Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
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
March 14
March 14, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
March 13
March 13, 2022
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: William Hurt
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TompaDompa (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: Is anybody up for sourcing a long filmography? Because I'm not. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- The article needs referencing updates, especially the filmography. --Tone 21:17, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The filmography is now sourced in its entirety. TompaDompa (talk) 22:23, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- TompaDompa Awesome! – Muboshgu (talk) 22:39, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support listing in recent deaths. --TheSandDoctor Talk 00:01, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support. BD2412 T 01:24, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support article seems to have no major problems. Hamza Ali Shah 01:29, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment marked as ready. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:03, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posting, excellent work! --Tone 09:06, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
British Academy Film Awards
Blurb: At the 75th British Academy Film Awards, The Power of the Dog wins Best Film. (Post)
Alternative blurb: At the 75th British Academy Film Awards, The Power of the Dog wins Best Film and Best Director for Jane Campion (pictured).
Credits:
- Nominated by Kingsif (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.
Nominator's comments: Expanded, refs and prose. Can't quite remember the blurb format. Kingsif (talk) 21:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support as nom - satis. Kingsif (talk) 01:46, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Hamza Ali Shah 02:12, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Should there be an "In Memoriam" section? Last year's page has one. The Award and Statistics tables should have references too. Joofjoof (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality statistics and in memoriam sections are unsourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:42, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Brent Renaud
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Created by Sulpyensid (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kober (talk · give credit), Pigsonthewing (talk · give credit) and GeorgiaHuman (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 journalist, writer, documentary filmmaker, and photojournalist. TJMSmith (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support article seems to be well sourced. Hamza Ali Shah 17:41, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Details still unclear, but NYT is claiming he may have been killed during shelling of a suburb in Kyiv. I don't think this necessarily calls for a blurb, but I just figured I would mention this detail in case that impacts discussion. WaltCip-(talk) 18:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready. Thriley (talk) 19:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support on quality. I'll be glad to see this appear. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, as per others. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:11, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:38, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
March 12
RD: Timmy Thomas
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Soultracks
Credits:
- Nominated by Humbledaisy (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 updated and seems to be well sourced Humbledaisy (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready for the usual reason. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
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 JayPlaysStuff (talk · give credit)
Article updated
RD: Traci Braxton
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1] iheart
Credits:
- Nominated by Riverflat2021 (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.
--Riverflat2021 (talk) 16:48, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready for the usual reason. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:01, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Rupiah Banda
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Cutlass (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 updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:11, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Solid article and well sourced. No issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks OK. – Ammarpad (talk) 19:08, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted after fixing multiple deadlinks in refs. --PFHLai (talk) 21:33, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) India fires missile into Pakistan
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: India accidentally fires a missile into Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, The Guardian; India Times;NYT; BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Re12345 (talk · give credit)
- Hypothetical Weak Oppose A supersonic missile at that, but any future article on the accident itself will likely be stubby, and the happy ending sure to dissuade the MINIMUMDEATHS-minded regulars. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:57, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose No article, and India has already said it was an accident. --Masem (t) 03:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support I've fixed up the nomination first made by an inexperienced IP editor. This seems to be quite significant international news; not the sort of thing we should rush to suppress. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:13, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose has no article of its own and the linked article is, and it looks like a bad joke, two lines. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 13:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality as there's only 2 lines of text about it. If it's that newsworthy, then there will be more that can be written. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- The death of Shane Warne was lead blurb for a week even though there wasn't much to be said about it ("natural causes") and the section about his death still just has two lines. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:45, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Per Masem. Although Pakistan demands investigation, no casualties & not widely covered. – Sca (talk) 13:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support pending improvements/creation of standalone article - Both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers. If any other nuclear power (see List of states with nuclear weapons) fired a missile into the territory of another nuclear power (think: U.S., Russia, China, U.K., France, North Korea), this would be posted in a heartbeat, even if it was an accident. It doesn't matter if there are any casualties. It is a significant event in and of itself. There is international news coverage. Also, suggestion for the blurb: "accidentally" is POV as that is India's statement, just like how we did not call the Ukraine invasion a "special military operation" per Russia's statement. 174.3.214.138 (talk) 16:17, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Is there any plausible reason to intentionally fire an unarmed missile at a wall of no strategic value during peacetime? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:30, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- To test anti-missile defence capabilities (and vulnerabilities) of an adversary. Same reason why countries like Russia make incursions into foreign airspace or territorial waters to see how far they can go before they get a response. 174.3.214.138 (talk) 22:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- I could buy into that. I don't think I will. But it's something to ponder. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- To test anti-missile defence capabilities (and vulnerabilities) of an adversary. Same reason why countries like Russia make incursions into foreign airspace or territorial waters to see how far they can go before they get a response. 174.3.214.138 (talk) 22:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Is there any plausible reason to intentionally fire an unarmed missile at a wall of no strategic value during peacetime? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:30, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose good faith nom per above. No article is usually a showstopper. Yes, there are exceptions, but this aint one of them. If this actually turns into something that generates a real (non-stub) article, I will reconsider. Until then, this is going nowhere. Suggest close. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Minor issue, zero casualty. Apparently, there's not even enough story to write a stub article. – Ammarpad (talk) 19:13, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
March 11
March 11, 2022
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
(Posted) RD: Bruce Duffy
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by AleatoryPonderings (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: First reported today (March 11); died on February 10 (i.e. provable gap of at least two days). —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:37, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Adequate depth of coverage, referenced. SpencerT•C 19:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Spencer. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 12:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 14:52, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) 2021–22 Major League Baseball lockout
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: The 2021–22 Major League Baseball lockout ends after 99 days (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Mannysoloway (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit), GhostRiver (talk · give credit) and Dmoore5556 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose For the same reasons this was opposed for when the lockout started. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose: I like to consider myself a big baseball fan, but I just don't see the significance of this news. Ultimately, this lockout had minimal effects on the average fan's experience. The only noticeable result of the lockout is that the season is going to start about a week later than normal. The rest of the changes are relatively minor rules changes such as universal DH and other labor/contract related stuff that the average fan wouldn't really understand and the long-term effects of which would probably take at least season to understand. Not to mention, it's not even the number one headline on ESPN right now (at least for me). Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 02:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Effectively only a few games of the season have been missed. Not a serious effect. --Masem (t) 02:31, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- They haven't even been missed, just rescheduled. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 04:07, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Masem, not a very large effect besides some rule changes. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 04:07, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
March 10
March 10, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Yevhen Deidei
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Created by Zorro naranjo (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Elserbio00 (talk · give credit) and Robby.is.on (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: Ukrainian politician and military officer. TJMSmith (talk) 14:33, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support article looks pretty good, but I'm not sure that the section on his financial earnings and net worth has much encyclopedic value. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Under sourced (including some contentious claims), a number of parts look like a hit piece, some sources are dubious. Black Kite (talk)
RD: Odalis Pérez
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by ActuallyNeverHappened02 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Nohomersryan (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: Dominican baseball starting pitcher. The "Personal life" section does not have citations and the section on his death is very short as of now. ActuallyNeverHappened02 (a place to chalk | a list of stuff i've done) 22:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready Most of the article is unreferenced. This is going to need some work before it can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:39, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jürgen Grabowski
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): FAZ
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Eastfrisian (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 footballer, played for Eintracht Frankfurt. He became European champion in 1972 and world champion in 1974. Grimes2 (talk) 19:40, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Almost there One CN tag. Otherwise short but adequate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, grateful that I didn't have to do it! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 15:07, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
RD: Emilio Delgado
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline Hollywood
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (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: Long-time actor on Sesame Street as Luis, the fix-it shop owner. Article needs sourcing help. Masem (t) 03:55, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: John Elliott (historian)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph
Credits:
- Nominated by Brigade Piron (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TheRichic (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: Eminent British historian of Early Modern Spain and the Iberian World. —Brigade Piron (talk) 20:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not Quite Ready The books need an ISBN. Otherwise the article, while short, is adequate and decently referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:26, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- The books do not need an ISBN, that is a requirement for the references of an articles, not for a list of publications by the article's subject. Aza24 (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, all information in a BLP needs referencing, and ISBNs, or some other reference for his works, show that he did write those books. Stephen 00:54, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Done. All ISBN numbers in Bibliography section added. Alexcalamaro (talk) 18:19, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, all information in a BLP needs referencing, and ISBNs, or some other reference for his works, show that he did write those books. Stephen 00:54, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- The books do not need an ISBN, that is a requirement for the references of an articles, not for a list of publications by the article's subject. Aza24 (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready now.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:53, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks good. – Ammarpad (talk) 07:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 09:04, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
RD: Mario Terán
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Los Tiempos
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Krisgabwoosh (talk · give credit)
- Created by Fake God20 (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: Bolivian warrant officer who carried out the execution of Che Guevara in 1967. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 15:34, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Far too much of the article centers on Che's exploits that have nothing to do with Terán. I understand we've completely abandoned WP:1E, but BLPs still should be about the person in the title. GreatCaesarsGhost 16:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready for the usual reason. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:19, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Kimberley Kitching
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Anarchyte (talk · give credit)
- Created by Callanecc (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: Australian Senator for the Labor Party. Died suddenly of a heart attack. Anarchyte (talk) 09:15, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Decent article and well referenced. No issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. TJMSmith (talk) 17:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
March 9
March 9, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Ready) RD: Mary Coombs
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph, The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Joofjoof (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit), Pachu Kannan (talk · give credit) and Philip Cross (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: First woman to work as a commercial computer programmer. Earliest death announcement on this date [3] with news sources following later. Joofjoof (talk) 08:55, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article is in good shape. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 09:29, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support more than good enough for RD. Marked as ready. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Donald Pinkel
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; The Commercial Appeal
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
- Created by LinguistAtLarge (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Bloom6132 (talk) 07:41, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. TJMSmith (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Inge Deutschkron
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tagesspiegel
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ruokasi (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 and Isreali journalist, 99, eyewitness of the Holocaust and activist for not forgetting. The article was basically there, I only distributed the existing refs more. There's more material if needed. Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. No issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Referenced. Meets requirements. Grimes2 (talk) 15:27, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Good to go. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 15:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. TJMSmith (talk) 17:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: David Wheeler
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Montgomery Advertiser
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Kafoxe (talk · give credit)
- Created by Connormah (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Incumbent state representative from Alabama. Kafoxe (talk) 20:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. No issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Good for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. TJMSmith (talk) 04:06, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
RD: Tomás Boy
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN MARCA
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: Mexican football manager and former player. Captained the Mexican national football team at the 1986 FIFA World Cup. Won two Primera División titles with Tigres UANL. Managed several Liga MX teams in a managing career that spanned three decades. --2806:109F:1:1A1E:4040:1912:AAD9:6AE2 (talk) 18:43, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready for the usual reason. The first half or so of the article is actually decently referenced. Unfortunately, after that it goes downhill quickly. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:28, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Presidential election in South Korea
Blurb: A presidential election is held in South Korea. (Post)
Alternative blurb: South Koreans head to the polls to elect their next president.
Alternative blurb II: Yoon Suk-yeol (pictured) is elected president of South Korea.
News source(s): Reuters The New York Times South China Morning Post, AP, BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Blurengo (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.
Blurengo (talk) 18:29, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Well, this is quite a close result as of an hour ago. Omnifalcon (talk) 19:17, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Wait Article is fine, I'm pretty certain its going to be Yoon who wins, but very few outlets have called it just yet, it would be preferred if we put the victor of the election. Until that is called, I think we should wait. Ornithoptera (talk) 19:20, 9 March 2022 (UTC)- Wait per above. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 19:43, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Seems like news outlets are more or less comfortably calling Yoon the winner by now, so I've proposed a blurb to reflect that.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The picture in use on Yoon's page and the election page seems to be from the election commission, and is probably a public license but I'm not sure. As a backup I added an image that is acceptable but it's got some image resolution quality issues. Also there's plenty of unsourced text on the page, but we do have a concession and race calls. Omnifalcon (talk) 23:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb 2 The results have now been announced so I see no problem in posting this. Hamza Ali Shah 00:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support ALT2 As per above, with Lee conceding there's little uncertainty left as to who the winner is by now. Ornithoptera (talk) 03:34, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support The result is decided as Yoon's victory. Reiro (talk) 07:44, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality the election article is tagged for needing copy editing. Once done, consider this a support. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:50, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Joseph. The results section lacks more prose than there is and also lacks a section on "reactions" or "aftermath". Otherwise the article is quite good. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 09:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support — I would suggest to include the description "Conservative candidate" in the blurb. STSC (talk) 12:34, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Alt 2. No need to label conservative. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support alt2 Article looks fine. Flameperson (talk) 16:26, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. The article is enormous and highly comprehensive on the primaries, campaigns etc. However the 'results' section has just one unreferenced sentence, with no reaction, and Lee's concession is only mentioned in the lead. That could do with a few sentences. Otherwise alt2 is the way to go. Modest Genius talk 17:47, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support alt2 Article seems to be good enough. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 18:36, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Updated picture as it was cleared under the KOGL Omnifalcon (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not ready I counted at least 10 paragraphs in the lower half that lack a single reference. Stephen 23:08, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Stephen: I have now added references to most of the paragraphs. I couldn’t find any references for one part though (I have added a citations needed there). There might be a source for it in Korean though. Hamza Ali Shah 10:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Please, someone, I've been staring at Shane Warne's face for a week now. --MZMcBride (talk) 08:13, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- I only contributed to the article just to cite stuff faster so his sunburned gaze would be off the front page, honestly. Omnifalcon (talk) 00:49, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Still missing a reactions/aftermath section, and there should be enough material by now. --Tone 09:12, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Referencing concerns appear to be addressed now. Sandstein 18:42, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: David Bennett
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): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Phinbart (talk · give credit) and 20chances (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.
- A biography that only covers the last three months of his life? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:09, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's the notable part. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 19:44, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Then how does this article not fail WP:BIO1E?
The general rule is to cover the event, not the person.
– Muboshgu (talk) 19:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC) - I see this was kept at AfD. I'll just walk away from this, nothing good will come of my involvement here. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:48, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Then how does this article not fail WP:BIO1E?
- That's the notable part. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 19:44, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per concerns raised by Muboshgu. This does not appear to be a complete biographical article and the subject likely fails WP:1E. I took a look at the AfD and all I can say is that the discussion is embarrassing in its near complete refusal to address policy and guidelines. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:34, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. It isn't a biography at all, it's an article about a pig organ transplant under the wrong title. Pawnkingthree (talk) 01:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, not a biography and shouldn't even exist Bumbubookworm (talk) 01:50, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Re-opening this, because despite the non-admin closure above, the article was snow kept. RD does not debate notability.--WaltCip-(talk) 19:47, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support passes notability, defied an AFD, article is up to scratch, death is "in the news". The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - the only detail of his life other than the transplant, is a section on his crime and time in jail. As such it seems the article is unduly focused on negative aspects of this guy's life. If some more detail is added about the rest of his life, then I might support. Either he's notable, and we should give him a full bio, or he's not notable, in which case the article should be moved to some other title which focuses on the transplant only. — Amakuru (talk) 22:15, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- As a reminder, the article was nominated for deletion and was kept. So the "community at large" believe him to have satisfied GNG. As I noted on ITN talk, this has already been subject to IAR. Perhaps it's going to experience a double-IAR: the community believe him to be notable yet ITN don't, so no likey, no posty. What's available about his life seems to be already covered, he's probably got a shit-ton more coverage globally than most of the Indonesian naval officers etc we post combined, but there you go. Wikipedia at its finest. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:49, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Well far be it from me to question the outcome of the AFD, Ramblo, but really I'm just applying the same standard as I would apply to any other BLP. If there are large gaps in the biographical narrative then I don't consider the article ready for RD. Particularly when the only coverage of the first 99% of his life is focused on a crime he committed. If such coverage is provided, then I might reconsider. Objecting on that ground is not relitigating the AFD, it's simply stating that the article as it stands isn't of sufficient quality as a standalone biography. — Amakuru (talk) 13:21, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- As a reminder, the article was nominated for deletion and was kept. So the "community at large" believe him to have satisfied GNG. As I noted on ITN talk, this has already been subject to IAR. Perhaps it's going to experience a double-IAR: the community believe him to be notable yet ITN don't, so no likey, no posty. What's available about his life seems to be already covered, he's probably got a shit-ton more coverage globally than most of the Indonesian naval officers etc we post combined, but there you go. Wikipedia at its finest. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:49, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Simply not enough information in the article to say it meets the level of a biographical article. DarkSide830 (talk) 23:33, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Obvious BLP1E, that AfD has some of the most useless Keep comments I have ever seen (especially the latter ones). Should be a redirect to Xenotransplantation#History where all the actually useful information should be found. Black Kite (talk) 23:37, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Administrator note I'd discount the notability objections in the absence of a new AfD. However, I dont see consensus to post yet either.—Bagumba (talk) 08:57, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Stats I nominated this because he was in the news (again) and that's what we're here for right? But I'm not convinced that there's much point to RD because the entries are just names and so, unless there's some name recognition, most readers won't have a reason to click through. You can see this by checking the readership. Even though he's being snubbed by RD, David Bennett is doing fine compared to most of the RDs. So, clearly our readers are finding their own way to these articles. Only Kimberley Kitching is doing better as her name seems especially distinctive and memorable. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:56, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- ITN and RD are not and have not been subordinated to clicks and view counts, otherwise it would just be WP:TOP50 as many here have opined. WaltCip-(talk) 13:24, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Ukrainian refugee crisis
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Millions of people flee the Russo-Ukrainian War. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.reuters.com/world/flow-refugees-ukraine-rises-2-million-people-unhcr-head-says-2022-03-08/
Credits:
- Nominated by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose and close this was discussed as recently as yesterday. Chidgk1 this is your fifth nomination of Ukraine/Russia events in the last 24 hours, and none have been anywhere near getting a consensus to post. Please stop, as this is getting disruptive now. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:58, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and stop. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 09:00, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Discovery of the Endurance
Blurb: The wreck of the Endurance, the ship sunk during Ernest Shackleton's Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition, is found. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In Antarctica, an expedition locates the wreck of the ship Endurance, sunk in 1915 during Ernest Shackleton's Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition
News source(s): The New York Times, BBC, Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Sdkb (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 37.111.41.176 (talk · give credit) and Pietadè (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Arguably the biggest maritime discovery since that of the Titanic. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:27, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, especially like the white dinner plates left by the crew on her deck (at 1st took them/these for some marine creatures, shame on me), in 3,008 meters below...☆☆☆—PietadèTalk 07:48, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- And, willy-nilly, instead of writing here, every pro/contra letter inserted here, if inserted into improvement of the article, would make more (useful/productive) sense, IMHO☆☆☆—PietadèTalk 21:29, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support on notability. The article is poorly referenced and a lot of work is required, though.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:48, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Both Ernest Shackleton and Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition are FAs. Linking Endurance (1912 ship) is probably the more honest main article, though. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose the entire paragraphs are sourced to a single source at the end of the sections, so sources likely are there already and just need to be polished. Support when this is done. --Tone 08:40, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Both Ernest Shackleton and Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition are FAs. Linking Endurance (1912 ship) is probably the more honest main article, though. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Oppose on quality woefully undersourced. Support in principle if fixed. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)- Support because people need a little good news amongst the bad Chidgk1 (talk) 08:08, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support was about to nominate this myself. It is the kind of thing I can imagine people wanting to look up to read further. Update is still thin but will get there in short order looking at updates already applied. 3142 (talk) 08:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Both encyclopedic and newsworthy. Note that it's the top read story on the BBC which reports a significant detail: "This past month has seen the lowest extent of Antarctic sea-ice ever recorded during the satellite era ... The conditions were unexpectedly favourable.". Andrew🐉(talk) 09:27, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, when sufficient citations have been added to the article to meet quality standards. BilledMammal (talk) 09:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- I prefer ALT1 over the original blurb, when this article is of sufficient quality to post. BilledMammal (talk) 12:40, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle, article needs sufficient citations; encyclopedic and notable. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 12:28, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle, oppose on quality. Impressive discovery and we have good encyclopaedic content on the topic. The article on the expedition is an FA, but couldn't be the bold link. The article on the ship is woefully short of citations - there are multiple paragraphs of text with just one reference at the end. I've added an altblurb, which avoids the long clause before 'is found'. Modest Genius talk 12:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thinking about it, does the ship's article even need all that content about the final voyage? That information is already present - and much better cited - in the expedition article. Modest Genius talk 12:41, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with one reference per paragraph. It may well be that all the text in that paragraph comes from just one reference. Mjroots (talk) 12:46, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's debatable. Regardless, my concern was e.g. the 'ownership' section has four paragraphs and just one citation, at the end of the final paragraph. That's definitely not acceptable. Modest Genius talk 12:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with one reference per paragraph. It may well be that all the text in that paragraph comes from just one reference. Mjroots (talk) 12:46, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thinking about it, does the ship's article even need all that content about the final voyage? That information is already present - and much better cited - in the expedition article. Modest Genius talk 12:41, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not to knock something we want to post, but are these types of discoveries something affirmed in peer reviewd publications (as the case for centuries-old ruins when things like carbon-dating etc come into play) or is it taken for granted that finding ship placards and the like sufficient for this purpose? Just making sure we're posting at the right point. --Masem (t) 13:07, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- That is a reasonable concern and I strongly advocate for awaiting peer-reviewed publications for science stories. However, a) this isn't science, it's exploration. It's unclear whether it would even be written up for a journal. b) No sophisticated analysis is required to identify the ship. The footage is incontrovertible. c) The media reports are quoting independent experts who are fully convinced by the discovery.
Ruins are debatable precisely because they haven't been fully preserved so require a combination of scientific data and subjective interpretation to identify. This ship just requires watching the 50 second video. Modest Genius talk 13:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- That is a reasonable concern and I strongly advocate for awaiting peer-reviewed publications for science stories. However, a) this isn't science, it's exploration. It's unclear whether it would even be written up for a journal. b) No sophisticated analysis is required to identify the ship. The footage is incontrovertible. c) The media reports are quoting independent experts who are fully convinced by the discovery.
- Support once the article is a bit better per the notes above. Definitely notable enough. — {{u|Bsoyka}} talk 13:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support - I couldn't believe my eyes when i saw this blurb. It's definitely a notable discovery. PenangLion (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Support... per Modest, Bsoyka – pending article development. Found sunken ships always are of high reader interest. Fairly widely covered. Good art of wreck might become avail. Colorized1915 photo above doesn't really tell the story. This might be a more appropriate pic. →
– Sca (talk) 14:09, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- The nominated picture was not colorized; it was taken with the Paget process. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:57, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Aha. Interesting. – Sca (talk) 18:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- The nominated picture was not colorized; it was taken with the Paget process. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:57, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per above. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 14:15, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality as noted above. Referencing is extremely poor and will require some work to get this up to scratch. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:11, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support after article improved Flameperson (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Article needs some work but the title is encyclopedic and notable.Alex-h (talk) 17:02, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Wait a bit to see if the article quality improves; if it does, I would give strong support. But tags need to be addressed and reliable sources added. Yakikaki (talk) 20:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Agree, partially, let's wait for the ice becoming thinner and thinner, no need to wait some teenager to point our attention to it; read the article too, eventually (1st attention to the subject was drawn by the empty dish plates presented by BBC), and, it indeed, the piece needs some (strong?) author's touch to rise higher (btw, Mrs., male cats, mesdames, odd...)☆☆☆—PietadèTalk 21:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I would support in principle - the update is just about long enough - but it's kind of academic as the rest of the article is so undersourced.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Besides, in about 6 hrs the coverage has widened/improved, so, not a 60 meters run on win...☆☆☆—PietadèTalk 21:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose just to point out that most of the comments that say Support are actually Opposes. C'mon, folks. GreatCaesarsGhost 21:04, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- I was hoping someone would point this out. No one here seems to think this thing is actually ready to post yet. WaltCip-(talk) 21:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sadly many of the early sections of the article are orange tagged with needs of refs. This isn't just a few missed CNs we can ignore. --Masem (t) 23:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose — Orange tagged. STSC (talk) 12:52, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support on notability once improved - This isn't an article I could update myself, especially not currently, but if anyone is willing it should really be an ITN item. 82.15.196.46 (talk) 16:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Getting stale. Essentially an 'unimpactful' feature story anyway. – Sca (talk) 13:59, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Staleness of a nominated item shouldn't be an issue when there are items that are more stale still in use on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 19:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Referencing issue reduced down to
seventwo cn tags. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 08:10, 14 March 2022 (UTC) - Support There is now only one cn tag, and that should not hold up the article. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 08:28, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support as article issues have now been fixed. Most important ship discovery in my lifetime, definitely ITN worthy (even if it's slotted in halfway down the ITN box). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:51, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think this should be posted before it gets any more stale. 82.15.196.46 (talk) 09:54, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
March 8
March 8, 2022
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
|
RD: Gordon Lee (footballer)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:
- Updated by EchetusXe (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: English footballer and football manager. His wikibio is already long enough. Could use more footnotes and maybe some copyediting -- this is almost ready for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 04:44, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
RD: Leo Marx
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Thriley (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: This wikibio is currently a 250-word stub. Is there more on him to write about? One must wonder how he got such an impressive list of accolades. BTW, that list needs footnotes. --PFHLai (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Nelson W. Aldrich Jr.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
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) 09:17, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready. Thriley (talk) 19:13, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 12:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ron Miles
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Denver Post; The Mercury News; NPR; The Denver Gazette
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) 19:36, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Margaret Farrow
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Credits:
- Nominated by Kafoxe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Wikipooba (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: First female lieutenant governor of Wisconsin. Kafoxe (talk) 19:01, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Length (600+ words) Coverage Formatting Deployment of Footnotes . This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 02:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. TJMSmith (talk) 01:03, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Conrad Janis
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
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.
Nominator's comments: First reported today (March 8); died on March 1 (i.e. provable gap of at least two days). —Bloom6132 (talk) 06:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support looks fine. Can find no earlier reports in RS. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:49, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article in good quality; no orange tags or cn tags to be seen. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 14:51, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article is vastly improved from when I looked at it last. Another great job from the OP. Marking as ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Good article for a notable person Alex-h (talk) 16:58, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Russian invasion
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.
Proposal: Change Russia's '''[[2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine|invasion]]''' of Ukraine
to '''[[2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine|Russia's invasion of Ukraine]]'''
.--Hildeoc (talk) 15:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support as no evidence of Belarus soldiers yet Chidgk1 (talk) 15:47, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Maybe Belarus doesn’t actively participate with military forces but Donetsk and Lugansk do, so it’s practically not only Russia and thus replacing “Russian” with “Russia’s” would be incorrect.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- oh I misread - and misled you as nothing to do with Belarus - support as more obvious link Chidgk1 (talk) 19:01, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- This only proposes hyperlinking additional words. The blurb already says "Russia's". DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 18:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I see. The blurb probably highlights the condemnation of Russia’s involvement. Anyway, I don’t think the blurb should begin with an emboldened word and this is extremely minor thing so that WP:EGG applies.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:30, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, per WP:EGG, and wonder why Belarus even matters. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:12, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Unnecessary. – Sca (talk) 17:00, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I am periodically dragooned into rearranging the furniture in my house. I am not interested in doing that here. The damned chair can stay in the corner. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- You get the coveted CVU (Creative Verb Use) award for this week. – Sca (talk) 14:20, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Bikeshedding Same argument, but no oppose, just asking editors to consider a minimum threshold of impact before proposing or voting on a proposal. TZubiri (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per InedibleHulk. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 18:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support per InedibleHulk. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 19:15, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The result of this nom would be this monstrosity: "Russia's invasion of Ukraine is condemned by the United Nations General Assembly." GreatCaesarsGhost 20:10, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- There was never a consensus to add the UN trivia in any case, so we've made that rod for our own backs. Stephen 22:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per GreatCaesarsGhost -Gouleg🛋️ harass/hound 21:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This month's theme is going to be about rearranging furniture on a certain doomed vessel I guess. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Thank you, User:Hildeoc for leading this discussion. As I alluded to in the discussion under #March 11 on this page (this one: "#(Posted) Expanding Russian invasion of Ukraine bulletpoint (March edition)"), the link to Russia's invasion of Ukraine needs to be more prominent than the link to Shane Warne. A blurb change to reflect the changing situation may also be sensible, since this isn't an isolated bombing that can be pinpointed to a single day (or hour, or even month), but rather a series of bombings over a series of very notable cities. It may be worth noting that "
The Biden administration bans imports of Russian oil, gas and coal to the United States.(CBS) (Politico)
" rather than highlighting older news about United Nations General Assembly Resolution ES-11/1 (on March 2), which seems as though it's due to roll out of the "WP:ITN" anyway. -- RobLa (talk) 03:39, 9 March 2022 (UTC) - Comment (OP) – Of course, I'd be fine with
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is ...
as well.--Hildeoc (talk) 10:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Move Russian invasion of Ukraine to ongoing
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Support for same reasons I supported it before, it's an ongoing event, so should be on ongoing. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for the umpteenth time. It's a major event that is currently blurbed. It will drop off the ITN blurb list when the next news item gets approved and then it will go to ongoing. I don't think we will even need a nomination for that. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's not an actual rule, no matter how many times people try and invoke it. This event should be on ongoing, as it's an ongoing event. The blurb for it is stale- like most of the ITN box. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:43, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Wait But fasttrack the next dead "legend", old or not, we need closure. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:42, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Conditional Support - not while it has a blurb, and I don't think we should pull the blurb early. Assuming the invasion is still ongoing when the blurb will be other wise pushed off, then I support it to ongoing. — xaosflux Talk 15:50, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Question Can we at least go back to four items while we wait for a fresher legend than Dino the Popcorn Man? InedibleHulk (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Comrade Putin's attempt to turn the clock back to 1939 remains far & away the No. 1 story worldwide. [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] I'm sure Vlad the Invader et al. would be only too pleased to see it relegated from the Main Page "headlines" to the comparative obscurity of Ongoing. – Sca (talk) 16:55, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- My reason for proposing this is to be able to add one of the consequences of war rejected below. I may propose one of them again tomorrow - meanwhile I hope some industrious Americans will improve them as I sleep. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:54, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Putin is a capitalist and has no intention on bringing back the Soviet Union. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 19:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- It was an ostensible capitalist who invaded a neighboring country in 1939. The other guy went along for the ride. – Sca (talk) 19:46, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support, if not today, then make sure that it happens as soon as it is pushed off of ITN by more recent events. The eyes of the world are on this situation. Side note - Speculation about Putin's motivations or worldviews are not pertinent to whether or not this is a story appropriate to categorize as "Ongoing". Thanks to all for their contributions. KConWiki (talk) 20:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and close as no reason has been provided to reopen this settled discussion. GreatCaesarsGhost 20:48, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Will major future developments in the war be considered for blurbs, or will nothing other than its conclusion be considered important enough for that? Jim Michael (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, major incidents and developments will always be considered. Stephen 22:07, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose
To make room for other news items
? My understanding is that it rolls off ITN as soon as new blurbs are posted, just like any other hook. As such, it's literally impossible for a hook to be 'blocking' the ability to have more news items, unless editors oppose any other reasonable nomination on the basis that this hook stays up (in which case, evidence?). Otherwise you're just advocating pulling a blurb that is actually in the news, because ... ? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 22:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Russia in the European energy sector
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Europe considers stopping buying Russian oil. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Russia threatens to cut gas supply to Europe.
Alternative blurb II: Prices increase as oil and gas flows from Russia to Europe are disrupted.
News source(s): [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]
Credits:
- Nominated by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)
- Oppose per WP:CRYSTAL; The gas flow to Europe hasn't stopped yet. Might be newsworthy if it actually is cut, however currently everything is just speculation. DNVIC (talk) 07:33, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- It is already newsworthy enough for the major news companies linked above. Although it seems unlikely that Germany will boycott Russian oil they have done several unlikely things over the past week already. The guideline you link to includes "It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about ... whether some development will occur". The gas flow has not completely stopped and may not, but according to the DW source one pipeline has stopped already. That and the speculation of more has increased many people's gas or petrol bills - maybe even yours. Some people are interested in news which is already increasing their bills. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:58, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose as WP:SPECULATION. If most/all of Europe cuts off their gas supply from Russia, that would be big news. But it hasn't happened yet. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose So, Europe considers stopping its purchase or Russia threatens to cut supplies? Let's first wait to see which one of these two happens and then re-consider it for posting.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:56, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:CRYSTAL
and WP:SPECULATION. This hasn't happened yet: and when it does, then we will reconsider it. I suggest close. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2022 (UTC)- Slashed WP:SPECULATION as I have just learned they are the same thing. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 12:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Incremental development of an ongoing news story -- and WP:CRYSTAL to boot.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Food prices
Article: Food prices (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Food prices increase due to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Prices of food, gold and oil increase substantially due to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.
News source(s): https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/3/7/soaring-food-prices-threaten-emerging-market-currencies
https://www.just-food.com/news/world-food-prices-reach-new-heights-with-ukraine-conflict-not-yet-fully-factored/
Credits:
- Nominated by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)
- Oppose and close we don't need two nominations for very similar things. Food prices increase all the time. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:04, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and speedy close per Joseph2302. This is a normal thing; maybe not for the normal reasons, but inflation happens literally all the time. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 12:33, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support altblurb. Expand to include major price increases of other things, including gold & oil - the latter of which on Sunday night spiked to its highest level since 2008. Put all of this in one blurb. Perhaps merge this nom with the one above. Jim Michael (talk) 13:00, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose It is a part of the invasion. There are well documented reasons why both food and gas prices have jumped due to the invasion. --Masem (t) 13:06, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Incremental development of an ongoing news story.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Ukrainian refugee crisis
Blurb: Millions of people flee the Russo-Ukrainian War. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.reuters.com/world/flow-refugees-ukraine-rises-2-million-people-unhcr-head-says-2022-03-08/
Credits:
- Nominated by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)
- Question The war is obviously a crisis, but is the refugee situation itself a crisis yet? I see a quote in the article that it could become one, but currently it seems neighbouring countries had prepared for this many and are handling it about as well as such things go. That's not to diminish the alleged unequal treatment, but I think "crisis" might be a bit much, this soon. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:15, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't have an opinion on the name of the article - anyway it is not used in the blurb Chidgk1 (talk) 10:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I'm more worried about linking to an inaccurate article, by any pipe. It's not just the title. The situation is described as a crisis throughout, alongside several ways these refugees have it easier than past refugees under new regulations. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Edited article to add official cite for "crisis" https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-exodus-is-fastest-growing-refugee-crisis-europe-since-ww2-unhcr-chief-2022-03-06 Chidgk1 (talk) 10:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- A solid tweet, carry on. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:06, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Edited article to add official cite for "crisis" https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-exodus-is-fastest-growing-refugee-crisis-europe-since-ww2-unhcr-chief-2022-03-06 Chidgk1 (talk) 10:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I'm more worried about linking to an inaccurate article, by any pipe. It's not just the title. The situation is described as a crisis throughout, alongside several ways these refugees have it easier than past refugees under new regulations. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't have an opinion on the name of the article - anyway it is not used in the blurb Chidgk1 (talk) 10:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- This should probably be posted when it becomes the "biggest migration crisis (in Europe) since WW2", passing the peak 1.3 million migrants in 2015. 188.27.42.181 (talk) 10:57, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's apparently reached 2 million, according to a UN report: [16] (also noted by BBC in their live ticker [17]). Joseph2302 (talk) 11:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Although according to our List of largest refugee crises, there are 3 ongoing refugee crises that are larger than this. The biggest one being the Refugees of the Syrian civil war. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- That says fastest, not biggest, totally different superlative. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:15, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
So everyone, if your questions have been answered, do you support or oppose? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Some good stuff here, but also much misleading, speculative and opinionated stuff, mostly covered by the invasion article. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:42, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Looking at the invasion article you are right the section there needs trimming now this article exists - I will take a look. Please could you tag exactly where the problems in this article are so people can fix them.Chidgk1 (talk) 12:04, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Too many places. From "largest" to multiple "could", "would" and "will" to "grave" and "phenomenal". Just look around. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I have now deleted the detail from 2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Refugees as you suggested. If you could tag exactly where the most serious problems are with this article I suspect they will be fixed quickly by other editors. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's not what I suggested. Williams' "quote" and suggestion of IDPs isn't in the citation. That's serious enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out - I think the editor who added it cited the "live" section of the newspaper which has since been updated - replaced with a stable cite. If there are other problems could you possibly tag exactly where on the article itself rather than here in case I am not available to fix them - there seem to be a lot of editors actively improving it. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:04, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's not what I suggested. Williams' "quote" and suggestion of IDPs isn't in the citation. That's serious enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I have now deleted the detail from 2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Refugees as you suggested. If you could tag exactly where the most serious problems are with this article I suspect they will be fixed quickly by other editors. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Too many places. From "largest" to multiple "could", "would" and "will" to "grave" and "phenomenal". Just look around. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Looking at the invasion article you are right the section there needs trimming now this article exists - I will take a look. Please could you tag exactly where the problems in this article are so people can fix them.Chidgk1 (talk) 12:04, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality as the article has tag for needs to be updated, and the "Alleged unequal treatment at the borders" is massively WP:UNDUE as it's about half the article text. I'm not convinced that even if the article is fixed, then it should be posted (I'm neutral, leaning oppose on this)- there have been many mass migrations, and we wouldn't even consider posting this if it weren't in Europe (we didn't post the Syrian one after all). Joseph2302 (talk) 11:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- You are right that section was a bit too large - have trimmed. I suspect most "in the news" articles need update as the news develops - I only tagged it a few hours ago but if no one updates it I will delete the Netherlands section as it only has one reliable source. I did not know about "in the news" at the time but as I live in the country with the most Syrian refugees I would have strongly supported it. There are several other editors on this article so if you could tag exactly where the most serious remaining problems are I expect they will be fixed quickly. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Will be part of the invasion ongoing. --Masem (t) 13:07, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry I don't quite understand - could you explain more fully? Chidgk1 (talk) 13:10, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Incremental development of an ongoing news story.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
March 7
March 7, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Vitaly Gerasimov
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [18]
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Created by Atchom (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Amitchell125 (talk · give credit), DividedFrame (talk · give credit) and Solipsism 101 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Russian Ground Forces major general. An ongoing AFD appears to be leaning towards keep. TJMSmith (talk) 13:07, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support notable officer Bumbubookworm (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Procedural question am I correct in thinking that this cannot go onto the front page until the AFD is concluded? Joseph2302 (talk) 13:49, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- That would be correct, yes. This nom should probably be closed temporarily until the AfD is resolved.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:20, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's not over yet, but Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vitaly Gerasimov is mostly KEEP thus far. --PFHLai (talk) 16:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
RD: Nadungamuwa Raja
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gihan Jayaweera (talk · give credit) and Abishe (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian elephant. Sacred in Sri Lanka. I have not gotten to working the article yet. But, will do so and share an update. If someone wants to work this before me, please feel free to join-in. Ktin (talk) 05:16, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: The Nadungamuwa Raja#History section has been tagged with {Confusing}, which should be resolved before this nom can proceed. The {cn} tag, too. --PFHLai (talk) 22:21, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- These have been fixed. Joofjoof (talk) 05:57, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
RD: Vasily Astafyev
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 59
Credits:
- Nominated by DadOfTheYear2022 (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: Recipient of the Hero of the Soviet Union award. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 18:44, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not Quite Ready Awards section needs to be properly referenced. Otherwise the article looks to be in decent shape. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:38, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- The Awards section has remained largely unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 22:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lynda Baron
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Evening Standard
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by 90.243.179.12 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by The C of E (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.
90.243.179.12 (talk) 15:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article is well lengthed and sourced. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 17:09, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. Referencing is ok. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:24, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support. English actress, comedian, and singer. Well-sourced, although exact date of death seems not to have yet been published. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 21:25, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Former President of Pakistan Muhammad Rafiq Tarar dies at the age of 92. (Post)
News source(s): Radio Rakistan, GeoTV
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: The ninth President of Pakistan. This wikibio is obviously long enough (1000+ words), but it could use more footnotes and maybe some tidying up. PFHLai (talk) 11:00, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Former world leader, doesn't this get a blurb? Castro and H.W., among many others, got one. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 14:10, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not every former head of state is blurb worthy. Tarir held the role for just 3 years, whereas Castro held it for 46 years. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:09, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- So did Gerald Ford, we gave him a blurb. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 15:49, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- That was in 2006 (if we did blurb it, there don't seem to be any easy to find ITN archives for that far back), and shouldn't reflect on how we run things 15 years later. Tarar has been out of the public eye for many years, I don't see him as important enough for a blurb. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- That was before RD started on ITN. Ford's death actually reached ITN before discussions on ITN/C. Those were the days! .... Very different rules back then. --PFHLai (talk) 18:07, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- So did Gerald Ford, we gave him a blurb. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 15:49, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not every former head of state is blurb worthy. Tarir held the role for just 3 years, whereas Castro held it for 46 years. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:09, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support RD / No Blurb Article length meets the minimum standards for RD but I am not impressed with the level of coverage for the head of state for a country like Pakistan. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:21, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb figurehead chief of state while a military junta was in place Bumbubookworm (talk) 20:42, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support RD, oppose blurb just about enough content to post at RD, though if there's anything that could be added on what he did since 2001, that would be good. Oppose blurb for reasons I mentioned above. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:56, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- EXTREMELY strong support RD, could go either way on blurb Pakistan is the 5th largest country in the world by population, its population is about two-thirds that of the USA. This may not be the best article but it does meet minimum RD requirements, and even if Tarar wasn't the most influential Pakistani leader in history, he was still leader of the fifth-largest country. 1779Days (talk) 05:33, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- My goodness, I was considering !voting to support this RD, but now that someone has given an EXTREMELY strong support, it doesn't seem necessary.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's about equal to 10 supports, I'd say. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 04:43, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, strongly oppose blurb it meets the minimum requirement for RD but definitely doesn’t deserve a blurb, article quality isn’t to blurb standard. He was really just a figurehead and didn’t do anything significant to deserve a blurb. He should be given a RD though. Hamza Ali Shah Talk 14:59, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Proposed blurb.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 19:04, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 04:56, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Regarding the blurb: Editors seem to be confused as to the significance of the President/head of state's role in here (as I was). In many parliamentary countries that position is different from the head of government and the President/head of state is merely a ceremonial figure/figurehead (as opposed to cases where the role is amalgamated like in the US).
- As President of Pakistan notes: "The president of Pakistan, officially the President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, is the ceremonial head of state of Pakistan and the commander-in-chief of the Pakistan Armed Forces"; though the position of the President in Pakistan has been significant but only under dictators such as Pervez Musharraf. The Prime Minister has been the main executive in Pakistan (the only breaks being under dictator presidents) and was somewhat semi-presidential but that was further devolved into parliamentary/premiership under Nawaz Sharif in the 1990s. The last non-dictator/civilian presidents of note were Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Asif Ali Zardari (the latter still alive who even further dissolved the presidency) with prime-ministers of note being Sharif and Yousaf Raza Gillani. Half of Tarar's ceremonial presidency (1998–2001) was during the military dictatorship of Musharraf (1999–2008) when the latter served as the effective head of state. I doubt we have/would post blurbs for figureheads unless quite notable themselves (e.g. Queen Elizabeth II). Gotitbro (talk) 10:48, 9 March 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: