Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/February 2020

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

February 29[edit]

February 29, 2020 (2020-02-29) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

RD: Éva Székely[edit]

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

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

Nominator's comments: Not sure when reported, but death was on 29th, so almost stale for ITN. Still would be neat if anyone has time to expand the article to get it posted. Kees08 (Talk) 19:12, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Odile Pierre[edit]

Article: Odile Pierre (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): France musique francetvinfo.fr
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: Great French organist and academic teacher. - Had no article until Jmanlucas created it today. Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted as blurb) Blurb/Ongoing: Malaysian political crisis[edit]

Article: 2020 Malaysian political crisis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Muhyiddin Yassin becomes the prime minister of Malaysia following a political crisis triggered by former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad's abrupt resignation. (Post)
News source(s): Channel NewsAsia, MSN, The Straits Times, CNBC, AP
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Noteworthy ongoing political event in a fairly major country. This nomination comes out of the February 24th nomination for Mahathir Mohamad per Masjawad99's suggestion, as this event is broader in scope than the subject of that person. Indefensible (talk) 18:22, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Something "apparently" happening doesn't meet ITN blurb standards. – Sca (talk) 17:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is supported by valid references and a significant event though, why doesn't that meet WP:ITN criteria? - Indefensible (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Apparently" is perhaps a bad choice of word, but Muhyiddin has officially been sworn in per March 1 morning Malaysian Time. The only way Mahathir could challenge it now is by prompting the majority of the MPs to vote for no confidence on Muhyiddin's government, in which case a snap election might be called. In any case, though, the situation merits to be listed as ongoing. Masjawad99💬 20:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Afghan peace process[edit]

Articles: Afghan peace process (talk · history · tag) and War in Afghanistan (2001–present) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States and the Taliban sign a peace agreement which establishes a framework for ending the War in Afghanistan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The United States surrenders to the Taliban in Afghanistan
Alternative blurb II: ​ The United States and the Taliban sign a peace agreement to end the War in Afghanistan, removing all U.S. and allied troops in 14 months.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Agree with 331.
Much RS coverage, but is agreeing to end the war the same as ending it? – Sca (talk) 14:40, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Vox too, local Afghans complaining it's a surrender. I doubt you're going to get the Trump white house to say it. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:43, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Local Afghans are not RS. 331dot (talk) 15:09, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 28[edit]

February 28, 2020 (2020-02-28) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Joe Coulombe[edit]

Article: Joe Coulombe (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: Founder of Trader Joe's. Short but seemed to be sufficiently sourced. Masem (t) 18:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Coronavirus stock market crash[edit]

No consensus to post. SpencerT•C 02:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Nominator's comments: As sad as the events are, the blubr connects to ongoing major news topics. bender235 (talk) 20:18, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@WaltCip: Panic or not, it's a current event. We're not in the WP:CRYSTAL business, so whether the market recovers in a month or a year from now is irrelevant. --bender235 (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I don't disagree that we should post something. I just think the DJIA is a poor indicator because that darn thing goes up and down regardless of what's in the news. If we're going to post a blurb on coronavirus using economic indicators, we should use something other than that.--WaltCip (talk) 20:41, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need to focus on the Dow Jones. Global markets have been massacred this week. It's fact, whether its panic or not. As I said, when we have our first US victim, things will be very differently perceived. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:43, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is currently noteworthy as a ~10% correction by definition, but just going back to last October's level is not a "massacre." - Indefensible (talk) 04:12, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In essence, that is my viewpoint as well. HiLo phrased it better than I could.--WaltCip (talk) 23:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I understand the desire to have something, but everything involving the outbreak remains an upward trend, and no critical line has been crossed yet (not declare pandemic, etc.) and choosing something arbitrary like a drop like this may be the wrong thing to focus on. We have the outbreak on ongoing, so to try to find some story to make it a blurb doesn't seem right. I want to stress that I believe we need to consider the fear and panic that the media is bringing to the situation here. the WHO earlier today say that not's not the time to spread fear on the matter and I think that's smart advice. Wait for MEDRS sourcing to panic and then we have every right to. --Masem (t) 23:31, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - The first article, 2019-20 coronavirus outbreak, is already in the ITN box as an ongoing event, posting it again would be redundant and not a good use of the space. For the second item; the DJIA is not the best stock index to follow per the current 2nd sentence of its article, and the submitted article is a list page rather than specifically about the event--it could be that at some point in the distant future, this event will not even be actively included on that page. - Indefensible (talk) 04:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support irrational or not, this drop is the largest since the Financial Crisis - it's clearly not something that happens every other week and has elicited significant policy responses. Practically every RS links this to the coronavirus outbreak and for us to say it isn't would be improper. Juxlos (talk) 13:02, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IF we post this, we could say that "Practically every RS links this to the coronavirus outbreak", but we cannot say, in Wikipedia's voice, that it is linked. HiLo48 (talk) 23:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's all a big coincidence. Smoking doesn't really kill people, etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC) [reply]
Have we posted that Trump caused the stock market to go up? Because he and all the people who voted for him said he did. HiLo48 (talk) 02:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looking forward to that nomination. We'd need to count the !votes carefully. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC) [reply]
Incertum quo fata ferunt ut solet. – Sca (talk) 17:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Posted) RD: Freeman Dyson[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Freeman Dyson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5]
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: A number of citation neededs in the lede, which may be removable b/c the views tagged are referenced in the body. Awards need sourcing, Possible blurb candidate. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:32, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Sun Yang[edit]

Stale, no consensus. Stephen 01:30, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Sun Yang (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Chinese swimmer Sun Yang, winner of three Olympic and eleven World Championship gold medals, is banned for eight years for evading doping controls. (Post)
News source(s): ABC BBC
Credits:

Article updated
 Bumbubookworm (talk) 11:43, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

People may claim that doping in sport is routine, however this fellow has been World Swimmer of the Year and none of the top swimmers have been convicted of doping. At first FINA didn't want to pursue the case and other swimmers made public podium protests against Sun Yang. Secondly, there also has been a geopolitical angle in this, whereby other swimmers (and their swimming federations) who have spoken out against this fellow have been targeted by internet trolls/hackers (possibly/probably with the encouragement of the Chinese media/government) and received death threats. For example, when Mack Horton spoke out, Chinese government newspapers wrote nationalist editorials directly attacking Australia, not just Horton. Bumbubookworm (talk) 11:43, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's swimming, not athletics. HiLo48 (talk) 23:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, there's that argument for never posting anything about American college football again. HiLo48 (talk) 23:00, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
His offence of avoiding a drug test is seen as more serious than simply doping. It has to be, otherwise everyone who has used drugs could just smash their samples. HiLo48 (talk) 06:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keeping in mind that he had earlier had been found to have doped, and that WADA/CAS had given him 8 yr as the maximum they could do for smashing vials, if he actually had doped, WADA's rules suggest that this 2nd infraction then would have been a lifetime ban. If it were a first, it would have been only a 2yr. --Masem (t) 07:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 27[edit]

February 27, 2020 (2020-02-27) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Burkhard Driest[edit]

Article: Burkhard Driest (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Die Zeit
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: A life good for a for a film, law studies and bank robbery, flirt on live tv with Romy Schneider, playing gangsters with charme, writing novels and screenplays, directing, - art also. - The article had one sentence, then Grozzi updated, then a new user replaced it all by a literal unformatted translation of the German WP article ... - I tried to repair and added a few sources. There's much more, in case someone wants to expand. Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Having a (hopefully) temporary brain lapse, but isn't there a small waiting period after death before fair use photos can be uploaded? Should it be tagged F7? Otherwise the article looks good enough for RD. Kees08 (Talk) 17:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Kees08 is correct, fair use can't be applied to a subject who's died so recently, there could easily be replacement images out there. I've removed the image, and otherwise the article looks up to scratch, so it's good to go.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted (although noting that the intro said he died February 28th, I changed it to 27 to match the source) Kees08 (Talk) 19:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Suthep Wongkamhaeng[edit]

Article: Suthep Wongkamhaeng (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Thai PBS World
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.

 Paul_012 (talk) 21:25, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 26[edit]

February 26, 2020 (2020-02-26) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: Nexhmije Hoxha[edit]

Article: Nexhmije Hoxha (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
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.

 Alsoriano97 (talk) 12:27, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another case of fame by name. And she was 99. – Sca (talk) 18:00, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2020 CD3[edit]

That's no moon. It's a boulder. Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 22:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: 2020 CD3 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Astronomers discover 2020 CD3, a mini-moon that has been in Earth's orbit (orbit pictured) since about 2017 and expected to escape orbit by April 2020. (Post)
News source(s): New Scientist, CNN,
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Might be seen more as a curiosity but it is an unusual astronomical discovery. Article is short but in decent shape. Masem (t) 06:17, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 25[edit]

February 25, 2020 (2020-02-25) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime
  • A man was revealed to have been arrested the previous day for attempting to blow up a car in The Pentagon parking lot. (NBC)
  • Aimee Anne Duffy, a Welsh singer who goes by Duffy, reveals she was raped, drugged and held hostage over some days resulting in her disappearance from the limelight in recent years. (The Guardian)

Politics and elections

Henneguya zschokkei[edit]

Article: Henneguya zschokkei (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Scientists determine that the multi-cellular parasite Henneguya zschokkei contains no mitochondria, making it the first known animal that does not use aerobic respiration. (Post)
News source(s): PNAS paper, US Today, CNN
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Article is short, so there may be a better target as the focus from the coverage of the paper is more on what this means to how we define an animal. Masem (t) 14:22, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But the name would make a great byline: By HENNEGUYA ZSCHOKKEI / Asocialated Press Writer. – Sca (talk) 18:08, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment stub. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not read the paper yet, but potentially support on importance (well, I was fascinated) but oppose on stubbiness of the current target article. Also, looking at the lead of mitochondrion, which might be a better target, I notice that there's another example of a eukaryote completely lacking mitochondria, so that would need sorting out. Perhaps "first known multicellular organism"? Espresso Addict (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The way I think Im understanding what they are getting at, a single-cell species is neither animal nor plant, but when you get to multicellular you can make that distinction, with this species above being animal in nature. However, this level of biology is not my field (I nominated this because I also found it interesting for ITN). --Masem (t) 16:08, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • As far as I know (and this has really surprised me) all plants have mitochondria; it's only bacteria/cyanobacteria and things smaller that don't. And thanks for nominating, Masem, I'd missed this and really appreciated it. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:13, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • All eukaryotes have mitochondria—except the few species that later went on to lose them—because they're what react oxygen with stuff to power the organism. Eukaryotic cells are much bigger and therefore need lots of energy. Plants have both mitochondria and plastids; the plastids (derived from ancient cyanobacteria) do photosynthesis, and the mitochondria "burn" the resulting molecules as needed, as in any eukaryote. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 05:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose mildly interesting but the article is barely even a stub. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:12, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on principle, oppose on quality There's room to expand the article given this new discovery, so I think it's possible this will eventually pass. NorthernFalcon (talk) 20:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on principle, oppose on quality This is a big deal in biology, but the article is a stub. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as above This is a paradigm-shifting find in biology; we couldn't reasonably pass over a decent article on this and still call ourselves an encyclopedia. It has to be at least a decent article, though...130.233.2.197 (talk) 07:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, but the article is a stub that give no more details than are in the blurb. Major expansion is needed before it could be posted. Modest Genius talk 12:44, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • IANAL zoologist, but isn't there a certain circular reasoning here? Aerobic respiration is a definitive characteristic of animals. If you find an animal without it, is it really an animal? GreatCaesarsGhost 12:53, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • It had been previously classified as an animal. Its anaerobic respiration quality had been discovered only recently.--WaltCip (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Modern taxonomy generally favors phylogenetic taxonomy, meaning classifying things based on their family trees. This means taxonomists today prefer "monophyletic" groups, known as "clades": groups containing a common ancestor and all of its descendants. This provides a definition based on evolutionary relationships and avoids classifying organisms based on arbitrary characteristics. If we define animals as a clade, we pick an ancestral organism and anything descended from that is an animal. (This is why most taxonomists consider birds dinosaurs now. If you define "dinosaur" as a clade, it necessarily includes all the living members of that clade: birds.) --47.146.63.87 (talk) 05:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very cool discovery. I'm ambivalent on it for ITN because while the discovery is great it's not a tremendous surprise. Parasites very often lose lots of functions over time due to natural selection, since they can just "steal" from their hosts instead. Several unicellular eukaryotes that similarly lost their mitochondria were already known. In any case, I'd love to see it on DYK! --47.146.63.87 (talk) 05:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Kazuhisa Hashimoto[edit]

Article: Kazuhisa Hashimoto (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WaPost, CNN
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: Video game developer, best known for giving us the Konami code. I did just create the article today, but it was possible to have created this article before based on existing sources. Masem (t) 22:05, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Javier Arias Stella[edit]

Article: Javier Arias Stella (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El Comercio (in Spanish)
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: Peruvian academic pathologist and foreign minister. I've expanded the lead, and refs look OK for a start class article.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:55, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dmitry Yazov[edit]

Article: Dmitry Yazov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: The last marshal of the soviet union and a convicted war criminal --89.113.138.10 (talk) 14:07, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) North East Delhi riots[edit]

Article: North East Delhi riots (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 21 people were killed and more than a hundred and eighty nine are injured as riots break out in North East Delhi amidst the Citizenship Amendment Act protests. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Twenty one people are killed and more than a hundred and eighty nine injured in riots in North East Delhi as part of the Citizenship Amendment Act protests.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Twenty one people are killed with more than 189 injured in riots in North East Delhi as part of the Citizenship Amendment Act protests.
News source(s): NDTV 21 deadBBC, NDTV
Credits:

 --I am not a Seahorse (talk) 13:47, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I've added a slightly different altblurb to tighten up the language a bit and avoid starting a sentence with a numeral. The article is short, but well written and well referenced, and the subject is being covered by major news sources. Checks every box for me. --Jayron32 14:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose when you take out the background filler sections, it's very light on details. Where in Delhi? Was it one large protest or scattered confrontations throughout the city? Total number of participants? Some kind of chronology of events? Way too thin. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:44, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 16:06, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Masem, I have redirected it as a newly created duplicate to the existing article. The content hardly merits a hist merge. --⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 15:06, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted blurb) RD: Hosni Mubarak[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Hosni Mubarak (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak (pictured) dies at the age of 91. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
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: Surely notable. Article looks fairly well sourced as well. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support blurb This is a clear-cut case as he spent 30 years in office as president of the most populous Arab country which now has almost 100 million people. His death is expectedly top-tier news in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:07, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wording comment: Blurb text has him as prime minister. He was, but his period as president was longer and more notable. Moscow Mule (talk) 14:13, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hook amended. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 14:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD only, oppose blurb article is of sufficient condition for main page posting. The article has nothing interesting to say about his death other than it happened, as such, there is nothing to say in the blurb to justify it. RD is sufficient for deaths where there is nothing to say other than that it happened. --Jayron32 14:35, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb once improved Obviously can't post either RD/blurb right now, too many CNs, but once cleared up, posting the death of a former long-term leader of a major country as a blurb is a no-brainer. --Masem (t) 14:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb once referencing is fixed. On the contrary to Amakuru's opinion, being forced out of office after 30+ years by some 2 million+ strong in Cairo's Tahrir Square, in an event given a moniker named after its start date ("January 25 Revolution"), is automatically sufficient for a blurb. As to the commonly used Thatcher and Mandela-trope, applying a strict criterion such as "created the political weather" (as Thatcher / Reagan / Mulroney did), which George H.W. Bush did not by any measure, even if his career began as a diplomat in the 1970s (?) and he was part of a political dynasty. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 14:43, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per Jayron, there is nothing to be said other than "dies aged 91", blurbs should be reserved for events where the death itself is the story, per our guidelines. (This is not one of the "rare cases" exceptions in my view.) The article is not yet ready for RD as there are a number of cite tags.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:47, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb A leader of Egypt for three decades (Egypt is basically half of the Arab world), relevant in the recent Arab Spring events, numerous reporting in the media.--Adûnâi (talk) 14:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb pending quality, updates, etc. Mubarak meets the Thatcher-Mandela standard. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb – per previous two. An important historical figure (unlike Harvey Weinstein) – Sca (talk) 15:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - 30 years' president of a country of just under 100 million. Seems pretty major to me. Juxlos (talk) 15:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either as RD or with blurb. Notable subject, article looks decent--currently rated B-class. - Indefensible (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb because there have a grammatical errors and linguistic problems But i Support posted to RD instead because the article quality and significance for Egyptian politic history. He is also very notable for Middle Eastern politics as whole. 180.242.51.208 (talk) 16:12, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb when the few sourcing problems are fixed. Mubarak was a transformative world leader, per above. Davey2116 (talk) 17:29, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb once the cn's are addressed, important Middle Eastern politician Joseywales1961 (talk) 18:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I added the image to CMP so it can be posted when the cn's are addressed. First time doing it so yell at me if I did it wrong or if it was inappropriate to do this early. Kees08 (Talk) 19:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • support blurb - definitely blurb worthy. post when few issues are fixed.BabbaQ (talk) 21:16, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The "Political and military posts" section is very difficult to source and doesn't add much. Suggest nuking it. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:43, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. 7 CN tags are keeping this off the main page. If every support above fixed one, this would be up by now. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I added 5 more citations; need 2 more. SpencerT•C 02:40, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - seems obvious, deeply involved in Arab Spring. Banedon (talk) 22:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - Per above. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support photo People remember his face and roles, but he was retired, and retired people dying is unremarkable beyond what the Deaths in 2020 link already covers. The fact that he ruled for three billion man-years until the Arab Spring was notable, so we blurbed it back when. This isn't that. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support as one of the most important leaders in the Arab world for decades. He should definitely be listed under recent deaths and it's bizarre he hasn't been already. Blurb and photo? Maybe not as much but he's easily comparable to Qaddafi or Al-Assad in terms of stature & length of rule.Chess (talk) Ping when replying 06:38, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality, neutral on blurb. Article is getting pretty close, and editors appear to be fixing the remaining issues fairly quickly, but it's not ready for the front page just yet, for either RD or blurb, as there's still a few outstanding tags, and there's a few sentences here and there at the ends of paragraphs that are unreferenced. NorthernFalcon (talk) 06:40, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • RD only Did not died at height of career, death was expected (hospital bound for weeks prior), death has little effect on current events, not a transformational figure. Arguments here rely on that last notion, but "lifetime strongman in Africa/Middle East" is not exactly an unheard of accomplishment. Sadat was transformative, Morsi might have been, but Mubarak and Sisi are just continuing a long line of tradition for that part of the world.130.233.2.197 (talk) 06:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb – I took care of the last few CNs. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 08:24, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted blurb. I see a consensus for a blurb, though not universal. 331dot (talk) 08:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see consensus for acknowledging his long reign and widely-reported overthrow were historic, but nobody seems to think the fact in the blurb (died at 91) matters on its own merits. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:24, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Readers can read the article(which is what we want) to learn that he was a long time overthrown leader, it doesn't need to be in the blurb. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you want dead retired politicians to pick up steam, you have to entice new readers with something memorable, a hook. Plenty were suggested, none made it. Odd, I think. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:37, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I still Support photo, regardless of the newer Delhi riots. He's more visually appealing than they are. And no, that's not a fascist bias, it's just the thing about a welcoming smile. Even coming from "beyond the grave", it's inherently warmer and more comforting than the mass personification of rage and despair. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - InedibleHulk has suggested at WP:ERRORS that we could note the length of Mubarak's presidency in the blurb, as a way of asserting the significance of his death, for example:
    • Hosni Mubarak (pictured), Egyptian president from 1981 to 2011, dies at the age of 91.
    I know this wouldn't be the usual formulation (as per the death of George HW Bush) but something to consider, and I am neutral on whether this is better or worse than what is currently there.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:57, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If "former president" isn't enough of a hook, I don't see how adding the years of his term helps. 331dot (talk) 17:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree with 331dot. If some readers can't immediately recognise someone's significance, the bolded link directs to the article for more information. We don't need to post blurbs indicating significance when we have this page to evaluate it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:11, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Former president" isn't a hook at all, potentially describing several unblurbworthy people just as well. Eight supporters found the long term the main point of interest, and none were excited about his age. If newsworthy aspects of a news story don't matter so much as giving readers a name to click, this could have just as easily been as uninteresting and clickable in RD. But whatever. Boring and scant lines aren't as bad as incorrect ones, at least. This occured "in Cairo," if anybody finds settings brief and cool. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:53, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is a clear example of why the RD-blurb criteria exists, and a clear indication that Mubarak doesn't qualify. But if we want to pretend that there was anything unusual about Mubarak's life or death, relative to his peers, then length of term is the only one. "ME/NA strongman" is a crowded field, but only a few make it to 30 years.130.233.2.197 (talk) 06:54, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Bob Iger[edit]

(non-admin closure) Consensus to post will not develop. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 08:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Bob Iger (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Bob Iger (pictured) steps down as CEO of The Walt Disney Company, and is succeeded by Bob Chapek, former chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences and Products. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Bob Iger (pictured) steps down as CEO of The Walt Disney Company, and is succeeded by Bob Chapek.
News source(s): [7]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Given that Disney is one of the most well-known and profitable media conglomerates in the world, I believe that this news is significant enough for inclusion on the front page. (Also hey, my first ITN nomination. Hi, mom!) AlexKitfox (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as nominator. AlexKitfox (talk) 00:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We don't post run-of-the-mill business news, even when the business is one of the largest in the world. If there was some significant reason for his step down (eg was arrested on criminal charges) then maybe but this is a standard transition. --Masem (t) 00:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't view this as run-of-the-mill business news in the slightest, or I wouldn't even have nominated this article. Iger presided over Disney as it made major acquisitions (including 21st Century Fox, PIXAR, and Marvel Entertainment for instance), produced some of the most profitable films of all time, and saw a record-breaking increase in wealth. Saying this news is "run-of-the-mill" requires some stretching of logic. AlexKitfox (talk) 01:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      If the story was about him leading Disney, those feats would matter a lot. But it's about him leaving the top office now, for (seemingly) far less interesting or exceptional reasons. Has the new, unpictured Big Bob done anything to suggest the corporate future on his watch will be substantially different? InedibleHulk (talk) 04:25, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I thank the nominator for his good-faith nomination and encourage him to do more ITN nominations in the future, but this is still ultimately business news that is inappropriate for ITN. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Good faith nom but this doesn't rise to the level that we typically deal with on ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:37, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This is included in WP:Current events but not sure it rises to the level of significance to be included in ITN. For example, contemporaneous to Iger's resignation as Disney CEO in Current events is Thomson Reuters appointing a new CEO, but that is not similarly nominated or posted. Even if Iger's resignation is unexpected, there may be no greater meaning or noteworthy consideration beyond that. However, if some significant reason does come up, then it may be worth posting. - Indefensible (talk) 04:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on notability: standard business news.  Nixinova   T   C   05:32, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose with regret, because I'd really like more business news on ITN. However, apart from the timing of leave, there's nothing "noteworthy" about this. All CEOs of medium-or-larger corporations preside over various initiatives, acquisitions, etc. Chairmanship can end in death (would qualify for an RD blurb), ousting (could qualify depending on circumstance) or leaving (which is mundane and not notable). There is of course something going on at DIS which is not being told, but without RS coverage we've nothing to found our "noteworthy" arguments upon.130.233.2.197 (talk) 06:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose person replaces person in business is not ITN-worthy. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 06:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose but with thanks for the nomination. I think there would need to be some controversy behind the change or the individual was forced out. 331dot (talk) 08:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 24[edit]

February 24, 2020 (2020-02-24) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Clive Cussler[edit]

Article: Clive Cussler (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
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 or co-author of around 80 novels, which have sold more than 100 million copies. He also founded the National Underwater and Marine Agency. JuneGloom07 Talk 17:42, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Diana Serra Cary[edit]

Article: Diana Serra Cary (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [8]
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.

Her death is notable as she was the last surviving star of the silent era (a few other child actors are still around, but she was the only real star). It seems quite well-sourced, every section has at least one source. --Clibenfoart (talk) 00:41, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support One CN tag noted but otherwise the article appears to be in decent shape and adequately referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:51, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, and note that she was indeed a star. That she was a little kid and ridiculously easy to rob shouldn't take away from the fact that she drew over a million bucks, at a time when a million bucks could buy a large swath of Africa (a continent much larger than most flat maps suggest, even today). If the "quotes" weren't meant to mock the magnitude of this "silly widdle baby", sorry for "getting all defensive" about it. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:14, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi InedibleHulk, I wanted to emphasize that she was the last star, because other silent film actors are still around, but they were never stars in the true sense of the word. So there was no harm intended. Greetings, --Clibenfoart (talk) 07:56, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense, thanks. I'd have found italics or *stars* a bit clearer, but was only mildly harmed. Barely even knew of her, personally. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:21, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Olof Thunberg[edit]

Article: Olof Thunberg (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [9]
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.

 BabbaQ (talk) 21:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Harvey Weinstein convicted[edit]

discussion is turning into unnecessary bickering. Consensus is to post. Errors in the article content can be discussed on article talk page. Errors in factual content of the blurb can be reported to WP:ERRORS. --Jayron32 16:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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
Articles: Harvey Weinstein (talk · history · tag) and Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse cases (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American former film producer Harvey Weinstein is convicted on two charges of rape. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Harvey Weinstein is convicted on one charge of rape and one charge of felony sex crime while acquitted of two charges of predatory sexual assault.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Harvey Weinstein is convicted of rape and a criminal sexual act.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Harvey Weinstein is convicted of two felony sex crimes.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ Harvey Weinstein is convicted on two charges of felony sex crimes while acquitted of two charges of predatory sexual assault.
News source(s): NYT, NBC News
Credits:

Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: Highly publicized trial (especially for its significance to the Me Too movement), with a verdict carrying a sentence of up to 25 years. Davey2116 (talk) 17:49, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
P-K3 why not ? you are supporting the name though. I am for both or nothing.--⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 13:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's no requirement that the top blurb must be pictured. And I will happily admit to a bias in favour of looking at Katherine Johnson rather than Weinstein for a week.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:31, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are hereby condemned to see this pic ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ
Pawnkingthree, In that case I propose that you as well as Wikipedia reading Humanity be forced to see his face like Clockwork Orange as long as possible, so that we may not have another Weinstein. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 14:35, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
GreatCaesarsGhost, lets not be hypocrites. Lets not introduce personal BIAS here. If you find it suitable to blurb him, it must have his picture. If a new blurb comes, his pic can be replaced, not until then. ⋙–DBigXrayᗙ 14:11, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please read more carefully - that's exactly what I just said. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Where's Trick when we finally need him? – Sca (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Posted) RD: Katherine Johnson[edit]

Article: Katherine Johnson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/katherine-johnson-hidden-figure-at-nasa-during-1960s-space-race-dies-at-101/2020/02/24/fd5058ba-5715-11ea-9000-f3cffee23036_story.html
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: Article looks to be in good shape. Not personally convinced this rises to the level of a blurb but could see the argument for it. Sam Walton (talk) 14:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Coronavirus outbreaks occur in South Korea, Japan, and Italy[edit]

Closing this as it "isn't notable". NoahTalk 14:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Coronavirus outbreaks occur in Italy, South Korea, and Japan, infecting over 1,300 people. (Post)
News source(s): https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus-cases/
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: I know this is ongoing, but these are the first major outbreaks of cases outside of China. Based upon the 4% drop in markets in Europe and US stock futures, it certainly seems to be garnering significant attention. NoahTalk 13:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's no special factor of these cases in S. Korea or Italy as to reblurb the outbreak. It already had been spread well beyond China already. It is similar here to climate change, and only want to make to blurb stories where there has been massive change. If, for example, WHO reclassifies this to a pandemic, then that calls for a blurb. --Masem (t) 14:15, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, but not to the extent of a thousand+ being infected. It was pockets of double digits in countries. All the news sources are screaming pandemic. I would say thousands of cases outside China is quite a change. NoahTalk 14:20, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • South Korea has almost 1000... I see no reason not to blurb that the virus is rapidly spreading in places outside of China since it hasnt been done thus far. NoahTalk 14:26, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Well ITN is not a news ticker, and there is no requirement to blurb every development on every single story. The coronavirus is clearly a major deal - the likely overall mortality rate of at least 2% and the potential for global spread makes it more worrying than the winter flu cases mentioned above - but probably we should wait for a more major development before re-blurbing.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:34, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

RD: Kiki Dimoula[edit]

Article: Kiki Dimoula (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Ekathimerini
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.

 Alsoriano97 (talk) 12:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Sardar Patel Stadium[edit]

Consensus to post this likely will not develop. --Jayron32 15:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Sardar Patel Stadium (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ US President Donald Trump on his first Presidential trip to India, officially opens the Sardar Patel Stadium which is now regarded as the largest cricket stadium in the world. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Sardar Patel Stadium officially opened by US President Donald Trump as the world's largest cricket stadium with a seating capacity of over 110, 000
Alternative blurb II: ​ Sardar Patel Stadium, the world's largest cricket stadium and second-largest overall with 110,000 seating capacity, is inaugurated in Motera, India.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Reuters, BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This is quite significant as the stadium is also now regarded as the second largest sports stadium ever in the world in terms of seating capacity. Abishe (talk) 05:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Second-largest stadium is second-largest and thus not record-breaking. Even on this, I would oppose the blurb focusing on Trump, just announced that the second-larget stadium by seating was opened, there is no need to make this potentially political. --Masem (t) 05:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's the biggest cricket stadium. HiLo48 (talk) 05:19, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Purpose is irrelevant, though I would make a distinction if we were talking between indoor and outdoor stadiums from an architectural standpoint. --Masem (t) 05:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hardly irrelevant. You can't even play serious cricket on most soccer grounds, and soccer fans don't like watching their game on big, wide cricket grounds. Note that we are talking of the two most popular sports in the world here. HiLo48 (talk) 05:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not irrelevant but not necessarily significant enough to be posted either. Undecided on this one currently though. - Indefensible (talk) 06:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If the key factor is "largest", then it is an architectural facet , not a sporting one, to figure out the way to support that many seat, though the sport itself is going to partially dictate why they need that many seats (eg , there's a reason why several of the largest ones are American college football) --Masem (t) 06:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose/Comment The building (and perhaps the opening) of the stadium is the news here, not the fact that Trump opened it. Stadiums are noted for their size, tenants, location, and many other things, but never for who opens them. HiLo48 (talk) 05:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Change Alternative Blurb II to say opened rather than inaugurated, and I will support it. HiLo48 (talk) 05:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[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) Mahathir Mohamad[edit]

Superseded by successor nomination. Stephen 23:00, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Mahathir Mohamad (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad submits his resignation to the king after 2 years in office. (Post)
News source(s): CNN Prime Minister's Office of Malaysia AFP Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: A prime minister resigning should be notable enough to be front-page news. (Correct me if I'm wrong) Nahnah4 (talk
  • Oppose For as long as the target is, I can't find an update in the suitable section (Second term as prime minister). Updates to the infobox and lede are lacking in detail. I am therefore unconvinced that this resigning is any more impactful or notable than any other.130.233.2.197 (talk) 08:53, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A change in PM is not always notable outside of a general election, mostly when the incoming PM is of the same party and policies are not expected to change(don't know if that's the case here). 331dot (talk) 09:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "The Prime Minister of Malaysia is the head of government and the highest political office in Malaysia. The prime minister leads the executive branch of the federal government.". We really need to get over this inane head of state vs head of government fixation. I'll change to full supprot if I have a chance to read the target before the nom is SNOW closed. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:15, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - has the change of leader actually taken place yet? I suggest we wait to post this until it's known who is successor is, and the reins of power are handed over. Then we can mention both of them in one story.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seems he's the interim prime minister while a new government is formed. Banedon (talk) 12:34, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 23[edit]

February 23, 2020 (2020-02-23) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections

February 22[edit]

February 22, 2020 (2020-02-22) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime
  • Lesotho PM Tom Thabane is granted sick leave until 27 February when he is due to appear in court for the murder of his former wife. (Reuters)

Politics and elections

Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II[edit]

Article: Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury II (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ British boxer Tyson Fury defeats American Deontay Wilder to win the World Boxing Council and lineal heavyweight championships. (Post)
News source(s): USA Today, Al-Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This was the most anticipated heavyweight championship match in decades, and is certainly a lot more notable than some of the items WP:ITNR Or Who am I kiddiNG boxing isn't a popular sport in this parts like I dunno Gaelic football or netball, but it cannot be denied this was the sporting event at least for this month. Howard the Duck (talk) 03:00, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: June Dally-Watkins[edit]

Article: June Dally-Watkins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2020/feb/23/june-dally-watkins-australias-queen-of-deportment-and-etiquette-dies-at-92
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: Australian businesswoman and fashion model. I have updated the body so it is now start-class rather than stub.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Hisashi Katsuta[edit]

Article: Hisashi Katsuta (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2020-02-22/voice-actor-hisashi-katsuta-passes-away/.156749
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: The voice of Dr. Ochanomizu. Nicely sourced but could use a little tidying and expanding. Died the day before, but announced on this day. ミラP 02:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD Thich Quang Do[edit]

Article: Thich Quang Do (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Straits 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.

 Bumbubookworm (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: B. Smith[edit]

Article: B. Smith (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The 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.

 --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:27, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mike Hughes[edit]

Article: Mike Hughes (daredevil) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fox LA
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: From a first pass of sourcing, the article looks ok, but keeping in mind he was also known as a flat earther, I would ask !voters to consider neutrality of language as well (I'm not seeing anything that immediately sets off problems). And while this would fall under a possible "unusual death" blurb, this is mainly a D-list celeb, so not to the level of recognition a blurb merits, and RD is fine. Masem (t) 02:40, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 21[edit]

February 21, 2020 (2020-02-21) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Lisel Mueller[edit]

Article: Lisel Mueller (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Sun 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: Pulitzer-prize winner for poetry. - Article expanded and refs added. Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 20[edit]

February 20, 2020 (2020-02-20) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Art and culture
  • An 18th-century Ethiopian ceremonial crown, one of the 20 in existence, is returned to Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. It was discovered in the Netherlands in 1998, and was held by Dutch authorities until now so it could be returned when the country was more politically stable. (BBC News)

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Peter Dreher[edit]

Article: Peter Dreher (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Badische Neueste Nachrichten
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: German painter, famous for a series of painting the same thing more than 5,000 times, exhibited internationally. For a change, I trimmed the article - tagged with multiple problems - to like a fifth of its former size, leaving sourced things. If someone is inclined to source more: welcome. Please dont' use a site which is a mirror of this (former version), though. Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - obligatory WTFBBQ. This seems pretty thinly sourced and more appropriate for the German Wikipedia, but hasn't even been posted there. - Indefensible (talk) 06:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There wasn't a single person supporting this between its posting and its nomination, and even the poster anticipated "WTFBBQ" as a reaction. While the subject was notable enough to have an article, it was start-class and deemed low importance, with only 5 references of which only 1 is in English. The fact that there is only 1 English ref and that there was no posting in the subject's native language Wikipedia suggests low notability. So the nomination seemed lacking in support and significance. - Indefensible (talk) 01:49, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That position is indefensible I'm afraid! 😎 RDs can't be opposed on significance, only on quality and referencing. 5 refs of which 1 is English, and start class, are probably sufficient. If you really think it's not notable then AFD is the place, but here we generally assume it's notable unless very obviously not.  — Amakuru (talk) 02:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The nomination still lacked any support between the posting and the nomination, regardless of significance. But if that is really the case, that means anyone who has a start or better class Wikipedia article who dies should be posted, which is obviously not the case. If an article has sections that lack ref'ing, they should just be removed so that the remaining content is fully ref'd. - Indefensible (talk) 04:11, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's unusual for RDs to be posted with support from only the nominator - but it does happen. There's no reason to hold up posting if the admin is satisfied that it meets the RD criteria. I'm not sure what you are trying to say in your second sentence. If an RD is nominated, then yes - if it is Start class or better, referenced and not stale, it should be posted.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The point in the 2nd sentence is that there is inconsistency in behavior in the relationship between article quality and nomination/posting. This can be seen from the numerous people who are not nominated or posted despite being notable enough to have an article about them listed on Deaths in 2020 (and I'm sure there are many more who are missed from that page as well) and are above stub-class and meet the subjective quality criteria (e.g. referencing). Michael Medwin might be an example, from a quick glance. Whether having an article should be enough to meet the significance criteria is a separate issue, although I am inclined towards having a higher threshold than that. - Indefensible (talk) 01:23, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dominican Republic Election 2020[edit]

Article: 2020 Dominican Republic municipal elections (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Protests happen in major Dominican Republic cities over the election problems. (Post)
News source(s): (Dominican Today) (Dominican Today 2nd)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: I am nominating this as protests are happening over the election being halted due to problems. People are being arrested. (Blurb might need to be updated) Elijahandskip (talk) 19:56, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • AGF, I'm going to make some suppositions about how this sort of nom goes. The election (and its suspension) will not be seen as sufficiently significant. Protests are non-stop around the world right now, so those are not significant per se, though the size of crowds (not documented yet) would be considered. Deaths are significant, but the passive voice ("left at least two dead") suggests less malicious intent (a heart attack, maybe?). This could develop in to something, but it's not there yet. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: These are sub-national elections, so would not normally be posted. Sufficiently major protests could be a blurb of the own, but there is one sentence about them in the nominated article. The two Dominica Today links provided have just a few sentences, and the international media haven't paid any attention. Unless I'm missing something, that does not indicate sufficiently major protests. Modest Genius talk 20:20, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article now has a decent section on the protests. However the Miami Herald source used there (the only one I can read) says there were 'hundreds' of protesters. That's substantial but protests with hundreds of thousands usually don't make it onto ITN. I'm afraid I must oppose this nomination. Modest Genius talk 11:56, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius' explanation which is well accurate. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:36, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 07:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The OAS is now investigating the situation. I doubt this makes a difference, but this now involved the United States and other countries. Elijahandskip (talk) 15:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Protests begin outside of the Dominican Republic because of the election problems. It is now very notable. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:06, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Elijahandskip, by "OAS" I assume you mean the Organization of American States. It seems that the election has been postponed to March 15 though and the situation has largely resolved for the time being until that date. Per what Modest Genius wrote this probably does not meet the threshold for posting even with the additional protests currently, but perhaps it is part of something larger as you wrote that should be documented in a separate article. - Indefensible (talk) 05:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wallan derailment[edit]

Proposed image
Article: 2020 Wallan derailment (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An XPT train (example pictured) derails near Wallan, Victoria, Australia, killing two people and injuring twelve. (Post)
News source(s): (Sydney Morning Herald)
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: There is no such thing as WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, so let's not cite the lack of deaths as a reason to oppose. This appears to be the first fatal accident for the XPT (am open to correction on this), which adds some significance if correct. Mjroots (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I call into question the validity and relevance of this justification for opposition. Labelling the fatal derailment as an accident caused by the driver "rushing" (which has not been confirmed by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau) does not make this event any less notable. ChocolateTrain (talk) 11:10, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Call it into question as much as you like. It's simply not that notable. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:43, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The vast majority of the non-American part of the world's media ignores college football. These arguments are silly. HiLo48 (talk) 23:18, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Despite what it may seem, this accident was certainly not minor. In fact, looking at the photographs of the incident, it is surprising that there were not more casualties. The entire train (except for the trailing locomotive) derailed, causing the front locomotive to fall onto its side, and the first four (out of five) passenger cars to buckle. The train has ripped off the tracks from the ground, and appears to have ploughed through up to 100 metres of trees on the side of the tracks. This is not a minor derailment. ChocolateTrain (talk) 11:26, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The term is relative. From a railroading perspective, the damage could be considered major, but in terms of fatalities (which are important, regardless of what anyone says) it was far down the list of current events in the world in which we live. – Sca (talk) 15:17, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PS: AFAIK, the jargony term "XPT" would not be understood by a majority of readers. – Sca (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support With Blurb Fix I support as it is notable, but the blurb is wrong. The official report was 2 dead and 69 injured. (Check current events portal). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elijahandskip (talk • contribs) 19:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with blurb fix: As indicated by the nominator, this incident caused two fatalities and 12 injuries, which certainly makes it notable. As far as I can see, this also appears to be the first fatal derailment of a loaded passenger train in Australia since 2003. A fatal passenger train derailment is inherently notable due to the fact that rail travel is, by several metrics, one of the safest forms of transportation in the world. Regarding the blurb, it should read "derails" rather than "is derailed", because the latter suggests that the train was deliberately caused to derail. ChocolateTrain (talk) 11:06, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The blurb has now been updated, so I have removed my suggestion for the blurb alteration. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What is known so far is that the signalling system was in a degraded condition due to a previous fire in an equipment hut. Trains were being diverted into a passing loop as work was being carried out on the other track. Both driver and pilotman were killed. First fatalities on an XPT since introduction in 1982. Mjroots (talk) 14:20, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The "pilotman" was a woman. It doesn't seem to be Australian English. HiLo48 (talk) 23:22, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Martinevans123: At the moment, it is definitely too early to say for sure. Although, it does seem clear from the photographs that the train derailed at a set of points. After the crash, a passenger on the train apparently walked back and discovered that the points were set to direct the train onto a passing loop on the left. News reports indicate that the signalling system on the entire stretch of line from Donnybrook to Kilmore (about 30 km, by my rough measurement) was inoperable due to a fire two weeks prior, and the points were also being operated manually. I would assume that this meant the driver did not know that the train was due to be directed off the main tracks (these points had been set to straight for the last few weeks apparently) and thus did not slow down. The speed limit for this set of points is apparently 15 km/h, and according to a passenger estimate, the train was accelerating through roughly 80–90 km/h when it reached the points. So, I guess it is a result of poor maintenance of the signalling facilities and a breakdown in communication between the driver and the main control centre. Clearly, going 600% of the speed limit is not going to end well. Ironically (but certainly not in a humorous sense), one of the two people who died had actually just boarded the train to assist the driver in navigating the section of track in question. Very sad indeed. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the very clear summary. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Of course, this is all just speculation until the accident report is published. ChocolateTrain (talk) 15:25, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose WP:MINIMUMDEATHS was a cynical attempt to criticize the necessary parsing of borderline cases. Nothing about that kerfuffle changes the accepted consensus (globally, not just at WP) that a disaster with a high death toll is more significant than one without. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @GreatCaesarsGhost: whilst it is accepted that the more deaths there are = greater weight to the case for notability, I do not accept that a lack of deaths = a lack of notability. In this case, we have the first fatal accident to those on a particular type of train in 38 years. This, and possibly the cause of the accident, is what give weight to the case for notability. In anyone thinks the accident is not notable, the AfD is thattaway! Mjroots (talk) 14:29, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Mjroots. Claiming that an incident is not notable due to a lack of fatalities based on the premise that a large number of fatalities implies notability is a logical fallacy—specifically, denying the antecedent—and is therefore logically invalid. An incident need not have copious fatalities for it to be notable. To assess notability, one must consider the nature of the incident itself and what it represents rather than just looking one-dimensionally at the number of fatalities. For example, this accident took place in Australia, where events like this are rare occurrences. By my check, this is the first fatal derailment of a loaded passenger train in Australia since 2003, and according to the nominator, the first death on the XPT in its entire history. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:49, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since you missed the strawman you were aiming at and hit me, allow me to clarify. The logical fallacy is "There is no such thing as WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, so let's not cite the lack of deaths as a reason to oppose." The extent to which a disaster results in deaths or financial loss is material to the significance of that disaster. It's not the only thing that's material, but preemptively dictating that it is not up for discussion is a bad faith argument. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:42, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
True. I agree with your comment regarding the WP:MINIMUMDEATHS thing in that the number of deaths definitely impacts on the perceived severity of the disaster. My point is more that (and I realise that you did concede this, so I'm not trying to be argumentative) the number of deaths is not the only thing which contributes to an accident being notable. I disagree that the WP:MINIMUMDEATHS comment was made in bad faith, though. Cynical? Sure. But cynicism only arises when there are things which fuel it. I think the nominator was just trying to say that the nomination shouldn't be rejected solely on the basis of the fatality count. Anyway, I think we've said enough on this issue. ChocolateTrain (talk) 19:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is short for Express Passenger Train. It is just what the train is called. It is not a grammatical issue. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:50, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
XPT is its common name. It's the Australian equivalent of the British HST, which it was based on. Mjroots (talk) 14:55, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
IP180. You don't need to oppose. You just need a different blurb. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:01, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If IP180 doesn't adjust this. I trust the assessing admin will see it's not a "strong oppose" to posting per se. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you for the explanation. I now Support it to be posted. 180.245.214.207 (talk) 22:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Reading what our article says, this is a case of an accident that had some unfortunate deaths but could have been a lot worse (as described by most reports). That "lot worse" is where we would have posted as it would have been a mass death accident but right now this is just a unfortunate case of a lot of things gone wrong in the prior 24hr. --Masem (t) 15:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marking ready - IMvHO, the strength of the supports outweighs the weak opposing arguments. Mjroots (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
'Weak' and 'strong,' to say nothing of the frothy variants 'very strong' or 'strongest possible,' are meaningless in terms of votes on ITN nominations. – Sca (talk) 18:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Two of the opposes are of the form "I haven't seen this in my local news", which we all know is not a valid reason to oppose. If this page was properly administered, and Admin would instantly delete such rubbish comments. HiLo48 (talk) 22:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we could get Paul Theroux to rule on this. In The Old Pategonian Express he talks, rather nervously, about train wrecks. – Sca (talk) 18:41, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I see this as similar to the recent Caspian Airlines nomination - a transport accident which could have been horrific, but is mostly a near-miss. This is tragic for the two crew members who died, but we can't post every transport accident that causes two deaths. I agree with Masem, the impact of this crash seems to be thankfully minor. Users shouldn't mark their own nominations as ready, especially if it requires dismissing some of the opinions expressed (whatever one might think of them). Modest Genius talk 20:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support because there nowhere train incidents like this in Australia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.137.187.159 (talk) 07:29, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seems sufficiently notable to me, especially since in today’s OTD there is a modern (2007) train derailment with only one fatality. In the first world and modern age, even non-fatal train derailments are very unusual and make waves in news. Kingsif (talk) 22:57, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per TRM and Modest Genius. I get the fact that train and plane accidents are usually far more talked about than car accidents with equivalent fatalities, but even so this one doesn't seem to rise to the level that makes it front-page ITN news. And as much as it may be making waves in some media around the world, I can say anecdotally that I have not encountered this story anywhere in my perusal of the news in recent days.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:31, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And I NEVER see American football finals mentioned in the Australian media. Nor, probably, do you in yours. But we still post it. HiLo48 (talk) 23:42, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What, you mean the Super Bowl? That gets a surprising amount of coverage here these days, which may irritate some people. And It looks like it featured on the main page of your news sites in Aus too. Anyway, my point on that was mainly in response to the contention above that this is "making waves around the world",not saying that my having heard of it directly impacts its postability.  — Amakuru (talk) 01:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No. Sorry. I meant college football, as I had already mentioned earlier in this discussion. HiLo48 (talk) 02:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. Well I opposed the college football too, so you can't blame me on that one  — Amakuru (talk) 08:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I come from the city this happened close to, so I was well aware of the incident before I saw it here. I didn't think of nominating it, and was surprised to see it here. However, the number of appalling reasons people are using to oppose this has led me post this support !vote to balance out the idiocy, bias and ignorance in the rest of the thread. (When will the Admins who watch here do something about the massive proliferation of rubbish posts?) HiLo48 (talk) 22:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) New Zealander of the Year Awards[edit]

Thanks for the nomination, but this does not have consensus to post. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: New Zealander of the Year Awards (talk · history · tag) and Jennifer Ward-Lealand (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Jennifer Ward-Lealand is named New Zealander of the Year. (Post)
News source(s): (TVNZ)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: New Zealand big award that is done annually. Elijahandskip (talk) 13:48, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 19[edit]

February 19, 2020 (2020-02-19) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents
Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) 2020 Hanau shootings[edit]

Article: 2020 Hanau shootings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least nine people are killed and several more are wounded during shootings in Hanau, Germany. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, DW, Express, CNN
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Article was just created (hence, it's a stub), but I think the event is notable. --SirEdimon (talk) 23:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PS: However, I see German Wiki's ITN blurb now says 11 "lost their lives" ("sind elf Menschen gestorben"), so maybe Eng.-lang sources will update soon. – Sca (talk) 15:55, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would oppose phrasing it like that. Yes, 11 people are dead, but one of them is the killer who killed 10 (other) people. Regards SoWhy 16:00, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

@Sca: So far, he has killed 10 people. And himself. Makes 11. I agree that it is a little confusing for the reader that the main page says ten and the article lead says 11, even though it makes sense. Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:53, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: José Mojica Marins[edit]

Article: José Mojica Marins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Folha de S. Paulo (in Portuguese), Bloody Disgusting
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: Brazilian actor and filmmaker, famous for creating and playing Coffin Joe. The article has some issues, but I'll be working on it. --SirEdimon (talk) 23:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've made some improvements, including adjusting and expanding upon much of the text, adding several citations (and a Bibliography subsection), and removing references to IMDb outside of the External links section. It isn't perfect, but we're aiming for a RD entry right now, not good or featured article status. —Matthew - (talk) 15:57, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MatthewHoobin: I believe we generally require citations in the filmography section. Kees08 (Talk) 20:40, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Kees08: Done. —Matthew - (talk) 21:21, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Heather Couper[edit]

Article: Heather Couper (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC 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: News of her death was published today and the article looks in reasonable shape. Carcharoth (talk) 18:51, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Pop Smoke[edit]

Article: Pop Smoke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [16]
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: Rapper from United States who recently signed a record deal with Republic and numerous charted singles and mixtapes  — TwinTurbo (talk) 12:06, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - I can't see any issues with the citing or article quality.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - The primary source for his death is TMZ. Pitchfork, a more reliable source [17] has TMZ as its lead and says "allegedly killed", "reportedly pronounced dead", "Pitchfork has reached out to representatives for more information". The article has no problems for the rest of it, but there is no police, hospital or management confirmation of his death thus far. Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As of 15:30 GMT all coverage is either tabloid or says "reportedly", or even has "death" in inverted commas. [18] Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not against waiting on a better source than TMZ, but in terms of reporting on deaths, TMZ has fixed their reputation of jumping the gun. I'd still wouldn't rush to put in a death based only on TMZ, but I would be expected to see other sources to confirm within a short time. --Masem (t) 16:44, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
NBC News are also reporting it, citing multiple sources who've spoken to them.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:54, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Fernando Morán[edit]

Article: Fernando Morán (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El Pais (in Spanish)
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: Former Spanish minister of foreign affairs, from 1982 to 1985  — Amakuru (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose because unknown for their nationality whether Spanish or Catalan but Support for well-referenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.69.53.66 (talk) 12:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 18[edit]

February 18, 2020 (2020-02-18) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology
  • Archeologists announce an articulated Neanderthal skeleton was unearthed in Shanidar Cave, Iraq, the first discovery of its type in over a decade. They argue the find provided further proof that Neanderthals buried their dead, as it was next to a site where similar bodies were found surrounded by pollen clumps. (BBC News)

(Posted) RD: José Bonaparte[edit]

Article: José Bonaparte (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La VerdadLa Nacion (both in Spanish)
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: Argentine paleontologist  — Amakuru (talk) 12:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2019 Afghan presidential election[edit]

Article: 2019 Afghan presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ After a delay of more than five months over disputed votes, Ashraf Ghani is re-elected Afghan president.. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Afghan president Ashraf Ghani is re-elected after a five-month delay over disputed votes.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Five months after polls closed, Ashraf Ghani is declared re-elected as President of Afghanistan
News source(s): The GuardianBBC
Credits:

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.

 Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now - sourcing is good, and I think this is probably WP:ITN/R, even though the election itself was some months ago. (It looks like we didn't post it at the time, unless I've missed it). It needs more of an update on today's news though. The lede has one sentence, but the body has not been updated yet, with details of what happened and why the result is now official.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose due to insufficient update. As noted above, we need more on this news; if this is a big deal, then the article should give it some weight in terms of some significant explanatory text. There's a sentence in the lead and that's it. Furthermore, I'm not entirely thrilled with the blurb, it feels like it buries the lead. It makes it sound like the election just happened, perhaps if we changed the bolded text to "verified" or "confirmed" the results of the five-month old election in some way, I would like that better. My skills are failing me at this point, but if someone can come up with something better, that'd be great. --Jayron32 18:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Still oppose until update is done, but when that is fixed, I would support ALT2. --Jayron32 13:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose not a significant event for global history outside involving any of English-speaking country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.69.53.66 (talk) 21:04, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Postings are not limited to being of interest to English-speaking countries. Presidential elections in any country are on the recurring events list, meaning notability is not at issue. You know the US still has troops there, right? Certainly of interest to Americans. 331dot (talk) 21:07, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
even if it wasn't of interest for Americans it should still be there.86.44.177.88 (talk) 11:18, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing: Northwestern Syria offensive (December 2019–present)[edit]

Nominator's comments: Ongoing offensive in the Syrian Civil War with notable gains by the Syrian government. Aleppo's neighborhoods have been fully captured and there have been clashes with Turkey itself. Updates on the offensive have been posted nearly every day on the Current news portal. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 14:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose for now. Article is well referenced, but needs some stylistic rewriting to avoid major WP:PROSELINE issues. If someone could find a more natural and narrative way of writing than just a string of paragraphs that start "On <date>..." I would support posting this. --Jayron32 15:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Perhaps a blurb would be a better way of adding this to the template, rather than an Ongoing without a defined end point. Based on the nom it seems that there are notable events worth posting about. SpencerT•C 18:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Something about "leaving the army in full control of the Greater Aleppo area." might make a good hook. Even if the daily proseline were glued together into a paragraph, it wouldn't be adequate for OG: too light on details. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose War never ends, and we can't post everything that is ongoing to "Ongoing." Given that this war has been posted many times in the past, I don't see enough here to post yet again. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:30, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Yukos shareholders lawsuit[edit]

Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 22:24, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Yukos shareholders v. Russia (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Dutch appeal court reinstates for Russia to pay $50 billion over Yukos. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In ongoing legal actions related to the Yukos Oil Company, the Hague Court of Appeals re-enforces a $50 billion award for majority shareholders from Russia.
News source(s): (NBC)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Nomination is because the case was originally done in 2016 and was overturned. Elijahandskip (talk) 13:42, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Stale) RD: Tapas Paul[edit]

Article: Tapas Paul (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of India
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: Bengali actor and former member of Indian parliament. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:56, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Ashraf Sinclair[edit]

Article: Ashraf Sinclair (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NST "Actor Ashraf Sinclair dies of heart attack aged 40". New Straits Times. 18 February 2020.
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: He is a Malaysian actor, who well known in Indonesia and was played in many dramas and films in Indonesia and Malaysia. 36.69.53.66 (talk) 07:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Daytona 500[edit]

Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 22:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: 2020 Daytona 500 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Denny Hamlin wins the 2020 Daytona 500 after a crash seriously injures Ryan Newman. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ After a crash seriously injures Ryan Newman, Denny Hamlin wins the 2020 Daytona 500.
News source(s): WESH, CNN
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Recurring event, made more notable by the serious injury sustained by Ryan Newman. Rockstonetalk to me! 16:14, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Contrary to what the nom says, the Daytona 500 is not listed at WP:ITN/R. It only mentions the NASCAR series itself, which I believe will conclude in around August. Not convinced the Newman injury makes it worth posting either... I gather it's not a life-threatening injury.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:09, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've taken off the ITNR per this. Doesn't mean that it can't be posted but we now debate on its merits in addition to quality. --Masem (t) 18:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      Well that's an interesting question... if a particular event could be ITN/R, but isn't, does that mean that by default we should not post it? Obviously this one has the extra circumstances around the serious injury, but ordinarily I'd imagine that would be the case. If something's worth posting one year then it's worth posting every year.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      I have never seen personally that an event like an ITNR one but not listed to be ineligible for ITN posting; it just loses the "free pass" of ITNR's "important already established". It can be more difficult for an event that is similar to multiple events on ITNR but not listed itself (such as yet another association football tourney), but that doesn't immediately disqualify it. --Masem (t) 18:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      we've had this discussion and fixed it. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:17, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh? Tell us more about a single race in a single class in a single country being absolutely miles away from ITN. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is Godwin's law, the WP:ITN/C version. "As a discussion about a news item grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving The Boat Race approaches 1".  — Amakuru (talk) 23:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I actually coined Oxford's Law, and would appreciate you attributing it to me. ;-) --WaltCip (talk) 00:36, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose - I'm sympathetic to desires to get this posted. It's hard to think of very many parallels to the Daytona 500, which is a notable sporting event in its own right even if it's not the season-finisher. But the article needs to be of good quality first and foremost. Also, I don't think the injury should be mentioned. It would be more notable if the victim died, as morbid and unfortunate as that sounds.--WaltCip (talk) 00:44, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 500 miles of left-hand turns? Yeeee-hhhaaaaaawwww, cousin Cletus! Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 14:41, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Classy.--WaltCip (talk) 16:56, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That has literally no relevance to anything.. "500 kicks of an association football? Woohoo, Oliver!" -- Rockstonetalk to me! 21:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 17[edit]

February 17, 2020 (2020-02-17) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents
  • Storm Dennis
    • The lower reaches of many rivers, including the Severn at Shrewsbury, continue to rise as a result of excess runoff from upstream. The River Wye in Hereford has now reached its highest level in recorded history. (BBC News)
  • At least 20 people, mostly women and children, are killed in a stampede during a rush to collect aid supplies upon the opening of the gates to an aid facility in Diffa, south-eastern Niger. (BBC News)

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports
  • 2020 Daytona 500
    • Denny Hamlin wins his second consecutive Daytona 500, and his third overall, becoming the first driver to win the race consecutively since Sterling Marlin did so between 1994 and 1995. Ryan Newman is hospitalized with serious but non-life threatening injuries after an airborne crash coming to the finish. (WESH)

(Posted) RD: Larry Tesler[edit]

Article: Larry Tesler (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Apple Insider
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: Computer scientist and mathematician within Apple during its formulative years, and developed the copy-and-paste UI approach we know today. Article has a few lingering CNs I am doing to try to tackle. Masem (t) 22:57, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sonja Ziemann[edit]

Article: Sonja Ziemann (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tagsschau
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: German actress, most popular in 1950s heimat films (1950 Bambi), then more serious and more international. refs were mostly fine, just not for death and the looong list of films. Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added another source and some text. Look, please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:16, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ror Wolf[edit]

Article: Ror Wolf (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): EN24 + FAZ + BR (but this one is in English)
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: German writer of audio plays, novels and poems, grotesque, award-winning, "dissecting reality". I expanded a stub. Much more could be taken from the German WP: lists of works and awards, literary criticism. - I heard it on radio. Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:11, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Owen Bieber[edit]

Article: Owen Bieber (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT Hall, Kalea; Noble, Breana (February 17, 2020). "Former UAW President Owen Bieber dies at 90". The Detroit News.
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: Article was a DYK and doesn't look like it's changed much since then. Should be ready, though the lead could be meatier. Nohomersryan (talk) 19:39, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Andrew Weatherall[edit]

Article: Andrew Weatherall (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [19]
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 DJ and producer. Article needs some more citations, which I'll work on this afternoon, and the usual unsourced -ography section, but otherwise in good enough shape.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:49, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 16[edit]

February 16, 2020 (2020-02-16) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Harry Gregg[edit]

Article: Harry Gregg (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, BBC Sport
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: Manchester United and Northern Ireland goalkeeper of the late 1950s / early 1960s, best known for saving lives in the 1958 Munich air disaster. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 14:27, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the Mail with cites from the Guardian and FourFourTwo, and added some references for the TV/film depictions. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:16, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good to go. --Jayron32 15:24, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 15[edit]

February 15, 2020 (2020-02-15) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology
  • Microsoft removes a security update four days after its release, upon receiving complaints that the update has been responsible for system freezes, boot problems, and installation issues for Windows. (Bleeping Computer)

(Posted) RD: Tony Fernández[edit]

Article: Tony Fernández (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): MLB.com
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.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Shehnaz Ansari[edit]

Now stale.

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: Shehnaz Ansari (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TheNews
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: A sitting MPA shot dead. Guy in the Mall (talk) 16:31, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Stale) RD: A. E. Hotchner[edit]

Now stale.

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: A. E. Hotchner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian obituary
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: Centenarian writer and editor, friend and biographer of Ernest Hemingway and of Paul Newman. Few sentences in the middle of the article need sources. Blythwood (talk) 14:43, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Posted) RD: Caroline Flack[edit]

Article: Caroline Flack (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph, Deadline
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: English radio and television presenter. The article has some issues, but it's being heavly edited since she was "very famous". --SirEdimon (talk) 18:05, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Storm Dennis[edit]

Good faith nom but consensus is against posting and is unlikely to change. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Storm Dennis (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The British Army is deployed for rescue efforts as a Bomb Cyclone hits England.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Storm Dennis, a bomb cyclone, becomes strongest winter storm ever in North Atlantic.
News source(s): (UPI) (USA Today)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Current Weather event that is bad enough the British Military is doing rescue efforts. Elijahandskip (talk) 20:40, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 14[edit]

February 14, 2020 (2020-02-14) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

(Posted) RD: Bonnie MacLean[edit]

Article: Bonnie MacLean (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): San Francisco Chronicle, Paste Magazine
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.

 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:46, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment P-K3 Added content. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:56, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ex-Tropical Cyclone Usei[edit]

No consensus to post. Stephen 22:17, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 2019–20 South Pacific cyclone season (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ex-Tropical Cyclone Usei makes landfall on Lord Howe Island and heads toward New Zealand. (Post)
News source(s): (NASA) (ABC News)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: It is a current Weather event that is out of season. Normally Tropical Storms/hurricans/cyclones are mentioned in this section. It has officially made a landfall also on Lord Howe Island. Elijahandskip (talk) 00:36, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 13[edit]

February 13, 2020 (2020-02-13) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Coastal GasLink Pipeline protests[edit]

Article: Coastal GasLink Pipeline#Protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following several days of protests blockading rail lines across Canada, Via Rail announces the shutdown of most of its passenger rail service until further notice. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Via Rail, Canada's only nationwide passenger train service, announces a suspension of all services with the exception of two northern routes after several days of protests opposing a gas pipeline project in British Columbia that crosses the territory of Wetʼsuwetʼen First Nation.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The Coastal GasLink Pipeline protests shut down the Canadian passenger train service Via Rail.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The Coastal GasLink Pipeline protests shut down Canadian passenger train service and much of the Canadian freight rail network.
News source(s): CBC, Global News, CTV, BBC, Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated

 2607:FEA8:1DDF:FEE1:7504:B465:858D:639A (talk) 04:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon? WaltCip (talk) 12:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is the same IP block that nominated the Trump impeachment for removal hours after the CAA protests were removed. I think it can be safely ignored. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:44, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unlike past protests we have posted, this is more a sit in, nonviolent protest of interminable size. Not in the same class as others, --Masem (t) 12:19, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm changing to a Support on improvements based on the explanations better in BBC than our article of the extent of the impact. Both freight and passenger trains schedules are disrupted so to me, this is like the Yellow vests movement from France that we did support. But the article needs improvement to address that scale of impact. --Masem (t) 16:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Unsee coverage on major RS sites. – Sca (talk) 13:53, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article is good enough. Front page at cbc.ca. Via shut down all passenger rail nation wide due to protests in the BC interior this is actually a pretty big deal. Why the hell are anti-pipeline protesters interrupting rail service? --LaserLegs (talk) 15:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support on quality, article appears to be fine. On significance, while these protests may be behaving differently from how protests would occur in other parts of the world, there's a long tradition in Canada that this is how First Nations protest. While it's been done before, I don't believe they've ever shut down our national rail service before, however, and that is where this rises to the level of significance required for ITN. NorthernFalcon (talk) 16:16, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I remember them closing the 401 out near cornwall years ago --LaserLegs (talk) 16:36, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt blurb 1's a good try, but it's not quite long enough. Just another 21 words and it'll match the length of all the current blurbs combined. —Cryptic 16:47, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is good quality, updated, and the story is a major news story on several outlets. Added another Alt2 --Jayron32 16:58, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Although it's a good article, it lacks sufficient notability to be shown as ITN, but yes in Current Events. Important for Canada, but little else. I think that the way to protest of "First Nations", as someone says above, has no relevance to consider whether it is important or not. (Alsoriano97) (talk) 17:57, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unsee even on main CBC page today. Getting a bit stale, eh? – Sca (talk) 15:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Um, it is on the front page of CBC, and is likely to remain so until resolution. There is also a pretty good CNN article which explains the situation reasonably well. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 21:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On my (PC) screen, the CBC site displays 30 articles, including one with the hammer-head "Trains vs. pipelines," but nothing on protests. – Sca (talk) 00:00, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Something you already knew, but which I should post publicly in case others didn't realize the irrelevance of your comment: News websites generally post a personalized view of their main page based on a number of factors, and whether or not a particular story appears prominently for you has little bearing on whether or not the story is being covered by in-depth articles. If one wants to know what sort of prominence a story is getting, one needs to look at the number, length, and depth of stories covering a topic from a wide variety of sources, not just what one's personal view of the world is. --Jayron32 12:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good point-out, Jayron. Dodging those algorithms (Google too!) is one of the major reasons I clear cookies and caches multiple times a session and never use a news feed. Otherwise I find that I am just getting "echo-chamber" articles. (Disclaimer - I actually learned about this in the first place because I coincidentally happened to be in Toronto, in Union Station, waiting for a train, on the day when it started. I asked various staff what was going on, and they told me. I managed to get home on what turned out to be one of the last trains before the system-wide shutdown. Job-related travel has been ... interesting ... ever since. (Plus, February is always particularly busy for VIA Rail because the corridor includes more than a million university and college students, all of whom have a Reading Week equivalent during February (or early March on the Québec side of the provincial border), and at times it seems like most of them hold student rail passes.) In passing, Toronto Union Station is proximate to one of Toronto's Chinatowns, and Toronto has reason to remember SARS vividly. Here and now, the combination made for large crowds, with lots of masks.) - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Based on all my experience in ITN, my dropping in here will be the kiss of death. Nonetheless, for context, I will mention that CNR is the third largest railway in North America (not just Canada) by operating revenue and the fourth largest by mileage. During the past week, approximately half of its rail was blocked, and a third of its rail remains shut down. Additionally, during the past week, half of all the container ports in Canada were blockaded (two still are on an on-again off-again basis), and the CPR rail line was also briefly blocked. CNR has stated that it expects to lay off 6,000 people as a direct result. Those layoffs have already started. For reference, the total employment of CNR is 24,000.
(As an amusing note, US domestic policy considers Canadian oil "domestic". Twenty percent of that oil is carried at least partly on CNR rails -- so yes, much of that is at a standstill as well. Not quite so amusing is that much of Canada depends on heating supplies delivered by rail. There have been extreme cold warnings in Canada this week and last.)
As noted in one of the blurbs, VIA Rail is the only cross-Canada intercity passenger service: the VIA Rail domestic services which remain running serve fewer than 5% of all Canadians. Several of the commuter train lines for all three of Canada's largest cities have been intermittently shut down as well. (At one point last week, Amtrak had to cancel its Cascade service to Vancouver because of this.) There is no Canadian Greyhound (intercity bus) service in most of Canada by geography (shut down by Greyhound last October, including the cross-country routes). Contrasting with the 401 shutdown, where alternate roads were not blocked, there simply are no alternate rail lines for most of this region.
As to violence -- well, the last major Canadian protest which had (2) deaths was the Winnipeg general strike of 1919, more than a century ago. It involved 30,000 people (roughly 0.5% of the total population of Canada at the time) and had about 80 or so arrests. The current protests have already exceeded that number of arrests, with roughly 0.5% of the population of Canada protesting. The numbers involved are not really obvious because Canada is so large geographically compared to its population, because the protests are scattered throughout Canada (some of the larger protests were in Vancouver, Victoria, Toronto, and London), and because the rail blockades and many of the arrests are happening in remote areas. Quite simply, Canada has 1/30 the population of India, but 3x the geographic size. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 21:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing keeping this off the main page is the one sentence update. Expand it, we can rightly ignore the "it's only Canada" opposes per Please do not "oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country". You have the power to do it, just add some details and up it goes. Easy! --LaserLegs (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
?? I looked at it, and all the information was already there. I did clean up the structure of the article -- lede, sections, removed duplication of information, and so forth. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 14:09, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update - article should be ready for posting. I also added an alternate blurb (3) to include the impact on freight rail traffic. For other impacts, readers can access the article. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 15:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pro - extremely large-scale transportation/economic disruption in Canada, major First Nations protest, uniqueness within Canada.
Con - Non-violent, only affects Canada, does not appear in (my) newsfeed/news webview, and "stale".
Article is completely up to date. Event still continues in full this week, with no end in sight. Some administrator really should make an objective assessment of the validity of each of these claims sometime before the shutdown completes its third week. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 16:34, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Better article than many other candidates. While the logistic disruptions mainly affect Canada, the underlying conflict plays out the world over. Also, I consider "non-violent" a pro rather than a con.--89.206.117.140 (talk) 20:59, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Rajendra K. Pachauri[edit]

Now stale.

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: Rajendra K. Pachauri (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): News18
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs copyediting and neutrality issue with one section should be fixed. Nizil (talk) 18:14, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[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) Antarctica temperature record[edit]

No consensus to post.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:38, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Climate of Antarctica (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The warmest temperature in Antarctica is recorded at Seymour Island (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At Seymour Island a temperature of over 20 °C (68 °F) is recorded in Antarctica for the first time
Alternative blurb II: ​ A temperature of 20.75 °C (69.35 °F) is recorded at Seymour Island, the highest recorded in Antarctica.
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Record held since 1982 2A00:23C5:508F:3E01:31E6:12F4:842B:25C (talk) 17:19, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How the heck do you sensationalize a temperature reading? What sort of news are you looking for, water coming up to the doorstep of houses in Miami? WaltCip (talk) 02:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Posted) RD: Anne Windfohr Marion[edit]

Article: Anne Windfohr Marion (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): American Quarter Horse Association
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: Texas rancher and philanthropist. Refs look ok. Died on 12 February. Jip Orlando (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks good to go. --Jayron32 18:40, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 12[edit]

February 12, 2020 (2020-02-12) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Closed) Trial of Maesiah Thabane[edit]

WP:SNOW. We could post a conviction or an acquittal, but ITN almost never posts investigations or charges. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Maesiah Thabane (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ First Lady of Lesotho, Maesiah Thabane, is being investigated for the murder of former First Lady of Lesotho, Lipolelo Thabane. (Post)
News source(s): [20] [21]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Major event in Lesotho. This can effect world politics (Possibly if the Prime Minister steps down from pressure) Elijahandskip (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. By long-standing convention, ITN doesn't post criminal investigations unless/until they result in a conviction. Nominate again if she's convicted (which may be years away). Also the article is barely a stub. Modest Genius talk 20:05, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 11[edit]

February 11, 2020 (2020-02-11) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Joseph Vilsmaier[edit]

Article: Joseph Vilsmaier (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BR
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: Film director of what was liked by Bill Clinton: Comedian Harmonists (film), - his article was writen in colloquial style, and practically without sources. There's more in German, but I'm tired. Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Katsuya Nomura[edit]

Article: Katsuya Nomura (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Japan 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: A titan of Japanese baseball. Holds numerous awards and titles. Elected to Japanese baseball Hall of Fame --TorsodogTalk 19:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) New Delhi Assembly Elections[edit]

Thanks to the nominator for suggesting this, and for their interest in the ITN process. It is gratefully received. But consensus will not form to post this item, so closing it now per WP:SNOW.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: 2020 Delhi Legislative Assembly election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Aam Aadmi Party sweeps the sate assembly elections of Delhi, the capital of India (Post)
News source(s): New York Times BBC
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Irish General Election[edit]

Article: 2020 Irish general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Fianna Fáil (leader Micheál Martin pictured) wins a plurality of seats in the Irish general election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Irish general election concludes with no party holding a majority of seats in Dáil Éireann.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The Irish general election concludes with Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin, and Fine Gael as the three largest parties, but no party winning a majority.
News source(s): The Irish Times[22]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: It seems the results are now final. Sinn Fein won the popular vote for the first time in history, though I don't believe we can/should mention this in the blurb. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:57, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two notes 1) According to the article, the blurb is incorrect as both Sinn Fein and Fianna Fail won 37 seats. That would not mean that Fianna Fail won the most, but that both Sinn Fein and Fianna Fail won the most, with a tie of 37. 2) There is no significant prose update of the results, just tables and charts and numbers in the infobox and stuff like that. I would expect a several-paragraph summary of the results in the "Results" section as well as a synopsis in the lead, and neither of those things has been done yet. Until that is done, I oppose posting this. Fix that, and get the blurb right, and I would support this. --Jayron32 13:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you want something done right, I guess you have to do it yourself. Article has been updated with sufficient prose now. Changing to support. --Jayron32 17:00, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fianna Fail have an extra seat as one sitting member is "automatically" re-elected by virtue of their post; they have 38 sitting TDs as of this election but only 37 were returned by popular vote. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 13:20, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then the article is wrong because it doesn't say ANY of that, and is reporting, both in the two numbers in the infobox AND in the graph in the summary section (Which, as I note, is insufficient, and there should be an extensive prose summary of the results), that the two parties have the same number of seats. So, there's a new reason to oppose the article as completely factually wrong. You should probably fix that if you want it posted. If you're OK with it not being posted, then don't worry about it and leave it wrong. --Jayron32 13:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a note in the article explaining it, note [a]. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 13:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Two things 1) The note entirely insufficient for posting this article to the main page, as it is not a multi-paragraph explanation of the results in the "Results" section as well as a synopsis of that section in the lead. Unless and until you fix that problem, the existence or not of a footnote is still insufficient to post on the main page. 2) The note is ambiguous as it only says that the one seat was returned automatically and not contested. It does NOT say whether the seat was counted among the 37 or not. It could be read as 36 contested seats won, and 1 uncontested seat which adds up to 37. That's how I read it. Now, as I said, you have the ability to fix any of these problems if you want to see this article posted to the main page. That is a conditional statement, you don't have to fix the article, but if you don't, it will not be posted. Trying to argue with me is not fixing the article. Get on that. We're all waiting to see what wonderful prose you are prepared to write. --Jayron32 15:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really see how you read this as an argument, I just pointed out something that it appeared that you overlooked. I'm not the nominator nor a contributor to the article, nor have I even supported its posting. The fact that the Ceann Comhairle's seat is not contested is in prose in the article's lead but I'll reduplicate it elsewhere if it'll calm you down. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 15:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but where in the prose does it explain how many seats each party won? It says that his seat is not counted among the 160 contested, and that there were only 159 contested. I knew ALL of that ALREADY, but you did not address the main concern: 1) Where, in the multi-paragraph section of prose in the results section, does it explain how many seats each part won? Where does it explain, in unambiguous detail in an obvious way, how that extra seat works in to the total number of seats won by Fianna Fail? None of that is yet there. --Jayron32 15:27, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We're used it in the past, but only when linked, because most readers are not familiar with it. Modest Genius talk 13:50, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: the three biggest parties won 37, 37, and 35 seats (22-23% of the total), so it seems unreasonable to pick out any of them specifically. The blurb should simply say 'a hung parliament' or 'no party gaining a majority of seats' (altblurb added). I agree the article is not ready yet - needs a referenced paragraph of prose on the results. Modest Genius talk 13:50, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I guess one seat was not up for election, though I'm not entirely clear on that point. 331dot (talk) 13:53, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, the speaker (from FF) automatically retained their seat. Modest Genius talk 13:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb. Since any one of three parties could at least theoretically be the lead party, it seems reasonable to not pick out one in the blurb. 331dot (talk) 13:58, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I am not supportive of including Sinn Fein into the blurb, but am open to allowing a blurb that says "a hung parliament". I don't have any objections to saying that Finna Fael (?) is the leading party by virtue of being the incumbent. SomethingNastyHere (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, at present: I think the lead para should at least mention something about the outcome in seats: 3 approx equal parties is noteworthy. And I think both currently proposed blurbs are poor: do many (any?) Irish general elections end with a simple majority for one party; and Fianna Fáil hardly seem to have won. My impression is that Sinn Fein are the big story: doing so well that they surprised themselves (didn't put enough candidates.) It's not all about them, but they seem to be the story at the moment. PaulBetteridge (talk) 18:15, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sinn Fein doing well does not mean they will lead or even be in the government, if the other two parties decide to form a coalition. Calling them out right now would be a very pro-Sinn Fein position to take. 331dot (talk) 18:20, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt blurb 2: 3 party result is what needs saying (wish article lead said it too); worth saying now, rather than waiting. No wish to take or push a pro-Sinn Fein position; but I don't think talking, in the blurb, about another party, or mentioning no party at all is the right thing; blurb 2 balances things well, for me PaulBetteridge (talk) 11:38, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lead now says what it needs to - no quality concerns remain for me --PaulBetteridge (talk) 18:16, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A little surprisingly, no: see Dáil Éireann#Title para 3 - PaulBetteridge (talk) 17:40, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good spot, whoever caught that. Modest Genius talk 21:01, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Storm Ciara[edit]

No consensus to post. Stephen 22:12, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Storm Ciara (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least seven people have died across Europe from Storm Ciara, leaving hundreds of thousands without power. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
 Sherenk1 (talk) 10:40, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article seems to be of reasonable quality. It probably lacks the significance we are looking for — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose It is rare for EU to get storms like this, and for people to die, but I feel this is rather minor in the scale of thing. I am not outright opposed to this being posted, I just this its not as major an event as typhoons and hurricanes. (also updated death toll to 7 per BBC). --Masem (t) 15:39, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. It's certainly been windy here, and there has been plenty of travel disruption, but the destruction has been fairly minor in world terms albeit tragic for those directly affected. I don't think we would post a tropical cyclone or hurricane that had this level of impact. Modest Genius talk 16:07, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it was blustery and trains were cancelled and a handful sadly died. Not significant in the big weather scheme of things. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:24, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[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) CIA code-breaking revelations[edit]

No consensus to post. SpencerT•C 03:03, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: C-52 (cipher machine) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Investigations revealed how the C-52 cipher machine had an intentional backdoor, allowing CIA and BND to read intercepted communication for much of the 20th century. (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, Deutsche Welle
Credits:
 --bender235 (talk) 18:40, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 10[edit]

February 10, 2020 (2020-02-10) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime
Politics and elections

(Closed) International football / soccer all-time record[edit]

Consensus is against posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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
Articles: Christine Sinclair (talk · history · tag) and List of international goals scored by Christine Sinclair (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Christine Sinclair breaks the all-time international goalscoring record in international football, with 186 career goals. (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Guardian CNN Fox News

At the CONCACAF tournament, Christine Sinclair shattered the all-time goalscoring record for any soccer/international football player, male or female, of any country. While the record was broken earlier in the tournament, she scored an additional goal before the tournament ended yesterday. (She did not score in the final game.) In the blurb I linked directly to her page, a second optional link in the template is to the list of her goals. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 21:19, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment we've posted a few soccer records in the past including world cup goal record and I think Messi's most goals in a season. This would be a great chance to combat systemic bias. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:59, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose incremental change to record, not encyclopedic, just tabloid. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 22:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose if this were a Soccer encycopedia, this should absolutely make ITN; since it isn't, I'm against it. If we post this then a lot of similar records would be postable, e.g. "most goals scored in friendlies", "most international goals by defenders", "most own goals scored in international competition", etc. Banedon (talk) 23:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Apart from being incremental, records like this can be a function of how long a player has been playing. Sinclair has been playing international matches for 20 years, which is 9 goals a year. Black Kite (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I must say, I am bemused by the "definition" of systemic bias used here, as well as by the types of comparisons being made ... especially given that WP has a wonderful series of articles on cognitive bias. That being said, your reactions thus far are in no way surprising. I have no doubt someone is already itching to tell me that if I already knew this, why did I bother posting? Truth be known, I keep hoping for a shred of genuine objective analysis to show up, if only to demonstrate that it is not utterly extinct. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 02:28, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    All of the blurbs, and four of the RDs currently in the box feature men. ITN overwhelmingly features male subjects. Featuring a woman who broke a record in the worlds most popular sport -- especially since we feature Sachin Somethingahar batting whatever 100 centuries are in cricket -- would be a way to counter that. Thanks for flaming me, the only one who wasn't outright opposed (I'd not had time to actually read the article). I hope you feel better. I guess we can snow close this now. --LaserLegs (talk) 02:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That would have meant more with a vote, LaserLegs ... especially since your phrasing actually parsed as the opposite of what you are saying here. "Systemic bias", as you said it previously, comes across as WP is biased toward posting soccer records -- which, you will notice, the subsequent comments followed up. You said nothing whatsoever about gender until now, and neither has anyone else. Sorry, but I can only judge based on what you actually write. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 02:39, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Did I just wander into an episode of Dynasty? 75.188.224.208 (talk) 02:47, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    ?? I ask because I am not that familiar with television shows generally (cut the cord without substituting subscriptions), and I am curious as to the application of the reference. Tell me on my talk page if it is off-topic here. I am curious, and I do want to understand. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Black Kite's observation that this record is a function of longevity more than anything else. Lepricavark (talk) 03:52, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose rather trivial. Unfortunately this doesn't appear to be DYK eligible, otherwise I would have suggested it for there. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Probably moot at this point but it's worth noting we've posted association football records before—and for domestic football which plays more games and therefore could theoretically break records more easily, too. I don't see that this is less noteworthy for ITN than Messi's season record, or any of the cricket records already mentioned. And yes, I'm aware consensus can change, as it seems to be doing, but that's my reasoning. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ˣ 11:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is really good (GA quality) and story is being covered by major news outlets. Can't think of any criteria that this doesn't meet. --Jayron32 13:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Per TRM, Banedon. Not widely significant. Sca (talk) 15:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not a big fan of "career"/"lifetime" records as an ITN, since as long as you stay in the sport and do well, you can potentially surpass it; it is the per game or per season where you have a fixed time to break records that make more sense to consider significant. Or if there's a clear indication that the sport considers a specific record metric to be important (eg the 4 minute mile). --Masem (t) 15:28, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not actually that remarkable considering she has nearly 300 caps.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:50, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Posted) RD: Waqas Hasan[edit]

Article: Waqar Hasan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPNcricinfo
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: The last surviving member of Pakistan's inaugural Test team. Guy in the Mall (talk) 18:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nixinova: - I've added a line about it and a quote from the PCB of his death. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:43, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 92nd Academy Awards[edit]

Proposed image
Articles: 92nd Academy Awards (talk · history · tag) and Parasite (2019 film) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Parasite wins four Oscars including Best Picture and Best Director (Bong Joon-ho pictured) at the 92nd Academy Awards. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Parasite wins four Oscars including Best Picture (director Bong Joon-ho pictured), the first foreign-language film to do so, at the 92nd Academy Awards.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Parasite (director Bong Joon-ho pictured) wins four Oscars at the 92nd Academy Awards, including Best Picture, the first foreign-language film to do so.
Alternative blurb III: ​ At the 92nd Academy Awards, Parasite (director Bong Joon-ho pictured) wins Best Picture and three other awards.
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Article is building out beyond the basic lists as the show progresses. Masem (t) 04:26, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support alternative blurb. MSN12102001 (talk) 04:36, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added the 2nd blurb because I thought the other one was a bit awkward to read. Anyway, Support due it being done every year and for the milestone. Mount Patagonia (talk) 04:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The film's article looks very good so I'm including it as a target. --Masem (t) 04:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. --Wow (talk) 04:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 2nd alt blurb The historic nature of the win should be noted & that blurb is less awkwardly worded. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 04:51, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The winning film's title isn't usually bolded. Kingsif (talk) 04:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Usually because the film's article is not in good shape for posting. I stated above I think Parasite is in above-average state for front page, so that's included in the nomination. --Masem (t) 04:59, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt3 A standard blurb was used for the BAFTA 1917 win (record wins, also won Best Director), so a standard one should be used here. Added alt3 in standard format. Kingsif (talk) 04:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Record wins is one thing, but we're talking a major first here, the first non-English film to win Best Picture, which wasn't the case for the BAFTA nom. --Masem (t) 04:59, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, it's my opinion that the standard format should be used, I guess it's not yours. While first non-English Best Picture Academy Award win is a big step for the US, I don't feel like it should be considered with the ITN/R nom. Kingsif (talk) 05:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt2. Not just a "big step for the US" but historic. Howard the Duck (talk) 05:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt2 blurb. Historic. The first Foreign Lang Best Picture is more notable for ITN as a highlight than the Oscars themselves. Sleath56 (talk) 05:15, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Either alt2/3. It should be noted why this is significant. Gotitbro (talk) 05:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The grammar in the first two alt blurbs is sloppy. The phrase "the first foreign-language film to do so" is being used as an appositive of "Best Picture"; the phrase is really meant to describe Parasite. The sentences need to be restructured. Zagalejo^^^ 05:35, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • While discussing how to word the fact that it was the first international film, I will post, and add that it is a South Korean movie. Feel free to change later. --Tone 07:14, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppoze for now. No real commentary on the event. Once it's up to scratch k. That regard, I would support Alt2 including bolding of Parasite.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt 1 or alt 2; it is important to mention that Parasite is the first ever foreign-language film to win best picture. NorthernFalcon (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support any blurb that mentions that Parasite is the first ever foreign-language film to wen Oscar for Best Picture and this is exactly the main focus of all news in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose. There's still very little prose on the actual ceremony itself - just a few sentences and a pile of tables, at least one of which is unsourced. Black Kite (talk) 13:32, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Looking at the previous years' (we have not missed posting these over the last 5 years from what I can see), there's not much more than can be expected to be added. The most lacking information is the "Ceremony Information" and comparing that to 91st Academy Awards: yes, the "box office performance" table is missing but that doesn't seem to be essential to the actual ceremony, and because the Academy early on made the decision to go with no host, there's no need for a "Host selection" section, leaving only ratings/viewership which might come today or tomorrow, the way those work. And having watched the ceremony myself, w/ no host, the Presenters section is basically a simplified recap of the event - there was little else to say outside of things like Enimem's surprise performance (which I know I added already to the article). Sourcing can be fixed, but the only table outside counting nom/wins that isn't sourced is the Performers which I think already is the same as the Presenters source, I'd have to check, but there's plenty of "live-blog" RS coverage of the show too to pull from if needed. --Masem (t) 14:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      Looking it again, it turns out that many of the ceremonies, such as 89th Academy Awards are actually classified as featured lists. So are these articles actually lists rather than articles? And if so, are they actually eligible for ITN? (That's not a rhetorical question - I don't recall seeing lists at bolded targets before, but it might be fine). If it's classified as a list, then a full write-up isn't necessary I suppose.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      I agree the awards article is very bare bones and mostly table. Whether a list qualifies for an ITN blurb is an interesting conundrum which probably requires a more detailed discussion on WT:ITN. It could be dodged for now by simply de-bolding that link; the article on the film itself is good enough to be bold on its own. Modest Genius talk 15:48, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      But, the ITNR is the Awards, and again, compared to the past several years, the current article is not missing anything that can be currently added (no host selection process, nothing yet on ratings/viewership). It's not like a sporting event ,where a higher-level summary of the event can be written. In terms of elements like controversies or the like, there's nothing I can immediately recall unique to this specific awards (the long term stigma of #oscarstoowhite still hung over it). The fair question to ask is what else realistically can be added that otherwise is not already covered by both the general facet of the awards and the ceremony itself? --Masem (t) 17:42, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      I agree that more needs to be done for these ceremonies. We should at least start a discussion which establishes whether a series of tables is sufficient enough for ITNR. And then we need to broaden that discussion out to other tabular ITNRs such as Templeton Prize. If it's good enough for the Oscars to just be a load of tables, albeit in a new article, then it's good enough for an existing featured list to be updated with a tabular update only. One presumes.... The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      I'm going to suggest taking this to ITN talk because that raises some ideas that better aligns academic and entertainment awards, but this specifically means a likely change in ITNR to have the target article(s) be the award winning thing, and not the award/award list/ceremony itself as the target. I can see that as a solution in the future. --Masem (t) 17:52, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting comment It's a little late now, but as this is still a ITN blurb, is there any reason why the point about this being the first foreign-language Best Picture hasn't been added yet? It's the most predominant point of the story in all RS. Sleath56 (talk) 04:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Removed) Remove: 2019–20 Australian bushfire season[edit]

Article: 2019–20 Australian bushfire season (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: Thankfully much of the bushfire area has received record-breaking rain over the weekend which has extinguished most of the fires. Updates to the article have petered out as the focus moves from fire to floods. Stephen 01:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not easy to get the wording right. The worst of the fires that led to this being part of ITN have been extinguished by heavy rain, but the 2019–20 Australian bushfire season is far from over. The second deadliest day of fires in Australia's history in fact happened on 16 February, later than today's date, back in 1983. HiLo48 (talk) 06:34, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add: 2019–20 East Africa locust infestation[edit]

Articles: 2019–20 East Africa locust infestation (talk · history · tag) and 2019–20 Pakistan locust infestation (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: It seems there is a locust infestation ongoing in Africa and Pakistan. 190.189.120.70 (talk) 23:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 9[edit]

February 9, 2020 (2020-02-09) (Sunday)
Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Mirella Freni[edit]

Article: Mirella Freni (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
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: Soprano, "Matchless Italian prima donna", known as Puccini's Mimi. - References were mostly useless (IMDb, YT) but hopefully replaced. Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Yi Hae-won[edit]

Article: Yi Hae-won (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [23]
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: Head of the Royal House of South Korea Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Margareta Hallin[edit]

Article: Margareta Hallin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [24]
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.

 BabbaQ (talk) 14:06, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 8[edit]

February 8, 2020 (2020-02-08) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Volker Spengler[edit]

Article: Volker Spengler (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Die Zeit
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: Actor best known for films by Fassbinder, especially Erwin/Elvira. - I expanded. Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2020 (UTC) (t) 22:38, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Robert Conrad[edit]

Article: Robert Conrad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline Hollywood
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 best known for Wild Wild West. As typical, -ology section needs sourcing but rest of body seems okay. Masem (t) 22:38, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pole Vault World Record[edit]

Article: Armand Duplantis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Sweden’s Armand Duplantis breaks the World Record in pole vault with 6.17 in Torun, Poland (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In pole vault, Armand Duplantis breaks the world record with a vault of 6.17 metres (20.2 ft)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

 BabbaQ (talk) 21:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Not a majorly important event.  Nixinova   T   C   00:39, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle. I think broken records in the major track and field events are notable enough for posting. And we did post it the last time it was broken. The only thing is, there seems to be some confusion about the categories of records. We have articles describing an overall record as well as a separate indoor record. But the official World Athletics website lists indoor and outdoor as the categories. Our "overall" list seems to WP:SYNTH the two lists together, creating something that may not be the official record. Someone who knows more about this may be able to clarify though.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:04, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nom for the posting in 2014 at the time the record had stood for 21 years. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:23, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pole vault#History says: 'In 2000, IAAF rule 260.18a (formerly 260.6a) was amended, so that "world records" (as opposed to "indoor world records") can be set in a facility "with or without roof".' This means the overall record was also broken. Men's pole vault world record progression follows the official https://www.worldathletics.org/records/by-progression/15143?type=2 by marking records set indoors with 'i'. The new rule was not applied to older jumps. Both records since then were set indoors. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The arguments in favor of this are strong: the record is world-wide; it is irrespective of condition (indoor/outdoor/gender/etc.); the new record replaces records set in 2014, 2009 and 1993, so it is likely to stand some time (9+/-5 yr); there have been (apparently) only 2 other people throughout the whole, long history of the sport to come within 10 cm of the record; the sport is widely appreciated (it is an Olympic component).130.233.2.197 (talk) 10:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per IP:130 above. An Olympic sport is not really "niche". Martinevans123 (talk) 12:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, not ready yet. Unlike some sports, this is only the second time the pole vault record has been broken in 25 years. It's not a hugely popular sport, but it is one that most people are familiar with, if only from the Olympics. However, the nominated article has just one line of update and the rest of it is essentially WP:PROSELINE. That needs substantial improvement before it could appear in ITN. Adding altblurb. Modest Genius talk 12:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Pulled) RD: Orson Bean[edit]

Article: Orson Bean (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LA Times, Yahoo News, Breaking News, NY Times, Hollywood Reporter
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.

 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality - a few isolated prose statements need sources and the ology is unsourced. Also, as I'm sure this is going to come up, while an "unusual death", Bean was neither in his prime nor was near the top of his field, so an RD mention is fine here, not a blurb. --Masem (t) 14:27, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All of the statements are sourced. If you have specifics, please elucidate. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
First para of Early Life, first three para of Acting career... It's not too hard to see missing refs at the end of paragraphs. --Masem (t) 14:39, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. You and I are working from different versions. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:57, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Television appearances still need to be sourced. I don't know how much TV Guide covers of what's there. --Masem (t) 15:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Seriously, you want every one of his credits referenced? WTH? Anything else? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:03, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is the expectation for actors, particularly for any show where they were not a main actor (particularly for cameo/one-shot appearances) as otherwise that failed WP:V. The bulk of RDs on actors aren't posted because the -ology sections are unsourced. I just tried to spot check the TV guide list all the appearances on the WP article aren't in there, so we technically need those others documented. Also as a point, that list is mixing TV and Film appearances: They should be separated. --Masem (t) 16:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since no one has yet proposed a "blurb", what exactly are you opposing?
Or what blurb do you suggest?
If you have better and comprehensive sources, by all means, put them in. this article should be able to be better developed, when the Sunday obituaries surface. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:40, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To you opposers, Saad, Nardine (February 8, 2020). "OBITUARIES Actor Orson Bean, local theater mainstay who rose to fame as a 1950s TV personality, dies". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved February 9, 2020. looks like a reliable source to me. If that is not good enough, then close up your shop.7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:26, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You folks cut out sources and marked it all up. You ignored the other sources. I will not call out what you did by name. Edit warring here is nonsense. Live with it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:12, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cutting out unreliable sources and adding tags for needed updates is positive work that should be commended, not criticized. Our intent here is to improve the project; posting to the front page is secondary. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:38, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strikes me that the unreliable sources were correctly removed and that we were left with a dog of an article. It shouldn't have been posted under such conditions. The pull was 100% spot on. I'm surprised to see such an experienced user arguing against that. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2020 Nakhon Ratchasima shooting[edit]

Article: 2020 Nakhon Ratchasima shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Thai soldier has shot dead at least 20 people in and around city also known as Korat, north-east of Bangkok. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At least twenty people are killed in a mass shooting in Korat, Thailand.
News source(s): BBC, AFP, Guardian, Reuters, AP
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Just created. Incident is still ongoing Sherenk1 (talk) 12:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

February 7[edit]

February 7, 2020 (2020-02-07) (Friday)
Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Lucille Eichengreen[edit]

Article: Lucille Eichengreen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): kz-gedenkstaette-neuengamme.de + Polish
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: Holocaust survivor, who was active to let us not forget! - But please look at Santi below first. Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:00, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 6[edit]

February 6, 2020 (2020-02-06) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime
  • Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune pardons a further 6,000 prisoners after doing the same to another 3,000 two days ago. The mass pardons this week follow an offer of dialogue with the protesters, the release of detainees arrested at demonstrations, the formation of a committee to amend the constitution and meetings with opposition figures. (Reuters)
  • A man is charged with raping a five-year-old girl inside of the United States embassy in New Delhi. The high-security mansion in the Indian capital is one of the most secure in Delhi, with multiple layers of manned and electronic security. (The Guardian)

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Nello Santi[edit]

Article: Nello Santi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT + others
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: The last maestro of Italian opera, 60 years with Opernhaus Zürich, had a contract for a 2020 production - I expanded a stub. Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:25, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Qasim al-Raymi[edit]

Article: Qasim al-Raymi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News, BBC
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: Leader of Al-Qaeda in Yemen. Word had it that he was killed in a drone strike around Jan 30, but today, the US Gov't made this statement. There is no confirmed date when he was killed, but this should be considered the date to post. Masem (t) 05:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Claudio Bonadio[edit]

Article: Claudio Bonadio (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [25] [26]
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: Argentine judge in charge of some relevant judicial cases, overall in the later years. Updating. Alsoriano97 talk 20:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Li Wenliang[edit]

Article: Li Wenliang (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN The New York Times The Guardian
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: The first person to warn the public of the 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak. MSN12102001 (talk) 18:40, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jhon Jairo Velásquez[edit]

Article: Jhon Jairo Velásquez (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CBS News, NY Post, Daily Star, Daily Mail
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: Medellín Cartel's most famous and prolific hitman --SirEdimon (talk) 18:22, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ospedaletto Lodigiano derailment[edit]

Like the train, this one is not going to reach its destination. Mjroots (talk) 11:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Ospedaletto Lodigiano derailment (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A high-speed train derails at Ospedaletto Lodigiano, Italy. Two people are killed and 27 are injured. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
 Mjroots (talk) 13:20, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[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) Christina Koch[edit]

Closed as No Consensus -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:48, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Christina Koch (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Achieving the longest continuous spaceflight by a woman, astronaut Christina Koch returns to earth. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ American astronaut Christina Koch returns to earth after 328 days aboard the International Space Station, achieving the longest continuous spaceflight by a woman.
News source(s): BBC News CNN
Credits:
 Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Considering how dangerous space travel can be, I'd agree that this should qualify for a blurb on ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 13:20, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as incremental. The old record was only two years old, and four men have had longer flights. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:25, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Just 12 days short of the all-time US record set by Scott Kelly. This should be in the blurb. MSN12102001 (talk) 14:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment in the past, ITN has carried women who broke records, it's very odd now to somehow argue "incremental" is a reason not to run women's records. Especially since the thing itself is of ongoing impact: women staying in space and being able to stay in space, is an actively ongoing area of scientific research and human endeavor-- Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    "Incremental" is a valid default argument against running any new record, because a record of some sort is set every single day. This would need to be overcome by things like a large increase from the prior (a la Neymar's contract) or the breaking of an old record (Hugh Duffy's single season batting average). GreatCaesarsGhost 15:39, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    A space walk is considerably more dangerous than playing baseball by several orders of magnitude. That in particular should serve as a mitigating factor in terms of notability.--WaltCip (talk) 15:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Default? Seems you are merely enshrining a personal definition for large and old. In human history, a day in space is large and a month is forever-long-ago. Drawing on sports for grasping what's going seems hardly sensible. Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The default for all stories is don't post, because we only post a small portion of events. There are some guidelines for what sort of story overcomes this default (e.g. ITN/R) but mostly it is personal definitions. Just because you disagree with me does not mean I am "grasping" or my arguments are "odd." GreatCaesarsGhost 18:26, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry. I think you misunderstood in part, and a "personal definition" is basically the exemplar of idiosyncratic (odd). But more than that, multiple RS say this is significant, so there is no reason to use what's claimed to be personal definition. (On the misunderstood part, "grasping" was used in my comment just as a synonym for "understanding.") -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Greatcaesarsghost. This isn't really an "amazing feat" sort of a record, it's just that they set the duration of the spaceflight and that's how long she was up for. Not really a groundbreaking or momentous achievement in its own right.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Maybe if she had been up 12 days longer to take the "all-time US record" from Scott Kelly, but probably not, because space doesn't care about nationality (or gender). – Muboshgu (talk) 16:07, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article quality is fantastic, reliable news sources are covering the story. I can find nothing wrong with posting this by the criteria. --Jayron32 16:17, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. The article is fine, but I just don't find this a particularly interesting record. The longest time in space overall would be notable, but breaking that down by gender or nationality seems pointless. We didn't post the first all-female spacewalk, which was part of the same mission [29]. Modest Genius talk 16:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Doesn't seem particularly significant in the history of space exploration. – Sca (talk) 17:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
!!!!!ROWING KLAXXON!!!!! --LaserLegs (talk) 20:41, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, some would say this is somewhat vexatious and pointy, but certainly not me. An incremental record change for spaceflight is hardly up there with anything of real significance. Certainly none of it is as important as college football, let's be clear about that.... !! The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does this have to be the longest spaceflight in order to be remarkable? Disregarding whether women's achievements in space deserve special consideration for now, surely not all acheivements have to be records to be notable. Realtable (talk) 00:55, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be honest I wouldn't find the longest spacefight very notable either, unless it's a proof of concept of the "now we know humans can survive a flight to Mars" kind. I don't see gender as much of a factor. Perhaps if there's something like "it had been thought possible that prolonged spaceflight renders humans infertile. We know from male spaceflight that this is not true for men, and Christina Koch's experience indicates this is not true for women either". Without this kind of discovery, I just don't find it very interesting. Banedon (talk) 01:19, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. From the PC point of view, "by a woman" would seem rather sexist. – Sca (talk) 17:53, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But it is remarked upon, (see eg., "single longest stay in space by a woman"; "breaking an iconic space record for womankind"; and multiple news sources). Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'm more a fan of humankind, though I do like women (if they can stand me). – Sca (talk) 21:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, the fact that the person in question is female has, as far as I'm aware, nothing to do with performance as an astronaut. (Both sexes are weightless in space, and physical strength doesn't seem to be a factor.) – Sca (talk) 21:44, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 5[edit]

February 5, 2020 (2020-02-05) (Wednesday)
Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) 2020 Van avalanches[edit]

Article: 2020 Van avalanches (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 41 people are killed in a series of avalanches in Bahçesaray, Van, Turkey. (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Took out a minibus LaserLegs (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

!!!! SPACE STATION KLAXON !!!! --LaserLegs (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's at least some actual meaning and logic in my opposition. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:04, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted to RD) RD: Kirk Douglas[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Kirk Douglas (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American actor Kirk Douglas dies at the age of 103. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ American actor Kirk Douglas dies. After an impoverished childhood, he starred in 90 films, helped end the Hollywood Blacklist, and was one of the last remaining from Hollywood's Golden Age of cinema.
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter, Washington Post, The Guardian, ABC, CBS, LA Times, NY Times, Variety, BBC
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.

 BabbaQ (talk) 23:32, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the customary standard for a blurb at ITN. What we generally judge is their place in history and their rank or importance within their field. If public mourning were the standard we might as well eliminate almost everybody outside of current celebrities and heads of state. In this case; Douglas was by any reasonable measure in the absolute top rank of film legends. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ad Orientem, That's not how I judge death blurbs. I judge it based on whether the death is an obituary or the death is a news story. Kobe Bryant is another good example of that. Kirk Douglas is of course a legend of Hollywood. But, I doubt we're going to see the same level of coverage for him as we saw for Kobe. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So you're just choosing to pretend the "major transformative leader" qualifier doesn't exist? GreatCaesarsGhost 12:51, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For deaths where the person's life is the main story, where the news reporting of the death consists solely of obituaries, or where the update to the article in question is merely a statement of the time and cause of death, the "recent deaths" section is usually used. What is your evidence that this is an exception to that? Is there something in sources I can read about the manner of his death attracting a lot of attention? What about real-world events memorializing him that we'd need to mention in the blurb? Have there been significant numbers of those? The "major transformative leader" qualification is not a synonym for "I really like him and personally think he's important to me". To demonstrate that, you'd need evidence in the form of source text that shows that either the manner of his death, or the reactions to it, were above-and-beyond the normal "So-and-so died at age of such and such". What is your evidence for that? --Jayron32 14:35, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Daniel Case (talk) 01:33, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The word "legendary" was used in a number of quotes in the article and as cited headlines from CBS and the LA Times. Without the word, it focuses more on his longevity. --Light show (talk) 06:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Posted to RD while blurb discussion continues. El_C 06:21, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
While I didn't add most of those, I can cite probably all of them in about 15 minutes if there's a way to. --Light show (talk) 07:06, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb some very famous people, regardless of how old they were when they died, are worthy of blurbs based on their notability alone. —Jonny Nixon (talk) 07:02, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • PULL – What the fuck? This is a shamble of an article. So much unsourced crap. No mention of Natalie Wood. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 07:17, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I wouldn't really expect it to mention Natalie Wood, per WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP. The source of that story is apparently an anonymous blogger, and the major reliable sources don't mention it. You're right that it shouldn't have been posted until the citations were fixed though.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:34, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. The rules say: "For deaths where the person's life is the main story, where the news reporting of the death consists solely of obituaries ... the "recent deaths" section is usually used". He was a relatively major figure in his field, but per the comments on Daniel arap Moi below, not transformative in the Thatcher, Mandela mould. If that's the standard, then let's apply it across the board, not give Hollywood actors a free pass because more people have heard of them.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:20, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's felt that ending the Hollywood Black List is transformative, as implied in today's LA Times headline, which focused on that fact, .."Spartacus’ star helped end Hollywood blacklist." --Light show (talk) 07:34, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Old actor dies. Not that important. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:28, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb - from his own article, he was ranked 17th in the list of greatest male American film actors of the classical film era. That's a very specific field that he failed to top or come close to topping; one wonders how far down he would end up if the field was opened up to all actors, of all nationalities, and of all genders. He also failed to win an acting Oscar. That's not significant enough to merit a blurb. However, I will grant that he merited a blurb discussion. NorthernFalcon (talk) 07:32, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at AFI's ranking, the first 25 were all major stars. --Light show (talk) 07:59, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb helping end the Hollywood blacklist is a major transformative event of the American film industry, enough that it pushes him over imo. GuzzyG (talk) 10:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    A major transformative event "of the American film industry" indeed. But not of a major transformative leader in the world as a whole, as required by the guideline. There are only a handful of people eligible for such blurbs, and they are mainly the Thatcher, Mandela types, not every major Hollywood star of yesteryear.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Amakuru, you're really testing the limits of good faith. The guideline clearly states leaders "in their field," not "the world as a whole." GreatCaesarsGhost 12:51, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GreatCaesarsGhost: Fine, I've struck that part. I'm not sure why you're accusing me of bad faith, but it was a bad idea for me to cite that page anyway, as it was written two months ago by one editor and may not necessarily represent what actually happens on the ground. I think setting the bar high for deaths through old-age is a good idea, either way.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:56, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral on blurb - I'm really not sure where to fall on this. He definitely was an accomplished Hollywood actor, but does that alone qualify him for blurb status? If we use Kobe Bryant and Carrie Fisher as a benchmark, the answer is yes. But we also did not post a blurb for Terry Jones, who was also retired and aging when he passed away. I know one thing for sure though; I completely oppose alt-blurb 1. That blurb sounds as though it's pleading to the reader for understanding as to why a blurb was posted, to the point of puffery, and many readers outside the United States won't have any clue what the Hollywood Blacklist or Hollywood's Golden Age is, or how relevant it is to contemporary society outside the U.S..--WaltCip (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb He was indeed at the top of his field and that field is acting, which is not an insignificant one and involves millions of people worldwide. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comment - By the way, I realize that this is something where TRM and I are going to be at odds, but we really need some clarification on death blurbs in terms of what constitutes being "transformative". Amakuru above uses the oft-repeated Thatcher-Mandela status, one that Kobe Bryant himself would fail if his death were not so sudden and unusual, as he never aspired to high office outside of his professional basketball career. But many people in that discussion argued that he was indeed transformative in his own sport. So there desperately needs to be some clarity on how "transformative" someone needs to be, either in the scale of their profession or in global society as a whole, rather than having it be up to the interpretation of whomever shows up to participate in a discussion that day.--WaltCip (talk) 13:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I would hold that no such clarity could ever be found. Given the insane fervor, erratic history, and constant whataboutism they cause, it would seem prudent to abandon RD blurbs all together (bearing in mind that IAR could be invoked when needed). We didn't NEED to blurb Kobe, Prince, Fisher, Thatcher, or Mandela. Trying to parse the borderline cases will always reflect the biases of the relatively small group that posts here. Seriously, we almost blurbed a Python a few weeks ago. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:19, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Clarification is easy. Just provide sources that show that 1) the manner of his death was significant enough that it received significant coverage and thus bears special note or 2) The events after his death such as significant memorial commemorations and the like, also need note. We don't need to decide for ourselves who is "transformative". The reliable sources will do that for us by reporting those things. We don't even need to personally have ever heard of the person who died. Just be able to read the reliable sources people provide, and judge by the evidence ourselves. --Jayron32 14:39, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a reasonable argument, but obit writers tend to be most hagiographic when covering subjects that are the least known, as the audience needs convincing. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No, obits, no matter how much purple prose they use, are not memorial commemorations. I mean, are there events where thousands of people showed up? Did someone create a makeshift statue where thousands of people have been laying wreathes? Did the funeral cause a riot that had to be broken up by police? That sort of thing would need explaining in a blurb. The existence of an obit means nothing for blurb-worthiness. Everyone gets an obit. --Jayron32 15:45, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep in mind, there are two allowances for RD blurbs, transformative is one, the other is "unusual death", and that is why Kobe was covered (as was the case with Prince, David Bowie, and Robin Williams), though obviously the unusual death needs to be of a significantly recognizable figure, not some random B-list actor. Douglas' death here is clearly only to be considered if he was a "transformative" one. --Masem (t) 14:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    As noted above, quite a few major news media have considered his helping end, or ending the Hollywood blacklist, a major contribution of his career, considering he acted in and produced the films involved, ie. headlines in NBC, LA Times. Although some, such as Variety, raised his influence above transformative: "Kirk Douglas: A Golden-God Movie Star Who Was Mythic Enough to Symbolize America." IOW, over here, being raised in poverty as an immigrant ragman's son, supporting his mother and six sisters, is even more than Leonard Cohen claimed, and he was given a blurb and image. Morphing from a frog to a prince is fairly transformative, IMO.--Light show (talk) 17:20, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Transformative or not, his life is the story, not his death, and therefore RD is more appropriate.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:25, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb – Per Masem, Muboshgu, P-K3. A widely known (but arguably not "transformative") actor dying of extreme old age may be be a cinema milestone (gravestone?), but is not blurb-level news. R.I.P. – Sca (talk) 13:38, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I find your gallows humor to be quite grave.--WaltCip (talk) 13:40, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Must you be so funereal about it? – Sca (talk) 13:45, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb None of the circumstances surrounding the death need additional explanation that a blurb would be necessary for. RD is fine. --Jayron32 14:28, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There are several free images of Douglas if it's determined that a blurb is appropriate. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:56, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb. Successful but not revolutionary actor dies in old age, long after he stopped working. He didn't even win the field's top award (Oscar for Best Actor). This is exactly what RD was supposed to be for. Falls well short of the influence of Thatcher/Mandela, which is where our bar should be. Modest Genius talk 16:59, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know who invented the Mandela Thatcher standard, but it is nowhere in our guidelines and has never been an accepted standard. Nor should it be as it would effectively block out almost everyone from getting a death blurb. Douglas is being widely described as a Hollywood legend and the greatest male actor of the post World War II era. He was instrumental in breaking the Hollywood blacklist. If that's not enough then we need to seriously consider doing away with death blurbs with the possible exception of heads of state/government who die in office. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:38, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody "invented" it, it's just a rule of thumb that's been built up by precedent over the years. And ITN doesn't have very many fixed rules, which is both a bane and a good thing, depending how you look at it. But it's always been the accepted standard that only very major figures get a blurb when they die of old age. Thatcher and Mandela are examples of the calibre of figure that qualifies, and there are very few examples outside of that level.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He didn't like and soon defied the studio system. Using his own money, he became a solo producer, actor, writer. "I make my own way. Nobody's my boss. Nobody's ever been my boss." The Academy wasn't pleased, which is a reason he didn't win. That same defiant attitude affected Orson Welles's career after Citizen Kane, yet it's now considered the #1 "greatest American film" by the AFI. Awards often have a political aspect. --Light show (talk) 19:47, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb – I have no opinion on article quality, as I've repeatedly demonstrated that the regulars push a purely superficial view of such (and exactly what percentage of the community was even aware of the RFC they constantly refer to, anyway?). I did, however, recently read WP:6MILLION, where once again we throw around that Jimbo quote about "the sum of all human knowledge" as if it actually means something. How can any of us claim to be achieving "the sum of all human knowledge" when so much weight is given to spamming whatever the news media is pushing today and not reflecting an appropriate historical perspective, once again shown in numerous rationales in this discussion? Not buying it. Look at all the deceased people we portray as still living because local and regional news outlets have largely ceased covering deaths of notable people pertinent to their audiences. They must be drinking the same Kool-Aid as some of the editors in this discussion. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 04:12, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support picture We have a good PD picture of the subject which would improve the quality of the ITN section. The current picture displayed by ITN is of a smirking Donald Trump. That picture has been used before and, this time, it illustrates the failure of the impeachment – a non-event which the public tired of long ago. Note also that Kirk Douglas is rated as a vital topic and that it was the top read article on the English, French and German Wikipedias yesterday and probably many of the others that I haven't checked too. Michael Douglas and Eric Douglas are big too – all having many times more readers than the impeachment. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:28, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There is also File:Kirk Douglas 1969.jpg, which could brighten up the page, in contrast to the mood nowadays. --Light show (talk) 17:47, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I too like this suggestion, though I can't claim neutrality. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Photo swapped. We have to wait for the other KD photo to get cascading protection. I too am tired of seeing Trump. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I remember correctly the previous image had been there for ages. Needless to say, I still think it was a good idea (Cornell had been discussed for a blurb but it was very no-consensus) and I think it's a good idea here as well. Black Kite (talk) 00:52, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's an excellent compromise where (1) there isn't an obviously more current image illustrating the main news; and (2) the deceased falls into the grey area where a substantial group of editors are arguing for a blurb. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The photo of Trump had been up for ~48 hours, and did not illustrate the news item specifically. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Next time Wikimedia is seeking donations, you should withhold your contribution until Jimbo Wales announces an investigation into this matter. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. The entire world knows what Trump looks like, the image wasn't exactly providing the reader with useful information. Black Kite (talk) 13:33, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And to think we passed up the opportunity to run a good one. – Sca (talk)
  • Comment I supported the blurb, but I appreciate that we've set the precedent that RDs can have pictures. Seeing as we're split nearly 50/50 on the blurb, an intermediate option is desirable. There is no reason for a rule saying that an RD cannot have a picture. Davey2116 (talk) 10:39, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Acquittal of Donald Trump[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Impeachment trial of Donald Trump (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States Senate votes to acquit President Donald Trump (pictured) on two articles of impeachment. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The United States Senate acquits President Donald Trump (pictured) of both articles of impeachment.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The United States Senate acquits President Donald Trump (pictured) of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
News source(s): AP, BBC, Guardian, AFP, Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating

 --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 21:19, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses[edit]

SNOW close. SpencerT•C 03:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Don't know, suggestions? (Post)
News source(s): See article
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Nominating for Peregrine Fisher on the talk page Banedon (talk) 00:04, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support putting 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries in ongoing; easily passes all the criteria. Davey2116 (talk) 01:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait / weak support The article is quite good; we wouldn't post the Iowa caucus results in normal circumstances, but the state party's incompetence here is noteworthy. In any case we should wait until the winner is determined for sure. As of this writing it's unclear when that will be. Davey2116 (talk) 01:41, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The winner was clearly Donald Trump. The loosers... pretty much everybody else. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose While what ends up happening in Iowa will have lingering effects on the rest of this election season, let's not pretend this has immediate, direct international impact to the world. In the US here, the situation is laughably ironic, with the promise of simplified voting having failed drastically on such a key race, but there's the immediacy of the situation compared to what the net result will be after the other 49 states have their primaries and we figure out who's running for the Democrats, which is the first potentially postable point for this election cycle. (and even then, we have to be well aware of the US Centricness of the world press particularly this cycle, everyone wants Trump out, but we're ITN and have to stay neutral and impartial here. --Masem (t) 01:50, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose posting the botched choosing of people from one state who will choose the nominee of a single political party be their candidate for POTUS. This is not USApedia. 331dot (talk) 02:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A small part of an ITN/R story – Muboshgu (talk) 02:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

February 4[edit]

February 4, 2020 (2020-02-04) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Volker David Kirchner[edit]

Article: Volker David Kirchner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SWR WK
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: German composer of operas and other music, Gilgamesh for EXPO 2000 - I updated the article for his 75th birthday, 2 years ago. Publisher Schott has a works list. Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: José Luis Cuerda[edit]

Article: José Luis Cuerda (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [30]
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: Influent and awarded Spanish filmmaker whose films have ended up being ones of most relevants in Spanish cinema, although article needing improving. Alsoriano97 talk 20:55, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Re-added) Ongoing: 2019 nCoV Outbreak[edit]

Article: 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This is about to roll off of ITN. I am sure that re-adding it to Ongoing is foregone, given the rapid state of news and global attention, but the nomination is here for procedure. Article is getting 100+ updates per day, many substantial, and is tracking the RSes very well. I have re-named the nomination to reflect what will probably be the eventual name of the article (after move) and to more accurately reflect the new name used in RSes. 130.233.2.197 (talk) 10:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd call it WP:COMMONSENSE. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:23, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we'd changed the rules because some contentious blurb stories had "automatically" rolled into OG and it's next to impossible to crowbar a story out of there. I see no reason why we can't build consensus to roll into OG when the blurb expires as part of the blurb nom. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:42, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, none of the ones that had were particularly contentious. Some people just feel like they need to be involved with every decision, and automatically object when they feel like they weren't asked, regardless of whether or not the decision was a good one. --Jayron32 13:35, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it's quite easy to remove a story from the ongoing section. You just need to 1) stop news organizations from reporting it and 2) stop Wikipedia editors from improving the article in the ongoing link. --Jayron32 13:36, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


  • Post-Posting Comment – With the China death toll (908→ 1,016) rising daily, and the number of cases outside China (350→ 460) growing – and with prime RS sites continuing to feature the story prominently [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] – it seems time to repost as a blurb. Understand the 'rolling off' issue, but updated versions could be re-posted as available. – Sca (talk) 15:19, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing removal: Impeachment trial of Donald Trump[edit]

consensus is to wait until after the final vote --Jayron32 17:06, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Impeachment trial of Donald Trump (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)
Nominator's comments: the article has not update many days ago as trial was ended. Thats a reason to remove this article from ongoing. 110.137.171.220 (talk) 08:25, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy oppose Trial isn't over, and it's been updated since the oldest blurb, which is Jan 30 coronavirus blurb.—Bagumba (talk) 09:24, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[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) RD: George Steiner[edit]

Article: George Steiner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51366053
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: Influential literary critic, public intellectual and Holocaust survivor. —Brigade Piron (talk) 07:40, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific? I agree the article could be more happily structured, but the referencing seems fairly good to me. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:27, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's a sprinkling of [citation needed] tags and the maintenance tag there for the mainly unreferenced "Awards and honors" section. This is a BLP so it simply can't be posted in its current state. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really covered by WP:BLP? Nothing in the article is "particularly [...] contentious or questionable material about the dead that has implications for their living relatives and friends". I agree that the article is not perfect, but there seems no particular logic behind many of the <citation needed> tags. As for awards, I would personally consider the section worth culling entirely. Do you agree? —Brigade Piron (talk) 13:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest it's better to reference the claims rather than simply cull them for the purposes of getting it onto the main page. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Daniel arap Moi[edit]

Posted as RD, no consensus for blurb. Stephen 03:26, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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: Daniel arap Moi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former Kenyan President Daniel arap Moi dies at the age of 95 (Post)
News source(s): KDRTV
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Former President of Kenya for 14 years. The news of his death still coming out. The article has several issues. The issues are resolved in my point of view. --SirEdimon (talk) 04:36, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and support Blurb, once the quality issues are sorted. A major transformative leader who dominated Kenyan life during his tenure. And I think it was 24 years, not 14.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:27, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: the quality issues (which are fairly minor) should be balanced against his importance in Kenyan history and the overall standard of African articles on Wikipedia. However, I do have reservations about the lead which steps around the repressive nature of his regime which is apparent elsewhere in the article —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:29, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Brigade Piron: I'm slowly working through the referencing issues in the article, hope to get that finished this afternoon, after which the article should pass for ITN on the citation front. Most of what's there now appears verifiable and basically accurate. Re the balance of the lead, do you have any particular suggestions, or aspects of the controversial regime which appear in the body and should be summarised in the lead? I can attempt to summarise those in the lead too.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:21, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose still needs references and most of the eponyms don't even have articles, how do we even know they're real? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:49, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I've split the others into a sub-list List of things named after Daniel arap Moi. That needs some referencing etc. but I don't suspect them of being fake.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:59, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support relatively little issues and some have been fixed, Weak Support for blurb. Juxlos (talk) 15:07, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I've fixed up the citations needed, so I think this is good to go now. I still think this is worth a blurb - definitely a very major figure in African politics for more than two decades, and nobody has objected to that yet - but will leave it up to the promoter to decide.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Article is ready now, and Moi was clearly a dominant figure in Kenya. Davey2116 (talk) 01:34, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 03:15, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb: Agree with Amakuru (and thanks for greatly improving the quality of the article). Highly influential figure in African politics -Zanhe (talk) 03:35, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upgraded to blurb. Disclaimer: I'm WP:INVOLVED here, because I !voted to support the blurb above, but with the current tally at 3.5 supports, and nobody having said they oppose the idea of a blurb, I'm making an WP:IAR WP:BOLD determination that there's a consensus for it. As usual, if anyone disagrees with this action then please holler in my general direction or revert and discuss, as you see fit. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:54, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb - this is getting weird by the day. I haven't seen more than a ticker about his death on TV & he gets a blurb. 39.50.212.206 (talk) 12:32, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's a bit too BOLD, given a) how long (and when) the nom was active, b) it was already "decisioned" by an editor, c) 3.5 supports does not demand quick action, and d) you are involved. I'm neutral on the case itself - he doesn't strike me as a transformative world leader, but maybe that's because "we" don't "let" Africans have that kind of influence. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree. This isn't worth pulling, but there should have been more input before turning the RD into a blurb. More generally, perhaps the 'recent deaths = yes' entry in the template should be switched to 'no' if there's the possibility of a blurb. I suspect a lot of ITN/C commenters gloss over the yellow RD nominations (I know I do, only reading the discussion in detail if it's someone I've heard of). Modest Genius talk 13:27, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Striking first point as I misread the timestamp - nom was active > 24 hours. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:23, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb, and let's stop posting extremely old people dying as blurbs. Say no to Jimmy Carter now. The readers can click on the name on the ticker. Abductive (reasoning) 13:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb Amakuru you should have posted as RD and let the blurb discussion continue until there was consensus for it. I support RD only, per Abductive.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:10, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, overlooked that it had already been posted as RD, but still, discussion should have continued.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:16, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pulled back to RD. I won't pretend I'm not disappointed, and I made the above posting in good faith, as the listing had been up for 30 hours already with unanimous support from four different users at the time. But hey ho, that's the way it goes I suppose. We probably need to nail down who exactly gets blurbs on their deaths, because there doesn't seem consensus on what the criteria should be.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:35, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indifferent to weak support for blurb I could go either way on a blurb for this one, leaning ever-so slightly toward a blurb. While DaM was an important leader on a regional scale, Jimmy Carter, on the other hand, I would strongly support a blurb when he dies, as a major, transformative world leader. 1779Days (talk) 15:05, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Moi wasn't just a former president, he ruled Kenya for decades and was a notable African politician. (Though this doesn't mean anything here at ITN) the article has been listed as Vital. Bush Sr. got a blurb and so did former Indian PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee, both died in their 90s. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:21, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb following my earlier comment above. Kenya is the sixth biggest country in Africa by population, and a regional power. I do not like blurbs for RD, but this is as good a candidate as any. Plus the article is now much improved. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:20, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Since all we can say is "he died", there's not reason to take up blurb space. The reason the RD section was created was to report deaths where nothing extra needs to be said other than "So and so died at the age of such and such". That's all we have here. Per the guidelines, For deaths where the person's life is the main story...the "recent deaths" section is usually used. I see no reason to deviate from that in this case. --Jayron32 17:41, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Blurbs for deaths should only be for people whose death becomes the news story, a la Mandela, Bowie, Thatcher, Carrie Fisher, Prince, etc. The death isn't a big news story. This is an old person dying, and just because he was a head of state does not mean he should get a blurb. Kenya's population isn't relevant to the nomination. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:45, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb – Ninety-five-year-old political figure, out of office nearly two decades, dies from medical/health causes. Normally I wouldn't support pulling a blurb once it's been posted, but this was highly borderline and there's a lot of real news out there. – Sca (talk) 18:04, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[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.

(Posted) RD: Willie Wood[edit]

Article: Willie Wood (American football) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [36]
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: Significant North American sports figure, first black QB in Pac 12 history, first black head coach in CFL. NFL hall of famer, 9x all-pro. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 13:53, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:07, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Far from it, MSGJ, the image is still in place on the article, despite Stephen removing it yesterday. This should not appear on our main page while it still has a copyrighted image on it.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Amakuru, The Rambling Man, MSGJ, Masem, Stephen, Pawnkingthree, PCN02WPS: There seems to be two issues here. (1) Having the article link on the main page because there are concerns about the image. (2) The image's non-free use rationale. Regarding (1), I have no prejudice to the article's removal from the main page. That's for you all to decide. Regarding (2), removing the image from the article doesn't do anything, nor is it rooted in policy. If there is a disputed non-free use rationale, then nominate the image at WP:FFD and make your case. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 3[edit]

(Posted) RD: Gene Reynolds[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Zhang Changshou[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Removed) Ongoing removal: Citizenship Amendment Act protests[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Yeah, apparently only topics like Brexit and Trump's impeachment (US-UK) are allowed to linger on for months as a coat hanger. This is a clear bias. --DBigXrayᗙ 09:49, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2019 Malawian general election[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Marked ready. Alt1 looks okay. – Sca (talk) 13:32, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 February 2 Template:Cob

(Closed) RD: Bernard Ebbers[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archive bottom

(Posted) Super Bowl LIV[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Template:U Events on the ITNR list do not need support on the merits/"support as ITNR"; this discussion is for evaluating the quality of the article. 331dot (talk) 12:13, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Template:U I think you must oppose it to include in ITN/R because this nomination only happens in single country, not multiple countries, like Wuhan coronavirus.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.137.171.220 (talk)
Please do not carry disagreements from one discussion to another. 331dot (talk) 12:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That is not why I am opposing. Please read my rationale again, closely.--WaltCip (talk) 13:12, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All posts must have proper sourcing. The sourcing requirements are not impacted (either way) by ITN/R status or the size of the article. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but when something has received as much publicity and analysis as the Super Bowl has, it really should not be that hard to find solid, reliable sources for every significant statement in the article.--WaltCip (talk) 13:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Trans: ... has received as much sportified hype. – Sca (talk) 15:05, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready. Unfortunately I have to agree with the opposes - there is a lot of unreferenced material there. I've added a bunch of Template:Tls; the game summary could also do with at least minimal sourcing. The statistics should be easy to source for those in the know (I'm not one). Modest Genius talk 12:46, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until the many citation issues have been fixed; I'm sure this won't take long for someone who knows the subject (i.e. not me). Black Kite (talk) 12:49, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I could understand the urge to post this if we were just waiting on recap and proper sourcing for that, but many of the sections on the lead-up to the game are lacking sources. That's a no-go. --Masem (t) 14:43, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – I seem to remember seeing a much worse Brexit article being posted in worse condition. The Brexit article only recently added a section in the body for the 31 January event and the section only has a single sentence about the actual major ITN-worthy event. This is what happens when we set our standards depending on our personal perception of importance. We look like hypocrites. Let's see what happens when North America wakes up. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 14:59, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • An blurb-worthy update could easily just be a sentence or two. The recent bump-back-to-blurb of the coronavirus due to the UN's declaration only needed one sentence and the sourcing to reflect that, because the rest of the article already existed and was in good shape. Same with Brexit. For sports events - not singling out the Super Bowl here - describing the event after it happens needs more than one sentence. The sporting event is the meat of the story, whereas in the other cases, it is just additional events atop the main existing one. And we know completing a recap is not impossible to do within 24hr or less when dedicated editors are on it (tip of hat to TRM and Boat Race here). No one is being a hypocrite here. --Masem (t) 15:06, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      But there was not even a single sentence when it was posted. Some of the very same people that opposed this item, supported posting Brexit without a single mention of the exit in the body of the article. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 18:17, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There are no unreferenced blocks of text anymore -- needs a re-check. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:57, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure if it's fully ready, but I've improved the sourcing of the game summary section. Lepricavark (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There's a couple CNs floating around in the broadcast sections - more on international versions - which should be fixed but far from serious problems as these tend to be minor elements (as they are not major regions of issue) and could be removed until sourcing can be found. --Masem (t) 16:17, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pinging opposers, Template:Ping. All Template:Tl tags have been addressed. Marking ready, unless someone else finds a problem I'm missing. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:53, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now improvements have been made.-- P-K3 (talk) 17:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted -- Fuzheado | Talk 17:14, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Ivan Král[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archive bottom

(Posted) 73rd BAFTA Film Awards[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support The sourcing is actually fine: in the current version sources 1 and 6 cover the whole of the awards and nomination table, which is fine. And while there probably could be more on the ceremony, what's there is at least addressing it. The only thing I see that could be added immediately are award presenters as from previous years. --Masem (t) 18:55, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There's barely a stub worth of prose. It's not suitable at all. A quick comparison to last year's article demonstrates what is possible. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:23, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Last year's article also has little prose, just a list of presenters. However, the point is moot - I've now massively expanded the prose section. Kingsif (talk) 19:47, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And that's brilliant, well done and thank you for such an effort! The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:09, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Salahuddin Wahid[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Mike Moore[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) RD: Mad Mike Hoare[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archive bottom

February 1[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2020 February 1 Template:Cob

(Posted) RD: Peter Serkin[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/February_2020&oldid=1085535213"