Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS. Archives of past nominations can be found here.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

A blurb is a one sentence summary of the news story. An alternate suggestion for the blurb is called an altblurb, and any more suggestions get labelled alt1, alt2, etc. A blurb needs at least one target article, highlighted in bold; reviewers check the quality of that article and whether it is updated, and whether reliable sources demonstrate the significance of the event. Other articles can also be linked. The Ongoing line is for regularly updated articles which cover events that remain in the news over a longer period of time. RD stands for the "recent deaths" line, and can include any living thing whose death was recently announced. In some cases, recent deaths may need additional explanation as provided by a blurb; this is decided by consensus.

Jiang Zemin in 2002
Jiang Zemin

How to nominate an item[edit]

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated).
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

Headers[edit]

  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as (Ready) when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked (Ready), you should remove the mark in the header.

Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...[edit]

  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. Maybe the previous reviewer has missed a problem, or an identified problem has now been fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes may also help administrators identify items that are ready for promotion to the ITN template on MainPage.
  3. Point out problematic areas in the nominated article and, if appropriate, suggest how to fix them. If you know exactly what to do, by all means, go ahead and fix it as you see fit.

Please do not...[edit]

  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  2. Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. The criteria can be discussed at the relevant talk page.
  6. Use the discussion section of an item as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome of a nomination and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates[edit]

A posted ITNC item that needs correcting can be addressed in two ways:

  • For simple updates, such as updated death tolls in a disaster, linking issues, spelling or grammar corrections, or otherwise anything that does not change the intent of the blurb should be discussed at WP:ERRORS in the ITN section.
  • For more complex updates that involve a major change in the blurb's intent, that should be discussed as part of the current ITNC nomination.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Archives[edit]

December 4[edit]


(Closed) B-21 bomber unveiled[edit]

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


Proposed image
Article: Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Northrop Grumman unveils the U.S. Air Force B-21 Raider stealth bomber (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is only the second stealth bomber to become operational. This is the first strategic bomber since the B-2 Spirit was unveiled in 1988. Article requires updates. Schierbecker (talk) 05:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The plane has not "become operational" – it's still in development, has not even flown yet and is not expected to enter service for years. This "unveiling" is not really news because the project has been ongoing for years – it's just a PR stunt – a photo-op. And we still don't have much detail because the details are classified. And the general background is not new. I started another article over 7 years ago – Renovation of the nuclear weapon arsenal of the United States – about the long-term program which started in the Obama administration and has been continued by subsequent administrations. The new bomber is part of the nuclear triad, which is also not new; it's a long-standing strategy. Even the name of the plane is not new – it harks back to the Doolittle raid. Hidebound militaries always love refighting the last war by clinging to obsolete weapon systems but what we see in Ukraine is that cheap drones and missiles are what works best now while manned aircraft, ships and tanks have not been effective. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Wikipedia is not a forum for product advertising or PR. Chrisclear (talk) 10:29, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose I don't see that it's any more notable than a new type of ship, train or even car. Black Kite (talk) 12:02, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose we wouldn't post a new Chinese service rifle or a new French tank. Juxlos (talk) 12:43, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose - Per above PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:10, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 3[edit]

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Jim Kolbe[edit]

Article: Jim Kolbe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

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: Not yet ready for the usual reason – Muboshgu (talk) 23:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Non-oppose Actually not in too bad a state source wise, I only see a few spots in need of help. The article is also pretty holistic as far as his career. Not good enough for support, not bad enough for oppose = non-oppose. Curbon7 (talk) 07:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Al Strobel[edit]

Article: Al Strobel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:
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: Actor, well known from Twin Peaks (original series, film, and revival series) and also appeared in other films and roles. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:A9C6:477:DAB7:8F4B 23:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

RD: Najma Hameed[edit]

Article: Najma Hameed (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Nation
Credits:

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.

 Ainty Painty (talk) 09:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Afzaal Ahmad[edit]

Article: Afzaal Ahmad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Daily Times
Credits:

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.

 Ainty Painty (talk) 09:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

December 2[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Issei Sagawa[edit]

Article: Issei Sagawa (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Japan Today
Credits:

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.

 Count Iblis (talk) 16:25, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support One cn tag and one unreliable source tag, but neither are for any particularly controversial information. It's good enough for the main page. --Jayron32 16:28, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: The "In popular culture" section needs more sources (or trimming). --PFHLai (talk) 15:26, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Closed) Sight & Sound poll[edit]

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


Article: The Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time 2022 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​In a decennial poll of film professionals, Jeanne Dielman is voted the greatest film of all time. (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Poll has been running since 1952 and is considered to be the litmus test for film culture. Over 1600 film makers, critics, curators and academics took part in this one. Article is listed for deletion, but I believe easily meets notability. yorkshiresky (talk) 10:04, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  • Should the above be reopened now that the article has been scrubbed of its copyright violations? -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 19:33, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

December 1[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Gaylord Perry[edit]

Article: Gaylord Perry (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:

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: Author of Me and the Spitter, which I got to DYK this year. I'll work on this one. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:05, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Chuck Stobart[edit]

Article: Chuck Stobart (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Memphis Commercial Appeal
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: I've begun fleshing out the article and will continue doing so in the morning Cbl62 (talk) 08:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support. One cn tag, but per WP:ITN one or two "citation needed" tags may not hold up an article, so this appears ready for ITN. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:35, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've fixed the one remaining "citation needed" tag. Beanie Fan fixed some gaps as well. The article is now fully cited. Cbl62 (talk) 18:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

November 30[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Ready) RD: Shatzi Weisberger[edit]

Article: Shatzi Weisberger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): JVP-NY, BuzzFeed News, Middle East Eye
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Expecting an obit to additionally verify death. Probably shouldn't run before that's out and cited in the article. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: John Hadl[edit]

Article: John Hadl (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Needs a lot of referencing work. I plan on working on it. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Christine McVie[edit]

Article: Christine McVie (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Fleetwood Mac vocalist / keyboardist --Vacant0 (talk) 19:47, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support Article is extensive and updated. Subject was a prominent member of Fleetwood Mac, a major global musical act (R&R Hall of Fame, 4 US and 4 UK number one albums, etc) GeoGreg (talk) 22:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. McVie was an integral part of Fleetwood Mac's most successful lineup. Wrote many of the band's biggest hits, including "Don't Stop", "You Make Loving Fun", and "Everywhere". Lunaroxas (talk) 22:49, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose McVie was part of a group of music, whose music that spans a human generation or more. Urbanracer34 (talk) 23:54, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality. Several unsourced paragraphs, some have been marked with CN tags. I'd also prefer to have sourcing for Billboard etc placement also included here even if those are sourced on the various album or song articles also, did she even get any nominations or recognition? That seems missing... --Masem (t) 00:02, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Having an article means that she’s notable enough for RD, so that shouldn’t factor into support or opposition. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:10, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That is incorrect. WP:ITNQUALITY states "Articles should be well referenced; one or two "citation needed" tags may not hold up an article, but any contentious statements must have a source, and having entire sections without any sources is unacceptable. Biographies of living persons are held to higher standards of referencing because of their sensitive nature, and these rules also apply to those recently deceased.". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    You're talking about two different things. Blaylockjam10 said significance is not a factor in response to two editors making significance arguments. You're talking about quality. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:32, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait for the rest of the day to see if the [citation needed] tags can be addressed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've now addressed the tags; some of the sourcing is not brilliant but hopefully it should be enough to alleviate the opposition above. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:28, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Ready) RD: Abu al-Hasan al-Hashimi al-Qurashi[edit]

Article: Abu al-Hasan al-Hashimi al-Qurashi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: 3rd Caliph of the Islamic State 4me689 (talk) 19:05, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Davide Rebellin[edit]

Article: Davide Rebellin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Italian racing cyclist 4me689 (talk) 15:40, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Not Ready Referencing is quite poor and will require work. Additionally the date of death is not clear and there is no citation. The lead claims Nov. 30, but lower down it says he was struck and killed over the weekend of the 26th. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That bit about "the weekend of 26 November" has been edited out. However, there are still a few footnote-free paragraphs in the Career section. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Two new minerals Elkinstantonite and Elaliite[edit]

Articles: Elkinstantonite (talk · history · tag) and Elaliite (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​Two never-before-been-seen on Earth minerals, Elkinstantonite and Elaliite, are discovered inside a 17-ton meteorite (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Credits:

Article updated

 CMD (talk) 08:42, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • This is extremely cool and I hope these articles will be expanded greatly. A merge might be an option too, as these two articles have a lot of duplicate information. Regardless, these two articles as they stand now are not suitable for an ITN feature. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am all for good science stories but these two are really short. Maybe a better target would be the article about this meteorite? Tone 10:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    There doesn't seem to be an article on the meteorite individually either. This feels more like a DYK. Masem (t) 13:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'm working on it Draft:El Ali meteorite CT55555(talk) 19:15, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Done El Ali meteorite. Seems like this is one of the largest meteorites on Earth. CT55555(talk) 19:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I have no strong understanding of asteroid science, but haven’t they discovered new minerals in meteorites every so often? Juxlos (talk) 11:11, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. Approximately 100 new minerals are recognised every year (see List of minerals recognized by the International Mineralogical Association). It's not unknown for them to appear only in extraterrestrial samples - just two months ago, a new mineral was discovered in a Moon rock [4]. While this story is mildly interesting and the press release has generated a couple of media stories, it has no other significance or likely lasting impact. DYK seems a more appropriate venue, though it might be better to start an article on the meteorite itself and merge the two mineral descriptions into that. Modest Genius talk 13:38, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Question (I started both articles mentioned) to what extent are the 100 per year notable, making international news, justifying articles? Are there 100 new mineral articles per year, or is this indeed something unusual? CT55555(talk) 17:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Quite common, it seems; a few in the last couple years alone. It just happens that The Guardian picked up this story, but I don’t see this exactly on headline or page 1 news. Maybe the science sections. Juxlos (talk) 07:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I don't know either the field or the wikipedia articles well enough to put an estimate on that number. Wikipedia:WikiProject Rocks and minerals might know, but doesn't seem very active. New minerals certainly get reported in the mainstream media several times per year. Perhaps the most-covered recent example is davemaoite. Modest Genius talk 12:18, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. DarkSide830 (talk) 14:05, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Reluctant Oppose per above. Normally I would support this as it sounds rather interesting. But it does seem to be not altogether uncommon. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:15, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose per above Editor 5426387 (talk) 20:19, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose - Interesting story, but, per above, doesn't quite make it to ITN. Maybe DYK? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree. This belongs more to the DYK page. Vida0007 (talk) 16:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted blurb) Blurb/RD: Jiang Zemin[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Jiang Zemin (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Jiang Zemin (pictured), former General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, dies at the age of 96. (Post)
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

Article updated

 CMD (talk) 08:42, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support Blurb highly important figure in modern Chinese history. Some lack of referencing and all, but that’s gotta be resolved before RD anyway. Juxlos (talk) 08:46, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wow that’s fast. Anyways support on notability, however since the death was literally just announced I suggest we wait until tomorrow so all things that are supposed to be edited is edited before posting on RD. Also there’s an orange tag that needs to be resolved. SBS6577P (talk) 08:48, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb obviously. Long-term president of China and general secretary of party in the inportant period. Kirill C1 (talk) 09:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb on notability, once article is fixed. starship.paint (exalt) 09:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb A leader of the most populous country in the world and an economic reformer who opened up the country deserves a blurb.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:08, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Multiple citation tags outstanding.—Bagumba (talk) 10:11, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb: Major figure in contemporary history, an important leader for China. Would be silly to omit him; but do take a while to wait before adding. MarcelDupré1886 (talk) 10:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb The death of a long-serving former president of China obviously needs a blurb. Wait until all article problems that need to be resolved before posting on RD are resolved. Evaxooooof25 (talk) 11:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support anything. Important and long-serving leader who's popular in online culture (toad worship). Good article. ~~lol1VNIO⁠🎌 (I made a mistake? talk to me) 11:11, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality for now. A lot of uncited material, including one whole section. Happy for blurb once that's resolved.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:35, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb per Kiril Simeonovski and Juxlos. gavre (al. PenangLion) (talk) 11:48, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb, important political figure passes.
B-MIKE -(Talk) 12:52, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality for now, 15 citation needed tags - Dumelow (talk) 13:00, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality, sourcing issues. Oppose blurb would support RD only because we have nothing extra to say than that he died. No extra explanation means nothing to say in a blurb. --Jayron32 14:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on Quality. Still one CN tag. Zemin's role in developing modern China is quite large - certainly more notable than just any old leader. DarkSide830 (talk) 14:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blub and RD but please wait a few hours. People are already starting to work on improving the article, with a fast pace of edits. I'm personally trying to add citations to Kuhn 2004 which seems like a respected work; hopefully the CN tags can be resolved quickly. DFlhb (talk) 14:29, 30 November 2022 (UTC) I didn't know the difference between blubs and RD, so I forgot to specify I support both; edited 23:58, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment I have been trimming down the article for a bit. It feels like multiple different people with very little knowledge of the subject has been using the article for an essay-writing practice, so I decided to be aggressive and remove a good chunk of unsourced statements. Plenty of redundant text blocks, too. Juxlos (talk) 14:48, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Juxlos: I appreciate your efforts here, but unfortunately I think this has may have been a bit overzealous, for example "Beginning in 1996, Jiang began a series of reforms in the state-controlled media aimed at promoting the "core of leadership" under himself, and at the same time crushing some of his political opponents" and statements like that. If true, it sounds like the sort of thing that should be in the article, and we should concentrate on trying to find sourcing for it rather than chopping it... It's a bit of a paradox, because we want everything cited, but equally we don't usually remove material on sight without at least verifying that no obvious sourcing is available... Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 16:21, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment I've added a bunch of citations and a fair bit of detail, and with the help of other editors we've finally resolved all citation needed tags. The article is still light on details on his actual tenure; I'll start work on that. But at least there don't appear to be any obvious falsehoods. I think we're good to go. DFlhb (talk) 19:50, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb Significant former head of state and article looks good. --2601:249:8E00:420:1409:FBDA:FC7:F1DA (talk) 20:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support blurb important leader, former leader of China. article highly notable. Editor 5426387 (talk) 20:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There are at least 5 CN tags still unresolved here, so this is not yet ready to post. --Masem (t) 20:56, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Those were just added. I've now fixed those except for 1 (an award; couldn't find a source, but I'd support keeping it, hopefully with front-page exposure someone will be able to confirm or debunk it). DFlhb (talk) 21:31, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Looks good to go - thanks to DFlhb for the hard work sourcing the unsourced bits, I reckon it's good enough now. What do others think? I also think there's consensus for a blurb. Marking as ready. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Significant improvements for sure. Post it, I say. Juxlos (talk) 07:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Blurb A major head of state with considerable lasting influence. Meets the threshold for a blurb. Thriley (talk) 04:27, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted blurbBagumba (talk) 08:34, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Post-posting support Article is good. Jiang was a major figure in Chinese and world history (and was rightfully blurbed like Gorbachev's last August). Vida0007 (talk) 15:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

November 29[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Aline Kominsky-Crumb[edit]

Article: Aline Kominsky-Crumb (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:

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

 Thriley (talk) 06:14, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Derek Granger[edit]

Article: Derek Granger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

 Thriley (talk) 04:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Closed) Trial of Stewart Rhodes[edit]

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


Proposed image
Article: Stewart Rhodes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Stewart Rhodes (pictured), founder of the right-wing Oath Keepers, was found guilty of Seditious conspiracy after his attempts to violently prevent the inauguration of Joe Biden at the January 6, 2021 United States Capitol attack. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Stewart Rhodes (pictured) is found guilty of seditious conspiracy for his role in the January 6, 2021 United States Capitol attack.
News source(s): WashPo
Credits:
 CT55555(talk) 22:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Not important... Tbh most people have likely never heard of this person or have any interest. This is simply important to too few people. NoahTalk 00:10, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Oppose one of many that have been tried and convicted for Jan 6 and certainly not the last. --Masem (t) 23:58, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just for context "Stewart Rhodes’ conviction is the most significant to emerge from the Justice Department’s investigation of the 2021 attack on the Capitol." CT55555(talk) 00:00, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment Simplify the blurb. It's too long. Most readers won't have a clue who this bloke is, nor what he was charged with, so will just ignore this. Maybe something like " Stewart Rhodes found guilty of Seditious conspiracy following the January 6, 2021 United States Capitol attack." HiLo48 (talk) 00:21, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When I first raised the idea on the talk page, I was told to make it longer...I'm happy for it to be shorter. CT55555(talk) 00:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose. There's only one potential conviction from 1/6 that would be notable enough for ITN. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:23, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. This is my first time here, so it seems like I've misjudged this. I had thought a news items on the front page of UK and US news would be a good enough indicator. Are you implying that a presidential conviction is the magnitude of what is needed to make ITN? CT55555(talk) 01:27, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The working consensus of ITN/C leans very conservative (not in the political way) as to what is posted on the main page. Trials don't have to be at the level of O.J.'s, but some degree of unique significance is needed. Curbon7 (talk) 01:50, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It seems sensible to withdraw this as WP:SNOWBALL opposed, but I don't know how to, so if anyone reading this wants to do that, I'd be grateful. CT55555(talk) 14:24, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose, Not an interesting subject for ITN. Alex-h (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

(Withdrawn) Repeal of Section 377A in Singapore[edit]

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


Proposed image
Article: Section 377A (Singapore) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​The Parliament of Singapore votes to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code, legalising same-sex activity between men. (Post)
News source(s): CNA, SCMP
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Significant repeal of a law which previously criminalised sex between men. Alt blurbs are welcome, I just put in a blurb which I felt was the most succinct to describe the repeal. I considered using an image of Pink Dot SG, but no recent free images of that exist (latest dates back to 2014), so an image of the Singapore Parliament should suffice instead. JaventheAldericky (talk) 18:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Not the first and wont be the last. NoahTalk 18:58, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose laws change all the time, and they are not always permanent. Editor 5426387 (talk) 19:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose - per above PrecariousWorlds (talk) 19:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


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

November 28[edit]

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Science and technology


RD: Donald McEachin[edit]

Article: Donald McEachin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WHSV3 (Fox)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American state politician Engineerchange (talk) 04:53, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regretful oppose To say this article is bare is the understatement of the century... I obviously don't expect articles coming through here to cover every detail, but there at least has to be some level of holisticness in the prose. Curbon7 (talk) 06:16, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've added some tags through the article, where necessary, and made efforts to start an electoral history section, which I cannot do at the moment. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 06:28, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support Important death, deserves to be posted. Rushtheeditor (talk) 17:37, 01 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How important someone is is irrelevant to RD. Curbon7 (talk) 22:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Weak Support While the article is bare compared to other members of Congress, we have seen worse articles posted on RD. Also to mention McEachin was an important figure in VA politics, making history as one of the first Black people to run for a certain position. Hockeyisthebest123 (talk) 19:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: No wikibios with orange tags should go on RD. Please expand the thin sections and put in more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 04:06, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Closed) Mauna Loa Erupts[edit]

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


Article: Mauna Loa (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​The Mauna Loa Volcano in Hawaii begins to erupt (Post)
News source(s): https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/alert-level-raised-hawaiis-mauna-loa-volcano-after-eruption-usgs-2022-11-28/
Credits:
Nominator's comments: First eruption since 1984, in a populated area. Might be too early to post, but worth keeping an eye on. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait. It's far too early to know what the impacts will be - so far it's just a bit of lava confined to the summit, and some red skies. Mauna Loa erupts effusively, so it's possible that the increasing volumes of lava start flowing downhill over the following days, and reaches populated areas (the last eruption almost reached Hilo). But unless that happens, it doesn't have the impact necessary for ITN. As a procedural point, if this eruption becomes significant enough to merit consideration for ITN, it would have enough material to split out 2022 eruption of Mauna Loa and use that as the bold link, rather than a few sentences in the much broader Mauna Loa article. Modest Genius talk 17:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Agreed. I was just putting this out there to alert people of a developing story that could become ITN-worthy. Though maybe I'm not nominating correctly(I'm new to Wikipedia) PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Ongoing: China COVID Protests[edit]

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


Article: Protests against COVID-19 lockdowns in China (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Protests keep spreading throughout China, with media attention growing. Might be too early for ongoing, but it's worth consideration. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait until the blurb for the protests were removed from the main ITN. Not sure whether it would even last that long (given the police are already cracking down protests) but if it does, support given the significance of the event. SBS6577P (talk) 11:28, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose It's redundant to me to have a simultaneous listing of a blurb and the same (or even related) item at Ongoing.—Bagumba (talk) 11:35, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Premature nomination. Iff the protests are still ongoing when the blurb is about to roll off and there has been no subsequent blurbable event then it should be considered for ongoing. WP:CRYSTAL. Thryduulf (talk) 13:56, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Fair enough. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wait until blurb is removed. Kirill C1 (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wait per above Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:23, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. Yes, it is too early. Let's revisit when the blurb rolls off. DarkSide830 (talk) 13:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait If, and only if, it qualifies for Ongoing per the standards, then we can add it when it rolls off the main list. --Jayron32 16:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

November 27[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Allan Wright (farmer)[edit]

Article: Allan Wright (farmer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NZC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: New Zealand farmer and cricket figure Dumelow (talk) 13:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Dr. James Wright[edit]

Article: James Wright (doctor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/popular-media-personality-dr-james-wright-dies-just-short-of-95th-birthday--c-9001895
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Australia's first celebrity doctor HiLo48 (talk) 05:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose Needs a few more citations - I've added some tags.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Still a handful of {cn} tags that ought to be addressed before this nom can proceed. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 05:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AFLW Grand Final[edit]

Article: AFL Women's season seven Grand Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​The Melbourne Demons win the AFL Women's season seven Grand Final (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​In Australian rules football, the Melbourne Demons defeat the Brisbane Lions in the the AFL Women's Grand Final
News source(s): The GuardianABC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Article is fully referenced and complate. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • ALERT ALERT ALERT!!!!!!! I know this is about a sport and a country none of the Admins here care about. Even worse, it's only about WOMEN'S sport. But at least have a bloody look at this nomination!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HiLo48 (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Well, I looked at it. Problem is, much as I think we need more women's sport in ITN ... it's not really ITN, is it? Probably because it's only the 7th time the tournament has ever taken place. As far as I can see, we're really only featuring international women's tournaments so far (apart from a random US basketball and a volleyball tournament, but they take place together). Now that's something we should probably be looking at, but at the moment I don't think a competition in one of its first iterations meets ITN standards. Black Kite (talk) 23:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Because of the nature of Australian rules football, an international championship is unlikely for a long time. This is the peak championship in the sport. Kinda like the World Series, if being international is an issue. Even if an international championship evolved, this would be the more important event for much longer still. This is the women's equivalent of the AFL Grand Final, an ITN/R event. HiLo48 (talk) 02:43, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    ...if being international is an issue: But then we have at the top of ITNC:

    Please do not...Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive.

    Bagumba (talk) 05:55, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WTF? I wasn't the one who objected on the basis of it not being international. HiLo48 (talk) 06:10, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is international interest. Both sides have Irish players and there is considerable coverage over there. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:21, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, I was only responding that "being international" is not supposed to be an issue, not that you originated the issue. —Bagumba (talk) 08:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know this is about a sport and a country none of the Admins here care about: The decision to post any item is driven by consensus from the community, not any particular admin's preference. —Bagumba (talk) 06:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So why was it totally ignored for 27 hours? THAT was my reason for that somewhat pointed comment. HiLo48 (talk) 06:10, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There aren't many active admins these these days. Look at the RD nominations. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:21, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The WP:WIKICUP also ended in October. —Bagumba (talk) 08:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
!Voting here is not limited to admins. —Bagumba (talk) 08:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support – Good indications for an item that should be ITN/R. We should discuss adding it as well. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 03:49, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment I'd be more inclined to consider supporting this more for page quality than for newsworthiness if there was prose summarizing the two teams' respective season, e.g. similiar to 2021 Rugby World Cup Final#Route to the final.—Bagumba (talk) 05:51, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The article has been nominated at GA. I'd be more inclined to add it if it came up during the review. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:21, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No worries. I'm merely suggesting what would sway my opinion for this to be posted on ITN as a quality article that might not necessarily be headline news. —Bagumba (talk) 08:37, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have expanded the Qualification section. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:05, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can assure the world that this HAS BEEN headline news in Australia, which is obviously enough. HiLo48 (talk) 10:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. While I'm sympathetic to the desire to get more women's sport into ITN, this does not appear to be significant enough. Aussie rules football is a minority sport that doesn't merit more than one story per year, and we already post the men's event. The women's version is recently established, small, and attracts a tiny fraction of the news coverage (at least as far as I can find from Google News). If they had been held at the same time then a joint blurb might make sense; but IMO the women's event doesn't reach the bar for a blurb on its own. Modest Genius talk 13:46, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The men's event is huge. Routinely attracts an audience in the stadium of over 100 thousand people. It's a whole day thing. The women's event cannot therefore be at the same time. You are therefore effectively saying you won't ever post the women's event. And Google News obviously won't show you what the coverage was like in Australia earlier this week. HiLo48 (talk) 22:05, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't expect the women's event to be as big a deal as the men's, but I do think they need to be within a factor of a few of each other to be considered similarly important. It appears there's currently more than an order of magnitude gap in the media coverage, attendance, TV audience etc. Why wouldn't Google News pick up the coverage? Modest Genius talk 17:12, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Article quality is up-to-snuff, news sources have covered the event. Checks every box for main page posting. --Jayron32 14:05, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Just because news sources have covered it doesn't meet its significant enough for ITN. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • What evidence, then, are you using to demonstrate significance? If someone is unfamiliar with the topic, how are you to show them that it is significant? --Jayron32 15:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Should we really be posting the championship for a semi-professional league that's not ITNR? BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Having more than 1 million attendees and more than 2 million viewers seems more relevant to me. Is that a lot by Australian standards? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 06:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Our article AFL Women's season seven says the average attendance this season was 2,700 per match. That's tiny. Modest Genius talk 19:36, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Notwithstanding the uncalled-for foot-stamping and screaming, support per Jayron32. Certainly warrants inclusion. And something not being ITN/R is not a reason to not post it (indeed, items can't become ITN/R without first becoming successfully posted through ITN/C).--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose, per Modest Genius. Just doesn't seem like something significant enough to post. League is (per our article) semi-pro, not ITNR, and only gets 2 million viewers (compare that to, say, the college football championship, which we don't post, which gets more than ten times that amount of viewers). BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
...in a country with fifteen times the population. So not much of a claim really. HiLo48 (talk) 21:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Still, an average attendance of just 2,700? Why is that worthy of posting? BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:26, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Low-quality league with small attendance, it's also full of people who play multiple sports part-time. This tells you the depth and quality of competition. If people from outside Aus saw photos of the players, they would strong oppose - many of them are in terrible physical condition Bumbubookworm (talk) 00:26, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On that basis, every article on Test cricket from before around 1980 should probably be deleted from Wikipedia. HiLo48 (talk) 09:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How does that make any sense? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Simple and well known fact. (Perhaps not in the USA.) In those days it was common for Test cricketers, especially Australians, to play other sports. And all teams tended to have some players who could not have been described as being in great physical condition, typically spin bowlers and hard hitting batsmen. HiLo48 (talk) 22:49, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's not true anyway. They are elite athletes and look like this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:16, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This one most certainly is not, although yes, some of them are proper athletes. Bumbubookworm (talk) 05:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Richard Baawobr[edit]

Article: Richard Baawobr (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Vatican News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Ghanaian Catholic bishop - Dumelow (talk) 10:55, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Comment Generally appears well cited, but could do with a copyedit (particularly this recent insertion.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Looks okay, but I do wonder if there's any more in-depth sources. DatGuyTalkContribs 18:41, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Long enough with 500+ words of prose, but the contents seem short on details on what the subject actually worked on. Formatting looks fine. Footnotes can be found at expected spots. Earwig reports no violations. This wikibio looks READY for RD, but I wish there is more on the subject's work to read about. --PFHLai (talk) 14:32, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Clare Marx[edit]

Article: Clare Marx (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Royal College of Surgeons
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: British medical doctor. Date of death not stated but first reported on 27 November - Dumelow (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) China COVID protests[edit]

Article: COVID-19 protests in China (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Mass protests across China break out in response to the government's Zero-COVID policy. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Mass protests across China break out in response to the government's Zero-COVID policy, which had led to a fire in Urumqi killing at least 10 people.
News source(s): CNN, BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: This has been brewing over the last few days but lots more articles now talking about it. Likely may end up in ongoing eventually. Article is currently in good shape. Masem (t) 05:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support Article seems to be of sufficient quality. Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 09:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support -- Mass protests in a country where protests are extraordinarily rare? Yes, worthy of posting. --RockstoneSend me a message! 09:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Quality is good. Mass protests notable. The Covid-19 protests in China article needs to be incorporated into the blurb.BabbaQ (talk) 09:29, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. Extremely significant considering this happened in a country where protests are extremely rare. SBS6577P (talk) 09:59, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Orange tag at the moment, needs to be addressed first. --Tone 11:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have addressed and removed it. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:56, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Extremely notable event, added altblurb including the Urumqi fire that started the protests. Azpineapple (talk) 11:31, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support altblurb as Urumqi fire should be included as the cause. Quantum XYZ (chat) 11:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
plus Posted. Note: as it stands, the wording of the alt-blurb seemes too convoluted. El_C 12:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The fire should probably be included as a separate bolded link within the blurb, as it's notable in its own right. Although it's too short to pass ITN on quality at the moment.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here's the thing - the fire doesn't have long-term notability compared to the protests, so there's no reason a separate article on it should be made. It should be part of the protest article. This is where editors tend to lose focus of NOTNEWS because they want to be first to create that new article. Masem (t) 23:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per above Editor 5426387 (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Added to blurb: Following a deadly fire in Ürümqi..., which hopefully addresses earlier "convoluted" concern. Since no consensus to also bold the fire (for now), I did not go into details about the casualties either. Notability concerns of the fire page can be addressed through WP:AFD, if necessary, but it appears reasonable to briefly address "why?" in the protest blurb.—Bagumba (talk) 04:30, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Reverted by Masem, the nominator.[6]Bagumba (talk) 04:32, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I explained at errors, but the fire did not cause the protests, as the change you made implied. The protests had been happening, the fire spurred them on. That's why I don't think treating the fire separately is a good idea. --Masem (t) 04:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thanks. I've responded at WP:ERRORS. —Bagumba (talk) 04:42, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Post-Posting Support for Original Blurb. The main story here are the protests, which may be partially caused by the fire, but only partially. I agree with Masem that that doesn't need to be a focus in the blurb. DarkSide830 (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References[edit]

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: