Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

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.

Bashar al-Assad Syrian rebel forces capture Damascus following multiple offensives as overthrown president Bashar al-Assad (pictured) flees to Russia. Notre-Dame de Paris reopens following reconstruction after the 2019 fire. The first round of the Romanian presidential election is annulled by the Constitutional Court following allegations of Russian electoral interference. The French government, led by Michel Barnier, collapses following a vote of no confidence by the National Assembly. Ongoing: Israel–Hamas war Israeli invasion of Lebanon Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: Eddie Stobart Dickie Rock Michael Ruetz Paolo Pillitteri Maggie Tabberer Kelly Powers view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story. Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story. A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles. Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage. The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death. 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 Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards. Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC). Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate. Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready! You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination. 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 When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria. Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A. If satisfied, change the header to (Posted). Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted). Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled). Voicing an opinion on an item Format 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... Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible. Please do not... Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s). Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive. Suggesting updates There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items: Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors. Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.

Suggestions

April 15

Portal:Current events/2019 April 15

April 15, 2019 (2019-04-15) (Monday) Arts and culture 2019 Pulitzer Prize Annapolis, Maryland daily newspaper The Capital is awarded a Pulitzer Prize for its coverage of a mass shooting inside its own offices on June 28, 2018, that left five of its employees dead. (BBC News) Business and economy AT&T Inc. sells its 10% stake in Hulu to Hulu LLC for $1.43 billion. (Variety) Disasters and accidents Notre-Dame de Paris fire A fire breaks out at the Notre-Dame de Paris cathedral in Paris, resulting in the collapse of its roof and spire and considerable damage to the building's interior. (AJC) (BBC) French President Emmanuel Macron pledges to rebuild the Cathedral after the fire. (BBC News) International relations Inter-Korean summits, North Korea–South Korea relations South Korean President Moon Jae-in says he is ready for a fourth summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The 2019 inter-Korean summit will be held in South Korean capital of Seoul. (Time) (SFGate) Law and crime Four people are killed in a string of shootings in Penticton, British Columbia, in what police are calling targeted killings. A man later turned himself in and was taken into custody. (CBC News) Politics and elections 2020 United States presidential election, 2020 Republican Party presidential primaries, Bill Weld 2020 presidential campaign Former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld announces he is running for the Republican Party's nomination to be President of the United States in the 2020 presidential election, the first Republican to officially challenge incumbent President Donald Trump. (CNN)

---

(Posted) Notre Dame fire

Proposed image

Articles: Notre-Dame de Paris (talk · history · tag) and 2019 fire at Notre-Dame de Paris (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Notre-Dame de Paris cathedral catches on fire. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The ancient Notre Dame cathedral in Paris is on fire, with the cause unknown (Cathedral pictured).
Alternative blurb II: ​ A serious fire breaks out at the Notre Dame cathedral in Paris.
News source(s): BBC, Metro
Credits:

• Nominated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Mr. Guye (talk · give credit), Rossbawse (talk · give credit) and Ajfweb (talk · give credit)

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Developing story. Article does not have a sufficient update yet. Davey2116 (talk) 17:30, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose until some context on any damage/death is provided. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support was in the middle of nom... edit conflict... think it's notable (The Notre Dame... is on fire!) without the damage information. It's, you know, the Notre Dame. Kingsif (talk) 17:33, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Edit conflict (x2) - was in process of nominating myself! "Developing story. May warrant posting depending on update and article quality and the amount of news coverage." Extensive damage would likely warrant posting. Carcharoth (talk) 17:35, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Beaten to the nom with multiple edit conflicts support. Obviously a major fire, article overall not in bad shape. Mjroots (talk) 17:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Support is for original blurb atm. The article on the fire itself is still a stub and not ready for MP. Mjroots (talk) 18:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose for now per TRM. I'm sure the context will become clear over the next few hours and we can post, but for now it's too early.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Edit conflict and support (x4) - Came her to nom. Clearly notable, based off of images and reporting damage is expected to be extensive. Most outlets refer to the fire as serious. StudiesWorld (talk) 17:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support this is going to be in the headlines/discussion for a few weeks at the very least in the European/American press. Sadads (talk) 17:48, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Slow the F down - As TRM says, plenty of time to wait for some context/information to this. We hardly know anything about it yet.--WaltCip (talk) 17:49, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - I am watching as the cathedral burns live out of control. This is the first time of a known fire on a world famous landmark that has stood for almost a thousand years. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• 1992 Windsor Castle fire. Black Kite (talk) 18:11, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support - very clear that this is what's going to be in all 2019-in-review programmes in December... I prefer the original version over the alt (keep it simple...) L.tak (talk) 18:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support, seems fine by WP:ITN#Criteria. --Njardarlogar (talk) 18:01, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support, but "catches on fire" is an Americanism (elsewhere we'd say "catches fire"), so I have given, and prefer, Alt2. Black Kite (talk) 18:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support I was about to nominate this myself, but yes, this is front page material. Either alts are fine. 'Catches fire/catches on fire' is too casual. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Rarely have I seen such a poor ratio of supports to article updates. —Cryptic 18:19, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

  Quite. It seems the rules are being cast aside in favour of shouting sensationalism today...  — Amakuru (talk) 18:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Posted There is general consensus to post. If another admin wishes to pull this, you do not need to ask for my permission. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:22, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose the spire collapsed, this is a big deal, but those details are scattered around the article. Write one paragraph with the details, please. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Pull obviously. There's nothing in the article!!!--WaltCip (talk) 18:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Have they sent in the flying water tankers yet?-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:28, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Could we change the image to one of the images of the fire now that they are available? StudiesWorld (talk) 18:29, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Not unless there's a free one available - I don't see one at the moment. No doubt there will be at some point. Black Kite (talk) 18:32, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Fire at the Notre Dame de Paris cathedral in 2019.png is available. Mjroots (talk) 18:33, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Post Posting Support This is an "in progress" disaster. The article is being expanded rapidly. But there is enough to post this. [When I was growing up, I knew the Roman Catholic priest, Msgr Leonard Fries, who as an American Army Chaplain in WWII celebrated the first Mass in Notre Dame after the liberation of Paris from the Nazis. I think I am going to be sick.] -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:31, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Pull per Walt, update is not there. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:34, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I am trying to update the article, but can't because of continual edit conflicts. That gives me confidence it will be expanded quickly and diligently. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:35, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Wait for what? Notre Dame isn't going to get better, and coverage is ongoing. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:41, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Pull Aren't the admins here to protect the hoi polloi from ourselves? GreatCaesarsGhost 18:35, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Maybe it went up a little quickly but it passes the significance test and will surely get expanded shortly.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market

Article: Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Council of the European Union approves the controversial Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. (Post)
News source(s): CNBC
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by SoWhy (talk · give credit)

Article updated

 SoWhy 09:18, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose Article 17 (formerly 13) " new, conditional exemption to liability". Ok, how does that work? The section doesn't say, it just explains that special interests dislike it. A few CN tags should be fixed. No comment on "significance" (I don't live in Europe) but I don't feel the article is "minimally comprehensive". --LaserLegs (talk) 10:30, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • All CNs were fixed. And actually, there was nothing in that section about special interests; the worked "claimed" is coming from the directive in that ISPs that claim to have certain measures get the conditional exemption. That I've reworded. --Masem (t) 14:49, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support I point back to when this passed the EP that there was generally broad support but this member states vote was the last hurdle. --Masem (t) 14:49, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • • "As a whole, Articles 14-16 in the working version of the Directive, would improve the bargaining position of authors and performers, even though it set out systems that were weaker than some existing ones in member states." improve how? weaker in what way? What do articles 14 through 16 even apply to? This article isn't up to scratch.
• Oppose - Frankly the time to post this would have been when it had passed the EP. This is an intermediary step in the process between then and European states actually passing appropriate copyright laws.--128.227.165.102 (talk) 14:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support We should have posted this back when the Parliament passed it, but now is also a good time to post. Clearly notable, and article is good. Davey2116 (talk) 17:31, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

April 14

Portal:Current events/2019 April 14

April 14, 2019 (2019-04-14) (Sunday) Disasters and accidents Tornadoes of 2019 At least eight people are killed in the Southern United States amid severe storms bringing floods and tornadoes. (ABC News) International relations Second Libyan Civil War Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar of the LNA visits Cairo for a meeting with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who has supported the LNA in its military operation against the rival GNA in Tripoli. (The Guardian) Law and crime Two people are dead, and two others were wounded in a drive-by shooting outside a nightclub in Melbourne, Australia. (News.com.au) One person is killed and another injured in a shooting in a church in the British Columbia city of Salmon Arm. The suspected shooter was wrestled to the ground by churchgoers, police say. (CBC) Politics and elections 2019 Finnish parliamentary election Social Democratic Party takes a narrow victory with 40 seats, while Finns Party comes close second with 39 seats. (Yle) 2020 United States presidential election, 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries, Pete Buttigieg 2020 presidential campaign Pete Buttigieg, Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, announces he is running for the Democratic Party's nomination to be President of the United States in the 2020 presidential election. (NBC News) Sports 2019 Masters Tournament Tiger Woods wins the Masters Tournament in Augusta, Georgia, his first major golf win in 11 years and his first win at the Masters since 2005. (WGHP) (The New York Times)

---

RD: Gene Wolfe

Article: Gene Wolfe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BoingBoing, Tor
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: Science fiction author. Some of the collections need sourcing but surprising most of rest seems ready. Masem (t) 17:15, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

2019 Western Libya offensive

Article: 2019 Western Libya offensive (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Time
Credits:

• Nominated by Nizil Shah (talk · give credit)
• Created by Koopinator (talk · give credit)
• Updated by EkoGraf (talk · give credit), Boud (talk · give credit) and Goodposts (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Some important things are ongoing in the Libyan Civil War and is getting international coverage. The elections are due and two sides are fighting for the capital city Tripoli. About 120 deaths and 560+ injured reported so far. About 13,500 people are displaced. It should be in the ongoing section. If someone else chooses a blurb for it, I am OK with it. I can not point specific blurb. Article is regularly updated and B-class. Nizil (talk) 07:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Masters Tournament

Articles: 2019 Masters Tournament (talk · history · tag) and Tiger Woods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In golf, Tiger Woods wins the Masters. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by Stormy clouds (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Arguably the largest golf story in at least a decade, Tiger Woods wins his first major in eleven years. Articles need updating, but are ITN/R. Stormy clouds (talk) 18:37, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose Article needs expansion in narrative text and has significant gaps in referencing. Agreed that this is a huge story and on merits would likely support even if it was not ITNR. But the article needs work. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose due to current gaps in referencing especially in the composition and nationalities in the field. Narrative sections seem OK. Capitalistroadster (talk) 20:33, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose incomplete, and not updated in the prose. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:40, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Wait, not oppose outright for identical arguments above. The blurb can be posted if 2019 Masters Tournament is updated to the standard set out by other editors. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 21:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose – there is a synopsis of the final round now but referencing is getting worse not better.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 09:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - I'd expect far better article quality from one of the most prestigious golfing events of the year, much less from an event won by Tiger. Article quality is why the Boat Race gets posted almost immediately. WaltCip (talk) 10:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Improve - The bolded article has a few citations needed, a few two-sentence paragraphs, and copious amounts of red links. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 15:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Bibi Andersson

Article: Bibi Andersson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

• Nominated by Bruzaholm (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: Starred in more than ten Ingmar Bergman films such as Persona, The Seventh Seal, and Wild Strawberries. ---Bruzaholm (talk) 17:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support Sad news. Persona is one of my favourite films. I've gone through and found sources for all the CN tags. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:18, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - per Lugnuts improvements and actress at the top of her field of work.BabbaQ (talk) 19:24, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:54, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - A legend. Article is in good shape.--SirEdimon (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted – Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:10, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment. Could some of the people who supported and (presumably) checked this article please provide sources for basic material such as her birth name, please? Espresso Addict (talk) 22:38, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  •  Fixed Confirmed by authority control.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:07, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Thanks, Coffeeandcrumbs. It looks like the variant name was introduced in an accidental edit by someone editing immediately after me on a mobile device. On a side issue, for the technophobes amongst us, what do you mean by "Confirmed by authority control"? Espresso Addict (talk) 23:52, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

      Espresso Addict, [1][2][3][4] actually only confirm her current full name and birth date from NYTimes. I am not sure if her full name was also her birth name.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC) --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

      There is also Birgitta Andersson. So I really don't know. But I think this version is fine.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:45, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

April 13

Portal:Current events/2019 April 13

April 13, 2019 (2019-04-13) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks Second Libyan Civil War, 2019 Western Libya offensive Aguila Saleh, the chairman of the Tobruk-based Libyan parliament that rivals the Government of National Accord, stated that the parliament's Libyan National Army will continue advancing on Tripoli in spite of international calls for them to stop the offensive. (Reuters) Health and environment The last known female Yangtze giant softshell turtle, the world's largest species of freshwater turtle and one of the most endangered species on the planet, dies at Suzhou Zoo in China. (Sohu.com) Science and technology Scaled Composites Stratolaunch, an aircraft with the largest wingspan ever to fly, makes its maiden flight over California, United States. (BBC News)

---

(Posted) RD: S. K. Shivakumar

Article: S. K. Shivakumar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of India
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Nizil Shah (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.

 Nizil (talk) 07:01, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:01, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support – good to go.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 09:04, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@Amakuru: While you're in town.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 14:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

• Posted. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 15:01, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

RD: Neus Català

Article: Neus Català (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): y
Credits:

• Nominated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Donna Gedenk (talk · give credit) and Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Just needs a little TLC to be ready. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:25, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose citations required. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:55, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Scaled Composites Stratolaunch

Proposed image

Article: Scaled Composites Stratolaunch (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Scaled Composites Stratolaunch, the largest aircraft by wingspan (pictured), makes its maiden flight. (Post)
News source(s): Flightglobal
Credits:

• Nominated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)

Article updated

 Mjroots (talk) 06:38, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Weak oppose uses Daily Mail and is a relatively small incremental change to the record. However, definitely saw it in the news and besides the DM clanger, the article is in reasonable shape. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • There is one DM reference, dating from before the decision to deprecate that source. Mjroots (talk) 05:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Oh, so the DM was reliable before that date?? Seriously. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:06, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
      • In a word, yes, the DM was a reliable source once. In this instance, it should be replaced with another source if one can be found. That the DM is used here should not be a bar to the article appearing on the MP. There are a few minor faults, but it's not in a bad shape by a long chalk. Mjroots (talk) 08:55, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
        • The DM is not a reliable source, period. It didn't magically change from reliable to unreliable on the day we deprecated its use. As such, it had to be be replaced, as indeed it now has been.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:42, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
        • Indeed, the DM has pretty much never been RS, certainly not in an era when powered flight existed. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Weak Support basically per TRM. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:29, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - I've fixed up the few citation needed tags in the article and agree that it's just about significant enough and interesting enough to post.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
• Weak oppose – How can we promote a plane taking off and landing (intentional understatment) and not promote a mission that made it to lunar orbit and made contact with the moon (intentional euphemism). I also not thrilled by the blurb. I would be more receptive to a blurb that mentions air launch to orbit which is really the most notable thing about this project.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 14:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Ignoring anything else, to answer "how can we Y but we didn't X" - because they're different things that have different standards of notability/impressiveness/aims. In terms of landing probes on the moon, by now it is fairly routine for all the people who do it, so someone not being able to is a non-notable weak failure. In terms of launching planes with massive wingspans, that's still dangerous, so a new record is a much more notable success. Kingsif (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Yvette Williams

Article: Yvette Williams (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/112027465/olympic-gold-medallist-yvette-williams-has-died-age-89
Credits:

• Nominated by MurielMary (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 article, updated MurielMary (talk) 01:38, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support Looks good to me. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:02, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support good to go. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:02, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support comprehensive bio, well referenced. JennyOz (talk) 07:34, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support just coming to nominate this myself. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:49, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Ping @Amakuru:. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:59, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted. Thanks to Coffeeandcrumbs for the ping.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:27, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

April 12

Portal:Current events/2019 April 12

April 12, 2019 (2019-04-12) (Friday) Armed conflicts and attacks 2019 Quetta bombing Twenty-one people are killed and about fifty others injured in a suicide bombing at a market in Quetta, Pakistan. (CNN) 2018–19 Sudanese protests, 2019 Sudanese coup d'état Lt. General Ahmed Awad Ibn Auf steps down as leader of the Transitional Military Council in favor of Lt. General Abdel Fattah Abdelrahman Burhan. (BBC News) Russian security services kill two ISIL-affiliated terrorists who were planning an attack in the city of Tyumen. (RT) Disasters and accidents Two buildings collapse in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, killing nine people and leaving fifteen others missing. The buildings were irregularly built. (G1) Politics and elections Abortion in the United States Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signs a bill that restricts abortion after a detectable heartbeat. The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio said it was preparing a constitutional challenge to the law. (ABC News)

---

Quetta attack

Article: 2019 Quetta attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 20 people are killed in an attack at a market in Quetta, Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by Solo Samaritan (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Casualties in double-digits. Article in good shape. Still in the news. Solo Samaritan (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support This is certainly notable, and article quality is good. Davey2116 (talk) 16:59, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose standard issue disaster stub tells me almost nothing about the blast (the most important part), very little about who is responsible (the next most important part) with a wall of text about the aftermath and reactions. ITN frequently railroads such articles to the main page, so before this one is done, it needs a copyedit to clean up grammar like "The hazara people protested on regarding the security of them" --LaserLegs (talk) 21:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose I agree with LaserLegs that there's a lot of horrible prose in there so we're not promoting that to the main page. As for notability, meh. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:31, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ivor Broadis

Article: Ivor Broadis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

• Nominated by Serial Number 54129 (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: Sup ITNers. Ivor Broadis died recently ——SerialNumber54129 10:06, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose a lot of unreferenced material in there right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted - I've eliminated the citation needed tags, and looks like it meets the criteria now. Let me know if this is in error.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@Amakuru: Not going to oppose the post but his international caps are mostly uncited in the table. Some of the games are mentioned in prose but the table has more info that is unsourced. One well placed source would probably handled it. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 13:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: thanks for bringing this up. I have added a source [5] for the England games. It may be on the edge in terms of whether that's a reliable source or not, but I don't think it's user-generated and is seemingly used in a lot of articles already: [6] Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 14:24, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Tommy Smith (footballer, born 1945)

Article: Tommy Smith (footballer, born 1945) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by The Rambling Man (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: In reasonable nick but a few unreferenced comments. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose still needs a few more citations.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:44, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted - I fixed up all the citation needed tags so it was good to do.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:42, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

April 11

Portal:Current events/2019 April 11

April 11, 2019 (2019-04-11) (Thursday) Armed conflicts and attacks 2018–19 Sudanese protests, 2019 Sudanese coup d'état The Sudanese military surrounds the presidential palace in the capital Khartoum, and takes over state media buildings amid protests against President Omar al-Bashir. Several senior ministers are reportedly arrested, including former Defense Minister Abdel Rahim Mohammed Hussein. (The National) The army forms an interim council, with First Vice President Lt. General Ahmed Awad Ibn Auf as the leader. President al-Bashir is reported to have stepped down. (BBC News) Politics and elections 2019 Australian federal election Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison calls an election for 18 May. (ABC News Australia) North Korea appoints Choe Ryong-hae as President of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly, the country's nominal head of state, replacing Kim Yong-nam after 21 years. Kim Jae-ryong becomes premier. (Yonhap) Law and crime Abortion in South Korea The Constitutional Court of Korea rules that the 1953 abortion ban is unconstitutional. (Korea Herald) WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is arrested in London after Ecuador withdraws asylum. He is later found guilty of breaching bail in 2012 by a British court, however he faces likely extradition to the United States over allegations he conspired with former US military analyst Chelsea Manning to acquire classified U.S. government files. (The Guardian) Police in Louisiana arrest Holden Matthews, a suspect in arson at three historically African-American churches in the past weeks which the NAACP flagged as hate crimes. Matthews is the son of a local deputy sheriff. He has ties to black metal music and commented on memes about musician Varg Vikernes, a neo-Nazi who boasted about burning churches in Norway and was imprisoned for arson and murder, but researchers are unsure if they prove hate was his motive. (CBS) (Rolling Stone) (Daily Beast) Michael Avenatti is charged by a federal grand jury in California on 36 counts, including embezzlement, wire fraud, tax evasion, bankruptcy fraud and bank fraud connected to his alleged theft of tens of millions of dollars from several clients. (United States Department of Justice) (ABC News) Science and technology Israel's Beresheet lunar lander crashes at Mare Serenitatis on the surface of the Moon. The crash resulted from a failure in the lander's main engine, resulting in the total loss of the spacecraft. (The New York Times) SpaceX's Falcon Heavy launches successfully from Kennedy Space Center carrying Arabsat-6A to orbit. All three boosters landed successfully, marking the first time that all three boosters of a Falcon Heavy landed without failure. (CNN)

---

(Posted) RD: Ian Cognito

Article: Ian Cognito (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Ritchie333 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Ghmyrtle (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: Veteran stand up comic, known for his chronic lack of shit-giving abilities. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:32, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support A bit short, but good enough. My favourite was him claiming he'd emptied a comedy tent at a festival, even though "... it was pissing it down outside, and Phil Collins was playing on the main stage". Black Kite (talk) 18:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Short but sweet and choke-full of interesting and funny tidbits.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - ready to go.BabbaQ (talk) 12:53, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Has been ready for some time now. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:24, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:18, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Espresso Addict: Thank you for coming to the rescue. If you have the time there are 3 other recent deaths on this page ready to post. Thank you! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:29, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Indeed, I should have started at the bottom of the page! I've posted another two; the third doesn't meet my criteria. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:53, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
      • Thank you. That is not an unreasonable criterion. There is always DYK.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:09, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

(Moved to Ongoing) Iranian Floods to ongoing

Article: 2019 Iran floods (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

• Nominated by Jayron32 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: The Iranian Floods blurb is currently on the last slot, and likely to roll off in the next day or so. However, the flooding is still an active news story, still receiving regular coverage, and the article is still being actively updated. Just taking the pulse to see consensus for keeping this on the main page as an "ongoing" item, to be moved there whenever the blurb slides off the bottom. Jayron32 18:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support Agree with everything stated by nominator.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Moved to ongoing Stephen 23:17, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Beresheet space probe lands on Moon

Article: Beresheet (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Beresheet becomes the first private mission to reach the Moon and carries a digital copy of Wikipedia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Beresheet becomes the first private mission to reach the Moon
Alternative blurb II: ​ Israel Aerospace Industries and SpaceIL crash the probe Beresheet on the moon.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Beresheet becomes the first private mission to reach the Moon but crashes during an attempted landing.
News source(s): https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47879538
Credits:

• Nominated by Rmhermen (talk · give credit)
• Created by JFG (talk · give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Soft Moon landings are rare events. (presuming it succeeds in the next hours) Rmhermen (talk) 16:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Not updated yet Will reserve judgement on quality pending an actual update to read; prefer altblurb as the Wikipedia angle seems like navelgazing. --Jayron32 17:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment No to mentioning Wikipedia in the blurb. It's navelgazing. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• I would change blurb as per ITN/R, to "Israel becomes fourth country to land a spacecraft on the moon."

  Except it wasn't Israel. It was a collaboration of several private corporations, and the Israeli state did not really have anything to do with it. --Jayron32 18:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• the Falcon rocket was not Israel, but the spacecraft was. And again, we go by RS. It's quite ludicrous to say "The Israeli state did not really have anything to do with it." WE don't need to split hairs. Right now, when the spacecraft lands, Israel will join three other countries in having landed on the moon, and this spacecraft will be the first private funded spacecraft. SpaceIL is Israeli and privately funded. To not mention Israel is not right. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• How did we handle other, privately launched space vehicles when we posted them? If we've established a precedent one way or the other, that would be helpful to know here. --Jayron32 18:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• We didn't post the launch and orbit of this rocket, although I think we might have posted the first Falcon 9 when it launched. The first launches and orbits are ITN/R, and I would say the first private launches of something would merit inclusion. In this case, it's ITN/R for a couple of reasons, see here Wikipedia:In_the_news/Recurring_items#Space_exploration Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Ironically, the Falcon Heavy news here is so routine that no-one has nominated it here... (well, not yet anyway). Carcharoth (talk) 11:29, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

• Actually mentioning Wikipedia in the blurb is newsworthy and potentially quite interesting to readers. Shouldn't call it a "digital copy" though, just "a copy of Wikipedia"; it's obvious it wasn't printed out. — JFG ^talk 18:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose on article quality. Look at nearly any NASA, ESA, or other national aerospace space mission and there's tech data out the wazoo. I realize this is private, theres probably less info out there but there should be a better attempt to summarize the probe's technology. Oppose inclusion of Wikipedia as WP is not the only chunk of information that is up there - NYTimes reports "It also will ferry a digital archive containing 30 million pages of information — including a full version of the English-language Wikipedia encyclopedia — provided by the Arch Mission Foundation, a nonprofit seeking to create a backup of humanity’s knowledge." [7]. Focusing on WP is very much navel-gazing. Also the landing is not for another hr as I am typing this so there is a chance this could go wrong. --Masem (t) 18:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• I understand your concerns, but on the other hand, IAR, and we have a private company who (hopefully) landed on the moon. Yes, it needs a better article, but that should be on the front page. Forget all the bad news going on in the world, we got to the moon. How many people alive today can say that again? Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Reiterating Support for Current Alt2Support Alt 2 when it happens. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• comment I think we can close this, since it didn't make it, unless it is newsworthy itself the first attempt at a moonlanding. We should have had this ITN a few days ago when it orbited the moon, but oh, well. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 19:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - Mission failed.--WaltCip (talk) 19:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • [8] Yup, this should be closed. --Masem (t) 19:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
    • I guess so. Bummer. Ahiijny (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose it crashed. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - it is the first private lunar lander, and a quick glance at news websites shows it is quite literally in the news. Very significant for them to get as far as they did, considering how many have tried/are currently trying. Kees08 (Talk) 20:47, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support. How many people can say that they crashed something onto the Moon? Right, this is still a big deal. 331dot (talk) 20:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I really don't know how many, but I can tell you that in one region of the U.S. people are said to "hang the moon," under certain conditions. – Sca (talk) 12:28, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

• Hopefully it is obvious, but would support an alt-blurb that says it crashed. At work now so don't have time to formulate one. Kees08 (Talk) 21:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Weak oppose on the crash news. If we were in a slower news period, this might be the right type of story to help, but we're definitely not in a lull of potential stories, and a failed unmanned mission is not as significant a news story at this point. --Masem (t) 21:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Question isn't this ITNR under "Arrival of probes (to lunar orbit and beyond) at their destinations"? Crashing doesn't matter - it still arrived. Banedon (talk) 23:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • It's assumed that a probe gets there and is still a working probe. A probe that arrives as a mass of worhtless metal because of a failure would not. --Masem (t) 23:14, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
    • The line in ITNR says "arrival". It doesn't say "arrival in working condition". Banedon (talk) 23:19, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
      • It actually says "arrival at their destinations", which is more specific than just arriving and suggests that the mission being completed (to reach intended destination) is the ITNR-worthy part, which implies that mission success is what we're looking for. Otherwise we could say that any probe reaching lunar orbit (which this one did intact) is valid, even if it then shuts down but was aiming for deep space. Kingsif (talk) 00:41, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
        • Right, this should have been up a few days ago when it arrived in lunar orbit, so I think we can put it up now, as an IAR as well, in addition to all the other reasons. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 00:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
          • But lunar orbit was not its destination. The moon's surface was. (The way I see it, if you ignore the cost issue, anyone can launch a chunk of metal and plop it on the moon with little care for the safe arrival of that chunk of metal. It's the safe arrival of a probe in mostly-working condition that is key as ITNR. Not saying this is otherwise invalid for a news story just not ITNR. --Masem (t) 00:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
            • I'll get this clarified on ITNR. Banedon (talk) 02:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
            • Done [9]. Banedon (talk) 02:10, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
            • Masem, lunar orbit was one of its destinations. To say that "anyone can launch a chunk of metal and plop it on the moon" is frankly insulting to those who worked on this. Carcharoth (talk) 10:34, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
              • It may be frankly insulting, but it's still true; any nation with the technical capability to build an ICBM has the technical capability to hit the moon, Mars, Venus etc. The technical challenge in these missions is either the landing or placing the probe into the correct orbit, depending on the mission objective. ‑ Iridescent 10:44, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
                • @Iridescent: You sure? I am under the impression you can't just hit Venus, etc, with an ICBM because of the complexities of the rocket equation. Banedon (talk) 10:46, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
                  • It's not as simple as pointing it at the sky and hoping, but it's not something that requires arrays of supercomputers provided your only objective is to be captured by the gravity well and crash somewhere on the planet; the Soviets were routinely sending hard-impact probes into Venus as early as the 1960s. The reason you don't see North Korea or Pakistan on the moon isn't that they don't have the capability, but that it's very expensive for very little gain (we know what the moon looks like from space; the prestige is in soft landings, which are difficult). Regardless, ITN is probably not the best place to be having this discussion. ‑ Iridescent 10:58, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
                    • Have a source for those claims? Especially since one has never needed a supercomputer array to land something on the moon - c.f. Apollo landing on the moon in the 1960s with a fraction of the computing power of a modern mobile phone. Banedon (talk) 13:32, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
                • Is it really as easy to hit a target elsewhere on Earth as it is to reach Mars or Venus? I suspect the technical requirements differ enough not to be trivial. Yes to the technical challenge of achieving the correct orbit (this also applies to some satellites and space probes with out-of-the-ordinary orbits). See here:

                  "The dramatic lunar capture maneuver was the linchpin of the entire operation [...] The lunar capture is an historic event in and of itself."

                  Though this is not made clear in our article. Carcharoth (talk) 11:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - I find this ITN worthy. First private lunar landing.BabbaQ (talk) 23:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support number 2. Connor Behan (talk) 07:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support first private moon landing. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:32, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support first alt blurb. Achieving lunar orbit (one of the mission objectives) is ITN/R. The fact that the news centred on the (failed) landing should not take away from that. Carcharoth (talk) 10:31, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment - If a blurb is posted, it must focus on the orbit and not the landing. If, during the height of the Space Race, either the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. crashed a lander onto the Moon beyond repair and destroyed it, then touted it as the "first successful Moon landing", they would be laughed off the world stage.--WaltCip (talk) 12:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, the orbit is the important thing. Though the analogy with crashing spacecraft into the Moon during the Space Race is not a good one. The first man-made objects to reach the Moon were deliberately designed as impactors. See Luna 2 which was 1959. It took another 7 years to achieve a soft landing. The crash should be mentioned. Hopefully the next one will not crash. Carcharoth (talk) 12:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
    • That's why I specifically used the term "lander" and not "impactor". For any object that is designed to be smashed into the Moon without concern as to its structural integrity, the destruction is part of the mission objectives.--WaltCip (talk) 12:26, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose only because of the outstanding citation needed. But Support Alt3 which I suggested. I do not see the need to promote the company's names and we need to make clear that it crashed. However, even reaching the moon is a major feat. Many state-sponsored missions have been sent to intentionally crash on the moon. This mission attempted to do more but the achievement of the reaching lunar orbit and (un)intentionally crashing on the moon is still significant enough for ITN.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:34, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Failed mission, especially weak compared with the Event Horizon Telescope. zzz (talk) 00:36, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support alt-blurb 3, per above. I believe this is sufficiently notable and has received significant coverage. Davey2116 (talk) 01:46, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment Laser Retro-reflector Array may have survived the crash "“Yes, we believe the laser reflector array would have survived the crash although it may have separated from the main spacecraft body,” the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s David Smith, the principal investigator for LOLA and an emeritus researcher at NASA Goddard in Greenbelt, Maryland. LOLA will begin planning observations early next week, he said." Count Iblis (talk) 03:22, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per being smashed to bits. ——SerialNumber54129 11:17, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support altblurb3; space probe crashes are ITN/R as per the discussion started by Banedon. Support mentioning orbit as per WaltClip. 2607:FEA8:1DE0:7B4:988:EB38:D09D:4C1E (talk) 08:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

(Re-Posted) Julian Assange withdrawal of asylum by Ecuador

Article: Julian Assange (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Wikileaks founder Julian Assange (pictured) is arrested in London. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Ecuador withdraws asylum it had granted Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Ecuador withdraws asylum it had granted Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. He is then arrested.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Ecuador withdraws asylum it had granted Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who wais subsequently then arrested by British authorities.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ Julian Assange (pictured) leaves the chancery of the embassy of Ecuador in the United Kingdom for the first time in seven years.
News source(s): BBC, AP
Credits:

• Nominated by Chetsford (talk · give credit)
• Created by Privatemusings (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Muffington (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: I believe this is an appropriate ITN event: it is sufficiently global, involving an Australian citizen given asylum by Ecuador and arrested in the UK; and, as of this hour, it is the leading story on the BBC, Deutsche Welle, the New York Times, and Reuters. Chetsford (talk) 10:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support on the merits. I know we don't typically post mere arrests, but this is a significant step in a years-long international matter. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose / Support - High profile arrest. We should post when he is convicted. Sherenk1 (talk) 10:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Any conviction is likely a long time away, this is in the news now. Essentially he has been a fugitive and we did post the arrest of El Chapo after he escaped. 331dot (talk) 10:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

That's understandable. However, do you also oppose the alternative blurb which deals with a related but separate matter (the withdrawal of asylum)? Chetsford (talk) 10:39, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

We report convictions rather that arrests as to not suggest guilt of the crime. There is no implication of guilt here at all; I don't even know what crime he's been arrested for. The story here is the withdrawal of asylum. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

@GreatCaesarsGhost: While we typically do not post garden variety arrests, we have posted arrests when something about the arrest is notable, as was the case with the escaped El Chapo who was an escaped fugitive. In this case, Assange was a fugitive from the UK justice system(he was wanted for failing to surrender) and was given asylum by another country to avoid extradition to yet other countries. 331dot (talk) 12:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, if that is the case then I support. Sherenk1 (talk) 11:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment skimmed sections, looks ok, few CN tags need fixing. Given the subject, and WP policy around BLP, it needs to be checked not just for having refs but that the refs actually support the content. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:37, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment the blurb should ideally mention both the vacation of asylum and the arrest. Neither really makes sense without the other, for a complete story.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

OK, I added an Alt-2. Chetsford (talk) 10:43, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support Alt-3 is longish but informative at a glance. Huge international story. Jusdafax (talk) 10:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• BLP Alt-4: In consideration of BLP, I added an Alt 4 that deals with the historic significance of Assange leaving the Ecuadorian chancery for the first time in seven years, and does not mention anything related to the report that his departure was the result of an arrest. Chetsford (talk) 10:51, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support alt-3a below. Sceptre (talk) 11:01, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  "Julian Assange is arrested by British authorities for failure to surrender to extradition to Sweden after Ecuador withdraws his asylum."

  I oppose Alt-3a. While well intentioned, AFAIK he was arrested on a charge of "failure to surrender" but by adding the explanation we are making a positive claim that he "failed to surrender to extradition to Sweden" which we can't know except with a trial verdict. Chetsford (talk) 11:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment. Not mentioning that he was arrested is very disingenuous to readers. He didn't leave voluntarily to go on vacation, he was taken into government custody. 331dot (talk) 11:02, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support The article has some prose style problems (it's got major WP:PROSELINE issues and needs some general love), but it's well referenced, the update is in both the body and the lead, minimally, and everything looks well referenced. It's not perfect, but it's sufficient for the main page. Alt3 seems to me like the best blurb so offered. --Jayron32 11:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support on notability. Not certain about the right blurb wording, but Alt-3 looks the best of the ones currently there. ZettaComposer (talk) 11:25, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support same thoughts as Jayron32. QUESTION: should we say London rather than British authorities? In the US that distinction is profound. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  The UK is a unitary state. All such organizations are an organ of the national government, and the UK does not have the same concept of "divided sovereignty" as such exists in the U.S. There are a few legal differences (i.e. for example some distinctions between Scotland and England/Wales law), but this is not one of them. The MPS has whatever jurisdiction the UK national government has given them, and as noted at Metropolitan Police Service, while domestically they have jurisdiction in London for normal crimes, "The Met also has significant national responsibilities..." that include things like this. Simply put, when acting internationally, they are acting as an organ of the UK government, not as an organ of any sub-national government. (Also, as such, there is not really any subnational jurisdiction which is not also an organ of the UK government in the way that the states are independent of the Federal government in the U.S. That concept doesn't really exist in the UK in the same way). --Jayron32 12:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment If posted, the blurb must state that this coward was arrested, otherwise it gives a false meaning to the story. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• "Alternative blurb II" is the only one that makes sense. Trillfendi (talk) 12:47, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support - On notability. This has been top news in all media I have seen.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Very notable story, alt-blurb 3 looks best to me. Article is very good. Davey2116 (talk) 12:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment – From what I've read, Ecuador didn't just withdraw asylum, the Ambassador then invited the police into the embassy to make the arrest. The blurb should not imply that Assange left the embassy of his on volition and was arrested outside. EdChem (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support – This significant development in what's been a notable ongoing story for seven years merits ITN display. Alt3 looks like the best current option. (But ... should we have a separate story on his arrest and possible extradition?) – Sca (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment I know we usually don't post normal arrests, only until they are convicted of crimes. I know that there's general resentment towards Assange due to Wikileaks, and I'd certainly consider this a high-profile arrest but it still only an arrest, and whether he's guilty is unclear. --Masem (t) 13:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment: Assange found guilty of skipping bail. Sceptre (talk) 14:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support complainer 14:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support This is a high profile story and the article is good. He has already been convicted of skipping bail and is being sentenced next month.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• How about this? "Ecuador withdraws asylum it had granted Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, leading to his arrest by British authorities."

Preceding unsigned comment posted by IP User 5.44.170.9.

The news isn't that he's been arrested, the news is that he's out of the embassy and in custody after a marathon hibernation there.
(Did he get the seven-year itch?) – Sca (talk) 14:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support. Significant news and article is well referenced. Capitalistroadster (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Alt blurb III. Significant story. Nice4What (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Alt blurb III: "​Ecuador withdraws asylum it had granted Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who is subsequently arrested by British authorities."

• Strong oppose alt4 as this implies that Assange left voluntarily. He was arrested in the embassy after Ecuador let the British police in. Iffy★Chat -- 15:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted using Alt3 which appears to be the best at this time, obviously discussion can continue on this. Black Kite (talk) 15:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support blub, but oppose picture. I'd prefer to keep the Eye of Sauron image for now, which is informative. This Assange head shot is outdated. If we get an arrest photo or mugshot, I think that might be usable. Jehochman ^Talk 15:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment I think the blurb needs to be flipped to focus on the arrest, which is what is making news. Ecuador could have withdrawn its aslyum, but that would not mean anything save for Assange being now without safe haven. The fact British police arrested nearly immediately is the story, so the blurb should be something like "British authorities arrest Assange ater Ecuador withdraws his request for asylum". --Masem (t) 15:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support with a blurb placing the arrest first, as suggested by Masem: British authorities arrest Julian Assange after Ecuador cancels his asylum status. — JFG ^talk 18:17, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose for a contentious article about a living person, the article contents too many uncited claims. The target article violates WP:BLP.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support on notability but needs updating. He was found guilty and faces jail, as mentioned above by Sceptre. This is a noteworthy event about a great journalist, although it shouldn't be put in "ongoing" or anything like that. wumbolo ^^^ 19:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment Revert back to the picture of the black hole. I saw this sentiment shared by another editor who commented above. Nice4What (talk) 19:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Why? The black hole had its day in the limelight. Assange's portrait is more timely today, something else will take the lead tomorrow (perhaps the lunar lander if it succeeds). — JFG ^talk 19:14, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Pull Far too many CN tags. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Pull 11 [citation needed] tags on a BLP is inappropriate for the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Pulled Per quality issues id'd by Ad Orientem and TRM. Far too many CN tags that are not in "easily fixed" territory. --Masem (t) 19:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • The issue was first identified before posting.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

The Pushmi-Pullyu in action

Here we go again. – Sca (talk) 20:43, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support article quality is more than sufficient, CN tags or not, especially compared to the volume of coverage. Banedon (talk) 23:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Lack of quality always overrides timeliness. We're not a news ticker for that reason. --Masem (t) 23:15, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Promoting a BLP with violations? Seriously? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support and I would say "arrested in London after having his asylum withdrawn by Ecuador". Also, many of the CN tags are dubious. Who really thinks it's not obvious that Assange appeared in a documentary about Assange? Connor Behan (talk) 07:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - global diplomatic and social importance to the decision to withdraw asylum, even apart from subsequent developments. @Masem: I spent the past half hour fixing all the citation needed tags so hopefully you have no further objection. Wnt (talk) 12:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Readd with the blurb reinstated. Article quality has been fixed, this has taken an embarrassingly long time to readd. Nice4What (talk) 14:11, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Re-posted based on quality improvements made by Wnt. --Masem (t) 14:16, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Question: The blurb posted is:

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is arrested by British authorities after Ecuador withdraws his asylum.

I think this is misleading as he was arrested inside the embassy with the support of the Ecuadorian government. Perhaps a better blurb would be:

British authorities arrest WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy after his asylum is withdrawn.

or perhaps:

Ecuadorian Ambassador invites British authorities into their embassy to arrest WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange after withdrawing asylum.

Also, is this best discussed here, or at ERRORS (or not at all)? EdChem (talk) 00:50, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

For brevity of the ITN box, whether he was in or outside the embassy, it doesn't matter. Just that the UK police were ready to seize him as soon as Ecuador withdrew. --Masem (t) 01:57, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

• Question: "British authorities" in the blurb is inaccurate and imprecise. Can we bring this in line with reliable sources which say he was arrested by the "Metropolitan Police"? See for example NY Times coverage [10]. Whizz40 (talk) 12:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  You can say it's less precise, but that does not make it "incorrect." Met Police is a "British authority" anyway and no need to copy sources verbatim. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:06, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Brexit negotiations

Article: Brexit negotiations (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)
News source(s): BBC, AP

Nominator's comments: There is a new deadline for Brexit of 31 October 2019, which is in the news at the moment. Brexit negotiations should either be removed from 'Ongoing', or a blurb put up (I have not included one here, but feel free to add suggestions), or a different article nominated for a blurb. I have struggled to find a Brexit-related article where the new deadline date of 31 October has been added (most recent activity seems to have been on Meaningful vote or European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2019). The new date has been added to Brexit. It does feel like the right moment to blurb this, as something relatively decisive has happened (even if it is only kicking the can down the road for half a year), but maybe it should just be quietly removed from ongoing (either now or in a week or so) rather than left there for 6 months. The significant developments are that UK need to take part in the EU elections in May and that this is a flex-tension (i.e. Brexit might happen at any point in the next six months now - the extension can be terminated early if things fall into place). Carcharoth (talk) 09:56, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Question doesn't parliament still need to approve the extension? I thought a "leaving the EU act" of somesort had already been passed. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Apparently not. See UK formally accepts extension: "Sir Tim Barrow, the UK’s ambassador to the EU, has written to European Council president Donald Tusk to formally accept the extension to Brexit until 31 October.". Carcharoth (talk) 10:15, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
    • If that's the case, and there is no other deadline looming before October 31st, then remove ongoing and I think some sort of blurb would be appropriate. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose removal at least for a few days. The latest development, well covered in the article, is the extension to October, and since that development just happened yesterday and the article has been updated with it, we meet all of the requirements for maintaining ongoing at the current time. If nothing gets updated in a few days, we can revisit this, however there is still fresh, well-reported news on the subject which has been added to the article. --Jayron32 11:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  Just to be clear, I'd also be OK with a blurb if someone were to propose one. The main page should link the article in some way, I'm just agnostic on whether or not that is as a blurb or ongoing. Outright removal, however, is a bad idea right now. --Jayron32 11:12, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  I was kinda hoping someone would propose a blurb. But then the Julian Assange story broke and attention seems focused on that... There is Brexit negotiations in 2019 as a possible hook for a blurb. Carcharoth (talk) 11:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose removal, let's wait and see what the proposals are going forward after May addresses parliament. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  The summary appear to be "go on holiday for Easter, have a think about it, and then let's get back to sorting out what to do". There is not going to be any big announcement. The only news that it is possible to blurb is the extension to 31 October. Are we really going to have Brexit negotiations in ongoing while Parliament is in recess after today? Carcharoth (talk) 12:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose - removing it right now is counter-productive.BabbaQ (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support removal with blurb replacement to identify the delay. The 6 month delay from this planned delay is significant, and tells use Brexit will be out of the news for a while. --Masem (t) 13:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose – An extension, with more confused, inconclusive Mayhem to follow. ZZZzzz. Leave in Ongoing. – Sca (talk) 13:40, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support and hope that Brexit will similarly be absent from the news for a while. This removal nom is appropriate because nothing is actually happening, with "still haven't left the EU" being a boring daily news story. Also would propose a blurb regarding the extension and fact the UK have to now elect reps to EU parliament and presumably participate for the fiscal year. Kingsif (talk) 15:03, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Update. @Masem: who added a blurb, but the template logic hides it if you put "rem" for the 'ongoing' parameter. So I will start a new nomination with Masem's blurb and ping those who commented on the ongoing item (someone can combine them if that is doable). Carcharoth (talk) 15:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - I think this will be in the news for a little while longer, because they can't just tick the clock down to October. If it really does fade then we can re-evaluate.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Keep it in ongoing for at least a while longer, per above. Davey2116 (talk) 17:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support It seems like updates to the page slowed down in the last few days. I would support taking it off ongoing and replacing it with the blurb. This removal won't pass, but we should reevaluate in a few days. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support removal Will be mostly out of the news until October. Nice4What (talk) 19:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Remove. The delay is in, and UK parliament has just gone into recess for two weeks. Nothing of significance is likely to happen for a while. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 22:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose removal it only just happened. Give it some time and remove it if/when it drops off news sites. Banedon (talk) 23:20, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support removal. This is non-news. I'm now skeptical of any political ongoing item, since these empty negotiations are doomed to fail. wumbolo ^^^ 08:44, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support removal and post blurb if feasible. Brexit is no longer ongoing, but the lack of a hard Brexit on the scheduled day is still a fairly big news story. There are people around the world who will be scratching their heads the next few weeks wondering "did Britain crash out of the EU?" So a blurb could be worth having, but it should be dated (and expire) per the time when the extension actually happened, so it may not actually get done before it would drop off the bottom of the list. Meanwhile ... the Yemeni Civil War (2015–present) is still ongoing, it's a damn sight more important, and it isn't on the ticker. Wnt (talk) 00:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose removal, at least until there's clear evidence it's not being updated in any of the several relevant inter-related articles. (I'm also opposed to a blurb, as nothing blurb-worthy has happened yet, as far as I'm concerned). Predictions here that nothing significant is going to happen until October is WP:CRYSTAL (for instance, May and Corbyn may want out before May 22 to avoid humiliation in the Euro elections, elections whose campaign could produce other relevant developments, and so on ad infinitum). But if and when the relevant articles stop being updated then the item should be removed.Tlhslobus (talk) 10:50, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Remove – I have looked at the history of many of the articles that begin with Brexit. Every article came to an abrupt stop in editing on or before April 14 with perhaps a single edit on a few of the pages in the last 24–36 hours. Most important of all the main target article and the most relevant subpage Brexit negotiations in 2019 have not even been copy edited for past 36 hours. This story is adjourned for the summer. Let's make room in the ongoing section. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Brexit deadline extended

Articles: Brexit (talk · history · tag) and Brexit negotiations (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The European Union grants the United Kingdom a six-month extension in their ongoing Brexit negotiations. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The European Union grants the United Kingdom a six-month extension in the ongoing Brexit negotiations; the UK must also elect representatives to the European Parliament in May.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The United Kingdom does not leave the European Union on its planned departure date, instead being granted a six-month extension to continue with internal Brexit negotiations.
News source(s): BBC, AP
Credits:

• Nominated by Carcharoth (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Specific nomination for a blurb in relation to this. See also above discussion relating to the Brexit negotiations item in 'Ongoing'. Carcharoth (talk) 15:25, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• @LaserLegs, Jayron32, The Rambling Man, BabbaQ, Masem, Sca, and Kingsif: pinging those who posted above. Carcharoth (talk) 15:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Added ALT1. It's not the greatest, and the original blurb is fine, but the main impact people will see is the force re-join of the council. Kingsif (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • It is the European Parliament, not the European Council - I took the liberty of correcting that. See also 2019 European Parliament election where this extension is mentioned. Carcharoth (talk) 15:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose – Per ZZZzzz comment above. – Sca (talk) 15:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - not very interesting. If we weren't going to post the meaningful vote, or the earlier extension, then no reason why we'd post this one. Keep in ongoing though.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Ah, but this is the meaningful extension! Well, chances are there will be another extension after that if things change again and there is no resolution to this, so maybe you are right. The gift that keeps giving. Carcharoth (talk) 16:01, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Prefer blurb over altblurb, otherwise Agnostic on blurb vs. ongoing. --Jayron32 16:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - Christ, this is such a bloody farce.--WaltCip (talk) 16:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support. In the news, blurb-worthy imo. Marks a major point in the Brexit negotiations process. I'd prefer the shorter first blurb. (Also if we can get the black hole picture back up there we can get some great juxtaposition à la some newspapers today. Metro: What Brexit Looks Like From Space. The Times: ...and here's another inescapable black hole.) -- Ununseti (talk) 18:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Wake me when they exit. – Sca (talk) 20:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. Brexit negotiations is already listed under Ongoing. There are new developments almost daily. Until Britain finally Brexits, individual developments probably don't warrant featuring. --Animalparty! (talk) 21:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • It was originally in Ongoing a month out because of the looming deadline. However, as that deadline no longer looms, inevitably there's going to be a lull in events as everyone goes back to the negotiating table. This blurb should be used to incidate that we'll pulling the ongoing, but will be ready to add it back in come Sept. or October. --Masem (t) 21:23, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Weak support weakly in favor of putting this as a blurb and removing it from Ongoing, with a return to Ongoing if it's still seeing coverage when it rolls off the bottom. Banedon (talk) 23:22, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Weak support - For blurb.BabbaQ (talk) 08:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb, keep in ongoing. Keep it in ongoing for the moment, as there are more crises scheduled for the next few days in this endless procession: on 12 April the UK government needs to formally decide whether it intends to take part in the European elections next month; if it can't agree to do so than the becomes set to irrevocably fall of a cliff with a deadline that can't be extended, and if it does agree to participate then it will immediately trigger what will be the nastiest and most divisive election campaign since Germany 1933. Everyone is sick of hearing about this, but unfortunately this isn't dropping out of the news for the next couple of months. ‑ Iridescent 09:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Historical note: By "election of 1933" you presumably are referring to Hitler becoming chancellor. Allow me to point out that Adolf Hitler was never elected to any office in Germany. He came to power on Jan. 30, 1933, not as a result of an election victory, but because a cabal of reactionary politicians persuaded President Paul von Hindenburg, then in his dotage at 85, to appoint Hitler chancellor, figuring they could 'manage' him. (The chancellorship was not an elective office.) The Nazi Party's high-water mark in a free Reichstag election was 37.3 percent, in July 1932 – and the Nazis' share actually declined in Germany's last free election, in November 1932, to 33 percent. – Sca (talk) 21:46, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

• • If the European elections for 2019 in the UK become the news, then Brexit negotiations is no longer the correct target (they aren't really negotiations with the EU any longer, more internal wranglings within the UK body politic). It is entirely possible that ITN will see an item on change of government in the UK or new UK Prime Minister before something concrete enough happens with Brexit to see a blurb-able item on ITN! That says something about what a mess it has become. Though maybe some sort of record can be set for the length of time for having an item in Ongoing - anyone want to calculate the current length and the past records? Hopefully if there is an election or change of leader, Brexit will get a mention somewhere... (it does seem strange that such a historic event is not getting more blurbs rather than just being in ongoing, but maybe understandable). Carcharoth (talk) 10:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
    • "Ongoing" is a relatively recent addition (c. 2015); had it been around at the time, I've no doubt the Iraq War would hold the record. AFAIK the entry that's been there longest was European migrant crisis. ‑ Iridescent 10:50, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Weak support as per Babba Q , the blurb is in poor quality as it seems. Sheldybett (talk) 15:03, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment added altblurb2 Kingsif (talk) 16:19, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb (but keep in Ongoing until the relevant inter-related articles stop being updated). An extension in negotiations isn't sufficiently notable to deserve a blurb.Tlhslobus (talk) 11:03, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) 2018–19 Sudanese protests

Articles: 2018–19 Sudanese protests (talk · history · tag) and Omar al-Bashir (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Omar al-Bashir steps down as President of Sudan following widespread protests and military intervention. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Omar al-Bashir is deposed as President of Sudan in a coup d'état amid mass protests.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Omar al-Bashir is deposed as President of Sudan after nearly 30 years in office, in a coup d'état amid mass protests.
News source(s): Independent (others forthcoming)
Credits:

• Nominated by SounderBruce (talk · give credit)

 SounderBruce 07:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support - Significant. Definitely for ITN.BabbaQ (talk) 07:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Will support (soon) — All the mainstream sources are quoting unnamed govt. sources and one provincial minister. I would prefer to wait for the military statement on State TV, expected in a few hours. Note: I have fully protected the Sudan article for the next two hours. El_C 10:02, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

  @El C: any reason to still delay on this one? Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 15:56, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• No, no reason to delay. The announcement has been made: "Sudan’s defense minister said on Thursday that President Omar al-Bashir had been detained “in a safe place” and that a military council would run the country for a two-year transitional period. In a statement broadcast on state TV Defense Minister Awad Mohamed Ahmed Ibn Auf said there would be elections at the end of the transitional period." (Reuters). El_C 16:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support if/when confirmed If confirmed, and only when confirmed, definitely cause for a blurb. 88.215.17.228 (talk) 10:34, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - Definitely. Sherenk1 (talk) 10:37, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - clear and obvious. Chetsford (talk) 10:42, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - as per others. MSG17 (talk) 12:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 12:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment - from what I'm reading, he didn't "step down", he was removed from power and arrested.[11]  — Amakuru (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment – as per above, it's reported that al-Bashir was confronted my the military in his palace and then resigned, hardly an simply step down from his position. I'd also add to the blurb that he was President for 29 years, seems to be worth mentioning. Nice4What (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment - sources are describing it as a coup, and we have a one-line stub for the coup. Have proposed an ALT to reflect this.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support either Alt1 or Alt2 [12], could replace the boat races for example. SashiRolls ^{t · c} 18:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Alt2, but "coup d'etat" should also be target IMO. Kingsif (talk) 20:32, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose the target article still has several citations needed tags and so does our article on the president. The BLP makes several contentious claims include some connections to Carlos the Jackal, Osama bin Laden, Abu Nidal and other United States' and allies labeled 'terrorist leaders'. This may be true but the article contains no citation for WP:V.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted - I have eliminated the remaining citation-needed tags from the protests article, to offset Coffeeandcrumbs objection above, so that is now suitable for the bold target. Other than that there seems to be consensus above. Omar al-Bashir and 2019 Sudanese coup d'état are still not main-page ready so they are not bolded. I've posted a variant of alt2 with slightly cleaner wording. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 07:26, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment - @Amakuru: The 2019 Sudanese coup d'état should be the bolded target even if it's not as main-page ready. The coup happened on April 10th, while the 2018–19 Sudanese protests have been ongoing since December 2018 and was in ITN before (as an ongoing event). Even the structure of the sentence grammatically places the coup as the object of the main clause, so the current bolding is just awkward. — MarkH21 (talk) 12:23, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

  @MarkH21: I do agree with you in principle, but the coup article unfortunately isn't ready to be a bolded main page article yet. It has two empty sections, and the section about the event itself (presumably the one titled "Arrests", which lies between Background and Aftermath) doesn't actually talk about the coup at all. Once the article meets the criteria at Wikipedia:In_the_news#Article_quality I would be happy to bold it but I do'nt see a valid case to bend the rules here, especially given that the protests article is up to scratch so there's no need to pull the whole story. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 12:31, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

  @Amakuru: I agree with your point and was making some edits, which seems to have happened concurrently with your response! The "Arrests" section did talk about detainments made during the coup, but I've made that more clear now. I've done a bit of re-organization and added a bit of material - it's certainly in a more respectable state now. — MarkH21 (talk) 12:40, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

  @Amakuru: I thank you for your initial decision to not bold the article. However, I think we can bold it now.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:43, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

  @Coffeeandcrumbs:  Done. I've left the protests article bolded as well for now. Can unbold if people think that right. Also flipped the word order so the coup is the first mentioned thing. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 07:52, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment - following a request on MP talk, I modified the posted blurb a bit, but now it's double the length of the other ITN blurbs...not sure if there's a good balance there between concision and clarity. ansh666 18:40, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

April 10

Portal:Current events/2019 April 10

April 10, 2019 (2019-04-10) (Wednesday) Armed conflicts and attacks Second Libyan Civil War, 2019 Western Libya offensive Aguila Saleh, speaker of the Tobruk-based Libyan parliament which Khalifa Haftar's Libyan National Army is loyal to, states that no peace agreement or UN-backed conference is possible while Tripoli "is occupied by armed groups". (Fox News) The Libyan National Army says it has shot down a pro-GNA L-39 Albatros over Tripoli. (RT) International relations Brexit negotiations The United Kingdom and European Union agree to delay Brexit until October 31, 2019. This means that the UK will participate in next month's European Parliament election. (BBC News) Law and crime The United States federal government charges 24 in a Medicare fraud scheme involving the billing of Medicare for nearly $1.2 billion in unnecessary back braces and other medical braces pitched via telemarketing through durable medical equipment companies. (NPR) Politics and elections 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis After the Organization of American States accepts an envoy from the government of President of the Venezuelan National Assembly Juan Guaidó as ambassador, United States Vice President Mike Pence asks for the United Nations to expel and replace the Nicolás Maduro-appointed Venezuelan envoy in its own chamber. (Bloomberg) The International Monetary Fund denies Venezuela access to its money as there is no majority of member states recognizing either Maduro or Guaidó, describing the situation as "political chaos" and asking for debate between its members on the nation. (Bloomberg) Science and technology Katie Bouman and scientists at the Event Horizon Telescope project release the first ever photograph of the event horizon of a black hole, that of the supermassive black hole at the center of Messier 87 galaxy, taken using a network of eight radio telescopes around the world. (CNN) Homo luzonensis is identified as a new species of human beings discovered in the Callao Cave, Northern Philippines. (National Geographic)

---

(Posted) RD: Werner Bardenhewer

Article: Werner Bardenhewer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sonderausgabe (extra edition of newsletter) by africa action
Credits:

• Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Sad. I just created the article in January on the occasion of his 90th birthday. RIP --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:36, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support good-quality article, ready for main page. --DannyS712 (talk) 19:57, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support ready for posting. -Zanhe (talk) 22:39, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted. AGFing on the German-language sources. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:50, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) Homo luzonensis

Article: Homo luzonensis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Homo luzonensis is identified as a new species of human. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Homo luzonensis is identified as a new species in the genus Homo.
News source(s): (National Geographic), Paper in Nature
Credits:

• Nominated by Nizil Shah (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Drbogdan (talk · give credit), Neutrality (talk · give credit) and WolfmanSF (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: A significant development in relation to human family tree. Homo floresiensis appeared on ITN (Wikipedia:ITN archives/2009/November) when identified as a distinct species. Homo needs some updates. Nizil (talk) 05:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support - identification of a new hominid species is definitely ITN worthy. Article is short but adequate. -Zanhe (talk) 05:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - if this pushes Iranian flooding off ITN, there will be no bad news on the main page at all. Seriously, Support blurb per User:Zanhe. — O Still Small Voice of Clam 06:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - Historic discovery and possibly will it change history of mankind as we know it.BabbaQ (talk) 06:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Extremely significant. CMD (talk) 07:04, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support on notability per others above (I'll leave quality to be judged by others), even tho we will probably need to update WP:BIAS to denounce hominidism as our latest wicked sin against Political Correctness, on grounds that we would not have posted the discovery of a new species of earthworm. We have of course long been guilty of speciesism, as we don't post stories about the tragic demise of dozens of earthworms. Tlhslobus (talk) 10:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Article is short, but sufficient, and the item is being covered as a current event by appropriately scholarly news sources. Checks all of the boxes. --Jayron32 12:29, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose only on article quality in that the lede should be written more about the importance of the discovery, why the layreader would understand this importance, with the details of the find/evaluation in body. -Masem (t) 13:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support The lead could definitely use that summary but I don't think that detracts from the overall quality and the significance. Kingsif (talk) 14:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment - marked as ready. Note that there's an ongoing request to move the article to Homo luzonensis, with unanimous support so far. Can an administrator please close that discussion and post the ITN under the new name? -Zanhe (talk) 18:25, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I've completed the RM. No change on my comment above, but the move was clearly SNOWing. --Masem (t) 21:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support per above. Very notable. Davey2116 (talk) 19:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 22:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) Event Horizon Telescope

Article: Event Horizon Telescope (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Event Horizon Telescope captures the first-ever photograph of a black hole (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Event Horizon Telescope releases an image of the supermassive black hole in Messier 87 (pictured), the first direct image of a black hole
News source(s): BBC News, Time, The Guardian, NYTimes, Science News
Credits:

• Nominated by Sherenk1 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Ahiijny (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: To be announced in around 3 hours, would like to ensure that article is up to date so that we can post as soon as a picture is available. Sherenk1 (talk) 10:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support - and wait until photo released and announcement made officially.BabbaQ (talk) 11:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support and comment Just seen this on the BBC News site (source added). Maybe the galaxy where the blackhole is located could be added into the blurb and/or be the main target, as it is a Featured Article. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment Keep in mind that this project is not solely NASA, so any works from it look to be copyrighted save for those that are purposely published as CC (as some of their papers have been). The photo's out, but its NFC for us which affects how it can be added to target article as well as limiting the blurb. --Masem (t) 13:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as I can tell, the image is in fact CC: the first publication is "First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. IV. Imaging the Central Supermassive Black Hole", which carries a note at the top that "Original content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence". Smurrayinchester 13:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Then we are good. Just wanted to caution that not material published by this group is PD like NASA works. Explicit CC licensing is good. --Masem (t) 15:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support important popular development in science. --MaoGo (talk) 14:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose for now. Article is short and provides almost no context. The update to the article is no longer than the blurb itself, consists solely of a banal sentence in the lead. The article needs expanding to provided context and significance of the development. --Jayron32 14:23, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support One of the most important scientific pieces of news of this decade, has popular appeal and cool picture. I was actually surprised not to find it on the main page already. complainer 14:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support. Big news! Might be worth linking to Messier 87 as well, since the information about the black hole itself is in there. (Maybe it'll get spun off into a separate M87* article later on.) As an informal starting point, this Reddit comment gives a good sense of the context of this development. Ahiijny (talk) 14:42, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posting I'm in the process of posting this. Just waiting for the bot to protect the image. Please work on the article in the meanwhile. Jehochman ^Talk 15:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• (edit conflict) Support in principle; I haven't had time to check the article update. However I've added an altblurb which names the galaxy and makes it clear the new event is the image release (it was actually taken in 2017). Modest Genius ^talk 15:36, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• I've used the alt blurb and edited it slightly to keep it short enough for the space. Jehochman ^Talk 15:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment Did anyone actually check the quality of the update before voting or posting? While I broadly agree Wikipedia should have a decent article on this, it currently does not. As of this second, the entirety of the updated information consists of a single sentence in the lead of the article about the telescope. There is nothing else there. By Wikipedia's established standards, The decision as to when an article is updated enough is subjective, but a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable. (bold mine). @Jehochman: to reconsider posting until the article meets standards. Thanks. --Jayron32 16:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

There is a consensus here to post. Feel free to work on the article. Posting, pulling, and reposting after everybody has lost interest in the news isn't really the best thing for our readers. We could also change the main link to M87* as that article has a lot more meat. Jehochman ^Talk 16:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Blindly applying the result of a blind vote does not result in what is best for the encyclopedia. --Jayron32 16:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

People want to see the picture. The telescope article may be thin, but it is accurate and provides all the salient information. Supplemental information is available at several links provided. I don't see anybody else saying that this news item isn't beneficial to the readers, and I don't think anybody is blind. It's ok for you to disagree, but please suggest exactly what improvements are possible and should be done to the article. Jehochman ^Talk 16:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Pull – This blurb is essentially the sum of the update to the target article. This article offers nothing substantive about the recent for our readers. ITN is not a news ticker and we are not here to publicize things we like. Per WP:ITN, this project "serves to direct readers to articles that have been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest" (emphasis mine). If the major update is the photo, we have POTD for that. I love space exploration more than the average person but I am shocked at the IAR to promote a single photo.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 17:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

The picture is the news, headline news around the world. There is a consensus to post. If this does not agree with the rules, then the rules need to be updated. Jehochman ^Talk 17:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

"If what I decided to do was against the rules, then the rules were wrong". OK. --Jayron32 17:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:IAR basically. Hddty. (talk) 02:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• I came here ready to argue that this should be pulled. But the telescope was created to make this observation, so it cannot be argued that the target article has not been properly updated. And the image, although mercilessly hyped, is not itself hype. This is not an embarrassment to have on the front page. Abductive (reasoning) 17:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I would argue that the fact that the article about black holes has gone from describing entities predicted by a (widely accepted) theory to describing objects that have been (sort of) photographed does represent a substantial update. Or we could say 'Oh well, we didn't report the second most important scientific discovery of the decade because the article was too short but, with the 164th edition of a boat race nobody cares for, we were spot on, since there were enough members of the Old Boys' Network with too much time on their hands to fill in an adequate amount of inane details. We're encyclopedic, us' complainer 14:01, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support It's in the news and we have adequate coverage. The entry should stay. Andrew D. (talk) 18:02, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Post-posting Support - Pretty sure we've broken the ITN record for the oldest image posted (it takes 53 million years for light to reach us from Messier 87)!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanhe (talk • contribs) 19:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I'd be surprised if that's true, because in the world of cosmology, 53 million light years is a pretty damn small distance. Banedon (talk) 03:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Post-posting support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 21:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Post-posting support my very important day's business was interrupted by a newsflash telling me this image had been released. It's universal. Good posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Really? The article is great now! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Yes, good posting, as I noted. You can ask me again if you like! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Theory of relativity clears states that one's observations of a news event and its related WP article clearly change from others as one approaches the event horizon.... :) --Masem (t) 22:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

The fact that this black hole is not a perfect circle clearly proves that Einstein's General Theory of Relativity is wrong, thus obliging us to accept that it has now been supplanted by Masem's General Theory of Relativity, as outlined above. Tlhslobus (talk) 09:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Post-posting support. Fully agree that it was appropriate to use IAR if needed in this case. Pretty good article that was the first source that I've come across to at least begins to address roughly why it doesn't look like the perfect black circle that I had previously been led to expect. My thanks to all those who have been working on it. Tlhslobus (talk) 09:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Post-posting comment Is there any chance of altering the blurb to mention who did it? I was expecting it to be more like "The EHT publishes the first-ever photograph of a black hole, produced with algorithms developed by Katie Bouman" - just because this is more of an individual achievement. Like, we'd say "Neil Armstrong becomes the first man to walk on the moon" and not "NASA have sent astronauts up to walk on the moon". Kingsif (talk) 14:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kingsif: Since Bouman did not appear in ITN, the Katie Bouman article is new enough and long enough qualifies for DYK. IMO, there are too many countries involved in this project. We want to avoid giving an undue amount of credit to a single person. I have a good DYK hook in mind. I can nominate it if you like.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: Go for DYK Kingsif (talk) 19:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

(Closed) Amendment to the Constitution of Malaysia

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

---

Article: Proposed 2019 amendment to the Constitution of Malaysia (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Through the process for the amendment of the Constitution of Malaysia to restore both Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners within the federation of Malaysia, the amendment fail to pass following the failure to reach two-thirds majority support (148 votes) with only 138 vote for yes while 59 abstained in the voting process. (Post)
News source(s): The Edge Markets, The Malay Mail, Daily Express
Credits:

• Nominated by Night Lantern (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Failure of amendment to restore both entities status after persistent breach of agreement since 1963.  Night Lantern^halo? 05:16, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose – Absent from major news sites. Lacks general significance. (Article appears to be entirely the work of one user.) – Sca (talk) 12:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose So, basically, nothing has changed? 88.215.17.228 (talk) 13:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose – Aside from the confusing wording of the blurb, per Sca Rockin 15:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose sadly meaningless. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

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

April 9

Portal:Current events/2019 April 9

April 9, 2019 (2019-04-09) (Tuesday) Armed conflicts and attacks Second Libyan Civil War, 2019 Western Libya offensive The UN cancels a planned Libyan National Conference that was due to take place later in April for negotiations between different political factions to organise new elections due to the ongoing fighting in Tripoli. (The Guardian) Sinai insurgency A 15-year-old suicide bomber attacks a market in Sheikh Zuweid, Egypt, killing four policemen and three civilians, and injuring 27 others. (Xinhua) 2018–19 Sudanese protests Heavy gunfire is reported in the Sudanese capital Khartoum as Rapid Support Forces loyal to President Omar al-Bashir attempted to break-up an anti-government protest outside the military's headquarters, killing at least 14 people, including five Sudanese soldiers who defected to the opposition. (Sky News) Business and economy Debenhams, one of the largest department stores in the United Kingdom which employs 25,000 people, collapses into administration. (The Guardian) Alcon has completed a 100% spin-off from Novartis. (PharmaTimes) (Reuters) Disasters and accidents A Japan Air Self-Defense Force F-35 Lightning II jet disappears from radar while on a training mission over the Pacific Ocean. Japanese Defense Minister Takeshi Iwaya subsequently grounds Japan's fleet of F-35s. (CBS News) Law and crime 2019 college admissions bribery scandal 16 people are indicted on new charges in the nationwide college admissions cheating scandal, one day after it was announced that 13 of the defendants charged in the case would plead guilty for conspiracy. (The Boston Globe) (The New York Times) Politics and elections 2019 Israeli legislative election Israelis go to the polls to elect the new members of the Knesset (Israel's parliament) and a new Prime Minister. (Reuters) 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis The Organization of American States votes 18 to 9, with six abstentions, to accept Gustavo Tarre Briceño as the ambassador from Venezuela. Tarre is the envoy from Juan Guaidó's government; Nicolás Maduro's Foreign Ministry calls Tarre a "political usurper". (Washington Post)

---

(Closed) Conviction of Hong Kong Umbrella Movement Initiators

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

---

Article: Umbrella Movement (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Hong Kong, nine of the initiators of the Umbrella Movement in 2014 are convicted of riot charges. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by Patrickov (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: A new stage of Chinese crackdown on democracy and freedom in Hong Kong. HELP!! Patrickov (talk) 03:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment - What do you mean "help"? We're not here to right great wrongs.--WaltCip (talk) 14:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ... which said "(I) will have to wait until it's been reported in mainstream media or published in books from reputable publishing houses", which IMHO already happened, as I have included in the sources.
    While I don't deny that I am calling for some kind of intervention (which admitted should be made at the White House site, US military, or other places), the most valid meaning of that claim here is to have someone help with: 1. Updating the article to reflect the fact (I think I wrote the blurb as neutral as possible); 2. Help to vote for this event showing up on the main page. -- Patrickov (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support Good article, important news story that is widespread in the news (possibly because of the tangential relation to Britain, but in the news nevertheless) Kingsif (talk) 18:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose people get convicted of crimes all around the world every day. I don't understand at all why this would be so significant that I might find it a synopsis of the year's events? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • In all due respect, you seem to suggest that if the event is elected it would also be a candidate for On This Day. I didn't see this through, but is it a subtle requirement that the event has to be anniversary-worthy? -- Patrickov (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
    • That's how I would judge newsworthiness for ITN purposes. Would I see it in a synopsis of the year's events around the globe? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose – still has a few citations needed.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Please elaborate. Sorry that I am not very much an expert in this field, so I merely added one sentence on the recent development. -- Patrickov (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose – the blurb links to the Umbrella Movement, an event that happened years ago, while the recent subject is the convictions. Either link to a subsection in that article about these convictions or make a separate article about the trial. Nice4What (talk) 13:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Weak support it was briefly in the news, but seems to have fallen off quite fast. Banedon (talk) 02:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

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

(Closed) 2019 Israeli legislative election

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

---

Article: 2019 Israeli legislative election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the Israeli legislative election, Benjamin Netanyahu retains the premiership. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by Davey2116 (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: Still waiting for results; preliminary results show a close race. Nominating to draw attention to the article, so that it can be improved. Davey2116 (talk) 00:59, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Wait for coalition to be formed, which won't be happening anytime soon. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 01:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

  No - the election is ITNR. The formation of a government is a distinct event that, as you note, can happen much later or not at all. We post when the results are known and the article quality is certified. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Netanyahu said "set" for fifth term by most major news sites.[13] [14] [15] [16] – Sca (talk) 12:44, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment. This will be an interesting blurb to write, because it is possible that the final results will give Blue and White more seats, but Likud is in the better position to form a government. Maybe it should be phrased as Netanyahu's coalition won the most seats? I don't know. 331dot (talk) 12:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support & proposed blurb. There is more info at Hebrew Wikipedia, but article still in good shape on English. Kingsif (talk) 18:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support apparently all we need is a single sourced sentence in the article announcing the results. Meets current standards for posting.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

  No, that's an incorrect assertion. We need an updated article with no maintenance tags which is written in an NPOV manner with inline verifiable citations. I'm very surprised indeed that you would make any other claim, how odd. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:09, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

This article is updated. It has no maintenance tags and is written in an NPOV manner with inline verifiable citations.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't follow your point at all. You said "apparently all we need is a single sourced sentence in the article announcing the results. Meets current standards for posting. which is blatantly false, have you now changed your own version of posting criteria to match the norm? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

OK. Correction. Apparently all we need is an update (with update defined as at least a single sourced sentence in the article announcing the results). Meets current standards for posting. This article is updated. It has no maintenance tags and is written in an NPOV manner with inline verifiable citations. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

No, that's incorrect too. The article should be free of dispute tags, and NPOV. Come on. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I fixed the citation needed tag. Thank you for pointing out my errors.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support but object to the current blurb which states as a fact that Netanyahu will remain PM. The statement should either be qualified as widely accepted opinion (not sure on proper wording) or removed altogether. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:51, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose current blurb - no coalition has been formed yet (though its likely Netanyahu will remain PM). Furthermore, Israel doesn't have a premiership or a premier, but rather a Prime Minister. --DannyS712 (talk) 01:14, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

"Premiership" is to Prime Minister what "Presidency" is to President. You talk about the premiership of the PM, come on. Kingsif (talk) 17:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• Depending on which section of the article I read, Likud has won 34, 35, or 36 seats. They may not even have a plurality (of seats)? That blurb is definitely CBALL, even if that outcome is understood. 159.53.110.144 (talk) 15:03, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Richard E. Cole

Article: Richard E. Cole (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Richard E. Cole, the last surviving member of the Doolittle Raid died at age 103. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Jimmy Doolittle's co-pilot and last surviving member of the Doolittle Raid, Richard E. Cole, died at age 103.
News source(s): https://www.foxnews.com/us/last-wwii-doolittle-raider-dies-at-103, https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/surviving-doolittle-raider-richard-cole-dies-103/story?id=62280697, https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/04/09/a-legend-passes-dick-cole-last-of-the-doolittle-raiders-dies-at-103/
Credits:

• Nominated by Hu Nhu (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 97.127.212.234 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Please excuse any errors in my posting attempts; I am unfamiliar with this process and trying to do my best. I believe the death of this man to be worthy of inclusion as it relates to an an event of great significance in recent world history and it is also an end of an era we are currently witnessing: the passing of the generation who experienced World War II. Hu Nhu (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment One significant CN needs to be fixed. This also is better as an RD - doesn't have the level of significance that a blurb would merit. (Unless he was the absolutely last known enlisted surviving soldier, which I don't believe is the case) --Masem (t) 22:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• RD only once that CN tag is dealt with. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - as of now. not ready. Ping me if fixed.BabbaQ (talk) 23:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• What is a CN?Hu Nhu (talk) 23:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  Hu Nhu, the tag. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

What is the matter? What needs correcting?Hu Nhu (talk) 23:49, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Hu Nhu, at least one citation to a reliable source is needed to verify the content of that paragraph. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:53, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Muboshgu. Where do I write that source? Am I to understand that the source listed, foxnews.com is considered inadequate, indeed unreliable, and I need to add another source or replace the current source entirely?Hu Nhu (talk) 00:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I reviewed reliable source and wp:verify as to the CN correction. I added two additional sources, yet they are of the same ilk as the original and in the same editing location. I have doubt that this will resolve the CN tag because I am unable to glean what the precise problem is and thus unable to adequately address it. My apologies for the uncertainty; much of Wikipedia, especially this ITN, is new to me. I will part the discussion.Hu Nhu (talk) 02:03, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Weak Support conditional on the cite tag being resolved. I am not generally a fan of "last man" blurbs, and with the WWII generation dying off we are going to be getting a lot of these. But the Doolittle Raid, while a tactical failure, was massively important on the strategic level. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support RD looks okay. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support RD not a hope for a blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 22:52, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ian McDonald

Article: Ian McDonald (civil servant) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times
Credits:

• Nominated by Andrew Davidson (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: I noticed this obituary in The Times today and checked that we didn't seem to have an article. I just heard a report on the BBC Radio and so people will be looking for the article now. I have to go out now but have made a brief start. Andrew D. (talk) 17:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. The article is a one-line stub at present and thus is not eligible for a link to the front page. Capitalistroadster (talk) 20:31, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Really. A one line article? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - good faith nom. but not at all ready, neither in length or sources.BabbaQ (talk) 23:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose seriously. Seriously. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support – I am sure it can be expanded more. But I think i covered the notable periods.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:32, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

@Stephen: Ready IMO.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:23, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support good enough for main page. Very clear improvement since the last oppose - see the difference since then. Marking as ready --DannyS712 (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 22:46, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

April 8

Portal:Current events/2019 April 8

April 8, 2019 (2019-04-08) (Monday) Armed conflicts and attacks Second Libyan Civil War, 2019 Western Libya offensive Forces loyal to the Government of National Accord retake Tripoli International Airport from the Libyan National Army. (Anadolu Agency) One of the vice chairmen of the GNA Presidential Council, Ali Faraj Qatrani, defects to the Tobruk-based government. (Asharq Al-Awsat) A warplane loyal to Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, reported to be a MiG-23, strikes Mitiga International Airport, the only functional airport in Tripoli. A LNA spokesman says civilian planes were not targeted in the air raid. (The Guardian) War in Afghanistan A roadside bomb kills three U.S. troops and one civilian contractor near Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan. (BBC News) Arts and culture The Nation's editor Katrina vanden Heuvel announces that she will step down as editor after 24 years, on June 15, 2019. (The New York Times) Law and crime Nationwide protests against animal cruelty take place in Australia. In the city of Melbourne, protesters blocked a major intersection for four hours before it was dispatched by police; several people were arrested. (News.com.au) The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport in the United Kingdom releases a white paper proposing to set up an independent regulatory body which would require Internet companies to remove content and block websites considered harmful. (BBC News) 2019 college admissions bribery scandal American actress Felicity Huffman and 13 other defendants involved in a conspiracy regarding admission to prestigious colleges have agreed to plead guilty in the matter, prosecutors say. The 14 individuals are among 50 people accused of engaging in schemes that involved cheating on college entrance exams and paying $25 million in bribes to secure their children admission to well-known colleges. (WKZO) U.S. district judge Richard Seeborg halts the Trump administration’s policy of sending some asylum seekers to Mexico while their cases are pending in the United States. The national injunction will take effect Friday. (Reuters) Politics and elections 2020 United States presidential election, 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries Eric Swalwell 2020 presidential campaign U.S. Representative Eric Swalwell from California announces he is running for the Democratic Party's nomination to be President of the United States in the 2020 presidential election. (Fox News) Trump administration dismissals and resignations U.S. President Donald Trump terminates the employment of Randolph Alles, the Director of the United States Secret Service. (CNN) United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announces the designation of the entirety of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), effective April 15. This will be the first time the United States has designated a part of another government as a terrorist organization. (United States Department of State) (CBS News) Science and technology David Saint-Jacques becomes the fourth Canadian astronaut to take part in a spacewalk and the first in 12 years as he begins a roughly seven-hour mission. (The Hamilton Spectator) (CBC.ca) Gravitational wave observations LIGO and Virgo detect a gravitational wave from a galaxy 6 billion light-years away in the direction of Cassiopeia, with further details being released on April 10. (New Scientist) Sports 2019 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament In basketball, the Virginia Cavaliers defeat the Texas Tech Red Raiders, 85–77 in overtime, to win their first national title. (The Washington Post)

---

(Posted) 2019 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament

Article: 2019 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship Game (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In basketball, Virginia defeats Texas Tech to win the NCAA Men's Championship. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In basketball, the NCAA Division I Men's Championship concludes with Virginia defeating Texas Tech.
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

• Nominated by WaltCip (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit) and PCN02WPS (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.

Nominator's comments: In case you missed it, there was a basketball game in the U.S. last night! It wasn't a very pretty one, but it was a championship game. Article is a bit short. I was surprised that this hadn't been nominated yet; maybe Duke not being there had something to do with it. WaltCip (talk) 12:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment Check your blurb. I'm not sure how Texas Tech, with 77 points, defeated Virginia, with 85 points. --Jayron32 12:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Must have been wishful thinking on my part. That or lack of coffee. Thanks for correcting me.--WaltCip (talk) 12:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Wake up, Walt! – Sca (talk) 13:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

*Oppose for now. Article has no prose summary of the game. --Jayron32 12:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support Problems fixed. --Jayron32 16:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

*Oppose per Jayron. A referenced paragraph or two summarizing the game is a bare minimum for me to support.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support Good enough.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment Should also discuss the Women's finals, which was held Sunday 2019 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Tournament, to avoid the gender bias. --Masem (t) 14:06, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

The Women's Basketball Tournament is not ITNR.--WaltCip (talk) 14:32, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm looking back at the ITNR discussion for the Men's and see that the Women's was addressed there (as why its not included). I disagree with that reasoning, but not going to make a point about it here, so this would be fine with just the Men's, then. --Masem (t) 14:57, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

For the record, I'm OK with including the Women's tournament, so long as the article is up to the same quality. "Not on ITNR" does NOT mean "we are forbidden from posting it". People seem to think that it does mean that, though I don't know why... --Jayron32 15:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

The threshold for significance in college sports is utterly random. The D1 basketball final draws less than half that of the football final. Both amateur, both not top tier (BB even more so due to one-and-done). One is ITNR and the other has never been posted. Now we want to add another, even lesser event in the name of gender equality? I do wish we would establish some common standard; this piecemeal treatment is...amateurish. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC) GreatCaesarsGhost 15:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

The threshold for significance in <literally anything in the world> is "are reliable sources covering this to sufficient detail" Since this is "In The News", our threshold for significance is slightly more restricted, we aren't looking for any reliable sources, we're looking for reliable news sources. Are news sources (where news is "the types of news sources that have a reputation for reporting important stuff") covering this in sufficient details. That removes the "do I like this myself" aspect that would otherwise plague discussions like this. ITNR is just a list of items that we expect reliable news sources to always cover in sufficient detail. --Jayron32 16:31, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment I will work on this, it should be up to par later today. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose too weak, bare URLs, unreferenced claims, etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose – Per TRM. – Sca (talk) 15:58, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support The article could always be improved, but it has a good amount of information. I don't know why a paragraph summarizing the game is necessary. Natureium (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support – Thanks to Muboshgu.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 16:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• @Jayron32, Pawnkingthree, The Rambling Man, and Sca:, please reassess now that I've put some work into it. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  Why is the final scoreline so obfuscated? What a peculiar format. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  The Rambling Man, do you mean {{basketballbox}}? I didn't design it, I can't speak to it. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  It's indecipherable. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  I lied, I can speak to it some. It covers game stats the way basketball scores can be condensed from box scores. It shows the overall score, scoring by period, and the team leaders in points scored, rebounds, and assists. Those terms should probably be linked. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  With respect to TRM, I don't see what's indecipherable about the scoreline. It's fairly standard. More importantly, it's no different from the one used last year.--WaltCip (talk) 16:57, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  "#3 Texas Tech Red Raiders 77, #1 Virginia Cavaliers 85 (OT)" really? Why not: "#3 Texas Tech Red Raiders 77–85 (OT) #1 Virginia Cavaliers"??? Why not? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  Isn't this a bit ticky-tacky? Both read the same to me.--WaltCip (talk) 17:06, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  It parses fine to me, I think this is an WP:ENGVAR thing; TRM is bring up a score reporting format common in the UK, where news sources will report football and rugby scores that way (TEAM ## - ## TEAM). Such a format is unknown in US press, and it would seem weird and uncomfortable to US readers, where scores are commonly reported as (TEAM ## - TEAM ##). There's no inherent benefit to either format, though ex-post-facto I'm sure we could all come up with some imaginary benefit to the format that coincidentally aligns with our own national standards. It's just a difference, and different is not a synonym for worse. --Jayron32 17:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  Wild, who said "worse"? I just said it was indecipherable to me. It matters not because this is American Wikipedia. And honestly Jayron, to say the format I have suggested is "unknown in US press" is utter bollocks, but you've made so many mistakes lately, I'm just going to add this one too. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  I've never said it was the American Wikipedia. --Jayron32 14:25, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

  I don't think anyone suggested you did. PLEASE, read more carefully, you are making mistake after mistake after mistake right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment - if this is posted, please can it be rephrased somehow to avoid the jarring "defeats". In BrE we always treat sports teams as plural, so it would be "Virginia defeat Texas tech" and it looks wrong to post it otherwise. I understand it's the same the other way around for US readers, so the norm is to phrase it in a way that avoids this construct altogether. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 17:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

For that matter, In rowing, Cambridge win both the women's and men's Boat Races (women's crew pictured). currently on the main page looks very strange to me because of the pluralization. Natureium (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

I thought the norm was to go with whichever country the blurb is "native" to.--WaltCip (talk) 17:06, 9 April 2019 (UTC) -- At any rate, the blurb I used is the same format as the one nominated in 2018. I'm open to changing it, but I think we ought to establish an ongoing precedence.--WaltCip (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) "Virginia Cavaliers defeat..." could work but it might get wordy to include both teams mascots. Natureium (talk) 17:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Just to be sure, the statement "Virginia defeat..." would be equally as jarring to US readers, for exactly the same reason. British English uses notional agreement and US English uses formal agreement. Neither is right, neither is wrong, they are just different. --Jayron32 17:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Exactly, which is why we don't use either construct on the main page - which has no WP:TIES.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:28, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Use American English for American-centric blurbs. Use British English for British-centric blurbs. This is not complicated. Post this damn thing already. "Virginia defeat" is a ridiculousunreasonable thing to say.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 17:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not ridiculous. It's just not American. Neither is wrong, neither is right, neither is better than the other. But the one which should be written here is the American usage. --Jayron32 18:13, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

It is ridiculousunreasonable to insist that an American team be described using British English. In BrE we always treat sports teams as plural, so it would be "Virginia defeat Texas tech" and it looks wrong to post it otherwise.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 18:17, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not the best way to do it, no, but we also should not use words that disparage others. It's not particularly useful in building consensus and including other people, who may have different backgrounds, to use a tone which is blatantly disparaging and rude. --Jayron32 18:20, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

I have proposed an alternative blurb, which is similar in format to what we posted last year, and is our standard form for sporting events on both sides of the pond as it works in all Eng vars.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:25, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment. Perhaps the women's tournament should be proposed separately(as a standard nom); the blurbs can always be combined later. 331dot (talk) 17:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Marking ready. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted. Seems like major issues dealt with and consensus to post. I've boldly gone with the alt blurb since it matches last year's wording. If anyone objects to that then let them discuss or amend as appropriate.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: David J. Thouless

Article: David J. Thouless (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Trinity Hall Cambridge
Credits:

• Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Article well sources, Nobel winner and death was acknowledged on this date --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
• Support - Good enough.--SirEdimon (talk) 00:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 00:45, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

(Closed) Candida auris

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

---

Article: Candida auris (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Toronto Star
Credits:

• Nominated by 2607:FEA8:1DE0:7B4:EDD6:545C:DDBA:D02 (talk · give credit)

Article updated

 2607:FEA8:1DE0:7B4:EDD6:545C:DDBA:D02 (talk) 04:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose no reason offered as to why this should be ongoing. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
• Comment My earlier self-reverted support notwithstanding, I am also curious why this is suddenly in the news.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose - Panic story. WaltCip (talk) 11:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose No explanation as to why this should be an ongoing link, nothing self-evident in the article itself that it qualifies as such. --Jayron32 12:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose; no explanation of why this should be ongoing; drug resistance is not a new problem and it doesn't seem any more urgent now than before. 331dot (talk) 12:04, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

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

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: