Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions
→Depp v. Heard verdict: Oppose, difficult to be neutral Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
|||
Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
*'''Oppose''' This is not the place to post a celebrity trial with no real long term importance. [[User:Thriley|Thriley]] ([[User talk:Thriley|talk]]) 01:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC) |
*'''Oppose''' This is not the place to post a celebrity trial with no real long term importance. [[User:Thriley|Thriley]] ([[User talk:Thriley|talk]]) 01:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
*'''Oppose''' Tabloid ITN is not. Depp is a well known actor, he has not been featured on ITN so far and if it was to be so it definitely shouldn't be about personal issues. [[User:Gotitbro|Gotitbro]] ([[User talk:Gotitbro|talk]]) 02:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC) |
*'''Oppose''' Tabloid ITN is not. Depp is a well known actor, he has not been featured on ITN so far and if it was to be so it definitely shouldn't be about personal issues. [[User:Gotitbro|Gotitbro]] ([[User talk:Gotitbro|talk]]) 02:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
*'''Oppose''' This is celebrity tittle-tattle, nothing more. Than doesn't mean it isn't of interest to a portion of the readership but there is an apparent contradiction with the earlier UK case. ITN is not the place to even attempt to resolve an issue such as that. [[User:3142|3142]] ([[User talk:3142|talk]]) 02:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== May 31 == |
== May 31 == |
Revision as of 02:12, 2 June 2022
Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
In the news toolbox |
---|
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
Headers
Voicing an opinion on an itemFormat your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated. Please do...
Please do not...
Suggesting updatesThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
June 2
June 2, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Health and environment International relations
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
June 1
June 1, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
Danish EU Opt out Referendum
Blurb: Denmark votes to eliminate its opt-out of the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy. (Post)
News source(s): DR, FT, Politico, BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by 4iamking (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Has pretty big implications for the EU as a whole, Denmark was the only country with such an opt-out, and it is the first time any opt-out is scrapped without leaving the EU entirely (#Brexit). Charts need updating, slowly plugging away at it but its a lot of data. 4iamking (talk) 22:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- I updated the results table now, full results are in article. 4iamking (talk) 00:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality this is the kind of news that is ITN-worthy because of its real impact in many aspects. This is a serious place. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support On par with a national election in importance This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Depp v. Heard verdict
Blurb:
Alternative blurb: Actors Johnny Depp and Amber Heard are both found liable in a defamation lawsuit.
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Andise1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Andise1 (talk) 19:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nope, absolutely not. We are not a tabloid magazine. This has little impact on the world. (Remember, this was a defamation trial, NOT a domestic abuse trial.) Cheers! Fakescientist8000 19:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Its on the front page of the New York Times so is not Tabloid fodder. Aircorn (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose no way. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- strongest possible oppose this is nothing more than tabloidy gossip glorifying bad and abusive behavior in relationships and hardly relevant to an encyclopedia despite social media interest. PRAXIDICAE💕 19:59, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Celeb gossip does not belong on the main page at all. --Masem (t) 19:59, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Vehement oppose Absolutely not. Blade Jogger 2049 Talk 20:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Re-opened. We post all manner of sports competitions and disasters of dubious long term notability. There are some facts: our WP:READERS are interested in entertainment, a massive world-wide industry. This story is in the news, and has been for some time, making headlines around the world (albeit that is not a requirement). The article is detailed with more prose than the four items currently in the box combined. Lastly, this isn't some simple gossip column, it's a libel case against content published in the press where libel cases are traditionally hard to make. I know this is going to go down in flames but seriously, this is getting more coverage than anything else currently in the box and everyone who opposes this knows that to be true whether the like it or not. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- If any of the opposes thinks the story lacks encyclopedic value, then I suggest WP:AFD and if you're not willing to put in the effort I'd suggest your oppose is without merit. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
I know this is going to go down in flames
Then there's no point in reopening it - you're just wasting everyone's time.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)- Stories can be of encyclopedic value dye to broad coverage, but at the same time, utterly fail for they type of stories that ITN is meant for. The legal tribulations of formerly married people is definitely of this sort. --Masem (t) 20:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- If any of the opposes thinks the story lacks encyclopedic value, then I suggest WP:AFD and if you're not willing to put in the effort I'd suggest your oppose is without merit. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per LaserLegs. 2A00:23C7:3D09:6001:2C41:F38E:27F5:DD2B (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per LaserLegs, and I'd like to express my bemusement at this nomination being originally closed after just 16 minutes. 49 TL 20:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I'm striking ALT0 and proposing ALT1, because Depp was also found liable for one count of libel, and though he "won" in terms of getting more money, it's not a pure vindication for him. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Very notable and high profile case. --TheDutchViewer (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality The article goes into an excessively detailed day-by-day (almost proseline), witness-by-witness rehashing of the trial. The trial itself should be summarized. The article also does not go into enough discussion of the ramifications of this case for libel law and free speech issues more broadly. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah I was just skimming through the article myself... and my god is it long and overly detailed. And what are the larger ramifications? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose little relevant, encyclopedic, worldwide, case. Two people suing each other in a defamation case is hardly a worldwide event. -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 20:57, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Don't be ridiculous. WaltCip-(talk) 21:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Incredibly strong oppose. The article is a mess, and as far as relevance, this trial is of interest only to a particular (primarily American) audience who has been following it and probably already knows the verdict. Others do not care or are actively trying to avoid the case. — GhostRiver 21:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality alone per ONUnicorn. Way, way, way too much detail. Article needs work before being on the front page. —Sirdog (talk) 21:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment While I know this is very polarizing, it disheartens me to see so many editors providing a vote without presenting rationale that comments as to why (particularly in relation to article quality or notability). I'd like to encourage anyone reading this comment to do so, regardless of the vote. —Sirdog (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Unless the case fundamentally changed how defamation is handled in the United States, there's nothing significant about two overpampered celebrities slinging mud against each other in court.
And it's not just because I'm so annoyed at how social media algorithms kept shoving this "story" in my face for the past couple of weeks.Mount Patagonia (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC) - Strongest possible oppose tripe, baloney, codswallop Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Codswallop! Thanks for teaching me a new word! PRAXIDICAE💕 21:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strongest Possible Support per LaserLegs. This is ITN, even if we want to pretend it's beneath ITN's dignity. Also, this is not primarily an American story; it's one of those few celebrity dramas that have an international angle: Heard was first found not liable in the UK. This also has another interesting angle: proving defamation is an extremely high bar in the US, much higher than in the UK: that defamation was proven in the US and not in the UK provides an interesting and unique legal angle. It is not just a celebrity drama. Finally, it appears as the headline news in the BBC. For all of these reasons, I strongly support this being posted ITN. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Remember, "strongest possible support" = support. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 21:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Right, and "strongest possible oppose" = oppose. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wasn't it clear from my previous statement that that applies too? Cheers! Fakescientist8000 22:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Right, and "strongest possible oppose" = oppose. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- ITN is purposely not a.newdticker, hence why we care little about stories dominate headlines, and consider articles of broader relevance. Masem (t) 22:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Remember, "strongest possible support" = support. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 21:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strongest possible support This is ITN. The page in question has been running at over 50,000 page views per day. Odds on that it will make the top 25 report this week. This is what our readers are interested in. I disagree that the case has no broader significance in the #MeToo era. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- our readers have the tabloids to read this kind of news. This place is an encyclopedia. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - quality of article isn't suitable. Item goes into ridiculous depths. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose two shitty people being shitty with other and being found guilty of variously being shitty with each other is not something I'd expect an encyclopedia to promote on its main page. Grow up. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. The world's first real-life soap series has ended, there are no plans for a sequel. Count Iblis (talk) 22:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- We've Heard that before. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:NOT. Wikipedia is neither a celebrity gossip magazine or even an ordinary newspaper. Even setting that aside, article also needs severe reworking as way too much of it is dedicated to a WP:INDISCRIMINATE recollection of events. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:49, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I've done some entirely non-precision cutting ([1]), which needed to be done anyways. Doesn't address the this-is-not-what-Wikipedia-is issue, but at least removes most of the cruft. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Tabloid, celebrity trivia. HiLo48 (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Terrible article which goes into mind-numbing levels of detail about an ultimately trivial story. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Rockstone. -- Tavix (talk) 23:55, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and reclose. This is not the sort of story which rises to ITN importance, and there's also clearly no chance of it being posted, so time to put it out of its misery. — Amakuru (talk) 23:57, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose and Reclose A defamation case between two people of very little influence is gossip stuff and nothing else. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality alone. While most of the other opposes are without merit the article contains too much excessive detail. Also don't reclose yet. Aircorn (talk) 00:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is not the place to post a celebrity trial with no real long term importance. Thriley (talk) 01:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Tabloid ITN is not. Depp is a well known actor, he has not been featured on ITN so far and if it was to be so it definitely shouldn't be about personal issues. Gotitbro (talk) 02:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is celebrity tittle-tattle, nothing more. Than doesn't mean it isn't of interest to a portion of the readership but there is an apparent contradiction with the earlier UK case. ITN is not the place to even attempt to resolve an issue such as that. 3142 (talk) 02:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
May 31
May 31, 2022
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
RD: Jim Parks (cricketer, born 1931)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News; ESPN; The Daily Telegraph; Sussex County CC
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 08:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Victor von Halem
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WDR
Credits:
- Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by LouisAlain (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Voceditenore (talk · give credit) and Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Internationally known operatic bass, article was fine thanks to Voceditenore. He died 28 May but the news came around today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- We have now details in English, updated further. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: KK (singer)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Venkat TL (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: C class article. 😭 Venkat TL (talk) 18:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Article needs ref work
and the lead could be beefed up to mention more about his career (such as why is he regarded the "most versatile singers of his generation") because it only mentions the languages his songs were in.such as the career section and his album/awards section contain no sources. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Will try to update in some time. As a fan, very sad due to his untimely passing. 😭 Venkat TL (talk) 19:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Seems to be an important figure to Indians. Prodrummer619 (talk) 19:31, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Prodrummer619: It's not about if the person is important, the main criteria is if the article is in good state (good sources, good info, etc.) TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment will try and assist folks on adding more sources to the article. Other than that, it has my Support. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 03:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Early life: "graduated from Kirori Mal College" in what?; two uncited statements: "This song featured members of the Indian Cricket Team.", "KK also has a daughter named Tamara Kunnath." Career: a lot of cn tags along with an additional refs banner. Awards and honors: completely uncited.
- Also, related article List of songs recorded by KK contains three wholly uncited sections (and subsections): Film Songs in other languages, Albums, TV Title Songs, TV Performances, Other Non-Film Songs; and uncited 2020, 2022, 2023 sub-sections. Gotitbro (talk) 07:23, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The missing references have been added. Needs review. Venkat TL (talk) 11:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ready I think. --Venkat TL (talk) 14:49, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment There are still a number of uncited sentences. Some appear trivial ("He got his first break in Mumbai with UTV to sing jingles.", "He has also sung the theme song for Star Parivaar Awards 2010 with Shreya Ghoshal.") and could probably be removed. Black Kite (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Miangul Adnan Aurangzeb
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Dawn, The News, 24 News
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs improvement Ainty Painty (talk) 07:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Article needs a lot of work such as expansion and source work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:29, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Beyond the person being an MNA, there doesn't seem to be anything to warrant an RD mention. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 03:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- As the ITN template above notes, for RDs only article quality needs to be sufficient, notability is not a factor. But the article is barely above a stub here. Gotitbro (talk) 06:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
2022 monkeypox outbreak
Blurb: 500 cases have been confirmed since the beginning of the outbreak of monkeypox three weeks ago. (Post)
Nominator's comment: Check the chart from OurWorldInData (local version linked to on the right):
Disclaimer - I am an involved editor in the article.
Notes: I had read some of the comments on the previous nomination. For all the epidemiological points, I'd like to point out that, as of now, there is too much unclear about the outbreak to be able to say whether this will go "pandemic" or not (even if due to the nature of transmission, a pandemic would be quite different to that of COVID-19 in any case). Also, I'd like to point out that - rather than being "hypersensitive" to the subject, my impression is that opposite - I think this would have been making more headlines before the pandemic (70 new cases of a disease - in one day in the UK - that was previously restricted to West Africa?).
So anyway, even if its not in the news that heavily anymore, I think this is warranted to presentation here on Wikipedia. (Also - I think it would be a shame not to showcase an article that many editors have put good work into - and which might be substantially out of date within a couple weeks though). Regards Sean Heron (talk) 11:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The WHO are not ruling out that this might become a pandemic. Me, I'm planning a trip to Colorado but see that it has already reached the Rockies! Andrew🐉(talk) 11:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- "not ruling out that this might...: is the sloppiest reason to post. HiLo48 (talk) 23:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb, Support Ongoing The only news about 500 cases I'm seeing is about Nigeria's 500 cases since 2017 and Sankuru's 500 cases since January. In a non-African context, it's just apparently some number. But the broader outbreak keeps chugging along in general, with however many new cases (article says 568). InedibleHulk (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing it's an ongoing event with ongoing news coverage. However, there is no single event so far that meets the threshold for an ITN blurb. And once again, there is no rule that something has to be a blurb before being added to ongoing, contrary to people that will inevitably argue this. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait It is fair game that this potentially can be a pandemic or the like, but we're still talking 500 cases out of 7 billion people, compared to COVID that by the time we posted was in the high thousands. Feels too premature at this point for ongoing. --Masem (t) 12:09, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- You can't go the rest of your life comparing everything to COVID. Apples and oranges. How long did the Russian invasion take? InedibleHulk (talk) 12:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Exactly! From creation, 19 days, 18 hours and 42 minutes of continual news and article updates. God knows how many seconds. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- For the record, this article is now precisely 13 days, 14 hours and 50 minutes old. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Without checking for sure, we didn't add Covid as ongoing until about 3 to 4 months after its first major news of spread. I am pretty confident our first articles on Covic were created that December before the pandemic declaration. Masem (t) 18:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Again, everything about that storyline is weird. The bards in charge had to whip up an entirely new and never-before-seen word just to describe its twists and turns. The "fight against monkeypox" is also not combat in the traditional sense, but as this enemy is selectively targeting gay men through physical contact and turning them red, it's closer in spirit to Russian barbarism than some ethereal indiscriminate upper respiratory threat. The simplest choice, of course, is to treat it on its own merits. Its incremental updates are novel, unique and original, after all. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Without checking for sure, we didn't add Covid as ongoing until about 3 to 4 months after its first major news of spread. I am pretty confident our first articles on Covic were created that December before the pandemic declaration. Masem (t) 18:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing - A COVID-19 comes along only once in a lifetime. All other pandemics in this generation will pale in comparison to it. But this is still newsworthy despite its limited impact thus far.--WaltCip-(talk) 12:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing. The blurb would happen if a pandemic is declared. Jehochman Talk 13:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Ongoing ... oppose blurb, since the situation doesn't appear to have changed markedly since the blurb nom. last week failed to fly, and because as Walt notes impact has been limited. – Sca (talk) 13:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb first - unusual outbreak. I would hold off on ongoing until the blurb sinks down though, within the week or so in which that happens we should know for sure whether it's Ongoing-worthy or not. Either way, hopefully it wouldn't be. Juxlos (talk) 13:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb or ongoing Either or should be fine, but this should 100% be on the main page ITN section ASAP. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:27, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Still 0 deaths; it has also largely rolled off of the front page at most news organizations. The last blurb was nominated during peak media hysteria about a new potential public health crisis 47.176.81.182 (talk) 18:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose unless WHO declares this a pandemic. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 20:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Honestly, not yet a pandemic, and with HIV/AIDS not posted, even that bar alone is not an auto-inclusion in my mind. 500 cases of a disease - and none of which yet fatal - in a span of a few weeks is notable, but not quite seismic in impact, nor unique. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Clarification question - is this opposition to a "blurb" or inclusion as "ongoing" ? (Just going by the current "ongoing" events, I could understand your seismic comment - for the blurb, I'm not sure how eg the winner of a Sports event would qualify as "seismic") Sean Heron (talk) 06:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- P.S. Actually, bar SARS and COVID, and to an extent the 2003 US monkeypox outbreak (which was zoonotic though) - this outbreak is in fact unique, as far as I can tell (happy to be pointed to other examples though!) Sean Heron (talk) 06:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support I'm not sure where in the ITN guidelines it says that a public health issue has to be declared a pandemic before it reaches sufficient newsworthiness. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 06:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Good point. -- Sca (talk) 12:41, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Last major outbreak was in 2003, looks significant. Gotitbro (talk) 07:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose unless it's declared a pandemic. This disease is also endemic to some parts of Africa already, so to suddenly highlight it just because it's moved to the "western" world is not a good look IMHO. — Amakuru (talk) 09:34, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- its not that it's moved to the western world, its that the disease has moved to countries where it shouldn't be found in. 4iamking (talk) 10:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support but Ongoing its getting alot of news coverage, and its not going away anytime soon. There is no requirement for it to be anther pandemic to be featured in ITN, it just has to take up a lot of oxygen in the news.4iamking (talk) 10:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Why isn't this nom. using the standard template? – Sca (talk) 12:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose ZERO deaths. I don't think natural disasters with zilch fatalities get posted. At least bother to nominate this once the first fatality is confirmed. I personally have a hard time finding differences between this and a panic-obsessed media complex trying to generate clicks. It's like the media complex has become habituated about posting every incremental update about possible but unconfirmed health condition that might or might not have an economic impact. 81.181.130.106 (talk) 14:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Blaming 'the media' is always a good ploy. -- Sca (talk) 15:05, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support. A new mutated pox virus that is going to become endemic is bad news given that pox viruses tend to evolve to become deadlier over time. Count Iblis (talk) 15:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- We don't post on speculations. Masem (t) 15:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose let's not put the cart before the horse. Trillfendi (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Made the news here for a couple of days a week or so ago, then disappeared. Obviously not a major issue for the world. Maybe if it escalates.... HiLo48 (talk) 23:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
May 30
May 30, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment International relations
Politics and elections
|
RD: Friedrich Christian Delius
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel and many others
Credits:
- Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit) and Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German Novelist who wrote as a great observer of Germans from pre-Nazi to present time, received highest German literary award, novels translated into English and other languages, - article was decent, slightly expanded, more possible if someone has more time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Sean Thackrey
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): San Francisco Chronicle
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 00:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Ramses Ohee
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Liputan 6
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Jeromi Mikhael (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: Incumbent member of parliament from Papua. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 02:08, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jeff Gladney
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fort Worth Star-Telegram Former TCU teammate Jalen Reagor
Credits:
- Nominated by KingOfAllThings (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American football cornerback who played for the Cardinals and Vikings. Unexpected and tragic death in a car accident. Only 25. KingOfAllThings (thou shalt chatter!) 18:45, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support, I was just planning on nominating this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The Kip (talk) 19:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Sad death, article looks good, is well cited, and generally issue free. Cheers. WimePocy 20:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
He was released on August 3, 2021 after his indictment for domestic violence.
What indictment for domestic violence? This sentence is the only mention of it. Article is incomplete without more detail there. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)- The info on that was removed by an IP here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Marking for needed attention. KingOfAllThings (thou shalt chatter!) 20:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good enough. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:31, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 12:29, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
2022 IIHF World Championship
Blurb: In ice hockey, the IIHF World Championship concludes with Finland defeating Canada in the final. (Post)
News source(s): CBC/The Canadian Press, National Post/Reuters
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.
- Oppose on quality there is no summary text in the article, either for explaining how this complicated tournament works, or any match summaries. These are standard issues with sports articles, and is why most of them don't get posted (see for example all the other ITNR sports things below that haven't been accepted). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I might be able to work on it tomorrow, can’t guarantee it however. The Kip (talk) 22:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
RD: Ronnie Hawkins
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV News, New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Floydian (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: 1950s rock and roll / blues musician who contributed significantly to the early development of modern rock. Article needs substantive work, but hopefully this draws attention to that. Floydian τ ¢ 03:09, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment A legendary pioneer, sure, but also continued rockin' into the 21st century. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note, prose is pretty much fully sourced now, just need to get the band lineups and discog/singles referenced and this will be nearly ready. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support because no one else seemed to say they were. AdoTang (talk) 21:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Unsourced discography and singles still to be addressed. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Discography (all but one) and singles now sourced to his official website. - Floydian τ ¢ 22:26, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ronnie Hawkins#Hawks lineups needs sources. Was the graph drawn based on the tabulated names and years above it? --PFHLai (talk) 01:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Stan Rodger
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff.co.nz, Otago Daily Times, NZ Herald
Credits:
- Nominated by Kiwichris (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Paora (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: Notable New Zealand unionist and politician. Currently C-Class article, well referenced. Kiwichris (talk) 01:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks in good enough shape. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Came here to suggest the article for RD but Kiwichris has beaten me to it. Schwede66 02:08, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Nothing to complain. Grimes2 (talk) 05:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 09:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
May 29
May 29, 2022
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Posted) Indy 500
Blurb: In auto racing, Marcus Ericsson (pictured) wins the Indianapolis 500, the second Swede to do so. (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by 2600:1702:38D0:E70:452C:FB38:4B5A:A417 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Waluigithewalrus (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.
2600:1702:38D0:E70:452C:FB38:4B5A:A417 (talk) 20:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose right now - article isn't updated yet - seems to have no information on the actual race. Still has a lot of uncited text in other parts as well. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment/question wouldn't a picture of the winner (we have one) be better than a picture of an oval? Thryduulf (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- As it comprises multiple ovals, yes, it certainly would. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK, he's here. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:10, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Minimal international coverage; even in international media where it is mentioned it is displayed less prominently than other recent races that we are not considering posting, such as the 2022 Monaco Grand Prix. It is listed on ITNR, but we are permitted to make exceptions, and given the clear lack of significance of this race we should do so. BilledMammal (talk) 01:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- The history of the race alone for both makes them suitable for posting, I would argue. I also would argue that, if we excluded this, other ITNR items such as the Kentucky Derby should be excluded as well. Personally, I believe this, the Monaco GP, and the Kentucky Derby are all suitable. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 02:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- The Indy 500 is also the "flagship event" of that racing season, like a final is in some other sports. That's not the case with the Monaco GP (probably because the racing there is awful). Either way, this is ITNR, so only article quality should be considered. Any other discussion should be done at WT:ITN. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:45, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- The history of the race alone for both makes them suitable for posting, I would argue. I also would argue that, if we excluded this, other ITNR items such as the Kentucky Derby should be excluded as well. Personally, I believe this, the Monaco GP, and the Kentucky Derby are all suitable. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 02:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks it's pretty simple. If you don't want this on ITN/R head over to WT:ITN and propose a removal so I can oppose it. Your oppose in this nom is invalid. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Very bizarre that Monaco Grand Prix is not ITNR listed but this is given they both form part of the Triple Crown of Motorsport. I know what race attracts more international coverage and it isn't this one. AusLondonder (talk) 15:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah there is a secret WP:CABAL of US only motorsport enthusiasts who conspire to keep the whatever you linked to off the main page. When you re-enter the earths atmosphere and the radio blackout has ended I'll transmit instructions to you on how you can nominate your favorite events at ITN, then if successful nominate for inclusion at ITN/R. I'm not sure from which planet or other celestial body you're originating from, just call me when you make it to Earth. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your constructive, collaborative, insightful comments as usual. A real asset to the project, you are. AusLondonder (talk) 08:01, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah there is a secret WP:CABAL of US only motorsport enthusiasts who conspire to keep the whatever you linked to off the main page. When you re-enter the earths atmosphere and the radio blackout has ended I'll transmit instructions to you on how you can nominate your favorite events at ITN, then if successful nominate for inclusion at ITN/R. I'm not sure from which planet or other celestial body you're originating from, just call me when you make it to Earth. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Very bizarre that Monaco Grand Prix is not ITNR listed but this is given they both form part of the Triple Crown of Motorsport. I know what race attracts more international coverage and it isn't this one. AusLondonder (talk) 15:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks it's pretty simple. If you don't want this on ITN/R head over to WT:ITN and propose a removal so I can oppose it. Your oppose in this nom is invalid. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality there doesn't seem to be a summary of the actual Sunday race itself (just a results table). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think this needs to be codified somewhere: ITN/R is not a guideline and there are no exceptions. Any attempts to treat it as such by opposing an ITN/R item based on notability, usually with the accompanying argument of WP:IAR, should itself be ignored. Any consensus established on ITN/R supersedes any attempt to block a posting on such grounds, and in order to remove an item's ITN/R status, consensus needs to be established on WT:ITN.--WaltCip-(talk) 15:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- WP:ITNR is a "generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply" AusLondonder (talk) 15:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:In_the_news#Sports_and_other_recurring_events " Items listed there are considered exempt from having to prove their notability through discussion on the candidates page" --LaserLegs (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Which is neither a policy nor a guideline. The guideline is WP:ITNR, and it says
occasional exceptions may apply
. BilledMammal (talk) 19:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)- What has more weight - a boilerplate template that is applied to every "guideline", or the wording of WP:ITNR itself which provides for NO exceptions? WaltCip-(talk) 11:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- WP:5P5: "Wikipedia has no firm rules". People pretending otherwise sound at best like lawyers (not in a positive sense); and more likely just silly. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- What has more weight - a boilerplate template that is applied to every "guideline", or the wording of WP:ITNR itself which provides for NO exceptions? WaltCip-(talk) 11:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Which is neither a policy nor a guideline. The guideline is WP:ITNR, and it says
- Per Wikipedia:In_the_news#Sports_and_other_recurring_events " Items listed there are considered exempt from having to prove their notability through discussion on the candidates page" --LaserLegs (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- WP:ITNR is a "generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply" AusLondonder (talk) 15:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support – there's a solid race summary now in place, with refs throughout, and no maint tags present. Article is of sufficient quality to post now, imo. And I don't find the arguments for invoking WP:IAR over WP:ITNR compelling, personally. There are far more appropriate avenues for disputing the presence of something on ITNR than in the nominations of ITNR items; forcing nominators and editors to repeatedly jump through the same hoops on every other nomination was exactly why ITNR was drawn up in the first place. I see no reason for setting aside the well-established consensus developed by editors and codified in that guideline. Cheers! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 20:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- More citations are needed, and I see several places in the body where mph is given without a template converting to km/h. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Many thanks for tagging those -- they should all be dealt with now. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 21:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Don't see any quality issues. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The article looks to go. Unnamelessness (talk) 04:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Article seems to have been updated. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 05:51, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Left out Swede tidbit. We didn't post regarding 1st Japanese winner for 2021 Masters Tournament, so I'd expect an explicit consensus to add that for a 2nd here.—Bagumba (talk)
- Oppose second tidbit The "important thing" is he's the first person in the world to drive around a famous oval 200 times this year. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Tara Air Flight 197
Blurb: Tara Air Flight 197 crashes with 22 people on board after going over some high mountains in Nepal (Post)
Alternative blurb: Tara Air Flight 197 crashes in Nepal, killing all 22 people on board.
News source(s): AP, Guardian, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Debjyoti Gorai (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: A plane crash with 22 deaths, even though the plane is small, plane crash should be mentioned because they are not common now a days which results in causalities. Debjyoti Gorai (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Debjyoti Gorai, This article isn't at ITN/R (I'm not really sure how it could be). You should remove that. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:08, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Removed it. Debjyoti Gorai 18:13, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now - so far the plane has been missing for around 12 hours (as far as I can tell). Seems quite disingenuous to say "with deaths". Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Reuters says search for plane suspended due to darkness. – Sca (talk) 18:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Wait until confirmation of its fate. --Masem (t) 18:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)- Now Support with both confirmation of the wreckage and the updated article. Cause is not likely to be known for days so expansion related to the search efforts is fine. --Masem (t) 13:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The disappearance is confirmed. The problem is that there isn't enough to fill up the wikiarticle yet. There will be more to write about after the crash site is found. --PFHLai (talk) 20:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The disappearance of course happened. What could be (hopefully) the case is the passengers all surviving but simply unable to communicate their status. That's what we should wait on the fate. --Masem (t) 22:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The plane has been found in crashed state. "Fourteen bodies have been recovered so far, search continues for the remaining. The weather is very bad but we were able to take a team to the crash site. No other flight has been possible," spokesman Deo Chandra Lal Karn told AFP a day after the crash. Please check here. Debjyoti Gorai 05:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debjyoti Gorai (talk • contribs)
- The disappearance of course happened. What could be (hopefully) the case is the passengers all surviving but simply unable to communicate their status. That's what we should wait on the fate. --Masem (t) 22:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Article just passes for ITN but should be posted when more details come out. Gotitbro (talk) 23:08, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose because it was a small plane, on a domestic route, no notable people were on board & there's no indication of it being deliberate. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 05:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Crash confirmed. Grimes2 (talk) 05:51, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose By plane crash standards, it seems a bit below MINIMUMDEATHS. Without (as Jim says) a notable person or apparent criminal onboard, I don't see this lasting the week as news. Plus, the article
seemsseemed a tad mistitled, as most RS consider this a Tara Air flight, like Tara Air Flight 193 (or the equally deadly and mistitled 2010 Tara Air Twin Otter crash). InedibleHulk (talk) 07:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC) - Support If this template is correct, this is the second deadliest plane crash this year, and it seems like there aren’t a lot of accidents/incidents that are notable enough to warrant a standalone article. Also, WP:MINIMUMDEATHS doesn’t exist, so it has no weight to refer to it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Bodies being recovered. [2] [3] – Sca (talk) 12:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support WP:MINIMUMDEATHS isn't even a page, yet alone an actual, established policy like some people try to use it as. It's the second deadliest plane crash of the year (so far), and significant news coverage. Article quality is much better than some almost-stub about disasters that often get posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Updated Reuters report says 21 bodies (all but one) retrieved. -- Sca (talk) 14:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Although we don't have a WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, I do have a page that I use to reference what type of accident and death tolls are most likely to be posted to ITN. For aviation incidents, Brandmeister stated that accidents with double digit death tolls are almost always notable enough.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support – Death toll moderately significant, but what makes this crash noteworthy is the altitude at which it occurred, ± 14,000 ft. (4,200 m) and the drama of the search/retrieval effort at that height. – Sca (talk) 14:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support as it is confirmed crash and 21 bodies has been found. Fade258 (talk) 14:49, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose utterly insignificant crash of a 43 year old long out of production aircraft operated by a tiny regional airline. The only thing adding any "significance" to this rubbish disaster stub of a story is the body count -- among which there was no one of particular note. Of course we'll post this. We shouldn't, but we will. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Not particularly significant as per Jim, a domestic flight of a small airline with a comparatively low passenger total and an accidental nature. Could see an argument, but it doesn't seem truly notable enough. Article is a bit short as well. The Kip (talk) 19:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Doesn't seem a particularly noteworthy crash. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:38, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support. We discussed this some time back, I forget when. A complete hull-loss as well as loss of all lives (in the double-digits) is a significant event. Was on NPR and CBC earlier today. RIP and condolences. Ktin (talk) 00:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Seems to be a major news story in Nepal and India at the very least; article looks in decent enough shape. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 06:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment All 22 bodies have been recovered. The black box has also been recovered. Please see BBC news article here. I think it's time to list/post the article now. Debjyoti Gorai 10:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Pre posting, post ready Support Article looks ready to go. RIP to the 22 people who died. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 10:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Following up to see if we have an admin who can consider posting this one? If not ready, please remove the 'ready' tag. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted — Amakuru (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pull This is nowhere near significant enough to be posted, per all the previous. Crash into terrain, in poor weather, in mountainous area, low-double-digits casualties, in a country and with an airline which both have a not-particularly stellar safety record, with a similar accident that happened five years ago (
This was Tara Air's second deadly accident on this route, after Flight 193 in 2016.
)? Tragic, yes, but unlikely to be of much long-term significance, or significant enough to be posted on the main page. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) 2022 Indian Premier League Final
Blurb: In cricket, Gujarat Titans win the Indian Premier League, defeating Rajasthan Royals in the final. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In cricket, Gujarat Titans win the Indian Premier League, defeating Rajasthan Royals in the final (player of the final Hardik Pandya pictured).
News source(s): Cricbuzz
Credits:
- Nominated by Sherenk1 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by MNWiki845 (talk · give credit), Ktin (talk · give credit) and Angole17637 (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.
Nominator's comments: Will be done in 1.5 hours. Prose is there. Good refs needed Sherenk1 (talk) 16:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality too short, not enough match summary text, and lots of citations needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- oppose - almost entirely unsourced. Bit odd to nominate significantly before it's finished. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I just noticed this too. The match isn't over, so nonsense to nominate it now, when there is literally no blurb available. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Irrelevant and immaterial. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Comment C'mon, we're really going to nom this before it's even over? SMH. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Added a blurb, but the target has barely any prose. Gotitbro (talk) 23:07, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Far too little prose and far too many CN tags. The Kip (talk) 19:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Prose added for the finals. All of the [citation needed] tags have now been fixed. Meets base-requirements for homepage / ITN. Please have a look and let me know if anything else is required. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 00:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me per the last one that was posted (2021 Indian Premier League Final), Support. Gotitbro (talk) 10:32, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - looks OK now, and marking as ready. — Amakuru (talk) 10:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Quality now sufficient. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Do we have an admin available who can consider posting this one? Seems ready. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. I did support above, but there seems clear consensus that it's ready and it's ITN/R too, so doesn't seem controversial. — Amakuru (talk) 15:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Madjoari massacre
Blurb: At least 50 people are killed by armed assailants in a rural commune of eastern Burkina Faso. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In Kompienga Province, Burkina Faso, over 50 civilians are massacred by an armed group believed to be linked to the jihadist insurgency in the country.
Alternative blurb II: Over 50 civilians are killed in Kompienga Province, Burkina Faso.
News source(s): France 24, Reuters, CNN, DW
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Mass casualty incident with international coverage. Article requires significant expansion. Most details surrounding event remain unclear (perpetrators, exact death toll, motives...) Mooonswimmer 15:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support but needs to be expanded. Added an altblurb,. Sheila1988 (talk) 15:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support Article is short, but good enough for a start. Juxlos (talk) 16:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support for ALT1. ALT0 seems to be a bad copy/paste of the other ITN nomination today, as it has the wrong location listed. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Too stubby, article barely expands beyond the single-line blurbs here. Gotitbro (talk) 16:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing The article says that "Civilians and soldiers in northern and eastern Burkina Faso are regularly attacked" and that this is the third big attack this month. This seems to be like US shootings – a regular occurence. See the List of ongoing armed conflicts (right) and note how many generate over 10,000 deaths annually. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support because it's important enough & the article is good enough. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 18:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose: (I'm the one who made the Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso article) This is certainly a high death toll, and the article is written well. The issue is with the notability- such actions happen regularly in the country. Madjaori is probably the first major massacre in the country in 2022, but what makes it so special? It's unlikely to result in significant changes or reactions. Such events are just normal occurences in many countries. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 18:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- This would be my concern - the Burkina Faso area has been undergoing such conflicts for years that highlighting any specific conflict may be a problem. I dunno if this also makes it viable for ongoing. --Masem (t) 19:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Stubby. Of 290 words of text, 80 are devoted to background. Toll of at least 50 seems corroborated by RS coverage. (France24/AFP cite is in French. English version may be found here.) Note that event occurred four days ago. – Sca (talk) 19:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support This should be posted now as this individual conflict seems to be notable. I don’t see any reason to consider the Jihadist insurgency for ongoing when that article doesn’t get regular updates because the last major incident before this massacre was more than three months ago.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support, As the article says it was condemned by UNSG, so it happened and is notable. Alex-h (talk) 12:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose disaster stub. What little original content exists could be a single paragraph in Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso --LaserLegs (talk) 19:02, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support The article is too stubby, but the event itself seems notable enough. The Kip (talk) 19:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Sidhu Moose Wala
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express, NDTV
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Venkat TL (talk · give credit)
- Updated by DeluxeVegan (talk · give credit) and Fylindfotberserk (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: C class. good sourcing. Venkat TL (talk) 14:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Needs heavy copy edit for poor English and slang phrasing ("On the next day, case was registered on him for the song", "Moose Wala founded a record label of his name and released numerous tracks on the record label.", "He released the first song "Warning Shots", which is diss track to Karan Aujla's track Lafaafe"). No update for death either. Black Kite (talk) 16:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Death Update was added. >>> Extorc.talk 18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Updated and copy edited by User:DeluxeVegan and User:Fylindfotberserk Venkat TL (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support One of the biggest Indian singers in recent history. Not posting this would be direct evidence of Wikipedia's massive American bias, where even the deaths of mediocre, relatively unpopular American celebrities gets posted. 2001:569:57B2:4D00:B918:FF3C:751E:85F5 (talk) 17:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not a notable person outside India. --TheDutchViewer (talk) 17:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Doesn't make any difference, per the RFC linked in the nomination. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also disturbingly false - I've seen multiple news stories here in Canada. Nfitz (talk) 03:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please be reminded that for RD noms, "recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD." PFHLai (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Doesn't make any difference, per the RFC linked in the nomination. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - He is well known person among the Punjabi community around the world specially in India, Canada and the UK. He is most well known among the Sikhs. His membership with the INC and participation in the 2020-2021 Farmers' protest also makes him known even more. Debjyoti Gorai 18:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Support- Well known subject and notable event. -Tow (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks fine for an RD. And as Lai/the ITN template above notes, notability is not a factor for RD noms, only the article quality (prose et al) should be discussed here. Gotitbro (talk) 22:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 23:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Port Harcourt stampede
Blurb: At least 31 people die at a church charity event in a stampede in Port Harcourt, southern Nigeria. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Over 30 people are killed in a stampede in Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
News source(s): AP, BBC, DW, CNN, Al Jazeera, Vanguard, The Guardian (Nigeria)
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jim Michael 2 (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Made world news as significant disaster, article however is a stub and needs major expansion. Nominating in order to draw attention to it. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support once destubbed current article is far off main page standards. Juxlos (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment @Abcmaxx and Juxlos: I've put some time into expanding the article based on what I could find online. Sam Walton (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I’d say it could use a little bit more - at 1700 characters I’m a little hesitant to call it for a blurb ITN. Juxlos (talk) 11:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment needs a map to fully implement the DISASTERSTUB then good to go. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- @LaserLegs: I've added a map to the article, please check if it is in accordance to the stub guide or not. Please ping me back if it is not. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 12:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait until fully destubbed. Per LaserLegs, map should be added. I have tagged the article as under construction, so we still have some time before we can blurb it. Side note, did we ever decide whether "stampede" or "crowd crush" would be better in this scenario? Cheers! Fakescientist8000 12:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
OpposeComment – Stubby. One-third of 290 words of text is background. Seems to have been agroup riotstampede. – Sca (talk) 12:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)- Nothing implied to be a riot. It's comparable to what happens on Black Fridays, stores open their doors and people rush and push over each other to try to get at the bargains first, though here it resulted in 31 deaths. And it has international coverage so, outside of the stubby article size, it definitely is the type of mass casualty incident we'd post. --Masem (t) 13:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb - This is easily important enough & the article is almost good enough. Had this happened in the developed world, it would have already been posted. I used the word stampede because RS do. The original blurb is too long. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 13:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think that's a little harsh, it's not always down to bias. There's far few fewer editors from that part of the world and local sources are harder to find on the internet, so it's only natural this is the way these things pan out.Abcmaxx (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Had it happened in the developed world, far more editors & readers would be interested in it. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Based on my read, its simply this is an area of the world not routinely covered by English and/or Western-based sources, meaning that there's a lack of information to be used for expanding the article. The event seems to have support of being recognized at ITN, but the lack of sourcing is what is limiting. --Masem (t) 19:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Had it happened in the developed world, far more editors & readers would be interested in it. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think that's a little harsh, it's not always down to bias. There's far few fewer editors from that part of the world and local sources are harder to find on the internet, so it's only natural this is the way these things pan out.Abcmaxx (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - term stampede is widely use in Nigerian media. Sheila1988 (talk) 15:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Has been tagged for expansion but as of now is barely more than a stub. Gotitbro (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've expanded the article a little more but I honestly believe we've summarised all the information that's out there online about this incident right now. Sam Walton (talk) 19:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ergo, wait. -- Sca (talk) 22:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Leaning support I've tidied up the existing references so what's there is properly formatted and makes use of all the parameters that it can. Schwede66 05:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The article now looks sufficiently good to go.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support, The article is good. Alex-h (talk) 12:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted — Amakuru (talk) 15:49, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lester Piggott
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, Bloomberg, BBC, Sky Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Seth Whales (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: Notable British jockey. "In popular culture" section has issues, rest of article OK. Mjroots (talk) 08:49, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose as stands 19 citation needed tags, not including the whole of his extensive honours section. I'm unsure as to whether blurb could be a possibility, as he was the record Derby winner with nine, and competed for nearly a half century. I would say the average person on the street in the UK knows only him and Frankie Dettori, though I can't speak for the rest of the world. Horse racing can hardly be called a niche due to the millions (billions?) put into it by the richest people in the world in order to get winners. Unknown Temptation (talk) 11:21, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- 9 tags now. I guess you mean "Major wins" which is wholly unsourced (although many of the horses have their own articles. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Sourcing needs to be fixed, content appears alright otherwise. Can be considered for a blurb but as it stands, no. Gotitbro (talk) 16:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- support -
lots of unsourced information, CN tags and quite a few MOS issues, such as flags in the competition victories section. Also, the shirts under the infobox take up about 8 pages on mobile view. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Supporting now, have made some changes for MOS. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC) - Support Refs now added (citation needed tags removed).SethWhales talk 19:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Well done Seth, great work. Any ideas about the "Major wins" section? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: The green boxes of jerseys placed just under the infobox, presumably not added there just as pretty decorations, need to be explained and sourced. --PFHLai (talk) 19:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- On that, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horse racing.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- They should never have been included in the article relating to Lester Piggott, they should only be in a specific horse race, such as 1983 Epsom Derby. They include also include second and third place finishes too, I have therefore removed them. I have been bold. SethWhales talk 21:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The reason I started a topic is because this isn't restrained to only this item - see Walter Swinburn for instance. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, they should also be removed too.SethWhales talk 21:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I have removed the Cite banner Unreferenced section too, as each race win does not need to be referenced as this information is widely available such as Willie Carson, Pat Eddery, Eddie Delahoussaye etc. SethWhales talk 21:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, they should also be removed too.SethWhales talk 21:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The reason I started a topic is because this isn't restrained to only this item - see Walter Swinburn for instance. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- They should never have been included in the article relating to Lester Piggott, they should only be in a specific horse race, such as 1983 Epsom Derby. They include also include second and third place finishes too, I have therefore removed them. I have been bold. SethWhales talk 21:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- On that, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horse racing.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- how does that source this information? These victories are uncited. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Pretty sure that this would all have been covered in major UK newspapers at the time, such at The Times. Mjroots (talk) 05:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I have added an archived reference as a source at bottom of the "Major wins" section from racingbase.com. Is it now good to go? SethWhales talk 06:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Issues mentioned above, including citation of Major wins section and the disruptive list of jersey pictures, appear to have been resolved satisfactorily. — Amakuru (talk) 10:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
May 28
May 28, 2022
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Ready for RD) RD/Blurb: Bujar Nishani
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:
News source(s): WaPo, CNN A2
Credits:
- Updated by Alsoriano97 (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: President of Albania, 2012–2017. Coverage seems thin for a recent head of state. Is anyone interested in beefing it up and adding refs? Blurbing is unlikely. --PFHLai (talk) 20:53, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I had planned to nominate it as well, since I started editing it. Between tomorrow and the next day I will try to expand the content and add more references. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:21, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment certainly needs a lot of inline citations. Oppose blurb - if I understand correctly President of Albania is a semi-ceremonial position and he served for 5 years during a period of relatively nothing happening in there. Juxlos (talk) 08:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai: @Juxlos: Can you take a look at it? It's a headache to be using information sources with a language I don't know at all. But I think the basics are there. Copyediting may be necessary. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the updating, Alsoriano97. --PFHLai (talk) 11:27, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good enough for RD. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- With more than 1200 words, this is more than long enough to qualify. Footnotes can be found at expected spots, with all non-English sources AGF'd. No glaring formatting problems. This wikibio is READY for RD to me. (But, this is my nom, so I may be biased.) --PFHLai (talk) 11:27, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Cannes Film Festival
Blurb: At the Cannes Film Festival, Triangle of Sadness wins the Palme d'Or. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Triangle of Sadness wins the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival.
News source(s): Deadline, France 24, Variety
Credits:
- Nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jnf663 (talk · give credit) and JuliánLeiva66 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: ITNR, but articles for the festival and the film need a good deal of work and/or expansion. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 19:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Needs a poster, awards section, plot (currently a single-line summary), for a film which won a major award reception section is bare-bones. Themes and analysis and the director's viewpoint/style (has also won the same award prior). The prod/disto companies listed in the ib are too large, only the major/directly involved ones should be listed and the list culled. Gotitbro (talk) 20:47, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- For posting to ITN, it does not need to be that developed. It needs to be well sourced and beyond stub length, which this is. --Masem (t) 19:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I realized that, was listing what an ideal film article for the second d'Or winner should at least be. Though a poster and a basic plot summary are still necessitated. Gotitbro (talk) 22:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The festival article needs a lot of work, as it's just a list of tables at the moment. Nothing in the lead to say who actully won too. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose needs more prose and lots more sources- most of the information in tables isn't sourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment the film article is nearly close to being a target as well, lacking a few citations (and it is more than just plot). It would be good if this could be highlighted as a bolded link too. --Masem (t) 19:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Champions League Final
Blurb: In association football, Real Madrid beat Liverpool to win the 2022 UEFA Champions League Final (Man of the Match Thibaut Courtois pictured). (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by 2600:1702:38D0:E70:452C:FB38:4B5A:A417 (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
2600:1702:38D0:E70:452C:FB38:4B5A:A417 (talk) 21:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Article needs a lot of work. No match summary, no prose in the Road to the final, several unsourced paragraphs, and not enough information on the pre-match entry issues. SounderBruce 21:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose in current state - match summary is completely unsourced, despite there being no shortage of sources to be used. Unknown Temptation (talk) 11:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Changing to support. Article is much improved and now cited Unknown Temptation (talk) 18:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - not suitable until the summary is sourced (as well as other information). Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support article has been improved and now meets quality standards for ITN. NorthernFalcon (talk) 21:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - I would suggest featuring 2021-22 UEFA Champions League instead, with the blurb stating “…won the 2021-22 UEFA Champions League”.Tvx1 22:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support now that there's a sourced match summary. Article is now good enough to be posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:42, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- @SounderBruce, Unknown Temptation, and Lee Vilenski: looks like article has improved since when you voted, would you be kind enough to take a look again? Joseph2302 (talk) 10:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Still some outstanding cn tags. Also, it appears that everything to do with the delayed kick-off has been spun off into 2022 UEFA Champions League final chaos, leaving just a sentence in this article. That should be expanded to a proper summary. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Quality seems sufficient and worth posting ASAP to avoid the nomination becoming stale. AusLondonder (talk) 16:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The game result is not significant. What's all over the news is the chaos at the stadium – widespread muggings, ticket issues, tear gas and more. This is so significant that there's a separate spinoff article but the lead of the target article says nothing about it and so seems to be a whitewash. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:06, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- You're no doubt aware that this is an INTR nomination so it's only the quality which is of concern in this nomination. If you wish to make a separate nomination for the chaos or suggest an amalgamated blurb here, that's fine, but stop disrupting Wikipedia to make a point please. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think Andrew is trying to say that he doesn't view the nominated article as being complete? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Andrew has a policy of opposition to any sporting event being posted on ITNR, his vote can almost certainly be disregarded. The Kip (talk) 19:27, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think Andrew is trying to say that he doesn't view the nominated article as being complete? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- You're no doubt aware that this is an INTR nomination so it's only the quality which is of concern in this nomination. If you wish to make a separate nomination for the chaos or suggest an amalgamated blurb here, that's fine, but stop disrupting Wikipedia to make a point please. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- It's not getting posted with citation needed tags. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Muboshgu: None remaining now. S.A. Julio (talk) 19:43, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 20:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
May 27
May 27, 2022
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Politics and elections
|
RD: Marko Račič
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [4]
Credits:
- Nominated by Canadian Paul (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: Slovenian Olympic athlete Canadian Paul 22:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support looks more than good enough for AFD (with AGF on the non-English sources). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:58, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
RD: Ahmad Syafi'i Maarif
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5]
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Juxlos (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Nyanardsan (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: Major figure in Indonesian Islam. Juxlos (talk) 08:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Plenty of sources and article has good length. –Jiaminglimjm (talk) 11:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- With more than 1000 words of readable prose, this wikibio is more than long enough to qualify. Footnotes can be found where they are expected (I AGF'd all non-English refs), and formatting looks fine, too. And Earwig didn't find anything wrong. This wikibio could use another round of copyediting, perhaps by a native English speaker, but otherwise, it's READY for RD to me. --PFHLai (talk) 19:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Angelo Sodano
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Pillar, FarodiRoma Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by Fakescientist8000 (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: Catholic bishop. 94. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Oppose on quality, a lot of cn tags must be fixed. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)- Support, notable figure, read the AP source to see his notability Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 15:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please be reminded that for RD noms, "recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD." Notability is not to be considered, unless there is a blurb to consider. --PFHLai (talk) 15:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Alsoriano97: Those CN tags have been fixed. Should hopefully be ready to go. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 14:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support good to go. Nice work Fakescientist! _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:45, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 11:27, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
May 26
May 26, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: George Shapiro
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety; WFTV (ABC); Toronto Sun
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 00:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support article is adequate in length and sourcing. Juxlos (talk) 07:48, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 10:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
International Booker Prize
Blurb: Indian writer Geetanjali Shree (pictured) and translator Daisy Rockwell win the International Booker Prize for Tomb of Sand. (Post)
News source(s): AP, Indian Express, BBC, International Booker Prize
Credits:
- Nominated by Joofjoof (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.
Joofjoof (talk) 15:12, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Given that the prize is awarded to the book (with recognition of the author and translator), rather as an award to the author, the book should really be a target article here, and in that situation, it needs lots of help. --Masem (t) 18:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- We have been seeing greater recognition of translators in recent times but unfortunately the translator here does not appear to have an article. Would be great if Daisy Rockwell can be blue-linked as well. Gotitbro (talk) 20:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- There is a currently a Draft:Daisy Rockwell which could use editing. Joofjoof (talk) 21:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- The draft was most recently denied mainspace status on notability grounds: diff. Surely that's no longer the case, with the Booker win? (Still, neither it nor the novel's article are ready for the Main Page.) Moscow Mule (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Adding the link to Rockwell in the blurb. Thanks Moscow Mule, Thriley, and others.Joofjoof (talk) 00:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- The draft was most recently denied mainspace status on notability grounds: diff. Surely that's no longer the case, with the Booker win? (Still, neither it nor the novel's article are ready for the Main Page.) Moscow Mule (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Andy Fletcher (musician)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Kafoxe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit) and Lugnuts (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: Member of Depeche Mode. Kafoxe (talk) 20:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Needs some work - Needs a handful of refs... but more importantly, where is the discography? - Floydian τ ¢ 21:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Would't it be at Depeche Mode discography (incidentally, a featured list no less, so an example of exactly how to do it)? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'd think it still warrants a section link or summary style. Bands go through lineup changes, and musicians often gig outside of their primary group. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- It was just a A Question of Time before it was added. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 13:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'd think it still warrants a section link or summary style. Bands go through lineup changes, and musicians often gig outside of their primary group. - Floydian τ ¢ 02:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Would't it be at Depeche Mode discography (incidentally, a featured list no less, so an example of exactly how to do it)? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Needs more sources, wants fewer repeated words. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:54, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Agree his bio needs a lot more work. Looks like it's Citation Time Again... Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I've added a TON of references (and a few CN tags). I'll take another look later today to get the bare info up to date. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:36, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support As far as I can tell, everything is now sourced. Give me a ping if anything isn't, or needs adding. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 14:15, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support All CN tags are taken care of, looks good to go. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 18:41, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 20:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: Mass Shootings in the United States
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)
Credits:
- Nominated by AviationFreak (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- This doesn't pass the laugh test, I'm afraid. WaltCip-(talk) 18:45, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Really? As stated above I'm not a regular here so a bit of WP:DBTN would be appreciated, but I think this meets all of the criteria laid out for ongoing additions. At any rate, I would reckon it's eligible enough for a discussion/debate? AviationFreak💬 18:52, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Anyone laughing at this is (IMO) a horrible person, I can't imagine someone would laugh at a a shooting. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support From the discussion about the Robb Elementary shooting nomination here and seeing how ongoing this is and how two of the country's mass shootings happening basically a week apart, I feel this is worth adding to ongoing. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose it's not an ongoing event, it's a series of unrelated mass shootings caused by poor gun control. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Articles such as this aren't added to ongoing since there really isn't an end date. It's similar to nominating an article about the modern age or search for a cure for cancer for ongoing – yes it's happening, but it's been happening for a while, and it'll probably continue happening long after we're dead. The recent shootings were disconnected, and, as weird as it is to say, not that much out of the ordinary. If this were a series of connected, planned, terrorist attacks over a span of a week for instance, then it would be different. Dat GuyTalkContribs 19:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 19:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose it is a long running problem, but it would absolutely inappropriate to treat all US mass shootings as part of the same event. --Masem (t) 19:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Even as I feel like it's constant, these shootings not actually a singular event, but a series of multiple events as a result of a decades-long underlying causes. It's inappropriate and mis-characterizing to say they're all the same, connected, one event. It's a series of events. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 19:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Procedural Oppose while the most recent slaughter is still on the main page under ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment this has indeed been mentioned by several commenters on the Buffalo and Uvalde nominations. I'm not sure if linking to a list is the best course of action though, despite it likely being the most updated. I'd hope there might be a less-listy article we could feature, on the line of Gun violence in the United States but more focused on recent events. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Although it may seem this way, we’re not actually at war. Trillfendi (talk) 20:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Absolutely not. This is essentially connecting dots that we should not be connecting under any circumstances. Kafoxe (talk) 20:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I disagree - I think mass shootings in the US are "dots" that are absolutely worth connecting as they show just how common these things are in the US opposed to other countries. This discussion is about the problem of whether our connecting of these dots should be put on the Main Page. AviationFreak💬 20:45, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- They are connected dots on the top of gun violence in the US, but they are not connected events outside of a long circulous route of legislation, case law, socioeconomic problems, and more. --Masem (t) 20:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I disagree - I think mass shootings in the US are "dots" that are absolutely worth connecting as they show just how common these things are in the US opposed to other countries. This discussion is about the problem of whether our connecting of these dots should be put on the Main Page. AviationFreak💬 20:45, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- EXTREMELY Strong Oppose - This isn't even an ongoing event, just something (bad) common in the USA. CR-1-AB (talk) 20:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Alan White (Yes drummer)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Ultimate Classic RockThe Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Floydian (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit), Martinevans123 (talk · give credit) and Zade Scrivner (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: Article is fairly well sourced, shouldn't be too difficult to fix up the issues. Pretty much just the discography/contributions left. Floydian τ ¢ 18:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Well sourced. Discography could be more sourced, or easily split off into a separate article. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- With the article not being that big, WP:AVOIDSPLIT seems applicable. We shouldn't split just to fast track an RD post. —Bagumba (talk) 08:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Per Martin. Daniel Case (talk) 22:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Good article, quite good drummer. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Discography still needs work. --PFHLai (talk) 04:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Now fully sourced by User:Grimes2. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted One Cn left.—Bagumba (talk) 16:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
(Closed, RD Posted) RD/Blurb: Ray Liotta
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 (Post)
News source(s): [6][7]
Credits:
- Nominated by Interstatefive (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TropicAces (talk · give credit) and Buttons to Push Buttons (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.
- Oppose per the usual requirements to source filmography etc. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- The real sad thing is that you take out his filmography, and there's not a lot left of his biography :( Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, because although he was a reasonable actor, I think I could list 100 actors right now who are more prominent than he was and they wouldn't be blurbed. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- The real sad thing is that you take out his filmography, and there's not a lot left of his biography :( Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb for obvious reasons. DzhungarRabbit (talk) 17:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Weak oppose The filmography section is unsourced. I'm also weak oppose on a blurb. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Support Article looks good. I remember when I strongly supported Jean Paul Belmondo for getting a blurb and one of the requirements was that there be a "legacy" section or something that highlighted his impact on French cinema. If such can be done for Liotta then I might lean towards a blurb. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:43, 26 May 2022 (UTC)- Support blurb. Unexpected, here death is the story. And he is worldwide known, prolific actor with career ranging from crime films to comedies. I added one more reliable source.Kirill C1 (talk) 17:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb I don't think I'll be looking out for Death of Ray Liotta or Funeral of Ray Liotta. Unexpected, sure, tragic, definitely, blurb-worthy? Absolutely not in a million years. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- He is extremely famous for Goodfellas and numerous other films. It is possible that such article appears. The requirement for blurb is met. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fame is an insufficient condition to blurb someone's death. --Masem (t) 17:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:ITNRD:
In general, if a person's death is only notable for what they did while alive, it belongs as an RD link.
. Exceptions can be made on an exceptional basis for major figures like if the Queen died or something, but clearly blurbs are not intended to be used merely for deaths of famous people. If we allowed that, ITN would be clogged with death blurbs. 4iamking (talk) 17:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- He is extremely famous for Goodfellas and numerous other films. It is possible that such article appears. The requirement for blurb is met. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD Only Page looks good, but unless i'm missing something there doesn't seem to be anything that I can think of why this should be blurbed. Being a famous actor isn't blurb worthy. 4iamking (talk) 17:32, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- He was in the middle of filming and has several unreleased films. His death affects several other articles, which is one of the requirements for this type of blurb. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:41, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Where do you get these "Requirements" from? 4iamking (talk) 17:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- He was in the middle of filming and has several unreleased films. His death affects several other articles, which is one of the requirements for this type of blurb. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:41, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD Only Being a well-known actor isn't enough for the blurb. Quality looks acceptable, assuming we are OK with the filmography being shunted off into a separate article.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD only blurbs are not for household names or famous people. They need to show being a transformative aspect to their field, and he clearly did not reach that. --Masem (t) 17:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- But there are different kinds of blurbs. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD Only Fine. Grimes2 (talk) 17:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD Article looks adequate. Indifferent on blurb. Yeah, he was well known. But not an A lister. On the other hand, his death is surprising (and sad). -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- There are sources calling him legendary [8] [9]. Also, some views on him not being A-lister may differ "In 1990, Liotta reached A-List status with his iconic performance as Henry Hill in the Martin Scorsese classic "[10]. Variety calls him marquee name [11]. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- He was nominated for a Golden Globe and picked up a handful of second tier, though WP:NOTABLE, awards. No other top tier award nominations. So no, I don't think he was an A lister. He was a well known actor who was steadily employed with some good roles to his credit. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Emmy is top tier award. He was also nominated for Screen Actors Guild Awards and won Film Independent Spirit Awards, these are top tier awards too. As for why he was not nominated for Academy Award - we may look at nominees for the years he was in contention. Kirill C1 (talk) 18:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- He was nominated for a Golden Globe and picked up a handful of second tier, though WP:NOTABLE, awards. No other top tier award nominations. So no, I don't think he was an A lister. He was a well known actor who was steadily employed with some good roles to his credit. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think is ready, as the unsiurced filmography was spun out in the last few hours, burying the problem that TRM pointed out. That needs to be fixed. --Masem (t) 17:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Jesus, what is this new metric for looking at someone who starred (lead actor) in what is considered one of the greatest American films of all time (per the Library of Congress and American Film Institute) and essentially saying "eh, tough titty"? Trillfendi (talk) 17:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- C'mon, Muppets from Space isn't that good... Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- His honey business was controversial. Joofjoof (talk) 23:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- I felt myself groaning "Oh, no" the moment I saw someone had tried to propose a blurb for this. It always devolves into the same thing, what amounts to a mudslinging upon the dead as editors vie to proclaim that the deceased wasn't sui generis or Mandela-esque enough to warrant a blurb. Let's please not do this again. For the record, RD only.--WaltCip-(talk) 18:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD Only Unfortunate news, but I think some of us might be overestimating how influential Liotta was. Will Malcolm McDowell get a blurb? What about Keir Dullea? Did Danny Aiello get one? Anyway, Ray Liotta filmography needs a lot of work sourcing-wise. And I'm not so sure about the first few citations in the actor's article. Mooonswimmer 18:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD only And should be added quickly. Inexpiable (talk) 18:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD when ready, oppose blurb. Clear difference between a transformative actor and just a popular one (who should have gotten an Oscar for Goodfellas, but I digress). De Niro will one day sadly get a blurb, but that's the high standard it should be, in my opinion. Rhino131 (talk) 19:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose RD Unsourced filmography. Forking doesn't fix that. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD only—Ray Liotta is a well-known, accredited actor whose legacy includes legendary performances in works like Goodfellas or Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. However, I feel that an actor being given an ITN blurb requires a truly extraordinary career, something that is above and beyond merely being famous; they have to be iconic on an entirely different level. If we were talking about someone like Dustin Hoffman, Al Pacino, or even the likes of Johnny Depp or Samuel L. Jackson, then I think the argument could be made. Ray Liotta? He's a noteworthy actor, yes, but I don't think he quite makes it to blurb-worthy status. Kurtis (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, and this looks ready to go. I think Kurtis above has laid out the same thoughts that I had. - Floydian τ ¢ 21:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose again why are we repeating his image, and where did the filmography go? This is not an appropriate use of a content fork, just to rush a nomination to the main page. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Honestly, I'd argue it was definitely of sufficient length to warrant forking... Made the old page look ridiculous, as it probably took up half the article height. Although I do absolutely agree we shouldn't post until the new fork is up to par. Been working on it; slowly getting there. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 22:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Honestly, I'd argue you're completely wrong. The fork would only be warranted if the rest if the article was huge and needed splitting for length reasons. Which is plainly not the case, and now the filmography is just empty on this page for no reason. Once it's put back we can continue considering whether it's up nto par. — Amakuru (talk) 01:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry all - my bad. I thought it would be a good solution in this case. Big thanks to Buttons for doing all the sourcing on that, too! Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Honestly, I'd argue you're completely wrong. The fork would only be warranted if the rest if the article was huge and needed splitting for length reasons. Which is plainly not the case, and now the filmography is just empty on this page for no reason. Once it's put back we can continue considering whether it's up nto par. — Amakuru (talk) 01:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Honestly, I'd argue it was definitely of sufficient length to warrant forking... Made the old page look ridiculous, as it probably took up half the article height. Although I do absolutely agree we shouldn't post until the new fork is up to par. Been working on it; slowly getting there. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 22:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb dozens of actors born in his decade can be found that are more impactful than him. No impact disclosed in article. Definitely not equivalent to a world leading international-quality sportsperson, professor etc etc Oppose RD due to inappropriate cutting of core info Bumbubookworm (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Marking as ready for RD. Discussion for blurb can continue, although the trend seems to be in opposition. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Not at all ready for RD, as the filmography has been illegitimately forked off simply to get around it not being cited. Please return it to the article and cite it properly. — Amakuru (talk) 00:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Photo RD Eventually Article needs work, and he didn't live like Robert De Niro nor die in storybook ending fashion, but did have beautiful eyes (relative to Yasin Malik's, anyway, not on Meg Foster's level). InedibleHulk (talk) 02:20, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. Filmography has been put back and fully sourced, so looked good to do. Consensus for a blurb seems unlikely to develop, so will leave it at that. — Amakuru (talk) 11:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Five {cn} tags remain in the Filmography section. --PFHLai (talk) 11:48, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- All dealt with now. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 14:35, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- RD only. He was a prolific, popular actor who was active until his unexpected, sudden death. However, he was nowhere near important enough for a blurb. Less than 1% of entertainers are. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 13:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb not probably in the 50 greatest/most well-known actors of his era (most of whom would also probably struggle to get blurbed), so definitely not blurb worthy. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com]
rather than using <ref></ref>
tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref>
tags are being used, here are their contents: