Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section - it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
Headers
Voicing an opinion on an itemFormat your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated. Please do...
Please do not...
Suggesting updatesThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
July 6
July 6, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
July 5
July 5, 2024
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
July 4
July 4, 2024
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) United Kingdom general election
Blurb: In the United Kingdom, the Labour Party (leader Keir Starmer pictured) wins the general election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Labour Party (leader Keir Starmer pictured) wins a landslide victory in the United Kingdom general election
Alternative blurb II: Keir Starmer becomes Prime Minister of the United Kingdom after his Labour Party wins a landslide victory in the general election (after he becomes PM, probably tomorrow morning)
News source(s): https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn09xn9je7lt
Credits:
- Nominated by orbitalbuzzsaw (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.
Putting this out in front so we can get it ready as and when results come in overnight This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Clearly, we're going to need sources to use the second blurb re being a landslide, though I know the exit polls suggest it will be that way. --Masem (t) 22:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- BBC says "Labour landslide predicted", as do most other sources This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not just the BBC. Sky News, the Telegraph, the Guardian ... in fact most UK news sources ... are already using it on their front pages (although at the moment it of course says "predicted" or "expected"). But yes, stick with the original blurb, we can always change it later. Black Kite (talk) 22:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Meh. I'm not going to get worked up over it, but FWIW I don't recall the word "landslide" ever being used in an election blurb before. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:03, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, we rarely use such terms on the Main Page in my experience. Granted, I have been away for a while. If anything, we may choose to use a less bombastic phrasing such as "significant gain in seats", or something more British. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 00:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not just the BBC. Sky News, the Telegraph, the Guardian ... in fact most UK news sources ... are already using it on their front pages (although at the moment it of course says "predicted" or "expected"). But yes, stick with the original blurb, we can always change it later. Black Kite (talk) 22:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- BBC says "Labour landslide predicted", as do most other sources This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb. It's factual and to the point. We can update tomorrow after Sir Kier becomes PM. The votes are still being counted but there is no doubt who won. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support either original Blurb or AltBlurb II. (later purely among the implication that's part of ITN/R: that this will mean Keir Starmer becomes PM) Obviously, we'll be waiting for the official results (rather than just the exit polls) and such to make it official. Article appears to be in great shape; hopefully this quality will be maintained through all the official results being added. I'm somewhat neutral (mildly opposed) on whether we should bother describing the margin of the election. However, if there's an applicable superlative, (e.g, it break's Labour's old record for most seats won) then that would have a much more convincing argument to be mentioned on the front page. Nottheking (talk) 01:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb as it is the most concise. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb but wait until the full results come out. I don't really see much of a need for the blurb to indicate that the result was a landslide; the reader will see that immediately after going to the page. The blurb only needs to state who won the election. Gödel2200 (talk) 02:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb and wait Good article, important event. Results are pretty clear but post after the votes are fully done being counted Hungry403 (talk) 03:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think its fair to call it a landslide now Hungry403 (talk) 04:27, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Sunak just conceded, effectively. Toss-up between original blurb and alt-1. Moscow Mule (talk) 03:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb unless the ultimate seat count surpasses Labour's old record for most seats won, in which case support alt-1 or alt-2 and add the superlative, per Nottheking. FlipandFlopped ツ 04:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support original blurb as it's now official. Oppose alt blurbs until sources use the phrase "landslide" — Czello (music) 04:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support, with "landslide" wording; they're on course to 400, which is Blair numbers. Sceptre (talk) 04:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted As Labour has already got more than 50 per cent of the electorate seats (362 right now, with 326 needed for a majority), it's probably safe to post ALT0 at this point. I don't think it'll be long before "landslide" can be added to the blurb. Schwede66 04:26, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- There have been other "landslide" elections. Have we ever used that term in an election blurb? -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not at all. I don't think we've ever done such a thing, and the Conservatives arguably won a landslide last time. I'm a little baffled as to why Schwede66 has suggested this and strongly recommend that no admin should change this. — Amakuru (talk) 07:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- There have been other "landslide" elections. Have we ever used that term in an election blurb? -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support ALT or ALT2 blurb as Labour has now won 400 seats, I think we're now ready to add "landslide" now. 92.27.253.187 (talk) 05:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support landslide. Davey2116 (talk) 06:18, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt-1 as it is more condense. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Majority would be a better word than "landslide". ITN should save the word "landslide" for the actual landslides that kill lots of people (they seem to have stopped counting in New Guinea). For elections, we should stick to words that more accurately describe the result such as supermajority. Simply winning a majority is a significant achievement when so many countries have systems that require complex coalitions such as we see in the current Netherlands blurb. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- We don't generally use the term supermajority for this, in the UK. Secretlondon (talk) 07:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- That doesn't matter because Labour don't seem to have quite that many seats (433 is two thirds of 650). The point is to use appropriate technical terms rather than colourful journalistic metaphors. In the Westminster system, the key thing is to get a "working majority". Andrew🐉(talk) 07:46, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- We don't generally use the term supermajority for this, in the UK. Secretlondon (talk) 07:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose landslide or majority or anything else. Longstanding precedent is that we don't attempt to add "nuance" or editorialisation to election results, even those that are "disputed" or "near-unanimous" or whatever, and there's no reason to deviate from that here. The current simple blurb that they won is completely sufficient and should not be changed. — Amakuru (talk) 07:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The convention in Britain is that a 100-seat majority is a landslide; Labour have won a 170-seat majority. If anything qualifies, this does. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:18, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- What convention? See Landslides in the United Kingdom. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The convention in Britain is that a 100-seat majority is a landslide; Labour have won a 170-seat majority. If anything qualifies, this does. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:18, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose landslide as an editorialising term. "Supermajority" isn't great either as the Parliament does not operate with a supermajority system as far as I know (no equivalent of, say, the 60-vote filibuster in the US Senate). Stating that Labour won a majority by themselves (and, when confirmed, that Starmer becomes PM) is the most objective thing to do. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- In the Westminster system, a substantial majority is significant because it means that the PM can force through legislation without having to appease rebels and rivals in his own party. See the US House of Representatives for the difficulty of getting things done with a narrow majority. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support - I find it funny this was nominated before any seat was even called. It might be good to mention just how historic this win is, the worst result for the Conservative Party I believe in its entire 200 year existence. This is a pretty crazy result as the dominant party in UK politics is going extinct. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The popular vote for the Conservatives was still quite substantial while the vote for Labour was little changed. The result in seats was a typical quirk of the first-past-the-post system. The main novelty is the advent of Reform UK which got the next largest popular vote and so split the centre-right vote.
- What helped Labour is that their leader looks and sounds like a conservative -- a safe pair of hands, rather than a radical like Corbyn, a wild child like Boris or a city slicker like Rishi. It's interesting that our blurb calls him "Sir Keir Starmer", like a "knight of the shires". Andrew🐉(talk) 08:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I see that the title has been removed now as admins tussle over the blurb. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pull. While obviously this is notable, 2024_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results is not updated. 12:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC) ~~ Jessintime (talk) 12:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Those look like numerical results once the full complete tally is known. The results that Labour won was based on factors like sufficient tallies from the various locals as well as candidates conceding that they lost, all reported in RSes. — Masem (t) 12:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Jessintime There's currently 2 seats to go (out of 650), until those are declared, these "results" figures don't exist. But that doesn't change the outcome that Labour have won, a fact that was confirmed in reliable sources before this was posted. And the article has been updated with this information and aftermath, and so WP:ITNQUALITY is met. We have posted other countries in a similar state i.e. where 95+% of results are known and the election result is assured. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Standard practice for ITN has been to post once the general outcome has been confirmed, since it's rare to instantly get total figures for every single constituent election from any country. There will always be stragglers, so yes, there will be some small gaps in the data as everyone in the world waits for those stragglers. However, it remains that all the RSes have reported that Labour has won a majority of seats, and that won't change. And Keir Starmer has already been appointed Prime Minister. Nottheking (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Those look like numerical results once the full complete tally is known. The results that Labour won was based on factors like sufficient tallies from the various locals as well as candidates conceding that they lost, all reported in RSes. — Masem (t) 12:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
July 3
July 3, 2024
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Jack Rowell
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs an infobox but only a few more citations. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:45, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose There are CN tags. User:MAL MALDIVE (talk) 11:31, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Mark Cavendish
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: British cyclist Mark Cavendish wins a record 35th stage of the Tour de France (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport Guardian USA Today ESPN NBC NEWS WSJ
Credits:
- Nominated by Paul W (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Cool sports trivia, but not what is typically posted at ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 20:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The result of the Tour de France is ITN/R, but individual achievements are way under the bar for notability. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Aficionados regard the result of the Tour de France as much more then the first person to crosss the finish line, but the non-cycling world is generally ignorant of such detail. So sadly, I agree. HiLo48 (talk) 07:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Probably under the bar as a stand-alone entry. However, given it’s broken a 49 year old record would suggest it’s mentioned at race summary e.g. “In the 2024 Tour de France, Joe Bloggs wins the General Classification, while Mark Cavendish breaks the record for stage wins” 92.17.186.116 (talk) 22:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agree The tour isn't over and he could win a 36th or 37th, and at the conclusion of the race that number can be announced as part of the blurb. Kcmastrpc (talk) 22:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also agree, solid suggestion. Kingsif (talk) 11:45, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's a monumental achievement that has taken 50 years to break. It's not trivia. There's often major records on ITN, sports or otherwise (longest person in space etc) Torqueing (talk) 23:02, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Trivia, Better suited to DYK. — Amakuru (talk) 23:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- It can't go on DYK, the article is already a GA and is too long to be expanded fivefold. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose While an impressive achievement, the fact there are only a few sentences of an update on each of the linked articles means that this is not suitable for ITN. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per above. While its impressive that he broke a near 50 year old record, these kinds of personal achievements aren't notable enough for the ITN. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 02:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. This is a huge 49 years old record, and yes it's newsworthy. Eddy Merckx should be mention in the blurb too. Mark Cavendish breaks Eddy Merckx’s 49-years-old record for most career Tour de France stage wins with 35th victory. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 06:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, while impressive, this still counts as sports trivia in view of ITN. For TDF, we post the winner. --Tone 07:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support a record that has stood for a long time being broken, and a target article Mark Cavendish that's a GA. This is more in the news than the eventual TdF winners usually are (because it's a record that has stood for nearly 50 years that was thought unbreakable for most of that time), and that article is nowhere near the quality of Cavendish's article either. Monumental achievement with worldwide coverage, which is higher enough to meet the threshold of WP:ITNSIGNIF. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose Winning a stage in a multiple-day cycling race has absolutely no meaning. One may not win a single stage but eventually win the race. I don't see a reason to post a meaningless record. If it were a record set at one-day classics, it'd be a much stronger argument for posting, but it's clearly not. Note also that he's not finished half of the Tour de France editions he entered and was ranked well below 100th place in all editions he finished, so it's completely worthless to talk about any notable record here.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- He's a sprinter, and they often don't complete all three weeks, different physiology. Where he finishes in the general classification is a complete irrelevance. Ericoides (talk) 12:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's why one-day classics exist – to make sprinters more competitive. A sprinter breaking a record in a race that he can barely finish is completely irrelevant.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- To claim "Winning a stage in a multiple-day cycling race has absolutely no meaning" suggests you have absolutely no understanding of cycling. See today's L'Equipe, which only devotes seven pages to the Cavendish record. Ericoides (talk) 13:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed. I'm not personally supporting this item as of sufficient encyclopaedic interest for ITN, but the achievement itself certainly isn't insignificant. Stage wins on the Tour de France are a big deal and treated as such in reliable sources. Wikipedians' opinions on their relevance is what's "meaningless" here. — Amakuru (talk) 16:22, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ericoides: I’ve been avidly following cycling about 18 years now, and that’s why I know that this record isn’t significant at all. In multiple-day cycling races, time is what counts, not the number of stage wins. You may say whatever you want about my understanding of cycling and cite zillion sources stating that this is a big achievement, but that won’t change the established fact that these stage victories won’t help Cavendish ever win Tour de France. This record is trivial as Ronnie O’Sullivan’s 1,000 century breaks achieved in 2019 or LeBron James breaking Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s long-standing record for most points in the NBA.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:45, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- He's not trying to win the Tour; it's an event within an event. As David Millar said in his ITV commentary this afternoon, "the Tour de France is the world championships for sprinters." Ericoides (talk) 19:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- To claim "Winning a stage in a multiple-day cycling race has absolutely no meaning" suggests you have absolutely no understanding of cycling. See today's L'Equipe, which only devotes seven pages to the Cavendish record. Ericoides (talk) 13:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's why one-day classics exist – to make sprinters more competitive. A sprinter breaking a record in a race that he can barely finish is completely irrelevant.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- He's a sprinter, and they often don't complete all three weeks, different physiology. Where he finishes in the general classification is a complete irrelevance. Ericoides (talk) 12:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - This is trivia. Winning a record number of tours would be worth mentioning in the tour result post (which is, as noted, ITNR), but this is a mere footnote. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per all above. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 11:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose minor sports trivia. An impressive personal achievement but we can't post every similar record in every sport. When the race concludes, the winner can be posted per WP:ITNR. I recommend you work on improving the 2024 Tour de France article so that will be ready to go e.g. by adding prose summaries of each stage. Modest Genius talk 11:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support An amazing achievement, transcending the sport. Ericoides (talk) 12:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Dismissing this as trivia is absolute rubbish. The most notable cycling sporting event in the world has had a longstanding record broken that will go unchallenged for a very long time. The closest competitor to challenge his record is Tadej Pogačar who only has 12 stage wins at the moment. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Final note, after searching the archives I found numerous examples of prior posting of notable sports records being broken, so I don't see how there isn't precedence for posting this in some form or another. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Records based on competing and winning (or whatever the aspect) a number of times, which the chances of improving simply increase with the person participating in more events, are records that are ripe to be broken and not really fair. More approach records that would make sense are breaking race times or other measurable factors in a competitive sport, or achieving a certain type of scoring record within a single game and/or season. But as others have said, when the race is done and we post the result (per ITNR), it makes sense to possibly include this record too. — Masem (t) 16:31, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Final note, after searching the archives I found numerous examples of prior posting of notable sports records being broken, so I don't see how there isn't precedence for posting this in some form or another. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose I guess you had to be there. Call back when someone actually wins the race. CoatCheck (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) 2024 Ukrainian coup attempt allegations
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: An alleged pro-Russian coup is foiled by the Security Service of Ukraine that sought to oust Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Scu ba (talk · give credit)
I noticed that nobody was talking about a foiled coup yesterday in Ukraine that major news outlets are talking about so I decided to make a page for it, I feel that this is just as notable as any other coup and should be included in the news. Scu ba (talk) 00:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Huh. A quite worrying development of the ongoing war, but the (alleged) coup wasn't actually attempted, so oppose on notability. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sadly oppose per above. poor zelenskyy Ion.want.uu (talk) 14:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose There have been a few assassination plots targeting the president as well over the past 2 years. And I believe there was a coup plot foiled shortly before the war. So unless something is at least attempted, like in Bolivia, I don't think it's worth posting. Scaramouche33 (talk) 05:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose respectfully. It seems like this was simply the arrest of four alleged Russophilic activists who were discussing a coup plot via instant messages. An actual attempted coup that could pose a real threat to Zelenskyy would definitely be notable, but an alleged coup plot that had already failed before anything could have even been attempted is not big enough to warrant a separate blurb for an event already covered in Ongoing. Vanilla Wizard 💙 12:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This would only not be covered by ongoing if the coup had actually happened. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Vanilla Wizard. I'm not convinced this is notable enough for a stand-alone article, let alone ITN. Modest Genius talk 14:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
July 2
July 2, 2024
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Jean Daubigny
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): L'Union
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Jmanlucas (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit) and Editrite! (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
French civil servant and criminal convicted of tax evasion. Jmanlucas (talk) 05:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
RD: Aydos Sadykov
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by Gödel2200 (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.
Kazakh opposition figure who died after an assassination attempt in Kyiv. Article will need some sourcing work. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose One of the sections does not cite any sources. Needs ref improve. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 17:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support I've fixed the last of the CN tags and it appears the page is very well sourced now. I'll ping @MAL MALDIVE to see if they would like to change their opinion. Jmanlucas (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) BB(5) discovery
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: In computer science, researchers discover the fifth Busy beaver number. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A group of mathematical researchers announces the discovery of the fifth Busy beaver number.
Alternative blurb II: The fifth Busy beaver number is discovered, establishing a new quantitative limit on the behavior of small computer programs.
News source(s): Quanta Magazine , Shtetl-Optimized
Credits:
- Nominated by Schoen (talk · give credit)
- Support just beat me too it! Big thing in computer science tho Ion.want.uu (talk) 23:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wow! Didn't follow it too closely, I'm surprised it was actually discovered. Science at ITN is always great, and, as Schoen says, this is likely the largest Busy Beaver number we'll be able to discover (for two-state Turing machines at least). Not only does the state space grow very fast, but these numbers are inherently uncomputable, meaning you can't just throw more computing power to find them, you need to go through mathematical proofs for each Turing machine. By the way, for anyone curious, the number is 47 176 870. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- A lower bound on the sixth Busy Beaver number is 10⇈15, or 1010...15 times...10. Needless to say, we don't have enough space in this universe to even write it down. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose primary because the target article is terribly undersourced and is the symptom of being far too technical for an encyclopedia. Besides that, I'd like to see at least either a peer-review article or a more mainstream news source covering this, because as the Quantum article points out, this is more a curiosity than a breakthrough in mathematics. --Masem (t) 02:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This does not seem to be in the news. For comparison, I can easily show you more mainstream coverage of real beavers in my area of London (a project that I helped with myself). Andrew🐉(talk) 07:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Target article is extremely poorly sourced (indeed, the main paragraph explaining it has precisely zero sources) and is not written in anything like an accessible manner; we do not expect technical articles to be dumbed down but even the introduction to this article makes assumptions that the reader knows what a halting Turing machine, its "states", or transition tables are. It is unfortunate that a lot of computer science articles are like this. Black Kite (talk) 09:02, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support in principle, but unfortunately the article is nearly fully unsourced, and is nowhere near being ready for the main page. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. While I'm open to posting mathematical advances, there are multiple problems with this: a) The topic is extremely esoteric and doesn't seem to have any application - the 'applications' section of the article speculates about uses in principle but indicates they are all impossible in practice. b) The fifth BB number has been known since 1990, but was only conjectured not proven [2]. While proving it now is useful, it's hardly a surprise. c) There is no formal publication of this result. The team's own website announcement [3] states "we are currently working on a human-readable paper" i.e. it hasn't been written up yet, let alone peer reviewed. A peer-reviewed publication is a requirement for posting scientific news. d) There's little to no coverage in mainstream media, I couldn't find anything beyond that Quanta article. e) The article is incomprehensible to most of our readers, who would not learn anything from clicking on that bold link. So while I commend the nomination, I don't think this is suitable for ITN. Modest Genius talk 19:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability. There should be more news like this in encyclopedia on the front page. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Except that it's notability is questionable as the only independent source I've seen is the linked quantum magazine article. That fails the actual "ITN" part. — Masem (t) 22:44, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per all above. Poorly-sourced article that doesn't explain why these numbers matter (certainly not to an extent remotely close to establishing main page notability), and if my bachelor's in mathematics is not nearly enough to comprehend the article, main page readers don't have a chance. -- Kicking222 (talk) 21:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not hard: I'm in the middle of an infinite coin row (all heads up). I read card 1 of 5. The heads up side says "1. leave tails up" "2. look to its immediate right" "3. do card 2 to it". Card 2-Heads is the same except 3. is "do card 3". Card 3-Heads is the same except 3. is "do card 4". Card 4-Heads says "1. leave tails up" "2. immediate left" "3. card 1". Card 5-Heads says tails/right/END. 1-Tails says tails/left/3 2-Tails says tails/right/2. 3-Tails is heads/left/5. 4-Tails is tails/left/4 5-Tails is heads/left/1. They just proved that you need ≥6 cards to end @ over 4,098 tails or after step 47,176,870 and these are the best possible cards. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that it's pretty easy to describe how to emulate the five-state Beaver. But in order for someone to care a lot about the behavior of these "cards", we might also want to connect this to "this is one of the purest ways to model and reason about what computers do, and what computers can potentially do". And indeed "the cards can do math, potentially as well as any other system can do math". Or maybe "computer programs' behavior is complex and hard to predict, in a very fundamental mathematical sense; people have now managed to fully analyze the behavior of some small computer programs, which was extremely difficult, and there's good reason to think humanity will never make it to the next step of fully analyzing the behavior of very slightly larger computer programs". Schoen (talk) 06:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not hard: I'm in the middle of an infinite coin row (all heads up). I read card 1 of 5. The heads up side says "1. leave tails up" "2. look to its immediate right" "3. do card 2 to it". Card 2-Heads is the same except 3. is "do card 3". Card 3-Heads is the same except 3. is "do card 4". Card 4-Heads says "1. leave tails up" "2. immediate left" "3. card 1". Card 5-Heads says tails/right/END. 1-Tails says tails/left/3 2-Tails says tails/right/2. 3-Tails is heads/left/5. 4-Tails is tails/left/4 5-Tails is heads/left/1. They just proved that you need ≥6 cards to end @ over 4,098 tails or after step 47,176,870 and these are the best possible cards. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I apologize if my reasons are short sighted, I know next to nothing about computer science. The article is very hard to understand for the average reader, and I fail to see how this discovery is used outside of the problem itself. Also missing citations Hungry403 (talk) 03:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - While the Busy Beaver problem is important in computability theory, and the discovery of a new member in a short and hard-to-determine sequence is very interesting, the combination of the two does not have any wider consequences. The discovery of BB(5) doesn't actually advance computability theory at all, and the number itself has no immediate wider applications. I also think the target article lacks a clear explanation for non-specialists, and is overall not ready for the home page. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Legendary sports competitor breaks a nearly 50 year longstanding record is largely opposed as trivia, but this isn't? Absurd. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not saying that this is the way things should be, but I don't think it should be a surprise that Wikipedia is more nerd than jock. Bremps... 19:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Dick Schoof (Netherlands PM)
Blurb: Dick Schoof becomes Prime Minister of the Netherlands. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Dick Schoof is sworn in as Prime Minister of the Netherlands.
Alternative blurb II: In the Netherlands, a new cabinet is sworn in with independent politician Dick Schoof serving as prime minister.
Alternative blurb III: In the Netherlands, Dick Schoof succeeds four-term prime minister Mark Rutte.
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Classicwiki (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jochem van Hees (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.
One interesting thing about this succession is that Schoof is not part of the coalition party. Mark Rutte was PM for 13+ years, will serve as the next SG of NATO (1 October), which was just made official on 26 June. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 19:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's interesting that he's not just not a member of the coalition parties but that he's not an elected politician. Instead, he's a civil servant and previously in charge of the security service. Deep state needs a section for the Netherlands... Andrew🐉(talk) 21:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support change of head of government is ITN/R This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support because he succeeded 13-year incumbent Mark Rutte, and this concludes government appointment from the November 2023 Dutch election. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 23:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- support blurb II article seems okay and new prime minister after 14 years.. Shadow4dark (talk) 03:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Link it to the election. Doesn't have to be bold, but it's obviously correlated. Not with rutte at nato too.49.205.145.3 (talk) 09:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt2 and the article seems to be of decent quality. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted ALT2. Schwede66 00:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 Uttar Pradesh stampede
Blurb: At least 121 people are killed in a stampede during a religious event in Uttar Pradesh, India. (Post)
News source(s): Hindustan Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Estreyeria (talk · give credit)
Article will need some work before it's ready. Estreyeria (talk) 13:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agree once the article is expanded. Sheila1988 (talk) 14:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support but wait until the event is over and all information has been reported on. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 14:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support when ready death toll is quite high but article needs a lot of expansion before it is ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. This could have some form of widespread significance, but we don't know that right now, so we can't support based on that. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The article needs work to be as clear as the NYT report. That says that such events are "relatively common" and so WP:NEWSEVENT applies. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:52, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Large number of causalities, and injured. A significant event, not a common occurrencee. Now reached to 121 deaths. TheHindu report. Numancia (talk) 08:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Significant event, with very high number of casualties. Similar to Hajj incident recently. Samuelled (talk) 14:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Big news, article is decent quality Poxy4 (talk) 17:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Tragic accident with a high number of deaths. Article structure looks good enough. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 22:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose While this event has a high number of casualties, the article gives no indication of lasting significance. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:43, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Post-posting support how often do we update the death toll of disasters? The main page still says 110, while RS says it has risen to 121. Bremps... 17:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- ITN is still technically correct, as it says at least 110. Admins do update death tolls, but I do not expect them to keep track of daily changes. Natg 19 (talk) 17:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Post-posting support how often do we update the death toll of disasters? The main page still says 110, while RS says it has risen to 121. Bremps... 17:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
July 1
July 1, 2024
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Closed) 2024 Seoul car crash
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A car crash killed 9 people in Seoul, South Korea. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Reuters The Daily Telegraph
Credits:
- Nominated by 117.53.77.84 (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Traffic accidents involving private vehicles are not the type of thing that should even be covered in WP per NEVENT, much less ITN. --Masem (t) 05:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not even sure if it is notable, let alone blurbworthy. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 05:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This is a case of sudden unintended acceleration. These are quite common and forensic investigation and statistics are required to establish the cause and any systematic problem. A single incident is just a WP:NEWSEVENT. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
RD: Robert Towne
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Staraction (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Staraction (talk | contribs) 02:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The more extensive the credits, the more pain in sourcing. Needs more citations all over. Just watched Chinatown too. -- Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 02:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
RD: June Leaf
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Staraction (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Staraction (talk | contribs) 13:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready entire work section have only two sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 16:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Tone issues, including usage of "we". Bremps... 20:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) José Raúl Mulino becomes President of Panama
Blurb: José Raúl Mulino becomes President of Panama. (Post)
Alternative blurb: José Raúl Mulino is sworn in as President of Panama.
Alternative blurb II: After winning the Panamanian general election, José Raúl Mulino becomes President of [Panama.
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Classicwiki (talk · give credit)
- Created by BastianMAT (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 190.219.24.14 (talk · give credit) and 219.77.28.65 (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.
--Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 21:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC) Updated image. --04:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Oppose- This is just the swearing-in. The election was two months ago; we discussed it, but didn't manage to get it posted. GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- @GenevieveDEon, thats why I nominated. 2024 Panamanian general election was not posted. Doesn't this meet the WP:ITN/R qualification of:
Changes in the holder of the office which administers the executive of their respective state/government... except when that change was already posted as part of a general election
? Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 22:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- You're both right. This is just as recurrent as the election item and just as subject to not getting posted after a discussion. It all depends who discusses what and how from here out. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- @GenevieveDEon, thats why I nominated. 2024 Panamanian general election was not posted. Doesn't this meet the WP:ITN/R qualification of:
- Support given that we didn't post the election This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Alt2 Article is of decent quality, and we should post this as the election itself didn't get posted. I would suggest posting alt2, as the first two blurbs don't actually say how he became the president, only that he is now the president. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support on notability. BilboBeggins (talk) 16:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Post-posting support - The arguments above are reasonable, and it's good to have a relevant political story to post. Thanks, everyone. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Hurricane Beryl
Blurb: Hurricane Beryl makes landfall in Grenada, causing extensive damage. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Hurricane Beryl, the earliest recorded Category 5 in the Atlantic Ocean basin, makes landfall in the Caribbean.
Alternative blurb II: Hurricane Beryl, the earliest-recorded Category 5 Atlantic Hurricane, kills at least 16 people in the Windward Islands and Venezuela
Alternative blurb III: Hurricane Beryl, the earliest-recorded Category 5 Atlantic Hurricane, kills at least 22 people in the Caribbean and Venezuela.
News source(s): CNN NBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Gödel2200 (talk · give credit)
Category 4 hurricane which is still active. Gödel2200 (talk) 21:12, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: it is now a category 5. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 17:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I thought about nominating this article. One notable aspect about this hurricane is that it is the earliest
Category 4Category 5 on record in the Atlantic Ocean. If this gets posted, this information might be worth mentioning in the blurb. I have proposed an alt (which might need some tweaks). --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 21:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC) Updated alt. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 16:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC) - Wait/Oppose. Full impacts aren't known yet, however the article body does not yet substantiate the "extensive damage" claim at the moment. The record, while interesting, is very much trivia, and a record for being category 4 is obscure. Cat 5 maybe we can talk, but not a category 4 record. DarkSide830 (talk) 21:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is a category 5. It got up to 165 mph. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 17:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for the hurricane's impact to see the full extent of the damage. The hurricane is ongoing. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 21:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Waituntil we know more about the human impact of the storm. It's early in the season, and both this storm and other storms may yet cause more damage. As it stands, I'd oppose, but I don't want to pre-empt things as the situation develops. GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- Wait For the most part, breaking specific intensity records don't warrant inclusion here. It might merit inclusion depending on impacts/ TornadoLGS (talk) 02:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Wait: Per others. At time of writing this, further land impacts are likely to occur in the coming week per the NHC forecast and model guidance. The full extent of this storm's impact has yet to be seen.Comment: Additionally, Beryl has recently attained category 5 intensity, breaking Hurricane Emily's record for earliest cat 5 storm in basin, though it is not expected to impact any land as a cat 5 storm. Changing to Support per others; this storm's impact is clearly notable, especially for the time of year and locations impacted. ArkHyena (talk) 07:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- Comment: a high end category 3 would still cause severe impacts on Jamaica; to which it is headed towards them in the next day or so. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 17:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for impacts to be known, and for potential subsequent landfalls. While it is true that this storm is remarkable from a meteorological perspective, ITN posts based on the real world effects a storm has on populated areas. It is still very possible it could warrant posting in the future, but not right now. Vanilla Wizard 💙 12:32, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb probably needs updating as its now Cat5 (and the earliest one at that) --Masem (t) 12:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Masem @DarkSide830. I have updated the alt. -- Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 16:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wait/Oppose A large hurricane in the middle of the ocean that isn't forecasted to make another landfall until it weakens substantially due to a significant amount of sheer in its path isn't quite notable enough for blurbing. Let's see what develops over the next few days. Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree on waiting, but just want to clarify that this isn't accurate according to current forecasts. It's expected to slam into Jamaica at major hurricane intensity tomorrow. Vanilla Wizard 💙 14:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Weak support/waitI think once Beryl passes Jamaica, I’ll be inclined to support inclusion in the “In the News” section. But let’s wait until then. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 17:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- Changing vote to strong support given verified impacts in Jamaica as well as the Windward Islands. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 04:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree on waiting, but just want to clarify that this isn't accurate according to current forecasts. It's expected to slam into Jamaica at major hurricane intensity tomorrow. Vanilla Wizard 💙 14:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support – I think the Windward Islands impacts and record status are already enough before it hits Jamaica; no need to wait in my mind. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support alt version: (There has never been an earlier Cat 4 either; perhaps the blurb should say "Category 4 or Category 5" rather than just "Category 5".) It has broken multiple records, has killed at least 16 people so far, and is bearing down on Jamaica. After that it will move on toward Mexico. We should highlight it before it's all in the past tense. — BarrelProof (talk) 18:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that we summarize news, even current news. We aren't hear to be a weather warning system, and may be more appropriate to figure extent of damage after more time has passed. — Masem (t) 19:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wait/Support. Although the hurricane is still active and the damage it will cause later on are still unknown, the damage it caused so far might be reasonable enough for the ITN. Also, I would like to propose a new blub: "Hurricane Beryl leaves at least 16 people dead across the Windward Islands and Venezuela." 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 22:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support "Armageddon." Bremps... 03:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Complete devastation and destruction of agriculture. Complete and total destruction of the natural environment. There is literally no vegetation left anywhere on the island of Carriacou," says Grenada Prime Minister Dickon Mitchell. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 03:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support - I have just proposed Alt2, combining Alt1 with Midori no Sora's suggestion. This is now front-page news on the BBC, with extensive destruction reported, and still going. We should also keep the blurb updated as the situation progresses. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support An unprecedented hurricane that also caused 20 deaths. 100.33.244.26 (talk) 14:31, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: I think there is consensus enough to post, given that most of the the Wait votes come from before the hurricane had made landfall and caused extensive damage. Bremps... 17:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted ALT3, which I've developed from ALT2, as Jamaica (where there are two fatalities) isn't part of the Windward Islands. Schwede66 23:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Just came here to say I find the current blurb very confusing. What is meant by "earliest-recorded"? e.b. (talk) 01:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Earliest in the Gregorian calendar (Jan 1 earliest, Dec 31 latest). It became category 5 half month before any other cat 5 in history. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- And in this scenario, "recorded" is to acknowledge that this is the earliest verified category 5 storm, acknowledging that the vast portion of hurricanes in history, obviously, were not documented. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted as RD) RD/Blurb: Ismail Kadare
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Albanian novelist Ismail Kadare (pictured) dies in Tirana. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Albanian writer Ismail Kadare (pictured) dies at the age of 88.
Alternative blurb II: Albanian writer Ismail Kadare (pictured) dies in Tirana at the age of 88.
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by Gobonobo (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.
Internationally renowned Albanian novelist. gobonobo + c 09:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb A true literary giant with famous and influential works translated into many languages.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb truly a transformative figure and one of the greatest writer of our time and thank god, it has an legacy section that helps understand his impact. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Can’t say I’m familiar with him, but the legacy section defines his elevated significance quite well, and we did blurb Milan Kundera not that long ago. The Kip (contribs) 15:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb on notability Murnane, Munro, McCarthy, Byatt, Oe, Auster, Amis, Kundera, Barth ... Out of all the notable literary deaths of the past two years, Kadare was one of the greatest. There's a bibliography, so you know what that means. Sincerely, Dilettante 16:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- So many passing recently, you’re right. I could argue (unsuccessfully of course) that all those you mentioned, except for A. S. Byatt and Martin Amis, should’ve gotten blurbs. Along with Louise Glück, who died last year and should‘ve gotten a blurb. Gerald Murnane (who you mentioned) is still alive I think, but I think he may deserve a blurb, too. I haven’t read anything by him yet. I think only Kundera got a blurb. And Paul Auster didn’t even get his RD posted, though it was ready to go on the last day of the deadline. Trauma Novitiate (talk) 04:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Murnane was a slip on my part. I think I meant Maryse Condé, another blurb-worthy figure IMO. There was a similar burst of deaths just under a decade ago, with Umberto Eco, Marquez, Le Guin, Toni Morrison, etc all within a few years. For my part, I'd support Amis as a prominent public intellectual if not for the fact that it would SNOW. There was a push for an Auster blurb, but it was shut down. Even I opposed that because in the US he's a fairly well-known and unique but, in Europe (especially France), he's just a particularly skilled author of Nouveau romans. His influence was low relative to his popularity.
- Murnane is IMO the second most skilled living novelist, behind Krasznahorkai,so I'd highly recommend him. Sincerely, Dilettante 15:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the Maryse Condé mention. Never heard of her, but I need to check her out. I need to read Murnane, too. I’m not so sure about Paul Auster and his popularity vs. influence. When I lived in Germany, every train station had a couple paperback Auster titles available, but we’re talking 15 years ago. If you “google” Paul Auster Rockstar you’ll get a half-dozen hits from European sources (ie., https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/arts24/20240501-the-rock-star-status-of-us-writer-paul-auster-in-france). But this doesn’t necessarily contradict what you said, because admittedly this “rockstar” status is kind of a publicity stunt that applied to Auster’s status in the 80s and 90s. He’s not really read or known by Americans today. Everything I’ve read by him kind of blows me away, so I’m biased. Trauma Novitiate (talk) 11:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- So many passing recently, you’re right. I could argue (unsuccessfully of course) that all those you mentioned, except for A. S. Byatt and Martin Amis, should’ve gotten blurbs. Along with Louise Glück, who died last year and should‘ve gotten a blurb. Gerald Murnane (who you mentioned) is still alive I think, but I think he may deserve a blurb, too. I haven’t read anything by him yet. I think only Kundera got a blurb. And Paul Auster didn’t even get his RD posted, though it was ready to go on the last day of the deadline. Trauma Novitiate (talk) 04:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb after fixing quality issues this is exactly what we should expect for a blurb able RD, an extensive discussion in the article about how they are a great figure. And this is a person I have not heard of but the type of person we should be highlighting at RD. Obviously there's an orange tag and a few smaller quality problems to be fixed before posting. Masem (t) 17:26, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Major, transformative literary figure. Khuft (talk) 19:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I tried to address the outstanding CN tags in the article. Sourced or put an ISBN for the English translations, but I do not have the time to source the complete works in Albanian. -- Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 20:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Old Man Dies One sentence update about a Tirana hospital, years of ill health and reaching 88. Mundane obituary stuff. Big deal in the literary life, sure, but his death doesn't affect that in any way
whatsoeverworth adding to his Career section. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:45, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- 'Old Man Dies' is an obnoxious response to proposed stories of this kind. You're saying more about yourself than about the news by your repeated use of it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 22:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Old Man Dies is simply shorthand for the repeatedly shot-down sorts of obituaries that keep popping up around here, as if they're legitimate media events. There's no state funeral, no plausible sidebar potential and generally no reason to stay posted for a week or more alongside earthquakes, sporting celebrations and scientific breakthroughs. Especially where dozens of other notable recent dead cycle along underneath in the meanwhile, for doing the exact same thing. If you want to try and psychoanalyze an author of my depths from a mere quip, "be my guest", but you're going to get a lot wrong. I suppose I should say I was wrong about an RD not affecting literary life, because several non-readers here seem to suddenly think Kadare's someone worth thinking about reading. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- How do you know whether or not someone's a non-reader? Most don't have a glaring userbox saying This user does not read books. Sincerely, Dilettante 16:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I mean people who haven't read a book by Kadare. Several of us said here we hadn't even heard of him, implying what that does. I certainly didn't lump you into that crowd, given your vote. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- My bad. I misinterpreted what you meant by non-reader. Sincerely, Dilettante 20:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- No worries. When I read you write "Byatt", part of me thought you meant Bray Wyatt by it. That's much worse. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- My bad. I misinterpreted what you meant by non-reader. Sincerely, Dilettante 20:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I mean people who haven't read a book by Kadare. Several of us said here we hadn't even heard of him, implying what that does. I certainly didn't lump you into that crowd, given your vote. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- How do you know whether or not someone's a non-reader? Most don't have a glaring userbox saying This user does not read books. Sincerely, Dilettante 16:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Old Man Dies is simply shorthand for the repeatedly shot-down sorts of obituaries that keep popping up around here, as if they're legitimate media events. There's no state funeral, no plausible sidebar potential and generally no reason to stay posted for a week or more alongside earthquakes, sporting celebrations and scientific breakthroughs. Especially where dozens of other notable recent dead cycle along underneath in the meanwhile, for doing the exact same thing. If you want to try and psychoanalyze an author of my depths from a mere quip, "be my guest", but you're going to get a lot wrong. I suppose I should say I was wrong about an RD not affecting literary life, because several non-readers here seem to suddenly think Kadare's someone worth thinking about reading. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- 'Old Man Dies' is an obnoxious response to proposed stories of this kind. You're saying more about yourself than about the news by your repeated use of it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 22:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Influential in his field (kinda think Munro should’ve been blurbed too but oh well). Article could be updated a bit better to reflect his death / reactions. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:22, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Support Blurb - I'm not an expert, but the article seems to support well, with citations, the proposition that he was a genuinely outstanding figure in the literary world. GenevieveDEon (talk) 22:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Don't know about this guy (maybe I should?) but apparently he was "one of the greatest writers and intellectuals of the 20th and 21st centuries." I guess that's pretty solid. Bremps... 23:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Surprised to learn that he was the author of The Ghost Rider, which, of course was later made into a major motion picture starring Nicolas Cage. Hyperbolick (talk) 01:37, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, I don’t believe that’s correct. The movie is based on the comic book by that name, which was inspired by the song “Riders In The Sky (song) that Johnny Cash (and many other singers, too) made famous. You know the one: “yippee i-oh, yippee i-yay, ghost riders in the sky” — Trauma Novitiate (talk) 03:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb – I agree that this article is very impressive. Very well-written, inclusive, and clearly establishing that Kadare is a great story-teller deserving of his acclaim and international readership. I had not even an inkling about any of this until just now, after I read the Wikipedia article which is close to being ready to be posted as an RD. A few minor issues such as the ISBN’s that Classicwiki mentioned already. - Trauma Novitiate (talk) 03:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb old man dies. Manner of death not notable. Not a serving political head. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb. His article explains well why he is blurb-worthy, though I don't think the update is sufficient to post just yet. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. I find it dubious that a person whom not many know is blurbed just because his peers praised him, while many people whom everyone knows, like Donald Sutherland, Christopher Plummer, Kirk Douglas and Olivia de Havilland, Cormac Maccarthy, Vangelis, to a lesser extent William Hurt, Angela Lanesbury, Harry Bellafonte.
- He hasn't even got a Nobel Prize, we didn't blurb a great many guys who had one.
- I don't think he is that transformative, I don't know his books, they weren't adapted to the screen notably.
- I also wouldn't say his influence in Europe is large. BilboBeggins (talk) 16:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your list is mostly celebrities. Secretlondon (talk) 19:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would regard Vangelis as top musician, Cormac Maccarthy as accomplished writer, Donald Sutherland and Christopher Plummer as character actors, William Hurt as powerful dramatic actor. Lanesbury was first nominated for Oscar 80 years ago. Bellafonte was devoted activist. And Havilland and Douglas were just legends. Still are. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- How influential are those actors? I've never heard an actor say "I saw William Hurt in Lost in Space and it was revelatory—it completely changed the way I act." At most actors are inspired by each other; it's rare their styles shift much. On the other hand, it's common for popular authors to cause significant shifts in the literary style du jour or the themes most covered.
- With Kadare, you can also make an argument for political influence as a dissenter and activist. Sincerely, Dilettante 21:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- To be fair, Lost in Space isn't even in top 20 Hurt's performances.
- Let's see
- [4]
- [5]
- [6]
- I put dozens of Sutherland references last month. BilboBeggins (talk) 22:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Havilland literally changed studio system and the ways actors were treated [7]. BilboBeggins (talk) 22:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would regard Vangelis as top musician, Cormac Maccarthy as accomplished writer, Donald Sutherland and Christopher Plummer as character actors, William Hurt as powerful dramatic actor. Lanesbury was first nominated for Oscar 80 years ago. Bellafonte was devoted activist. And Havilland and Douglas were just legends. Still are. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- notability does not always go hand in hand with popularity. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Whether a death is still in the news by the time it's posted depends on popularity, though. That's the more important thing, blurbwise. Notability just determines whether the biography exists. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- But enduring popularity across globe is notability.
- I regard as the problem that in a competitive field top or upper tier representatives won't be considered, only top top top ones, while in a sport the best known player will be considered good enough for blurb.
- 81 wiki page for Sutherland, 30 for Willie Mays, 30 for Shane Warne, around 40 for Jim Brown at the time of death.
- This all hardly makes sense.
- I would assume blurb deaths are for cases where a person is so well known that it is news that they died, and everyone should know about it, and Wikipedia spreads this information. As in cases of Pele, Queen Elizabeth II, Sidney Poitier, Pope Benedickt XVI. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- If we're going to use "popularity across the globe" as the new criteria for death blurbs, why stop there? Let's apply popularity across the board at ITN! New PM in the Netherlands? Who cares! Taylor Swift's outfit malfunctioned during a concert in Ireland! Kim Kardashian just renovated her luxury villa! Let's please focus on the really popular news. Khuft (talk) 21:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- WP does not consider fame or popularity as part of notability, because that feeds into the systematic bias of English and Western topics. We are an encyclopedia, the main page meant to displace high quality encyclopedic articles, and in this case, a person that has a thoroughly established legacy and impact on literature, an ideal encyclopedic topic, even if one hasn't heard of them before. Absolutely meets what we want the main page to reflect. Masem (t) 22:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- More specifically, we're an English encyclopedia. Most English readers and writers exist in or know of this "Western world" of internettable common knowledge; these have always been the sort of people we work with and for. Anyway, I'm pretty sure I've reminded you of this recently and it had no effect, so I'll just suggest "globularity" for this newfangled metric (assuming Khuft isn't kidding about that topless news in Ireland). InedibleHulk (talk) 04:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- The key of what I'm saying is that just because the majority of readers and editors of en.wiki likely have not heard of this author because of being outside the normal English/Western sphere of influence (and I'm in that boat of having no idea who he was), should absolutely not be a valid point of opposition becasue that runs against the fact we cover all topics globally. The same argument, in reverse, came up with the Willie Mays blurb, in that he was a figure likely known to most American readers and editors but not to other parts of the world - but still demonstrated why he was a great figure in the field of baseball. Masem (t) 04:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Now you're getting en.wiki (the thing that covers all topics globally) mixed up with "us" (WP:ITN, a tiny speck within the whole, where Western news comes first). This is hopeless. You win! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- The key of what I'm saying is that just because the majority of readers and editors of en.wiki likely have not heard of this author because of being outside the normal English/Western sphere of influence (and I'm in that boat of having no idea who he was), should absolutely not be a valid point of opposition becasue that runs against the fact we cover all topics globally. The same argument, in reverse, came up with the Willie Mays blurb, in that he was a figure likely known to most American readers and editors but not to other parts of the world - but still demonstrated why he was a great figure in the field of baseball. Masem (t) 04:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- More specifically, we're an English encyclopedia. Most English readers and writers exist in or know of this "Western world" of internettable common knowledge; these have always been the sort of people we work with and for. Anyway, I'm pretty sure I've reminded you of this recently and it had no effect, so I'll just suggest "globularity" for this newfangled metric (assuming Khuft isn't kidding about that topless news in Ireland). InedibleHulk (talk) 04:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your list is mostly celebrities. Secretlondon (talk) 19:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. Come on, really? Blurbs are not for this kind of person, no offence to him, he led a noteworthy and accomplished life. But RD exists for us to list deaths. — Amakuru (talk) 22:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. His life was significant, which is why he has an article. But what's significant about his death? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Orange tag is now gone. Should be ready to post. gobonobo + c 00:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb? Is he famous for dying? HiLo48 (talk) 01:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- He's much more famous than he was two days ago. Sincerely, Dilettante 01:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb? Is he famous for dying? HiLo48 (talk) 01:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, blurbs should be reserved for cases where the sourcing could support a stand-alone article on their death and funeral. Abductive (reasoning) 06:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, support RD only This is what RD is for. While Kadare may have been somewhat transformative in a field, he wasn't transformative on a world stage like many state leaders or even top-tier sports stars. And even in literature, he doesn't reach the notability of, say, Stephen King. 1779Days (talk) 07:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb not only a legendary writer, but also his death and funeral are notable, given that Albania and Kosovo declared national days of mourning. 2A02:908:676:E640:1529:50D8:AC9D:7F61 (talk) 19:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted as RD Stephen 23:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Stephen: Your decision to post as RD only when there’s a strong consensus for a blurb is somewhat confusing. Furthermore, there’s an ongoing discussion on the talk page regarding the validity of the old-man-dies argument, which is prevalent among those opposing a blurb. Could you please elaborate your decision?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posting as RD doesn't preclude further discussion on a blurb. I wasn't making that call. Stephen 00:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Stephen: Your decision to post as RD only when there’s a strong consensus for a blurb is somewhat confusing. Furthermore, there’s an ongoing discussion on the talk page regarding the validity of the old-man-dies argument, which is prevalent among those opposing a blurb. Could you please elaborate your decision?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) New Indian Criminal Code comes into effect
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: New Criminal Code Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) comes into effect from 1 July 2024 to replace the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which dated back to the period of British India. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Three criminal laws namely Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) comes into effect replacing Indian Penal Code (IPC), Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), and Indian Evidence Act (IEA), respectively.
News source(s): The Hindu ndtv.com The Times of India
Credits:
- Nominated by Redmyname31 (talk · give credit)
- Oppose I wondered what "Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita" meant as I don't speak Hindi. The nominated article doesn't tell me so I have to go to Google Translate to find that it means "Indian Judicial Code". My impression is that this is much the same as before with the usual offences of theft, murder, etc. It's just that everything has been rewritten in Hindi rather than English, right? But this is the English language Wikipedia and so the topic is more suitable for हिन्दी विकिपीडिया. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:23, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I am an Indian and I would say that this is not something worth mentioning in the ITN. Almost all the rules and laws are same expect for few notable exceptions. This is not something that is changing India drastically. Also, picture of the constitution has got nothing to do with it. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The article does not make it seem like much has changed through the new code. It does have a criticism section, but the criticism about new changes the code has seems to be limited to ambiguous phrases it introduces. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:23, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per all above. Totally irrelevant for ITN. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per all above. The Kip (contribs) 15:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Sam Mostyn as new Governor-General of Australia
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Businesswoman Sam Mostyn (pictured) succeeds David Hurley as Governor-General of Australia. (Post)
News source(s): news.com.au ABC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Aydoh8 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Nford24 (talk · give credit) and Abraham, B.S. (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Governor-Generals are just ceremonial roles. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Non-oppose but I will note that we didn't post previous changes of viceroy/reine in Commonwealth realms This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose good faith nom. Kind of a ceremonial stand in for the head of state. The prime minister holds the power and technically King Charles III is the head of state. So I'm not seeing any real significance here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The governor-general is mainly a ceremonial role, as mentioned by Ad Orientem --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is in great shape. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per the reasons above, mainly ceremonial and they have not been posted previously. Ornithoptera (talk) 05:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as the governor-general is mostly a ceremonial role. As the lead of the article says: "In almost all instances the governor-general only exercises de jure power..." Gödel2200 (talk) 14:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) United States President granted criminal immunity
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: The United States Supreme Court grants the President of the United States full immunity for official actions taken in Trump v. United States. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In Trump v. United States, the United States Supreme Court rules that former presidents are immune from criminal prosecutions of official acts.
News source(s): Supreme Court CBS News The Hill
Credits:
- Nominated by lunsel (talk · give credit)
- Created by ElijahPepe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ElijahPepe (talk · give credit) and DanzST (talk · give credit)
- Oppose — This is a standard and expected ruling that has no personal significance to the country, unlike Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Totally irrelevant for ITN. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose not suitable for the ITN and the main page. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose because it's an ongoing event as part of a larger legal process (Trump indictments) and wasn't a conviction or acquittal like the New York trial. It's not suitable for ITN. JohnAdams1800TALK 15:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support because of the immense significance of this decision. ITN has had an anti-US bias that prevents most posters on here from recognizing the obvious importance of extremely significant news stories for far too long, and the opposition expressed above to one of the most noteworthy Supreme Court decisions in the lifetime of anyone reading this is an exceptionally good illustration of that. IntoThinAir (talk) 16:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose both the topic and the blurb. The decision is more nuanced than described in the blurb. And ElijahPepe is correct that this is not a "major upset" (to use sports jargon). EvergreenFir (talk) 16:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose since this goes back to lower courts to rule what actions are or aren't immune now, which most pundits I've seen will still leave some of the table. If anything, the three decisions to nuke the administrative state (Jarsky, Loper Bright, and corner Post) are actually far more impactful but even then not ITN worthy material. Masem (t) 17:30, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
June 30
June 30, 2024
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Hugh Aldons
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Sunday Observer
Credits:
- Nominated by Abishe (talk · give credit)
- Created by Sammyrice (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sammyrice (talk · give credit), Abishe (talk · give credit) and Erksahin (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.
Sri Lankan sportsman who has played field hockey. rugby union and cricket for Sri Lanka. Abishe (talk) 02:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Oppose. Although it is sourced, the article is way too short at the moment and needs expansion.Support. Changing to support as the article structure looks slightly better than before. Cheers. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 04:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support IMO meets bare minimum requirement. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support per PoP but an infobox would be nice. Bremps... 23:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The article is short and good enough for RD. The birthdate is unsourced though. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
RD: Nadim Mostafa
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Financial Express
Credits:
- Nominated by Classicwiki (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit) and Vinegarymass911 (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.
Bangladeshi BNP politician. Exact DOB needs to be nailed down. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 18:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment the article seems to rely heavily on just one news website, needs other sources than that site. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted as RD) RD/Blurb: R. Sampanthan
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Sri Lankan Politician R. Sampanthan (pictured) whose been in the Parliament for 6 terms (1977, 2001, 2004, 2010, 2015, 2020); and as the opposition leader for a term had passed away. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Sri Lankan Politician R. Sampanthan (pictured) whose been in the Parliament for 6 terms with 5 consecutive terms; and as the opposition leader for a term had passed away.
Alternative blurb II: Sri Lankan Politician R. Sampanthan (pictured) whose been in the Parliament for 6 terms with 5 consecutive terms (1977, 2001, 2004, 2010, 2015, 2020); and as the opposition leader for a term had passed away.
Alternative blurb III: Former Sri Lankan opposition leader R. Sampanthan dies at 91.
News source(s): The Hindu, BBC, Newswire
Credits:
- Nominated by Vestrian24Bio (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Obi2canibe (talk · give credit) and Gotitbro (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.
Sri Lankan politician. Been in the parliament for 6 terms, and as opposition leader for 1 term. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 02:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb is a bit much for a Leader of the Opposition. Bremps... 02:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- He is one of the most important political figures in the country. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 02:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Well, was. So far, his article doesn't seem to reflect that he was a supposedly transformative figure, but it might just be due to omissions. Bremps... 03:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- He is one of the most important political figures in the country. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 02:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, leading the opposition in parliament for a term isn't really blurb-worthy. If a blurb has to be chosen, altblurb 3 is the most concise and fluff-free. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 03:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Nowhere close to the expected type of coverage/content to describe being a "great figure" in Sri Lanka politics. Perhaps important being the opposition leader, but that doesn't equate to "great". --Masem (t) 03:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD The prose and citations are there for an RD mention; the very few uncited statements are not controversial. A blurb is obviously not going to happen and is not worth discussing. -- Kicking222 (talk) 08:25, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD article is good enough to be posted in the RD, but being an leader of opposition is not a blurb worthy position. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb - I don't think we'd generally consider a blurb for a politician who had never actually led a nation or government from any country. I wouldn't, at least. Politics is an important field, as I often say, but this isn't being at the top of it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 22:02, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb is out of the question but support RD. Let's focus on article quality from here on out. Bremps... 03:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb With all due respect, subject simply does not reach the significance for a death blurb. Article looks good for RD, though. The Kip (contribs) 03:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb not a serving head of state or government. Manner of death not notable. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 05:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Not a political figure that we blurb. BilboBeggins (talk) 16:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. Per most of the above. A politician who led the opposition party is not notable enough for a blurb. I will support it being in the RD though. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 22:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted as RD Stephen 22:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
June 29
June 29, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
Mauritanian presidential 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.
Blurb: Mohamed Ould Ghazouani (pictured) is reelected in the Mauritanian presidential election. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Gödel2200 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Tidjani Saleh (talk · give credit)
- Comment ITN/R surely? Added image for consideration. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Technically it isn't, as ITNELECTIONS only lists changes in the holder of office as ITNR, whereas this is a reelection. However, it should be ITNR, and there is ongoing dicsussion on how we should amend ITNELECTIONS. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment although I like tables, it needs more prose. -- Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 04:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
2024 Borno State bombings
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: At least 30 people were killed and over 100 injured in suicide bombings in Borno State, Nigeria. (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times Vanguard
Credits:
- Nominated by Staraction (talk · give credit)
- Oppose on quality article needs serious work before being front page ready This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality death toll is quite high but article as of now has only 6 sources and is 276 words long. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:49, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The article doesn't mention what group (if any) the attackers were a part of, and it is currently too barebones to be posted to the main page. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now Who, what, where, when, why and how? What, where, when and how are answered, leaving who and why (though we have a pretty good guess). Ping me if both are answered, if so, I'll support this being posted as this is a major attack. Bremps... 02:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
RD: Pål Enger
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NRK, Dagbladet
Credits:
- Nominated by Classicwiki (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Oceanh (talk · give credit) and Robby.is.on (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Norwegian footballer and art thief (stole the The Scream!). Will not be posted in current state, needs lots of citations if anyone wants to tackle. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me. 18:30, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as the nominator said it is not in a good shape. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Princess Lalla Latifa Amahzoune
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): APA News
Credits:
- Nominated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mohamad Darilin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
princess widow of King Hassan II, mother of the current King of Morocco Mohammed VI. Article is short (she had a very discreet role and it seems that little is known about her), but almost ready. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - What is that lead image, it looks like some found footage creepy pasta. More recent and quality image would be better PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but there is no better photo available. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- The copyright information may be inaccurate. Bremps... 18:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- This website gives a better picture, though I am not sure what the copyright situation of it is. Gödel2200 (talk) 18:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Mostly Support I don't have a problem with a creepy video still for an obscure quasiroyal figure, given the state of VHS recording even in Denmark at the time, but a section called Biography within a biography makes me strangely uneasy. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:52, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is okay enough to be posted, but photo is actually weird but the photo on her husband's page is even more weirder, PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not ready for the front page. I tried following note 1, and it appears to be an OR justification of some of the terminology used elsewhere in that paragraph. GenevieveDEon (talk) 22:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- You cannot say that the article is not ready because of an inconsistency in the note. If you don't think it's appropriate, it's deleted (it doesn't actually contribute anything). For the rest, what assessment do you make? _-_Alsor (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) 2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup final
Blurb: In cricket, India win the T20 World Cup by defeating South Africa in the final (player of the final Virat Kohli pictured). (Post)
News source(s): CNN, BBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera The Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by 14.139.34.101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by MNWiki845 (talk · give credit), Vestrian24Bio (talk · give credit) and WikiEditPS (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
14.139.34.101 (talk) 18:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support. The article is good, well written and has all the details. Must be on the ITN. AnalyserOP (talk) 19:06, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support. ITNR. Article looks good. Good to go to mainpage. Ktin (talk) 19:20, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Article seems well-cited (I spotted two CN tags, but they were for "self-evident" items that don't need an explicit single source) And there seems to be sufficient prose for each section. Overall rather well-done; good to see that much attention quickly: the number one cause of ITN/R sports stories going unposted is usually because the article remains a mess of tables with no cited prose. Good job on the editors to get this past that. Nottheking (talk) 20:45, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural support rules require it. Sports. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support prose looks good. The Kip (contribs) 03:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support The page is of sufficient quality to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:18, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is in a good shape but I suggest we should picture player of the series (in this case Jasprit Bumrah) rather than player of the match. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Licensing info for the image on the page for the cup is a bit fishy. Bremps... 05:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support The article has been further expanded and all the cn tags have been replaced with references. --Abishe (talk) 10:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support As per the comments above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:40E2:102C:CDD8:2D34:E8FC:93F8:5F9F (talk) 13:25, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Admin Attention Needed. Tagging @Admins willing to post ITN: , this has been ready for posting for some time now. Please can you help take a look and post. Ktin (talk) 14:52, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 19:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com]
rather than using <ref></ref>
tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref>
tags are being used, here are their contents: