens
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport, Reuters, AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:31B8:ECBC:1D01:F0D8 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Deathisallaroundus (talk · give credit) and Albert101032 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Noted Dutch football manager and player. 240F:7A:6253:1:31B8:ECBC:1D01:F0D8 (talk) 15:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Article is in good shape Prodrummer619 (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose most of the article is uncited. Scuba 15:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support there is one cn tag but that shouldn't hold it back from getting posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unreferenced DoB. Schwede66 17:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support the Dutch football magazine Voetbal International unsurprisingly had a comprehensive obituary, fully available for free. [12] It helped me fill in the gaps and then some. Unknown Temptation (talk) 23:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 08:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Sinking of HMNZS Manawanui
[edit]Blurb: The Royal New Zealand Navy ship Manawanui sinks off Upolu, Samoa, after running aground. (Post)
Alternative blurb: At least 12 people are injured as the Royal New Zealand Navy ship Manawanui sinks after grounding off Upolu, Samoa.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
- Updated by IdiotSavant (talk · give credit) and Nick-D (talk · give credit)
Fairly unusual for commissioned navy vessels to sink, particularly Western vessels. This is the first RNZN vessel to sink since WWII. Article could use some updating. Will see what I can add - Dumelow (talk) 18:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've expanded it to a reasonably complete update - Dumelow (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment We generally do not post military vessel accidents, since such are considered part of the duty. --Masem (t) 19:18, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Interested in seeing some discussion on this; I think such sinkings are rare enough (particularly in Western navies). We posted the accidental sinking of the Iranian navy's Kharg in 2021 - Dumelow (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Meaning no disrespect toward Her Majesty and no respect toward the Ayatollah, but IRIS Kharg had been around for longer, seeing more people and doing more things. Her loss was more "significant" for having spent those further 42 years afloat. Sometimes localized rarities just aren't rare enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:49, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Interested in seeing some discussion on this; I think such sinkings are rare enough (particularly in Western navies). We posted the accidental sinking of the Iranian navy's Kharg in 2021 - Dumelow (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose For the Royal New Zealand Navy, sure, not the most pleasant experience. But in terms of recent boat sinkings, count your blessings. Article isn't bad. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- There were more deaths, sure, but are you seriously comparing the sinking of a "locally made wooden boat", as described in your source, to a modern naval vessel? —Cryptic 22:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not in construction, maintenance and several other ways we can (and should) view an object. But as an event, yeah. Both seriously sunk in two newsworthy ways (and one we generally don't post). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:09, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- There were more deaths, sure, but are you seriously comparing the sinking of a "locally made wooden boat", as described in your source, to a modern naval vessel? —Cryptic 22:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose No deaths, small ship, unimportant country (I didn't even know they had a military or a navy) Kasperquickly (talk) 22:37, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- That last part is an absurdly ignorant and snide comment, but from your past history, unfortunately not out of your typical behavior.
- Quit it if you want to continue participating in ITNR, because I can assure you people don’t like it. The Kip (contribs) 23:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well, it got a hearty belly laugh out of me! Schwede66 03:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Kasperquickly Knock it off. If you are unable to contribute to a discussion w/o being rude and obnoxious, then kindly don't. You've been here long enough to know better. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Kasperquickly your on how many warnings again and you continue to do these acts?? learn a lesson please and stop with the offensive rhetoric and personal attacks on others Ion.want.uu (talk) 01:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah mate, real helpful. ITN isn’t for you to show off your ignorance it’s for discussion. I personally disagree with posting this but there are other ways to do it then saying oppose because “the country is unimportant (no such thing)” 27.96.223.193 (talk) 08:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- “the country is unimportant (no such thing)”
- there is such thing though, this palce has been filled with news about elections in pacific micronations with populations of 10,000 people for no other reason than the local editors wanting to virtue signal others how liberal they are Kasperquickly (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think 27 is referring to your (at least prior) idea that there's "no such thing" as a New Zealand Defence Force. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:16, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I get the outrage, especially from the new zealander editors, but I actually honestly had thought New ZEaland was on this list: List of sovereign states without armed forces Kasperquickly (talk) 03:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- The important things are you learned something about the planet, New Zealanders have a fairly hardy sense of humour and Australia doesn't exist. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:10, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I’m not even Kiwi? It’s just unproductive and annoying to see snarky comments on discussion pages. 27.96.223.193 (talk) 12:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I get the outrage, especially from the new zealander editors, but I actually honestly had thought New ZEaland was on this list: List of sovereign states without armed forces Kasperquickly (talk) 03:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- A country is significant becuase it’s a country, and that’s a fact you cannot deny. We post elections because they are elections, we don’t get to pick and choose becuase they are objectively “unimportant” 27.96.223.193 (talk) 12:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think 27 is referring to your (at least prior) idea that there's "no such thing" as a New Zealand Defence Force. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:16, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability - this wasn't exactly the Sinking of the Moskva. 0 deaths and the destruction of an otherwise hardly notable ship with no indication this'll have any affect on the worldwide stage or as precedent for any future event. Before 48 hours ago, the article only had 2 paragraphs of prose, with none indicating particular significance beyond replacing the HMNZS Manawanui (A09) which itself is hardly notable. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 00:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: New Zealand is a popular country, and sinking of navy ships of powerful Western countries are indeed rare. High Admiral JMT (talk) 01:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability - a curious incident, but not an important or apparently significant one. LocoTacoFever (talk) 01:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is in good shape. Not unusual for an article to be greatly expanded (or even created) after an event. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support No casualties, but the unintentional/accidental sinking of a sizable warship is above average notability-wise. The Kip (contribs) 04:56, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose — Insignificant event, non-notable subject.STSC (talk) 05:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)- Weak Oppose. Unfortunate event, but there were no casualties and the crew evacuated the ship safety. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Given her role (removing WW2 ordinance from shallow waters) it's unsurprising this grounding happened. Additionally, no fatalities mean relatively little impact -- other than embarrassment. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:18, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on importance. Ships regularly sink, buses crash, floods flood... Not a major story in international media. Sandstein 14:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: ships (fairly) often sink, but warships don't often -- particularly in the RNZN, which only has a handful of them. I believe this is the first time a Commonwealth naval ship has had to be abandoned since the Falklands, and the first in a long time outside war. Article looks good. UndercoverClassicist T·C 15:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't a warship, it was a support vessel that was tasked with removing unexploded WW2 ordnance. Kcmastrpc (talk) 18:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Unusual "accident" that happened under mysterious circumstances; becoming notable because of the likelihood of oil spill and the potential environmental disaster affecting the locals.[13] — STSC (talk) 17:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Maritime incident (sinking in this case) involving a state vessel. Don't dismiss it because it's an auxiliary (as opposed to a combatant). CoatCheck (talk) 17:36, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Failing to see any real impacts here besides being an expensive incident to clean up for the NZ navy. This actually IS a good item that DYK can cover if there's a bit more expansion of the article in the next few days. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose -- this doesn't seem to be a blurbworthy event. No one died, and it seems not to be being picked up in international news. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose not a major event and has (fortunately) no deaths. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose No deaths, minimal injuries. More a “Did you know that the HMNZS Manawanui is the first ship from New Zealand to sink in peacetime?” 27.96.223.193 (talk) 06:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's not correct, HMNZS Manuka sank in 1952 at its moorings. Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 21:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- It sank in 1952, years after it was decommisioned, and was then a fishing trawler. Nfitz (talk) 21:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's not correct, HMNZS Manuka sank in 1952 at its moorings. Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 21:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. NZ is one of the world’s major nations, the article is in good shape, and warships don’t sink fairly often. 64.114 etc 03:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Support as with my main man. 2605:8D80:401:9506:71A2:F7E:99F4:3379 (talk) 03:24, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Support This accident is unusual, and does "[involve] a [national] state vessel". Green light. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:1407:8831:3685:866E (talk) 03:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
October 5
[edit]
October 5, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Helmut Bauer (bishop)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): katholisch.de
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Auxiliary bishop in Würzburg, Bavaria, influential in church music and ecumenism for Germany. New article, based on the German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment There are several uncited sentences, including one award. Will support once this gets fixed. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please check again, - I could add many more awards with one of the added references. The Requiem tomorrow will be live-streamed, - it would be nice if we managed until then ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Vacant0: FYI. —Bagumba (talk) 07:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Looks better now. Support. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 11:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Vacant0: FYI. —Bagumba (talk) 07:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please check again, - I could add many more awards with one of the added references. The Requiem tomorrow will be live-streamed, - it would be nice if we managed until then ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ifigenia Martínez y Hernández
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Proceso (in Spanish)
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit) and EchoLuminary (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Abcmaxx (talk) 19:14, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose article is teetering on a stub, and almost all the sources are primary sources. Scuba 20:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Support article's problems have been fixed. Scuba 12:18, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose An unsourced early life/education, a load of primary sources for each legislature she was elected to, and then her death. The infobox runs further down the page than any of its text. WP:ITNQUALITY says "Articles should be a minimally comprehensive overview of the subject, not omitting any major items". We have absolutely nothing sourced from a third-party source for any event outside the last of her 5,148 weeks on Earth. Unknown Temptation (talk) 14:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note Expanded the article quite a bit. Hopefully it's up to a minimum standard. EchoLuminary (talk) 06:55, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Scu ba @Unknown Temptation: FYI. —Bagumba (talk) 07:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping! Article looks much better now, will change my vote. Scuba 12:18, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Scu ba @Unknown Temptation: FYI. —Bagumba (talk) 07:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Robert Coover
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [14]
Credits:
- Nominated by Vladimir.copic (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Vladimir.copic (talk) 02:58, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Bibliography uncited. Scuba 04:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Scu ba Are you able to point me to the policy or guideline that says we need citations for a bibliography? Vladimir.copic (talk) 05:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:CS Scuba 05:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Scu ba Can you point to the specific text you are referring to? I had a conversation about this here a few months ago and I don't think there is any consensus on it. This seems to be a fairly robust bibliography although there could be ISBN and publisher information - but this would be a higher standard than the Ernest Hemmingway FA. Vladimir.copic (talk) 05:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't a bibliography its own citation, in that it makes reference to the respective primary sources, which can be verified in any online library catalog? Sandstein 13:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- then cite the online library catalog. Scuba 16:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- We don't do that for any other kind of bibliography? I really don't understand this strange quirk of RD that is so divorced from the practice in the article space, requiring something that we do not even expect of FAs. See: William Gibson, James Joyce, Mary Shelley Vladimir.copic (talk) 04:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Because of how often concerns about uncited -ographies come up as a sticking point in ITN, I once added citations to the filmography of a living actor, thinking this was just the right thing to do, only to be flat-out reverted by an editor who claimed that citations are not necessary if the actor is credited onscreen or on the poster. Now that feels like it was on a rather extreme end of reactions, but I agree that there really does not seem to be any generally accepted best practice here. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 05:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- This exact thing happened to me at Toumani Diabaté and is what highlighted to me this wider issue. Search -ography at any time on this page and you will get someone opposing based on it being uncited - yet the wider community does not agree on whether inline citations are needed. I am considering drafting something to go in MOS:LISTSOFWORKS to address this. Vladimir.copic (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Because of how often concerns about uncited -ographies come up as a sticking point in ITN, I once added citations to the filmography of a living actor, thinking this was just the right thing to do, only to be flat-out reverted by an editor who claimed that citations are not necessary if the actor is credited onscreen or on the poster. Now that feels like it was on a rather extreme end of reactions, but I agree that there really does not seem to be any generally accepted best practice here. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 05:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- We don't do that for any other kind of bibliography? I really don't understand this strange quirk of RD that is so divorced from the practice in the article space, requiring something that we do not even expect of FAs. See: William Gibson, James Joyce, Mary Shelley Vladimir.copic (talk) 04:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- then cite the online library catalog. Scuba 16:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't a bibliography its own citation, in that it makes reference to the respective primary sources, which can be verified in any online library catalog? Sandstein 13:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Scu ba Can you point to the specific text you are referring to? I had a conversation about this here a few months ago and I don't think there is any consensus on it. This seems to be a fairly robust bibliography although there could be ISBN and publisher information - but this would be a higher standard than the Ernest Hemmingway FA. Vladimir.copic (talk) 05:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:CS Scuba 05:13, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Scu ba Are you able to point me to the policy or guideline that says we need citations for a bibliography? Vladimir.copic (talk) 05:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- I added a few sources to the Bibliography section, but I have run out of time today. Most of the bullet-points after the prose remain unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 21:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
October 4
[edit]
October 4, 2024
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Christopher Ciccone
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter, Entertainment Weekly
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:EDA2:6B32:7BE5:1E7C (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Partyclams (talk · give credit), Danielvis08 (talk · give credit) and Apoxyomenus (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American artist, interior decorator and designer. 240F:7A:6253:1:EDA2:6B32:7BE5:1E7C (talk) 01:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks good, albeit heavily supported by a single source. Scuba 03:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Article is good enough, though more work can be done on it. High Admiral JMT (talk) 04:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Sourced, and the article is in a decent shape. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted. Sandstein 14:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Michel Blanc
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Monde, The Guardian, BFMTV
Credits:
- Nominated by Mr. Lechkar (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Notable French actor. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 23:27, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose uncited filmography Scuba 03:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose unsourced filmography and on stage works. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Remove whatever is unsourced if necessary but give him an RD, he's a household name in France and won a male acting award at CannesVaroon2542 (talk) 21:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- No, we don't merely remove verifiable content just to fasttrack a posting. That's gaming the system. —Bagumba (talk) 12:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Greg Landry
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NFL.com, NBC Sports, ABC News, AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:9C21:B9C3:98B5:A380 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Cipherbug (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Detroit Lions quarterback and Chicago Bears assistant coach. 240F:7A:6253:1:9C21:B9C3:98B5:A380 (talk) 12:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article is orange tagged. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: Article is not in good shape. Orange tagged. High Admiral JMT (talk) 08:35, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article is in bad need of citations. Scuba 21:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Billy Shaw
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NFL.com, ESPN, AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:2D9A:96F4:D7E9:E994 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and Blaylockjam10 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Hall of Fame Buffalo Bills guard. 240F:7A:6253:1:2D9A:96F4:D7E9:E994 (talk) 04:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait college section needs some work as it mainly consists of quotes, there is one cn tag and there is basically no indormation about his life between 1969 till 1999 and then from 1999 till his death. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks good from a glance, no orange tags, no CNs that I could see. Scuba 16:02, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Multiple citation tags outstanding.—Bagumba (talk) 16:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support @Admins willing to post ITN: It looks like this article has enough details & references now. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Ongoing Removal: Sudanese civil war (2023–present)
[edit]Nominator's comments: Even if it's still ongoing, it dosen't receive as much coverage that it use to have. That article is also less updated then what it was. --Roncanada (talk) 22:36, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose still a major conflict and receiving news updates This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Every time we do this it reescalates within like 2 months. It's an on and off war, and its brutally horrific. It should be ongoing. Just because the West wont cover it doesn't mean that we shouldnt. Lukt64 (talk) 23:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- To play Devil's Advocate, notability in ITN is judged by amount of English-language reliable sources covering an event. If it's not being covered then that lessens notability, irrespective of how significant the story actually is. Though I do think we should keep this item up. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose there was just a major offensive in Khartoum like a few weeks ago. Scuba 00:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as one of the main editors of the page. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is also getting less coverage than it used to. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- oppose per previous arguments Abo Yemen✉ 12:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Still being updated frequently by western sources. River10000 (talk) 16:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support The list of ongoing armed conflicts lists six major wars, 15 wars and many lesser conflicts. By listing just a few of these in ITN's Ongoing, we give the impression that that's all there is. That's misleading and so it would be better to link to the list. That would provide a continuous gateway to all the numerous conflicts such as the Gang war in Haiti which is discussed below. Cherry-picking particular wars and incidents is not adequate as it thereby ignores all the others. And we don't have space to list everything. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:07, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- You opposed the nomination related to the Haitian gang war though? We have plenty of space, the main obstacle is regular updates and article quality. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Just 3 days ago there was an article in The Guardian about the El Fasher offensive, 2 weeks ago CNN article about the capital city battles, and Al Jazeera article about the resulting refugee crisis. Quite clearly ongoing and widely reported on, even given the difficulties reporting on this part of the world. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:15, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support The ongoing line is meant for stories that are making headlines on a near daily basis, not simply because the event is ongoing. The Ukraine and the Israeli fronts clearly get those. While there are occasional stories from the Sudan civil war, its just too small scale in terms of coverage to be appropriate to maintain in the ongoing line. Masem (t) 12:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support only 50 edits since August, and nothing substantive. Stephen 13:03, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Due to various reasons, this particular conflict is not making that much news. It has only limited number of edits in the last two months when ongoing articles are expected to be updated nearly every day. I don't think timeline article is good enough to be posted on the main page as it seems to have turned into a news ticker. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I see well over 30 articles on the subject of the war in the last 24-48 hours (Searching for Sudan and Soudan...) Yesterday, AfricaNews wrote: "Fighting is expected to intensify as the rainy season draws to a close." (source) For some reason, neither the 29 Sept 2024 NYT article (§) on the UAE's "borrowing" of the Red Crescent symbol, nor the 2 October BBC article mentioning that NYT article have made it to the entry yet... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 14:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Even if there are dozens of news stories of late about it, the lack of significant updates on a near-daily basis to our article itself means it's failing the quality aspect that would be expected for ongoing, and should be removed. But even with the bulk of those stories, the ones I see all fall into more routine coverage that doesn't describe any significant events that are part of it. Masem (t) 15:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. Yes, the pace of editing has slowed a bit. But the article is still getting meaningful updates and sadly the war is continuing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- support per stephen. it is for events with regular updates, clearly it is lacking.Sportsnut24 (talk) 00:36, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: I disagree that an ongoing item needs to require regular updates, but then, as others have noted above, there certainly are things going on in this conflict, particularly if we look more widely than the front pages of western media. The war is important and the war is ongoing: therefore, it is a good candidate for an ongoing item. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:08, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. The Kip (contribs) 04:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. The way I see it, the Timeline article is not written well enough to be at ITN as things currently stand. Too many single sentence updates that are simply "side a did x" or "side b claims y". Timeline or not, the article is still subject to the test of "substantial updates", which I think are lacking here. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- The timeline and the main article are two different entries. The main entry has had significant updates since this was opened. Articles from La Presse, Africa News, RFI, etc. have appeared in the last 24 hours (each of those 3 on different subjects related to the war). They could be added if those who work on the page deem them useful to enrich the reader's understanding... nb: the page is already >300K (no sense bloating for the sake of bloating it) and has had over 178K views in the last 30 days.-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 21:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Still not really convinced to be honest. There has been a substantial update every few days, but a lot of the info being added seems to be background information. Besides one blip about the offensive, I don't really think there have been ANY substantial updates really that are directly related to the conflict itself. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- The timeline and the main article are two different entries. The main entry has had significant updates since this was opened. Articles from La Presse, Africa News, RFI, etc. have appeared in the last 24 hours (each of those 3 on different subjects related to the war). They could be added if those who work on the page deem them useful to enrich the reader's understanding... nb: the page is already >300K (no sense bloating for the sake of bloating it) and has had over 178K views in the last 30 days.-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 21:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Bosnia and Herzegovina floods
[edit]Blurb: At least fifteen people die in floods and landslides in Bosnia and Herzegovina. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, Al-Jazeera, N1Info, Associated Press
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Daß Wölf (talk · give credit)
Article sources count 14 dead in Jablanica and 1 in Fojnica. At least one place was apparently completely buried by debris (Donja Jablanica), so likely many more. The main road between Sarajevo and the Adriatic Sea is closed. Elections are also due this weekend. Daß Wölf 14:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Support on notability, oppose on quality as the article isn't there yet.15 confirmed less than 24 hours after the event happened is awfully high, and a village with its own article buried is what I'd considered newsworthy. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 14:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)- Any suggestions on what to improve? There's more info in the sources I used in the article, but I tried to stick with what's almost surely not going to be refuted. The catastrophe entered the news cycle only several hours earlier today. The people who found the dead in Jablanica are with the mountain rescue service, which probably started at sunrise.
- There should be more info by tomorrow, but I don't believe any of this is going to be struck out. Jablanica might or might not turn out to be the centre of the catastrophe. I'll add the government info from the N1 article; I only relied on BiH and Croatian sources up till now. Daß Wölf 14:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Some suggestions I have for improving the article's quality are to split it into sections and add an infobox. I suggest the article have at least sections for the lede, background, the flooding itself, the aftermath, reactions, and a see also section to similar disasters. As for the infobox, I suggest Template:Infobox flood. If you find any images, either free-to-use or fair use (mutually exclusive), use that as the image parameter. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 14:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- @GeorgeMemulous: Thanks, I've added an infobox. I'll organise it into sections if I find more time later today (but naturally, anybody is welcome). No objections beside the layout? Daß Wölf 15:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Beyond that, I'd say the article length is the other main concern, but I assume once it's split into the aforementioned sections that won't be much of a concern. Everything appears to be sourced. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 15:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- @GeorgeMemulous: Thanks, I've added an infobox. I'll organise it into sections if I find more time later today (but naturally, anybody is welcome). No objections beside the layout? Daß Wölf 15:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Some suggestions I have for improving the article's quality are to split it into sections and add an infobox. I suggest the article have at least sections for the lede, background, the flooding itself, the aftermath, reactions, and a see also section to similar disasters. As for the infobox, I suggest Template:Infobox flood. If you find any images, either free-to-use or fair use (mutually exclusive), use that as the image parameter. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 14:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait/Weak Oppose For now, still unclear on total casualties or economic impact. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article needs some work. Scuba 17:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- The page has been updated and given a typical section layout. Daß Wölf 13:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Quality seems fine, everything's cited, high national impact event. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is of good enough quality and I don't think floods of this level are common in this country. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Kcmastrpc: Economic impact will be pretty high. Due to the enormous damage of the railway, the Federal Railways will suffer a daily loss of circa KM 280,000 (~€143,000) for at least a few months according to this source. The fact that part of the main road, M-17, between the capital Sarajevo and Mostar has suffered major damage as well (the two cities garnering a major amount of economic cash flow), will most definitely add to the financial loss. These are the most damaging floods since the ones in 2014 and this is an enormous deal as it was completely unexpected. Bakir123 (talk) 14:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 19:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
October 3
[edit]
October 3, 2024
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
|
RD: Pierre Christin
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Figaro, El Pais
Credits:
- Nominated by alexcalamaro (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
French comic author known per Valérian. Article not ready yet. Alexcalamaro (talk) 07:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready. Article is too short and needs citations. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait three cn tags needs to be resolved. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- We do not post stubs. Schwede66 17:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Current size is 1345 B (214 words).—Bagumba (talk) 12:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 Pont-Sondé attack
[edit]Blurb: An attack on the Haitian town of Pont-Sondé by a gang leaves at least 70 people dead and another 50 injured. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, AP
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Borgenland (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Breaking news around the world now, death and injury toll still only estimated at the moment. Only just started the article so help with expanding most welcome: need background, attack, response and aftermath sections ideally. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose on quality Article is a stub and needs major expansion. Would support on significance due to the high number of deaths and injuries.Weak support Article's not as long as I'd like it to be for something of this magnitude, but it's good enough for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Oppose currently Article is one paragraph, needs major expansion and if that happens I’ll change my vote to support. 27.96.223.193 (talk) 08:06, 4 October 2024 (UTC)- Support I’d like to change my vote to support thanks. 27.96.223.193 (talk) 12:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Seems to be a routine incident for Haiti and so WP:NEWSEVENT applies. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose article is a stub. Scuba 14:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Support Issues with the article have been fixed, no longer a stub and well cited. Quick glance at media coverage and the event looks significant enough. Also it's been a while since ITN updated the situation in Haiti. Scuba 00:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)- Oppose. Stub, and this does “[seem] to be a routine incident”. 64.114 etc 15:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose per Andrew, Scuba and 64. 2604:3D08:9476:BE00:181F:B893:ADD2:6921 (talk)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Also oppose per 2604. 2605:8D80:401:9041:BC0A:88E5:52B2:275 (talk) 15:28, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Suspected sock per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/64.114 etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Oppose article is a stub and is only around 150 words long, far too short for a blurb.ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)- Support per the discussion. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 09:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Update No longer a stub, thank you to those who expanded the article. As to those who say this is "routine" (if a town-wide gang attack can ever be that); the gang warfare centers around Port-au-Prince and Cap Haitien not remote smaller towns, this is definitely outside the norm. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:05, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sardonic comment: sorry, come back if a white person dies, otherwise not hittin' WP:MINIMUMDEATHS here. (Advice for those outside the Global North "wanting" to "make it onto" ITN: [15]) Hmm, Helene got deaths-blurbed when its tally hit the century mark—though to be fair it already was blurbed as a Major Storm. I wonder where the line is for that, maybe Category 3, the NHC's for "major hurricane" vs just "hurricane"? "Fun" thought exercise how many people would a Cat 2 storm have to kill in Haiti, to get on ITN, if it didn't affect anywhere else? (Stick a pin in this comment, for next weekish when then-likely-Trop Storm Kirk warp-5s over to W Europe, and how ITN reacts towards that, to contrast.) --Slowking Man (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait/Lean Support Article still need a bit more work, but given the causalities and based on the international reaction I'm leaning towards support. Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality per above - while not a stub, article is still far too short. Support on notability - even with the ongoing crisis, a gang shooting that kills upwards of 70 people is anything but "routine." The Kip (contribs) 19:58, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Event in the news, endorse (conditional on quality as usual). Bitter regretful observation: people might want to keep eye on (T·E·H·L·R) Haitian Civil War for if/when it gets turned to an article. --Slowking Man (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability, I would have to agree with Slowking Man's and note the blasé attitudes towards this event by some individuals reflecting trends that have been documented among media portrayals of certain communities. Clearly a significant event. Ornithoptera (talk) 06:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Highlighting this particular incident still wouldn't give the big picture. The list of ongoing armed conflicts indicates that this is just a drop in the ocean. The gang wars in Mexico generate more deaths than the gangs in Haiti and then there are other major wars too. If you want to right great wrongs, then you have your work cut out for you. Our job as an encyclopedia is to summarise all this, not to dwell on the detail. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- The larger issue is that WP is not a newspaper, and not every single event needs an article or a separate article. This specific event looks like part of the ongoing violence in Haiti and while it was noted in the day-to-day media, likely will not have any substantive difference from all the other violence in Haiti that necessitates a separate article, much less being ITN. Masem (t) 13:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think here is a larger point some of us are kind of working towards: Okay, now, take a view like those expressed in the replies preceding mine, and apply to other subjects and kinds of events. Do we really need to mention every cyclone that kills a bunch of people and give it its own article? What about floods in Europe or China or India or insert place here? Heat waves? Storms happen, people die, big deal, people die all the time. Put it in some kinda "storms in $YEAR" article. ("Don't let $PERSON's death get you down. People die all the time. Why, you could wake up dead tomorrow. ...Well. goodnight!") Philosophical/rhetorical query: What is it that makes "big storms and their effects" more intrinsically ITN-worthy vs "humans directly killing other humans in $PLACE"?
- Fun exercise: reflect on this given that us cranking up our planet's temperature is inevitably going to lead to much more of this stuff. What's gonna be the response when three/four-digit death tolls from cyclones become a routine annual event? (Excerpts from Future Wikipedia: "The 2039 tropical storm death season begins in the Northern Hemisphere. Wikipedia reminds those located below 40 degrees north to review their disaster and evacuation planning, stay informed, and promptly follow instructions from relevant authorities.") Not to mention all the inevitable mass migration/conflict/wars likely to result. (More excerpts: "Ongoing events: Current sub-temperate territorial conflicts") Ooh, nice informative & relevant map: pop. density/latitude. --Slowking Man (talk) 18:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC) (Phrase of the day: "shifting baselines" --Slowking Man (talk) 18:04, 5 October 2024 (UTC))
- Replying to own comment to note that "floods in part of Europe" has been apparently just posted to ITN. (Bonus points: from a non-English-as-first-lang part!) Compare-and-contrast current death toll. More data points for calibration of WP:MINIMUMDEATHS? ("Storms and floods happen, people die...") --Slowking Man (talk) 19:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support The flood stub and this stub are about the same size (by any name). I didn't think the flood one would make it. Now that it has and with this event rarer and deadlier, holding it down would definitely appear to suggest what it looks like about our standards and practices. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:22, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- InedibleHulk, you would know (or at least should know) that we do not post stubs. The 2024 Bosnia and Herzegovina floods article wasn't a stub (any longer) when I posted it. Neither is this article a stub any longer. Whilst those assessments are not an exact science, I note that they no longer have stub tags, and on the talk pages, they are both rated start class; I agree with those ratings. Hence, the basic premise from which you start your argument (if we post the other stub, we might as well post this stub, too) is wrong.
- Blurbs get posted when there is at least rough consensus to do so. To my mind, this article is good enough now. It cannot get posted, though, because that's not what the consensus says. There are many comments above that the topic is notable but the article (at the time of voting) was a stub. That's now changed, but editors need to say so. Schwede66 03:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I thought adding "(by any name)" would be enough (sorry). Whatever we call this short article or that brief overview, you posted the latter after two supports. Given the expansion and de facto "Wait !votes", I now count more than two supportive of publicizing this attack (including your own) and know some admins who'd rightly discount a few of those opposes as poor arguments; if any of them are watching, I suggest posting sooner than later. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Needs attention If those who opposed on quality can please have a look again if the current quality is enough now to change your votes given the article has been majorly expanded. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Abcmaxx: Am I to understand your prior Update and Needs attention emboldenings as support in itself? If so, I think you'll need to embolden the word "Support" for it to technically count toward "consensus". At least that's what I've gathered from
editors need to say so
. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)- I'm the nominator though. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Good point, my bad; @PrinceofPunjab: You're not, are you? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:21, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Scu ba: I missed your name in the SEAOFNUMBERS; would you care to start again? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @InedibleHulk: Thanks! Changed my vote. Scuba 00:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @TDKR Chicago 101: I have no idea how I missed you starting first, but that's no excuse; have things changed? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm the nominator though. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Abcmaxx: Am I to understand your prior Update and Needs attention emboldenings as support in itself? If so, I think you'll need to embolden the word "Support" for it to technically count toward "consensus". At least that's what I've gathered from
- Weak support. Still quite short, but this attack seems pretty noteworthy, even in the context of the larger gang war (which I still believe has been underrepresented here at ITN), so I think the article state is good enough. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Schwede66: is consensus strong enough now for posting? Abcmaxx (talk) 09:56, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is no longer a stub at 2264 characters. It appears well-cited. Ready to post. Thriley (talk) 17:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 19:05, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Typhoon Krathon
[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.
Blurb: Typhoon Krathon leaves at least 18 people dead in the Philippines and Taiwan. (Post)
News source(s): Barrons, Inquirer, France 24, AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by HurricaneEdgar (talk · give credit)
The storm death toll has risen to 18, and the articles are in good shape. HurricaneEdgar 19:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Looking at the scope of deaths, inuries and damages, this doesn't seem like as significant storm compared to other major typhoons. -Masem (t) 19:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is in good shape, and the Typhoon has made landfall and caused significant casualties which checks both boxes for ITN inclusion in my book Scuba 20:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:NEWSEVENT. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: article looks good, and the event is notable. I don't see that NEWSEVENT is an issue here: major storms which cause significant loss of life generally meet GNG, and that guideline has Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources: that seems to be met here. UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Very notable disaster. Though death toll not significant, the destruction is. High Admiral JMT (talk) 23:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, not significant, low casualties, low damage, spent most of it's time over the sea. Stephen 04:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Stephen. The Kip (contribs) 19:59, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose has Low damages and casualties. TyphoonAmpil [citation needed] 04:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: This typhoon has broken the observation record in Taiwan according to the local news.[16][17][18]--Sinsyuan✍️🌏🚀 06:07, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support This has a death toll that’s similar the death toll of the floods in Bosnia, so it seems notable enough for a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 12:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
(Ready?) British Indian Ocean Territory / Chagos Archipelago sovereignty dispute
[edit]Blurb: The United Kingdom agrees to cede sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius (Post)
Alternative blurb: The United Kingdom agrees to cede sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius
Alternative blurb II: The United Kingdom agrees to cede sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius in exchange for the territory being leased back to the UK for the initial period of 99 years.
Alternative blurb III: In conformity with international law, the United Kingdom completes the decolonisation of Mauritius through a bilateral treaty between both countries
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Chipmunkdavis (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ornithoptera (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
CMD (talk) 10:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for Significance and Oppose on Quality "The deal is still subject to finalisation of a treaty but both sides have vowed to complete this as quickly as possible." Now, I know times move faster than they did when some natives treated and vowed with the Crown. But still, even if it doesn't take centuries this time, it could be months or years before anything comes of this. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Agree the transfer itself would be newsworthy, but I nominated feeling the reaching of an agreement was significant in its own right. It follows about a decade of concerted diplomatic efforts by Mauritius. The ceding of territory is a rare enough event. The last was probably the 2016 agreement for Egypt to transfer two islands to Saudi Arabia? CMD (talk) 11:14, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, I hear you. As you say, though, this next step follows about a decade. The ceding itself will happen if it happens, and that's final (to me). InedibleHulk (talk) 11:18, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Agree the transfer itself would be newsworthy, but I nominated feeling the reaching of an agreement was significant in its own right. It follows about a decade of concerted diplomatic efforts by Mauritius. The ceding of territory is a rare enough event. The last was probably the 2016 agreement for Egypt to transfer two islands to Saudi Arabia? CMD (talk) 11:14, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Major power is ceding a large part of its territory to another country, very big news. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: This is quite a surprising move from Britain after blocking the transfer of sovereignty for so long, however there are some details that need clarification such as when will the transfer come into effect. Tofusaurus (talk) 11:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait or at least alter "agrees" to "offers". This will only happen if Mauritius agrees to a treaty that allows the status quo indefinitely, more or less, on Diego Garcia. That may be objectionable to Mauritius, and they may refuse to sign off.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- For what it's worth this was reportedly a joint statement also issued by the Mauritian PM, they're presumably as on-board as the UK. CMD (talk) 14:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- (Based on the report) this wasn't a unilateral offer by the UK. It's the high level agreement after negotiation with the agreement of all parties (UK, Mauritius & USA). The 99 years lease would had been agreed to as a term by Mauritius. -- KTC (talk) 17:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait and Support: Definitely major. However, plans have not yet been finalized. High Admiral JMT (talk) 12:51, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- The updates to the article were reverted; the only remaining relevant change is the removal of a statement that negotiations were halted in December 2023. We can't possibly post this until that's resolved. —Cryptic 13:18, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's a piece in the lead now (as of 13:45); not sure if that counts. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support This is a textbook example of a notable story of high encyclopaedic value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance This is a major change to the map. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 13:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support a major international news and is blurbworthy and should be posted when articles are updated. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support once fully cited: not sure we need to wait for it to actually happen; the decision is noteworthy enough. UndercoverClassicist T·C 14:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now due to quality issues with the article and lack of significant updates to it, but I do Support on significance once those are resolved ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support once citation issues are cleared up Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:51, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support resolution of a long-standing diplomatic issue, proposing ALT blurb to link to the Chagos Archipelago sovereignty dispute. Ornithoptera (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- I’d rather wait until the treaty is finalized. Since there seems to be a lot of support for posting this, I’d prefer the alt blurb if this is posted. I’d say that highlighting the Chagos Archipelago sovereignty dispute would be the most important aspect of a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Pretty historic momement for the people of those islands and it's also a notable international news story in general. GWA88 (talk) 18:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support – I would say "to return sovereignty ..." STSC (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mauritius was never sovereign when they administered Chagos Scuba 19:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Would "transfer sovereignty" be a more neutral wording? Ornithoptera (talk) 20:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm fine with "ceding sovereignty" because that's what most publications are saying. Scuba 19:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Would "transfer sovereignty" be a more neutral wording? Ornithoptera (talk) 20:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Mauritius was never sovereign when they administered Chagos Scuba 19:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support goodbye British Indian Ocean Territory, one of the few remaining English colonies. Scuba 19:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- There are no English colonies remaining, England as an independent polity was dissolved in 1707. The Indian Ocean Territory is also classified as a territory rather than a colony (the legal status of 'colony' was dissolved in 1982). PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Awesome, saying it "totally isn't a colony" doesn't magically make it stop being a colony. Also the Scottish Welsh and Irish weren't the ones making the colonies, the English where. Scuba 19:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Y Wladfa and Darien scheme might make for interesting reading; and plenty of Scots (especially) were involved in British colonial projects after the union. None of which is to deny the poor treatment of the Scots, Irish, and Welsh by the English within the Union - but do get your facts right. GenevieveDEon (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yup you're so right, the sole Scottish colony (that failed), and an group of welsh immigrants are totally the same as to what the English did around the world. Scuba 16:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- See John A. Macdonald#Colonial leader, 1858–1864 for a more "succesful" campaign. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yup you're so right, the sole Scottish colony (that failed), and an group of welsh immigrants are totally the same as to what the English did around the world. Scuba 16:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- This isn't an accurate assessment of British colonial history. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Y Wladfa and Darien scheme might make for interesting reading; and plenty of Scots (especially) were involved in British colonial projects after the union. None of which is to deny the poor treatment of the Scots, Irish, and Welsh by the English within the Union - but do get your facts right. GenevieveDEon (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Awesome, saying it "totally isn't a colony" doesn't magically make it stop being a colony. Also the Scottish Welsh and Irish weren't the ones making the colonies, the English where. Scuba 19:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- There are no English colonies remaining, England as an independent polity was dissolved in 1707. The Indian Ocean Territory is also classified as a territory rather than a colony (the legal status of 'colony' was dissolved in 1982). PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance but wait until the orange tag on the target article is fixed. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 20:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very significant news, but best to wait until all plans are finalised per above. Editor 5426387 (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support noting the ceding of a remnant of the Old Empire. SerialNumber54129 23:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Tentative support but Wait until it is fully agreed upon and completed. --Masem (t) 00:21, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- oppose this is pure fluff, nothing changes. Formal sovereignty replaced with a 99-year-long lease. Does anyone really expect we'd still have nation states with borders like the uk, the mauritus or indeed the US (that is the actual primary user of that military base which is at the source of whole dispute) come 2123? lol. Kasperquickly (talk) 06:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- The 99-year lease applies to the base on Diego Garcia; the transfer of sovereignty applies to the entire territory, and Mauritius has indicated that they'd support resettling Chagossians on the other islands of the archipelago. And the rest of your comment convinces me that you are not bringing a serious understanding of international relations to bear here. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance as this is a pretty big moment in decolonisation of the UK's remaining territories. Article still needs work though. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait and support once the treaty is fully finalized. Major significance, new change in the map. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:29, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance but wait both for better article quality, or potentially even an article on the transfer itself. –DMartin 15:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- support it already mauritius sovereignty now. obviously administrative change will not happen so quick, but legally done.Sportsnut24 (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment ALT2 is incorrect, and implies that the UK retains control of the entirety of the Archipelago rather than the lease on Diego Garcia. Ornithoptera (talk) 18:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Significant moment geopolitically. Lean waiting until the treaty is formalized, however. The Kip (contribs) 20:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding quality issues raised above, the History section has been changed significantly, and I believe the yellow tag is no longer applicable. CMD (talk) 06:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - I don't agree to the wording "to cede sovereignty" in the blurbs. It implies that the UK was the rightful owner and they were forced to do so. Many sources including BBC use the words "hand over". STSC (talk) 07:40, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- These seem functionally synonymous. "cede" means to give up, it doesn't imply legitimacy either way. At any rate, the UK was effectively forced to turn over the territory, so that implication if read is accurate. CMD (talk) 09:09, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has its own neutrality standard; IMO, "hand over" does sound more neutral than "cede". STSC (talk) 04:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not sure how any neutrality standard is affected by this. CMD (talk) 05:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has its own neutrality standard; IMO, "hand over" does sound more neutral than "cede". STSC (talk) 04:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree, you don't have to be forced to cede something. Scuba 16:03, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe unwillingly. STSC (talk) 04:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- These seem functionally synonymous. "cede" means to give up, it doesn't imply legitimacy either way. At any rate, the UK was effectively forced to turn over the territory, so that implication if read is accurate. CMD (talk) 09:09, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait as per WP:TOOSOON. The treaty hasn't been signed or ratified yet. The UK could still pull out and retain the BIOT. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:27, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. A major country giving part of its territory to another country is highly significant and notable. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait/Oppose. Noteworthy enough, but I agree with the contingent here in belief that the best course of action would be to wait for official ratification of the agreement, or, even better, the actual date of the hand-over to post. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance Would support posting twice, once now and once when the handover is official. Territorial cessions like this are quite rare are the exact kind of news that we ought to feature at ITN. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Major development in decolonization and an end to a decades-long territorial dispute. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 22:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- I note that both target articles are orange-tagged. The British Indian Ocean Territory seems like the easier one to untag. Would somebody like to have a go? Schwede66 08:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Mauritian here. Why not use the terminology used by the courts and the foreign offices of both countries and by insisting on why it is considered a watershed moment in international rule of law?. "In conformity with international law, the United Kingdom completes the decolonisation of Mauritius through a bilateral treaty between both nations"Varoon2542 (talk) 21:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Varoon2542, we should not worry about the hook wording in the first instance. This item is about to drop off this page without getting posted because both target articles are orange-tagged. If you'd like to see this posted, I suggest you put some immediate effort into the issues that caused those tags. When done, say so here and then we can finesse the hook wording. Schwede66 08:31, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- The orange tag issues for the BIOT article were fixed days ago. CMD (talk) 13:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Varoon2542, we should not worry about the hook wording in the first instance. This item is about to drop off this page without getting posted because both target articles are orange-tagged. If you'd like to see this posted, I suggest you put some immediate effort into the issues that caused those tags. When done, say so here and then we can finesse the hook wording. Schwede66 08:31, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very significant geopolitical moment; land cessations of this kind are increasingly uncommon in the 21st century. This is notable now, and it may not be in the news anymore when the symbolic 'finalization' occurs later on. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Big news. Anyone know what will happen to the .io domain? Will it disappear? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unclear The source says
The deal – reached after years of negotiations - will see the UK hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius in a historic move.
But the blurb sayscede sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory
, which seems like more than Chagos. I'm not knowledgable in this area, but seems stronger sourcing is needed to distinguish what is agreed to be handed over, if it is indeed the BIOT.—Bagumba (talk) 05:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)- The British Indian Ocean Territory and the Chagos Archipelago are the same place, like say Hawaii and the Hawaiian islands, only with a much more different name. British Indian Ocean Territory is the formal name for the polity that was created when the Chagos archipelago was split from the colony of Mauritius (along with some other island groups, but these are no longer part of the BIOT). See later in the source: "the UK has faced rising diplomatic isolation over its claim to what it refers to as the British Indian Ocean Territory". CMD (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Update size For the alt blurbs, Chagos Archipelago sovereignty dispute is bolded, but it only has a one-sentence update. WP:ITNUPDATE reads:
The update at British Indian Ocean Territory meets this.—Bagumba (talk) 05:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)The decision as to when an article is updated enough is subjective, but a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable.
October 2
[edit]
October 2, 2024
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Sports
|
RD: Christopher Charles Benninger
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Indian Express
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:E8D8:9FD9:8A77:E4D6 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Tatiraju.rishabh (talk · give credit) and Strattonsmith (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American-born Indian architect. 240F:7A:6253:1:E8D8:9FD9:8A77:E4D6 (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose there is an orange COI and NPOV tag. The early life section have no information about the subject's early life. Sourcing is not great as some of the sources are dead, primary or have no information about the subject. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Complete brain mapping of fruit fly
[edit]Blurb: Scientists complete a full brain map of the common fruit fly. (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, The Guardian, Nature (peer reviewed paper)
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
- Created by Iwaterpolo (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Bremps (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Best likely article to include this but currently lacks this update. Masem (t) 17:59, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
*Strong oppose on quality - article hasn't been updated at all since May 2024. A timeline article, or an article about this specific brainmap would be best here, but to my knowledge none exists. Not sure as to notability, but leaning weak support. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 18:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC) Quality issues are more or less resolved, overall support. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 11:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- I plan to do the update if it is not done in the next 12 to 24 hr. On mobile so can't do an effective job of it until on real keyboard. Masem (t) 18:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Expansion is done. I think there are free use images based on the papers, but have to try to figure out best source to work from . --Masem (t) 05:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- I plan to do the update if it is not done in the next 12 to 24 hr. On mobile so can't do an effective job of it until on real keyboard. Masem (t) 18:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose belongs in a DYK not an ITN. Scuba 20:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- It is not eligible for DYK, it is not at GA within the past 7 days, nor expanded 5x, or new enough. Ornithoptera (talk) 20:31, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's in the news and seems quite significant. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support on notability, oppose on quality. Noting that the main article is not eligible for DYK, although the possibility of creating a new standalone article (either for ITN or DYK) could be considered. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose – Fascinating subject, but I think our article doesn't quite represent it in a way that's worth featuring. I appreciate the singular new paragraph, but it doesn't really feel like enough. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 16:07, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: In the news and interesting. C F A 💬 22:16, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose it might generate some modest headlines, but the scientific value is rather thin. 2A02:8071:6362:54A0:C01A:1F41:5B33:E7AB (talk) 07:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Target article does not effectively demonstrate the significance of this discovery. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: Susie Berning
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USGA.org, ESPN, AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:F8A2:3A7B:85FC:16AA (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mohamad Darilin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American Hall of Fame professional golfer. 240F:7A:6253:1:F8A2:3A7B:85FC:16AA (talk) 02:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready: mostly uncited. Would support once fixed. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:16, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose article has only three sources. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
October 1
[edit]
October 1, 2024
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
Mark Rutte installed as Secretary General of NATO
[edit]Blurb: Former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte (pictured) is installed as the Secretary General of NATO, succeeding Jens Stoltenberg (Post)
Alternative blurb: Mark Rutte (pictured) succeeds Jens Stoltenberg as Secretary General of NATO
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by Anomynous (talk · give credit)
- Updated by WikiGuff (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Weak support Neither ITNR nor a national leader, but certainly an extremely influential position, and Stoltenberg had been SG for a decade. The Kip (contribs) 00:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Although not a national leader, the Secretary General of NATO is still an important and influential position. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Support Good Candidate, Per nom. TyphoonAmpil [citation needed] 03:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support(?) Nato Secretary General falls into a grey-area for ITN/R, but I think(?) we included Ursula von der Leyen being re-elected EU Commission president, so we should include Rutte too. Scuba 04:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support: The position of NATO Secretary General is pretty important, according to me. High Admiral JMT (talk) 07:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The article is orange-tagged and the position seems a rather bland, bureaucratic one. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, the Secretary General of NATO is a bland and bureaucratic role? Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- That's right. The article makes it fairly clear that this is a civil service position -- one of facilitation rather than making military or political decisions. Those rest with the member countries. For example, there's currently a crisis in the Middle East with many missiles flying around. Does NATO have a position or part in this? It appears that various members are involved in various ways such as shooting down the missiles but NATO and its bureaucracy don't seem to be significant players. Even in Ukraine, which is closer to home, it doesn't seem that NATO has been as significant as the actions of individual members seem to have been taken on a national and separate basis. Even the EU seems to have been more coherent there. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:03, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, the Secretary General of NATO is a bland and bureaucratic role? Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality the main article is orange tagged with multiple cn tags. But, when those have been resolved, I will support the blurb. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support once fully cited: I might have a go at adding some. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability as the NATO Secretary General seems like an important role, as the leader of the largest military alliance in the world. Oppose on quality as there is still an orange tag and 15 CN tags too. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 20:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support on significance Once citation issues are resolved. Arguably a role more significant than many national leadership changes we post. AusLondonder (talk) 20:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Theoretically support since NATO’s Secretary-General is an important position, but oppose for now due to quality issues. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:45, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment When or if NATO goes to war, he'll be subservient to the non-secretarial generals in his ranks. That's not to diminish his perceived power right now, mind you. I'm led to believe it's quite substantial. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality Rutte's article needs some ref work. Once fixed, I'd support posting especially given how NATO's presence has been more talked about in the news in recent news. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on significance. Principally a secretarial position, appointed, which is serving as the head of a steering committee (albeit an important one). Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose — Not even ITNR, who cares about the head or tail of NATO. STSC (talk) 18:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Probably the 32 member nations of NATO which contribute ~55% of global military funding and 45.65% of the global GDP. Scuba 20:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- I visited the International Maritime Organization recently. This has 176 members which represent most of the world. It's responsible for the world's shipping and so quite important for vital commerce and trade. It has a Secretary-General too – Arsenio Dominguez – and he was appointed earlier this year. There are lots of international agencies like this with lots of staff and so forth. But are their staff changes significant or not? You can't really tell until they have been in post for a while and so determine whether they have made a difference. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Probably the 32 member nations of NATO which contribute ~55% of global military funding and 45.65% of the global GDP. Scuba 20:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose There are many other alliances and supranational organisations in the world, so it's really unnecessary to single out NATO and give it more importance. Furthermore, this position is largely ceremonial as this person doesn't wield any significant power. The decisions whether the United States or Turkey will go to wars are simply made by their presidents.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:05, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality, support once improved on notability article needs some work. I honestly don't know where those editors have been hiding for the past thirty years (or two) who doubt NATO's stature and the importance of what NATO's top leader does and says. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:27, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Over the past thirty years, several major NATO members have been at war (one its longest). That mostly stopped while Stoltenberg was attending meetings, issuing memoranda and all that high and mighty hidden stuff. In peacetime, it's the many other industry bigwigs whose technically unsexy jobs "really" matter. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- It might also help you understand others' apathy to wonder whether his two "big" vows (to work against Russian aggression and with the American president) are things NATO already routinely does. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:00, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready for the usual reason. Support on significance. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:44, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
US port strike
[edit]Blurb: Dockworkers strike at East and Gulf Coast ports in the United States (Post)
Alternative blurb: 45,000 ILA dockworkers go on strike at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports in the United States.
Alternative blurb II: 45,000 dockworkers of the International Longshoremen's Association strike across United States Gulf and East Coast ports.
Alternative blurb III: The ILA and USMX negotiate to suspend a three-day labour strike at US Gulf and East Coast ports by over 45,000 dockworkers.
News source(s): (initial CNBC report), (post-strike Reuters report)
Credits:
- Nominated by Interstellarity (talk · give credit)
This may impact supply and inflation and is newsworthy. Interstellarity (talk) 21:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - this may not last long. And hasn't exactly been getting anything other than local reporting. What other strikes have we ITN'ed? I'd have thought it would have had to be more of a general strike, or something unusual like the 1981 US Air Traffic Controllers strike, when they simply fired all the strikers. If we ITNed all similar strikes, we'd have a few a month just for France! :) Nfitz (talk) 21:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment US East Coast / Gulf ports process close to half of the value of imports coming into the USA, and if I'm not mistaken, the US is the biggest importer on the planet. Also, I believe we blurbed the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike which was entertainment workers, not people who oversaw trade. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 21:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike was blurbed in July 2023: see the posted blurb page. There was also coincidentally a blurb for a large-scale strike in France earlier that month. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 21:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Purely by the numbers, a French strike does not have the same economic impact as one that impacts the entire East and Gulf Coast ports, which as noted process about half of all imports/exports. IF this lasts long (more than a few days), it could be one of the largest strikes in decades. Wqwt (talk) 22:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- If this lasts long, then it can be reposted. Obviously strikes in bigger countries have bigger local impacts. That doesn't make it ITN. Surely the relative impact of the Canadian rail strike (which shut down virtually the entire rail network) was bigger - but not even nominated. Nfitz (talk) 16:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Canadian rail strike was nominated. It was mainly opposed due to article quality issues & also b/c the strike ended too quickly. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- If this lasts long, then it can be reposted. Obviously strikes in bigger countries have bigger local impacts. That doesn't make it ITN. Surely the relative impact of the Canadian rail strike (which shut down virtually the entire rail network) was bigger - but not even nominated. Nfitz (talk) 16:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support – From the Impact section of the article, we can see the massive effects this strike has. First strike of this sort in nearly fifty years. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 21:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- There have been many, many, dockworkers strikes. It isn't even the first one this week - Montreal. The only difference is the rest of us don't rush here as fast as we can for local news. Nfitz (talk) 21:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Wait for a while to see if this is resolved very quickly (i.e. under 24 hours), but otherwise strong support. (argument moved below). GeorgeMemulous (talk) 21:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Wait/WeakSupport If this goes longer than 72h then the impact could be rather severe. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It looks like there isn't going to be a resolution to this anytime soon and the fact this story has dropped off the front pages of many MSM outlets has me suspicious. Blurb it! Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Wait/support per Kcmastrpc and George.The Kip (contribs) 00:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose now that the strike has ended. The Kip (contribs) 20:02, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hold for now, suggest 48h as the threshold for a revisit This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 00:47, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for at least 48/72 hr to see how this develops and how the wind blows in terms of negotiations to end it. The Impact section should likely be expanded to explain better about how much cargo goes through the eastern ports relative to other ports (known factors), as that will help put the dollar figures mentioned in better perspective. --Masem (t) 01:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Significant event that could have an important impact on the US economy and the US election. Tradediatalk 04:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Those of you who support are relying on conjecture and forecasts. Here we cannot rely on crystal balls: we must wait for a global and noticeable economic impact. For now it is something sectorial, local and exclusively newsworthy and Wikipedia is not a news portal. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- An issue with a case like this is that the onset of the strike will be covered by the news, but that when the impacts start to actually occur, it will be a trickle of news and very difficult to set a point where it could be then considered "in the news". We obviously don't want to rush but here's a case where there's multiple high quality sources expressing very likely results should the strike persist, so it makes sense to post at this stage (but as noted above, after being sure the strike isn't likely to resolve quickly). — Masem (t) 12:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Soft Support politically relevant, and the only glaring issues is that it needs more content in some sections. Scuba 20:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Support altblurb:45,000 ILA dockworkers go on strike at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports in the United States.
It's been over 24 hours since the strike commenced and a quick search for "when will the port strike end" gives no indication it will be an affair that will be resolved quickly. CNBC estimates a weeklong strike at East Coast / Gulf ports could cause up to 3.6 billion in economic loss, and compare that to 6.5 billion over a full 105 days for the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, which was also blurbed. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)- Maybe I’m just being pedantic but I think “…dockworkers strike at…” is more correct than “go on strike”. –DMartin 03:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Changing my vote to Strong support per Reuters: No negotiations to end the strike are scheduled, and Joe Biden, the US president, is putting his support behind the ILA. This may truly be a long one. Also, as per economic loss, JP Morgan now estimates the strike could cost the nation up to $5 billion USD a day, significantly above the initial CNBC estimate of 3.7 billion in one week. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:30, 3 October 2024 (UTC)- Altblurb 2 proposed, per @User:dmartin969's suggestion. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:33, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not surprising that he'd put his support behind them; it's a month to go before the general election, and the last thing he wants is to lose the sizable union demographic on failing to take a stance with a story like this. For that reason, I do not believe his support makes the strike inherently more significant. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:34, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- My stance is is that this is as opposed to no stance or an anti-union one taken by the president, had this happened last year. The president's stance is a not insignificant argument that this strike will go longer, whether or not it was done for political advantage. Besides, it's not going in the blurb. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 13:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait then Support - If this continues over an extended period of time then this will be one of the most significant strikes in the last few years. Already all over the news PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is very likely to have a significant effect on not just the US economy, but the global economy. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:31, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - This will likely be significant and companies are known for their greed, there is a very high chance that the protests last longer than 3 days and start affecting the global supply chain. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 05:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - This is a big one, comparable to the air traffic controller's strikes in the 70s and 80s, which also had similarly broad impacts. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:32, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - It's been 48 hours and the situation hasn't yet been resolved. The United States is the world's biggest economy and this strike affects the whole Eastern US. This will surely have a large impact. -insert valid name here- (talk) 17:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Becoming a big issue maybe even causing riots if it's seriously disrupting the supply chain. STSC (talk) 18:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- SupportMajor industrial unrest becoming social unrest. Remember, people: The class struggle is a political struggle. SerialNumber54129 22:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Word is that the negotiations have worked and the strike will be over by Friday [19] Masem (t) 22:44, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- And now confirmed. [20] — Masem (t) 03:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The strike didn’t last long enough to necessitate a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 00:02, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Strike put on hold so this doesn't need a blurb. Noah, BSBATalk 04:11, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Post-strike support - significant economical damage has already occurred, markets worldwide already fell, and regardless, this was the biggest US strike action since 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike (which we blurbed in 2023), and if the JP Morgan estimates are confirmed, would have caused twice as much economic damage as that (see Reuters source for more). Altblurb 3 proposed. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 12:02, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Post-Altblurb 3 Proposal Oppose Strike news is only news during a strike and markets were designed to fluctuate. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The strike has ended and I don't think we should post about an ended strike that lasted just few days. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Strike is over without major disruptions. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
RD: John Amos
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by Staraction (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Rusted AutoParts (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Amos passed 21 August 2024; it was announced 1 October 2024. Staraction (talk | contribs) 19:42, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose large chunks of article are uncited. Scuba 20:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. I am shocked to see that they didn't let public know before 40 days passed. BilboBeggins (talk) 21:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready Referencing is extremely poor. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose orange tagged and many cn tags. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 14:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Iran strikes Israel
[edit]Blurb: Iran launches strikes against Israel following Israel's ground invasion of Lebanon. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Iran launches a missile attack against Israel.
Alternative blurb II: Iran launches a missile attack against Israel in retaliation for the assassinations of Hezbollah and Hamas leaders Hassan Nasrallah and Ismail Haniyeh, and of Iranian general Abbas Nilforoushan.
News source(s): WaPo CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by RockinJack18 (talk · give credit)
Early, but could have crucial consequences in the conflict - RockinJack18 17:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Altblurb1 until Iran's attack is directly connected to the invasion of Lebanon. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 17:17, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm sure this was just a spur of the moment thing. Scuba 02:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait - not much is known yet about the scale, impact, etc. Fog of war is still very much in effect. The Kip (contribs) 17:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm satisfied with the combined blurb. The Kip (contribs) 00:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Thousands of missiles launched simultaneously, with many dozens of missies making it through the Iron Dome and causing massive damage. Count Iblis (talk) 17:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Do we have sources for thousands of missiles launched, with dozens causing massive damage? It was hundreds and a handful with no indications of the degree of damage when I was looking. But at the same time, surely this is why we should Wait. Nfitz (talk) 17:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait we don't the scale or the impact of these missiles, let the dust settle a little. Also, currently the article coinsists mostly of the background information and has no information about the strikes itself. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's been widely reported that this is in response to Israel's actions against Hezbollah which could be covered under the ongoing item for Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present) RachelTensions (talk) 17:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. This was a major, highly newsworthy attack that is important enough to have its own entry. Jerdle (talk) 18:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait We don't know enough at this point. However, if this results in a major direct military conflict between Iran and Israel, I suspect some kind of blurb will be justified. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - I know it's tempting to bundle together the crazy events in the last 2 days but I think this is a notable development on its own. A nuclear-armed state has been directly bombarded by a foreign nation. Tel Aviv and Jerusalem have had hundreds of missile strikes, the entire country is in lockdown, by far the biggest confrontation between Israel and Iran ever. This will have major ramifications for the future of the conflict. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I feel there's significant exaggeration in your statement User:PrecariousWorlds. It's not the "biggest confrontation between Israel and Iran ever". With less than 200 missiles fired, it's not even the biggest confrontation this year - as there was over 300 in April 2024. Also, with less than 200 missiles fired, what sourcing are you using for the "hundreds of missile strikes"? Surely the majority of the missiles were shot down, and didn't strike. Can you provide some kind of back-up for your comment, or edit it? Thanks, Nfitz (talk) 20:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- US Major general Pat Ryder says the attack was at least twice as big as in April ( ). Most were intercepted but many struck and caused significant damage in suburbs and in military bases. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Your words are hundreds. Clearly Ryder is full of it, according to Israeli and Iranian claims. Nfitz (talk) 16:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- US Major general Pat Ryder says the attack was at least twice as big as in April ( ). Most were intercepted but many struck and caused significant damage in suburbs and in military bases. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- I feel there's significant exaggeration in your statement User:PrecariousWorlds. It's not the "biggest confrontation between Israel and Iran ever". With less than 200 missiles fired, it's not even the biggest confrontation this year - as there was over 300 in April 2024. Also, with less than 200 missiles fired, what sourcing are you using for the "hundreds of missile strikes"? Surely the majority of the missiles were shot down, and didn't strike. Can you provide some kind of back-up for your comment, or edit it? Thanks, Nfitz (talk) 20:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wait/Oppose until we see if this has wider ramifications. Iran launched missiles at Israel just this year, in April, as a response to Israel killing five members of Iran’s revolutionary guards, but there was no larger effects. The middle east is a powder keg right now, and we should not be posting every salvo that occurs between all these nations. Natg 19 (talk) 18:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support. a whole country waiting for missiles coming from +1000miles away to fall on its head, in what might spark a (choose your superlative / descriptor) war, is important enough. TaBaZzz (talk) 18:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is a big breaking news live coverage on every major news network around the world. It should be "Alternative blurb" because blurb is original research that is probably wrong. Tradediatalk 19:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Covered in ongoing. Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb. We shouldn't try to read tea leaves about why Iran did this, nor should be broadcast their explanations. The article will cover all that. What's important to cover in the blurb is what happened. Hundreds of ballistic missiles were fired. Add casualty figures if there were any, as they become available, because we customarily include them. Jehochman Talk 19:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- comment reports say most of the missiles were shot down, and the few that landed did little damage with maybe perhaps one casualty. This would make this similar to the previous missile strike this year. It is probably better to try to keep it to one facet of this conflict, being the lebanon invasion. Masem (t) 19:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb unless there is a separate posting for the Lebanon invasion. Two for one. Bitspectator ⛩️ 19:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Question Is the consensus that this nomination and the below nomination regarding the Israel invasion of Lebanon from September 30th are mutually exclusive? On the one hand, the two events are directly connected and closely related, so it seems logical to group them in a blurb. But on the other hand, this attack by Iran has been in the works for a while - is it an oversimplification to imply causation by saying "After Israel does x, Iran does y"? In any event, support some blurb being posted. The admin who reviews this probably should assess and decide on the nomination for the invasion at the same time. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support the original blurb here with both launches strikesand Israel's ground invasion of Lebanon to be bolded. We can use one blurb to document two very related events.VR (Please ping on reply) 19:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Vice regent Not true, the IRGC said it was for the assassinations Personisinsterest (talk) 22:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose covered by ongoing.
- Noah, BSBATalk 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Observation 1: No one (of the general reader public, to a first approximation) notices/sees the "ongoing" items down there. See banner blindness. Might as well just remove the individual entries, just retain the "Ongoing events" link, enlarge text size a bit. Move all the "here are various Major Global Events" stuff to the top of that page. There, frees up space in the already crowded ITN box (this helps in making individual items stand out more). (Wikimedia really needs to hire a professional UI designer. The Right Thing to do would be for them to make suggestions on improvements, and work on things requested by the projects.)
- Observation 2: Assume waaaaay less general background & world events knowledge of a general audience (the audience Wikipedia is supposed to be written towards). Lowest common denominator. What % of the total English-as-a-first-language population do you estimate would be able to without looking up anything, correctly answer: Name a country that Hezbollah has something to do with? Which countries are immediately adjacent to Israel? Okay now do total world English speakers. Those things being necessary prerequisite knowledge, to know that for some kind of News related to "Israel" "Iran" "Lebanon", you might want to go looking under "Israel—Hezbollah war". --Slowking Man (talk) 20:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- on the ·second point, we don't assume readers are dumb as rocks and there is some degree of WP:CIR for readers, it's why we normally do not link country or major city names unless we are specifically talking about that as a geographic place, because we assume that readers have a decent knowledge of world geography. Masem (t) 20:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- To be fair, it's hard to keep track of axis of the three H-terrorist groups, and what they currently occupy, for a casual reader. I think a simple "Israeli wars" or "Fighting in the Middle East" might cover it better. Nfitz (talk) 20:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I have some possibly bad news for you about the median level of geography knowledge of the general public. (Yes that's the right link though the website might look unexpected, they apparently commissioned the survey.) Hmm wonder what kind of results you'd get from a survey of one of the top 5 countries here after the US (the total # of which are in Europe: 0) Slowking Man (talk) 01:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC) (Clarifying addendum: top 5 by total # of en speakers --Slowking Man (talk) 04:36, 2 October 2024 (UTC))
- on the ·second point, we don't assume readers are dumb as rocks and there is some degree of WP:CIR for readers, it's why we normally do not link country or major city names unless we are specifically talking about that as a geographic place, because we assume that readers have a decent knowledge of world geography. Masem (t) 20:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted I've written a combined blurb with the 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, but phrased so that we don't imply that Iran attacked because of the Lebanon invasion. The blurb I've removed was the 2024 Hezbollah headquarters strike, partly so that we don't overload ITN with middle eastern affairs, and partly because Maggie Smith was posted later than the blurbs above. Schwede66 22:55, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Post posting Support - a case of dog bites man, relative to recent news relating to Israel. SerialNumber54129 22:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Thai school bus crash
[edit]Blurb: Twenty schoolchildren and three others are killed in a bus crash (pictured) in Pathum Thani, Thailand (Post)
Alternative blurb: A school bus crashes (pictured) in Pathum Thani, Thailand, leaving 20 school children and 3 others dead
Alternative blurb II: A school bus crashes and burns (pictured) in Pathum Thani, Thailand, leaving 22 school children and 3 teachers dead.
News source(s): Reuters, BBC, Bangkok Post
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Chainwit. (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Bloxzge 025 (talk · give credit) and Miwako Sato (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Bus carrying school children crashes and catches fire in Thailand, leaving 20 children and 3 other dead. Significant both in term of number of fatalities and that of the fact that most of which are children. PS Feel free to edit the blurb as appropriate. I'm not sure about its writing style. --Chainwit. (talk) 16:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that image AI generated? See the hose on the right disappearing and the nearly unintelligible Mercedes-Benz written in English. That, or this image was taken at a low resolution and upscaled, keeping the sparse details. Either way, I don't believe this image is a good fit for ITN. Neutral on the blurb, seems to be a relatively major safety incident more than it is as a loss of life, as the article states that over 20,000 traffic fatalities are reported yearly in Thailand. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 16:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Image is not AI generated I can confirm. It just happen so to be a screenshot from a low-res live stream on YouTube. And yes, the bus indeed bears a Mercedes logo. -- Chainwit. (talk) 17:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose The loss of life is horrific. However we almost never post traffic accidents, even really bad ones. And as GeorgeMemulous noted, Thailand has a bad reputation for traffic safety. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose a tragic accident, but I don't think this will any sort of long term impact or effect. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose, tragic but ultimately routine news. For anyone curious, on the livestream, we can see that there's a twist and fold in the hose making it flatter at one angle, and giving the impression that it's disappearing into the ground (and reappearing), especially with the low resolution. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support Sigh... with respect, I find myself once again needing to correct the record and point out a double standard in relation to a bus crash which occurs outside of the western world. In March of this year, after 2024 Mmamatlakala bus crash was nominated, there was strong opposition with many claiming that we do not post "routine bus crashes" (similar to what is happening here). At that time, I pointed out that, quite contrary to those claiming we never post automobile accidents, we had actually in fact posted both the Carberry highway collision and Humboldt Broncos bus crash with minimal, if any, opposition. To post those accidents from the Western world but not one with more casualties from a non-western country, would leave ITN readers with the impression that white bus crash victims dying is notable where African or Asian bus crashes are not. In the end, the 2024 Mmamatlakala bus crash was posted to ITN. For consistency and to avoid systemic bias, that precedent should be upheld. This is a devastating event for Thailand and it is being widely reported by global news outlets and there is no reason to break from the precedent we set earlier this year. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- I understand your position, but in my opinion, the Carberry bus crash would get an oppose vote from me. Of the four mentioned, I'd say the Humboldt Broncos bus crash and 2024 Mmamatlakala bus crash are the only ones that would deserve a blurb, given the former having important and notable passengers killed and the latter having a very high death toll of one identifiable group. That being said, Oppose the 2024 Thai bus crash until if and when a major new development occurs. If all is said and done, it'll stay oppose. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Honestly, I wouldn't have supported posting any of these bus crashes. We can always point at previous times we did something to call it a precedent, but it means we never get to actually ask ourselves whether we should've actually be doing it to begin with. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not interesting to our readers. Tradediatalk 20:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- this is not a forum to discuss if articles are interesting but rather to post articles that are in the news ( WP:ITNPURPOSE ) so no offense but that argument is not valid (keep your oppose vote though not invalidating that!) Ion.want.uu (talk) 01:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per above. Absolutely tragic, but limited impact and likely to have a limited legacy. The Kip (contribs) 00:44, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support event is significant due to high fatality rate and the circumstance of it being children. Being "not interesting" to readers just because it didn't occur in the Western world shouldn't be any reason to oppose and doesn't diminish its significance and impact. Happily888 (talk) 01:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This is the type of event article that at the present time, it is not clear if it has the enduring coverage that we'd expect for event articles, as is the case for most road traffic accidents, even with the large toll. This is the trouble that we have overall with keeping the encyclopedia to covering news topics that are appropriate for an encyclopedia, with a long tail and influence elsewhere, and not for any current event that gets a burst of news coverage (even if worldwide). Maybe there is some long tail of a story here, but its definitely not obvious, and until it is, we really shouldn't even have an article on it (that's more what Wikinews is for). --Masem (t) 04:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment A quick update here, investigations found the bus to have been illegally modified with 10 gas tanks fitted into it. It "likely would" cause a stricter reform in term of bus regulation in Thailand, which IMO makes the incidence significant in term of a lasting effect? (Again with another "?") --Chainwit. (talk) 08:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose although a tragedy, it doesn't have any impact outside Thailand. Willing to reconsider if this somehow changes bus regulations globally or something major happens due to this. Scuba 16:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:ITNCDONT says:
Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Please do not… Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
- generally unproductive, but not always Scuba 20:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- WP:ITNCDONT says:
- Support per Flipandflopped. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Support: Very terrible bus accident. Notable, with significant death tolls. High Admiral JMT (talk) 03:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Certainly a notable and ITN newsworthy event about a school bus fire that killed many youngsters wherever it happened. STSC (talk) 19:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I looked at this and found it quite interesting as it was not quite the usual bus plunge. Points to note include:
- It was a coach rather than a school bus, having been hired for an outing
- It was about 50 years old and been extensively modded, being converted from an Isuzu to a Mercedes – don't ask me how
- Such incidents are common in Thailand which has a very high rate of traffic accidents – see List of countries by traffic-related death rate
- Andrew🐉(talk) 22:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Andrew Davidson and the bizarre view that ITN only posts things if they have a global impact *facepalm* SerialNumber54129 22:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support without the image, we can make do without the low-res quality. There are updates in the article which indicate a move for stronger regulation (albeit a small start); suspension of the bus operator as a business; seizing of their other illegally modded bus inventory. – robertsky (talk) 03:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Accidents are posted - period. I see zero reason this does not meet ITN criteria, and the mere fact it's a "tragic accident" or only is impactful in one country is not a reason to exclude it. I do, however, agree with the others that the image is less than ideal and would prefer this not be an image post if a better one is not found. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 03:09, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per nom et al. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Numerically, it's almost even. I'm guided here by many editors expressing "weak opposes" and one oppose vote that had to be neglected for a non-policy based rationale. Schwede66 19:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Jimmy Carter turns 100
[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.
Blurb: Former U.S. president Jimmy Carter turns 100, the first U.S. president to do so. (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, The Hill, USA Today, Al Jazeera, BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Moonreach (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Trivia, not the type of news we post. Masem (t) 14:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good for him, but this isn't really news, it's basically trivia, as Masem already said. TomMasterRealTALK 14:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The people over at DYK will probably love this one, good faith nom though. TwistedAxe [contact] 14:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. However, I'd set the criteria for a blurb at being older than Chau Sen Cocsal Chhum, age 103 years 4 months 21 days, the oldest state leader of all time. That or if he dies before then; either way Jimmy Carter is going to get at least one blurb by March 2027 (assuming no other leaders take the title before then). GeorgeMemulous (talk) 15:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above; a birthday isn't exactly ITN. Send this over to the DYK folks instead and let them have at it. qw3rty 15:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support For once, it would be good to report someone continuing to live rather than dying. The topic is making headlines across the world and so qualifies here at ITN. It definitely does not qualify for DYK for several reasons -- it's not a new article or recent GA, it's already a GA and it has previously been run at DYK in 2021. OTD might be a possibility as they do anniversaries but I don't know the ropes there so well. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:07, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Now I check, I find that it's already at OTD but it's easy to miss as it's buried down the bottom "Jimmy Carter (b. 1924)". Andrew🐉(talk) 16:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Post-close clarification: please DO NOT send this to DYK either. The article exists since more than a week, a five-fold expansion is simply out of the question, and it has already been promoted to GA. There's no possible way for the Jimmy Carter article to meet WP:DYKNEW. Cambalachero (talk) 16:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Post-post-close: I already nominated it for OTD a few days ago and it is running today, so we couldn't have had it elsewhere on the main page either way. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:49, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Inauguration of Claudia Sheinbaum
[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.
Blurb: Claudia Sheinbaum (pictured) is inaugurated as the 66th President of Mexico, becoming the first woman to ever hold the office. (Post)
News source(s): NPR, NBC
Credits:
- Nominated by The Wikimonger (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Already commemorated as an election winner in June. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also, Queen Victoria more or less founded Canada in 1867. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not only that. Elizabeth II more recently ruled Canada for 70 years.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- And not only that, but Mary Simon is more or less wielding that mace singlehandedly lately. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- 😆 Also 4 of the last 5 have been female + Sauve. Nfitz (talk) 11:56, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- And if we're playing Devil's semanticist here, there's Kim Campbell, more or less "elected". InedibleHulk (talk) 12:05, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- 😆 Also 4 of the last 5 have been female + Sauve. Nfitz (talk) 11:56, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- And not only that, but Mary Simon is more or less wielding that mace singlehandedly lately. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not only that. Elizabeth II more recently ruled Canada for 70 years.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't see anything that's changed since the June ITN. Nfitz (talk) 11:56, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose we already posted her winning the election. Scuba 16:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think we post the presidential inaugurations. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 16:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: The news is when the candidate wins the elections. Unless notable for something else, the inauguration is trivial when it happens. Cambalachero (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) New Prime Minister of Japan
[edit]Blurb: Shigeru Ishiba (pictured) becomes the Prime Minister of Japan, succeeding Fumio Kishida. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Shigeru Ishiba (pictured) becomes the Prime Minister of Japan, after winning the Japanese Liberal Democratic Party leadership election.
Alternative blurb II: After winning the Liberal Democratic Party leadership election, Shigeru Ishiba (pictured) becomes the Prime Minister of Japan, succeeding Fumio Kishida.
Alternative blurb III: Shigeru Ishiba (pictured) succeeds Fumio Kishida as the Prime Minister of Japan, after winning the Liberal Democratic Party leadership election.
News source(s): NHK, Japan Today, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Midori No Sora (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Borgenland (talk · give credit), TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit), Faustino Sojo (talk · give credit), ValenciaThunderbolt (talk · give credit) and ギルディアス156世 (talk · give credit)
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Shigeru Ishiba has officially been accepted as the 102nd Prime Minister of Japan by the Diet. However, the article still needs some work done. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 05:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Duplicate nomination with the 27 September one, and the item should be posted ASAP. Unnamelessness (talk) 05:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- That nomination was closed with consensus to wait till inauguration. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Weak oppose Election article is good sourcing wise, but the background info is lacking info between 9/11 to 9/27 and that's a huge/crucial part of the election coverage. Ishiba's article also has a few cn tags, given the overall improved state of the article.Support Expanded the LDP article and addressed cn tags on Ishiba's article. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)- Support per ITN/R Scuba 16:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- amended as ITN/R. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support both the the PM's article and the election article are in good shape. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 17:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above. The Kip (contribs) 17:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Still an orange tag in the election article, and agree with TDKR that the post-9/11 coverage is still lacking. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Chaotic Enby: Issues fixed. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support because it's a new head of state and ITN/R. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 23:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- @JohnAdams1800, if something is ITN/R, then the only matter to comment on is whether article quality is up to scratch. Schwede66 23:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- To clarify, he's not head of state but head of government, Japan is a constitutional monarchy, with Naruhito as head of state. AusLondonder (talk) 20:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- @JohnAdams1800, if something is ITN/R, then the only matter to comment on is whether article quality is up to scratch. Schwede66 23:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Support: Now that he has inaugurated, I support very much since the head of government in Japan has changed, and Japan is a very notable country worldwide. High Admiral JMT (talk) 03:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Addressed update/sourcing issues on both articles. Should be good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hey! That's my image I uploaded! In all seriousness, in all seriousness, support. Both articles look good. Someone vastly improved the LDP leadership election article also; thanks to them. River10000 (talk) 13:33, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)