Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
![]() | Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
![]() |
---|
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary[edit]
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps[edit]
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
Headers[edit]
Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated. Please do...[edit]
Please do not...[edit]
Suggesting updates[edit]There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
[edit]Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives
Sections
[edit]This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.
February 18
[edit]
February 18, 2025
(Tuesday)
|
February 17
[edit]
February 17, 2025
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
Delta flip-flop
[edit]Blurb: A Delta Bombardier (pictured) flips on landing at Toronto. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN],
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Created by Guninvalid (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ForsythiaJo (talk · give credit) and Trinitrobrick (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: No, nobody was killed but the nature of the accident seems remarkable and likely to be of interest to our readers given the stream of other aviation accidents in North America lately. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong support. Reminds me of Air France Flight 358. 2604:7A40:2041:8900:E1C1:E814:ABF9:D3C (talk) 23:06, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Procedural close as the article is at AfD. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- That discussion has already been snow closed once and the consensus seems clear. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:48, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose and procedural close, as per PK3. The discussion already has been snowclosed before. I’ve voted for delete on the AfD discussion. Barely significant. 64.114 etc 00:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose - At AfD and barely significant enough for ITN. EF5 23:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on significance. If we posted every aviation incident on this scale ITN would stand for "In Travel News". We're only even considering it because of systemic bias toward U.S. news. Sdkb talk 23:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- The incident happened in Canada (which has not yet been annexed). I nominated it because I just saw it on the BBC News in the UK and thought it seemed interesting. It's "in the news", you see; unlike the bus plunge which happened over a week ago and which we're only now blurbing. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:13, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Andrew, please review WP:POINT. GenevieveDEon (talk) 01:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose No deaths, (thankfully) minimal casualties, and runway overruns aren’t too terribly unusual - the only unique bit is the plane somehow ended up upside-down but mostly intact. The Kip (contribs) 00:08, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Zero deaths, minimal impact. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support own article. Article definitely needs to be cleaned up before it's fully ready but I suspect that'll continue to happen over the next several hours. Article was AfDd, but the AfD closed as SNOW a second time and there doesn't appear to be any dispute against it yet. This happened in Canada, so it's not just U.S. news. It did land upside-down, but the flight was a hull loss, most likely a total writeoff. guninvalid (talk) 00:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak oppose for now On the one hand, I agree with Andrew that the nature of the accident is remarkable, and that interest/coverage will likely be amplified by the recent surge of plane crashes. Also, the rush to nominate this for AfD and then cite it being at AfD to torpedo this ITN nom, comes from a cohort of editors who are overly zealously applying WP:NOTNEWS in violation of WP:RAPID. But even still, nobody died and it's not clear to me whether or not this accident comes from a cause which will drum up even bigger coverage (example: Boeing 737 Max style design defect), or whether it was instead something more ordinary (e.g. pilot overreacts to a gust of wind). Willing to change my mind if subsequent coverage in RS continues to grow as opposed to die out. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Also, for the record, I strongly oppose SNOW closing this nomination. It is far too soon to snow close this, and we should not set the precedent that prematurely nominating a recent event at AfD precludes it from ITN eligibility. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:19, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- By that, do you mean you oppose the SNOW close at the AfD? Or would you oppose a SNOW close of this ITN nomination? guninvalid (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- The latter! FlipandFlopped ツ 01:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- By that, do you mean you oppose the SNOW close at the AfD? Or would you oppose a SNOW close of this ITN nomination? guninvalid (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Also, for the record, I strongly oppose SNOW closing this nomination. It is far too soon to snow close this, and we should not set the precedent that prematurely nominating a recent event at AfD precludes it from ITN eligibility. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:19, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Thankfully, there were no casualties from this accident. But still, its been an awful start for the aviation world this year. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 00:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Almost a nothing story. Perhaps vaguely related to the winter storm because of the likely wind impact, but that's it. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:10, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - no fatalities. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 01:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - a minor incident without causalties. The fact that it happened to an aeroplane in the 'global north' rather than a bus in the 'global south' doesn't make it more notable. GenevieveDEon (talk) 01:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per most of the above. A relatively minor accident with no fatalities. IMO the case for it meeting WP:EVENT is pretty weak. This is yet another example of the persistent problem of editors rushing to create articles the moment a news story breaks. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:13, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Thankfully no fatalities and all to say, can be considered a minor aircraft incident in its context. Kingsif (talk) 02:15, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Paquita la del Barrio
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Latin Times
Credits:
- Nominated by FlyingAce (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Mexican singer. Unsourced discography, but the rest of the article appears sufficiently sourced. –FlyingAce✈hello 22:06, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - discography now mostly sourced, there are only a few entries left. –FlyingAce✈hello 01:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Flash flooding in eastern United States
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A storm complex in the United States causes flash flooding, claiming at least 14 lives in Kentucky, West Virginia, and Georgia. (Post)
Alternative blurb II: Flash flooding in the United States claims at least 12 lives in Kentucky with others still missing.
News source(s): CNN, NBC, New York Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Kentuckian (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose again, because even with 11 deaths, thousands die worldwide from seasonal flooding, this is a minor incident along those lines. --Masem (t) 18:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Did you even read the article? 13 people have died with others still missing. Not even mentioning the property damage, this was a disastrous flood. It should not take 100 people to die for something to be considered "notable". Maybe if you lived in EKY and witnessed this catastrophe first hand you’d feel different. Kentuckian |💬 18:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, it was tragic but we cannot post every tragic event that happens. For example the Taichung department store explosion is tragic, but as seen in its discussion below, people dying is not a reason to post. History6042😊 (Contact me) 18:14, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- It is not the number of deaths but the fact that when seasons change or warm weather follows from heavy snowfall, there is routine flooding which routinely can bring deaths. Its less often that happens in the US but it happens frequently. --Masem (t) 18:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't usually get this angry, but this is really making me mad seeing how ignorant some people are. First off, snow melting did not cause this, it was heavy rain. Second off. Yes, I agree, there is usually flooding that causes 1-2 deaths, but this is 13 people in three different states. And we aren't even gonna talk about the property damage. As I said, maybe if you lived in Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia and seen this catastrophe first hand you would feel differently. Kentuckian |💬 18:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- You appear to be emotionally invested in this event and the nomination. Perhaps to the point of not being able to objectively assess notability. This is an encyclopedia, not a blog for people to share their personal traumas.--Danthemankhan 18:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't usually get this angry, but this is really making me mad seeing how ignorant some people are. First off, snow melting did not cause this, it was heavy rain. Second off. Yes, I agree, there is usually flooding that causes 1-2 deaths, but this is 13 people in three different states. And we aren't even gonna talk about the property damage. As I said, maybe if you lived in Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia and seen this catastrophe first hand you would feel differently. Kentuckian |💬 18:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Did you even read the article? 13 people have died with others still missing. Not even mentioning the property damage, this was a disastrous flood. It should not take 100 people to die for something to be considered "notable". Maybe if you lived in EKY and witnessed this catastrophe first hand you’d feel different. Kentuckian |💬 18:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Still oppose per Masem. History6042😊 (Contact me) 18:03, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Still oppose WP:POINTy re-nomination, per Masem, and as original closer. The Kip (contribs) 18:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support event is notable and article is in good shape. 2A02:8071:78E1:A100:4DA2:B42A:700C:C2A8 (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, it rained to a tragic degree, but this happens all over the place. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 18:33, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support on notability, weak oppose on quality. I'm tired of this "climate change is worsening, so we can't feature disasters" rhetoric at ITN, but I do agree that this is just some really bad flooding with a few tornadoes, none strong as of now. 13 deaths from a flood is semi-notable, but deaths only play an indirect part in notability. Article needs more info as well. EF5 18:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose - unfortunate, but flooding events of this magnitude are quite routine in the United States. It's far from Summer 2022 levels for sure. Departure– (talk) 18:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Big oppose due to a re nomination of something that’s already closed. 64.114 etc 20:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability once again per all above. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:24, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strongly opposed. As per Masem, 11-13 deaths is a minor incident compared to the thousands of people worldwide whom seasonal flooding kills. 207.194.85.134 (talk) 21:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Support — Notable enough for ITN with 13 deaths. The article is well rounded with plenty of information. The argument “Flooding happens all the time across the United States”, doesn’t really hold water. Though it is true, those are usually just minor events with 1-2 deaths, while this is a major event that has caused 13 deaths with more fatalities likely and a lot of property damage. It is definitely notable. Shlumbis11 (talk) 20:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose and Snow Close per Masem and Departure. Suggest SNOW closing this renomination, until or unless there is a more substantive change in the nature of the floods themselves. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Snow close Good call, F&F. 72.143.219.80 (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2025 (UTC) •
- Support - This was not by any means minor. Minor flooding would result in some damage to buildings, and maybe some deaths. This is MAJOR, the effects of this complex have been felt all over the entire country, from an EF4 tornado in Calfornia to the flooding in Kentucky, Virginia, and Tennessee. I don’t see how this isn’t notable, and the article seems to be in good shape. Fatcheeto728 (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2025 (UTC) — Fatcheeto728 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Also, for the record, the tornado in California was a much more common EF1. There haven't been any EF4s in California and it'll take more than a flood event or winter storm to change that. Departure– (talk) 00:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- I noticed how someone tagged this reply with “Fatcheeto728 has made few or no edits outside this topic”. Shouldn’t we do this to the several IP editors as well? Kentuckian |💬 22:06, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Not from what I can tell. A lot of IP editors often have good points in other discussions, or come from an IP range despite being serial constructive contributors. Registered accounts, on the other hand, going strongly against consensus, will be put under scrutiny if this was their first edit. Departure– (talk) 22:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article looks well sourced and is notable as well, since it event included power outages, flash floods, snow, and even a Tornado. TheHiddenCity (talk) 00:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. I still do not believe this storm is terribly exceptional. Perhaps for a winter storm, but winter storms aren't generally enduring weather events when it comes down to it. There seems to be some attempt at synthesis here - no, this storm is not notable because it had some tornadoes - the last one did as well, and that one actually had a fatal tornado IIRC. Compare to the freak snowstorm across the Gulf Coast a few weeks ago. That was the more unusual and likely enduring weather event - it was evently voted down. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:13, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article looks ready to go and is of significant nature for one of the most impoverished areas of the US.CoatCheck (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
2025 Indonesian student protests
[edit]Blurb: Hundreds of students start protests against the government of Indonesia across the country. (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
ArionStar (talk) 16:50, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait on notability, given the protests only began today. Oppose on quality - the article in its current state completely fails to illustrate why the protests are occurring, with only a passing mention of "controversial [government] policies," and why the protests are unique/special; neither their size nor their cause appears to be overly unusual. The Kip (contribs) 18:21, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Statement from the page's creator: This article indeed requires many improvisation, and all editors are welcome to improve it. There might be errors since I am not an English native speaker, and I only created the page at 7 p.m. (ICT / UTC+8), when most protests were over. My decision is wait, since the protest only began this time. DDG9912 22:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
M23 captures Bukavu
[edit]Blurb: In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the March 23 Movement captures Bukavu, the capital of South Kivu province, as part of an ongoing offensive (Post)
News source(s): Guardian BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Modest Genius (talk · give credit)
- Created by Noble Attempt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Noble Attempt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Last month, we posted when M23 rebels captured Goma, the capital of North Kivu province. Well now they've taken Bukavu, an even larger city and the capital of South Kivu province. There was a lot less fighting this time around, but widespread looting occurred, apparently not by M23 themselves. The Congolese army retreated without contesting control of the city, and the government has admitted it has fallen. It took more than two years of fighting to capture one major city, now two have fallen in just a few weeks. The article has been updated (not by me) and is in good shape already. Modest Genius talk 14:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support on quality, the article seems well sourced. oppose on notability, this is covered by ongoing. History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Covered by the M23 ongoing, as that was added after the Goma campaign ITN posting was rolled off. --Masem (t) 14:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Neutral on notability (not sure if it is significant enough to be posted with the whole campaign covered by ongoing), but support on quality if there is consensus that it's notable. MT(710) 16:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose covered by ongoing. The Kip (contribs) 18:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Although this is also covered by “Ongoing”, the size of Bukavu’s population makes this development notable enough for a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support An armed rebel group capturing a city of over 1,000,000 people from a UN-recognized state strikes me as fairly noteworthy. Although the conflict is covered by ongoing, the taking of a large city with millions of people has typically still merited its own blurb at ITN in the past, even where we have the overarching conflict covered in ongoing: see e.g. Fall of Mosul which we posted, or as the OP references, the Fall of Goma as well. I see no reason for an arbitrary deviation now. FlipandFlopped ツ 02:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
February 16
[edit]
February 16, 2025
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
International relations
|
(Ready) RD: Gil Won-ok
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Korea Times MK
Credits:
- Nominated by TNM101 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Korean activist TNM101 (chat) 07:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Well-referenced and is detailed. Ca talk to me! 12:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Citations throughout and good enough. Even better would be to sort out chronological order in the "Activist work" section. Cielquiparle (talk) 15:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Meets the threshold needed per above. Marking ready. FlipandFlopped ツ 22:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: , pinging because the article is ready. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Viktor Antonov
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): IGN PC Gamer
Credits:
- Nominated by Curbon7 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit) and Leetchr (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Video game art designer. Curbon7 (talk) 03:36, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, far too short. History6042😊 (Contact me) 09:36, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Kim Sae-ron
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: South Korean television and film actress.
- Soft oppose - Prose looks good at a glance, but some citations needed for awards. ForsythiaJo (talk) 01:14, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Kim is a prominent South Korean actress and her death is being talked about in multiple prominent news sources. NewishIdeas (talk) 02:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
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.
Curbon7 (talk) 03:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you NewishIdeas (talk) 03:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) British Academy Film Awards
[edit]Blurb: At the British Academy Film Awards, Conclave (director Edward Berger pictured) wins four awards including Best Film. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Kingsif (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Klaw135 (talk · give credit) and Kingsif (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Updated. Note that Berger did not win best director, but as the main creative did receive the Outstanding British Film award - the blurb could be amended re. describing his photo. Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. The article looks well cited, the same quality as 77th British Academy Film Awards. Moraljaya67 (talk) 07:24, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. I'm pleased to see this has actual prose about the ceremony and winners, not just a big table. This is ITNR and the quality is sufficient to post. Modest Genius talk 12:24, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - per Modest Genius ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:03, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support No objections. ArionStar (talk) 16:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is ready and ITNR. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: , pinging because the article is ready. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- No rush; Mahamoud Ali Youssouf was posted right now. ArionStar (talk) 01:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: , pinging because the article is ready. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 01:11, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Michael O'Sullivan (jockey)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Credits:
- Nominated by History6042 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Irish jockey who died due to a fall. History6042😊 (Contact me) 21:24, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - quality looks good ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 22:20, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Died age 24. Citations throughout (14 sources listed under References from 2020–present) and 2011 characters of prose. Looks fine. Cielquiparle (talk) 15:51, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Ready for RD. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: , pinging because the article is ready. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Half marathon world record
[edit]Blurb: Jacob Kiplimo sets the current world record for the half marathon at 56 minutes and 42 seconds. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Jacob Kiplimo sets the world record at the Barcelona Half Marathon, finishing in 56 minutes and 42 seconds.
Alternative blurb II: In athletics, Jacob Kiplimo sets the world record in half marathon, finishing the Barcelona Half Marathon in 56 minutes and 42 seconds.
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Clovermoss (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: I've never tried to do ITN before but I noticed this achievement in the news and it seems to meet the criteria. It seemed better to ask than to do nothing. Clovermoss🍀 (talk)
- Support Nedia Wanna talk? Stalk my edits
- Support - Thanks for the add Clovermoss. I’ve added an altblurb that reflects the style we typically use for events. I think Kiplimo’s article looks good and new world records are typically notable. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 19:41, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Added an alt2 that doesn't kinda sound like he just set that event's record. Kingsif (talk) 00:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Combine with the new racewalking world record for men's 20km. The page that has them both and other athletics world records is List of world records in athletics. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:03, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support alt2. Half marathon isn't the most impactful record to set, and the update in the article says nothing more than the blurb does, but I suppose there isn't much more detail to give. The rest of his article is of sufficient quality to post. Modest Genius talk 21:01, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Half marathon doesn't have the interest the marathon does. Doesn't feel significant enough for the front page. Thriley (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Pretty significant accomplishment with widespread coverage in RS. Diversity of topics is important, and this is a significant milestone in athletics. ITN doesn't just have to be tragic events and ITNR election/event updates. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:55, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support alt1 This will probably get broken in a few years like they mostly do, but still pretty significant TheHiddenCity (talk) 00:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Half marathons attract much less attention than marathons. A world record is not a free pass to ITN notability (if they were, it would be ITN/R) and I don't think this one is significant enough. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Flash flooding in United States
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Flash flooding impacts parts of the United States, claiming at least 8 lives in Kentucky. (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, CNN, FOX Weather, AP, WLWT5
Credits:
- Nominated by Kentuckian (talk · give credit)
- Oppose on notability Floods occur all over the world and with three victims these, although unfortunate, are not ITN-worthy for now. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Alsor. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose conditionally way too stubby. Support otherwise but it's prolly best to wait for a greater impact. — Knightoftheswords 17:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Lots of snow followed by warm weather during this time of year always brings floods. Not a significant event considering how many people die by seasonal flooding around the world every year. --Masem (t) 17:41, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The article isn't in a good state right now, and also per Masem. TheHiddenCity (talk) 17:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Certainly a wild storm in a series of wild storms, but not really of enduring notability. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose in terms of quality. The article needs to have information in order to have support. Rager7 (talk) 17:47, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality and Weak Oppose on notability. BTW the name is now February 2025 North American storm complex. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 18:07, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
New racewalking world record for men's 20km
[edit]Blurb: In men's 20 kilometres race walk, Toshikazu Yamanishi (pictured) breaks a 10-year-old world record with a time of 1:16:10. (Post)
News source(s): World Athletics
Credits:
- Nominated by UCinternational (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: The article needs significant updates. UCinternational (talk) 05:37, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Not Ready. Article is a stub and is nowhere near ready. Per nom, it will need some work. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 07:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: it is pointless to nominate a four-sentence stub. There's nothing for us to assess. Write an actual article first, before asking ITN/C to consider posting it. Modest Genius talk 15:58, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose, this is way to short to even be considered. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:03, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Stub. ArionStar (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality; weak oppose on notability Can reassess notability if actual coverage in global RS is updated either in the nomination or article itself. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:56, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: Myanmar civil war
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by TurboSuperA+ (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose I am not seeing the near daily type of significant news and updates that would make this appropriate to be in ongoing. --Masem (t) 16:13, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, the article isn't getting major updates. Also, you nominated a redirect, I would suggest changing it to the target article. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- When I click on the link (or hover over it) I get to the wikipedia article, I don't see a redirect. TurboSuperA+ (☏) 19:43, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, the article isn't getting major updates. Also, you nominated a redirect, I would suggest changing it to the target article. History6042😊 (Contact me) 17:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- @TurboSuperA+ I've fixed it for you TNM101 (chat) 17:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you. TurboSuperA+ (☏) 19:42, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: No major updates. MT(710) 17:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose article isn't receiving the updates necessary for ongoing. The Kip (contribs) 18:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak Support I think this conflict needs more attention, but it's being nominated at a pretty bad time with few offensives currently ongoing. --SpectralIon 20:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- There's articles and updates on the war every week, e.g. [4]. I was hoping that mentioning it on the front page might encourage editors to update it more frequently.
- How many people even know about the civil war going on over there? Wars in Gaza and Ukraine dominate the headlines/attention, but Wikipedia is a global project and the front page shouldn't only cover things that might be of interest in the West. TurboSuperA+ (☏) 20:25, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
There's articles and updates on the war every week
- Yes, in news sources. They're not being added to the linked article, though, therefore the article isn't eligible for ongoing.
I was hoping that mentioning it on the front page might encourage editors to update it more frequently.
- That's not how ITN works. The Kip (contribs) 20:29, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There hasn't been daily updates. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:59, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
February 15
[edit]
February 15, 2025
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Gerhart Baum
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): FAZ
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Qaswa (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German politician and Federal Minister of the Interior Grimes2 (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Muhsin Hendricks
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): barrons
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: World's first openly gay imam. Was murdered on this date. Article is a GA so it might be good to post soon. Onegreatjoke (talk) 07:09, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support, good quality article and a notable person. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 13:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - good to go ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support per reasons stated above. –GnocchiFan (talk) 15:34, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Sam Walton (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Barry Urban
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News The West Australian WAtoday
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Steelkamp (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Australian politician. Steelkamp (talk) 02:24, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support, well updated and sourced article. Yeshivish613 (talk) 03:07, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - seeing no issues here ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support – Ready to go. 5225C (talk • contributions) 01:16, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) New Chairperson of African Union
[edit]Blurb: Mahamoud Ali Youssouf has been elected Chairperson of the African Union Commission (Post)
Alternative blurb: Djiboutian diplomat Mahamoud Ali Youssouf won Chairperson of African Union
Alternative blurb II: Former foreign minister of Djibouti Mahamoud Ali Youssouf elected as Chairperson of the African Union Commission
Alternative blurb III: Mahamoud Ali Youssouf (pictured) is elected the new Chairman of the African Union Commission
News source(s): AP Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by QalasQalas (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: If Ursula von der Leyen election nominated before then AU chairperson deserve ITN QalasQalas (talk) 16:57, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment the argument you use is totally wrong. There are many differences between the EU and the African Union: in the latter there is neither a single market nor a common currency, nor is there interdependence and the need for common harmonization of laws for the member countries, nor is there political cohesion, nor do the institutions have supranational power like the European ones, among many other differences. That said, I believe that the election of the president of the AU commission may deserve ITN's attention for its representative role at the international and diplomatic level of the continent. I have added a more grammatically correct altblurb and more in line with ITN's MOS. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:37, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Is it sounding excessively egoistic!! Because proving AU value to be better and more important by EU due to popularity and wealth. and without contempt aren't both equivalent? QalasQalas (talk) 19:41, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- The AU is moreso akin to a regional United Nations, similar to the Organization of American States, the Pacific Islands Forum, or the Council of Europe; the EU is a supranational union sharing a common currency, borders (via the Schengen Area), regulations, an elected continental parliament, and so on, almost like a super-state. That's not "egotistic" or "popularity and wealth," that's just factual. The Kip (contribs) 20:06, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- That is completely wrong. The AU is a supranational union akin to the EU. It has a free trade area, a parliament, and plans to have a continental customs union (having set up regional ones), a common market like the EEC, and a monetary union. See Agenda 2063. Kowal2701 (talk) 20:36, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Kowal2701, both the monetary union and the customs union are planned, not actual things put in place akin to the EU. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:24, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- This. It has ambitions of being EU-like but it's quite far away from actually being there. The Kip (contribs) 22:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- It's not that far away, and has institutions the EU doesn't yet, like peacekeeping. It's still a major player on the international stage. Is the EU the only continental bloc we've historically posted? Really surprised we've never posted this, given how important continental blocs are becoming Kowal2701 (talk) 23:04, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- This. It has ambitions of being EU-like but it's quite far away from actually being there. The Kip (contribs) 22:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Kowal2701, both the monetary union and the customs union are planned, not actual things put in place akin to the EU. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:24, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- That is completely wrong. The AU is a supranational union akin to the EU. It has a free trade area, a parliament, and plans to have a continental customs union (having set up regional ones), a common market like the EEC, and a monetary union. See Agenda 2063. Kowal2701 (talk) 20:36, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- The AU is moreso akin to a regional United Nations, similar to the Organization of American States, the Pacific Islands Forum, or the Council of Europe; the EU is a supranational union sharing a common currency, borders (via the Schengen Area), regulations, an elected continental parliament, and so on, almost like a super-state. That's not "egotistic" or "popularity and wealth," that's just factual. The Kip (contribs) 20:06, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Is it sounding excessively egoistic!! Because proving AU value to be better and more important by EU due to popularity and wealth. and without contempt aren't both equivalent? QalasQalas (talk) 19:41, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- If this is posted, alt III should be used. However, parts of the article currently lack citations – this would have to be resolved before posting. Toadspike [Talk] 19:04, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- fix it thanks
QalasQalas (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- fix it thanks
- Undecided on notability, but oppose on quality - both Youssouf's article and the Chairperson article are woefully short and under-cited. The Kip (contribs) 20:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, posting the EU equivalent and not this would be a double standard. Quality is very poor atm Kowal2701 (talk) 20:39, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Also support but contest the idea that this is a double standard - the EU Commission President oversees the second-largest integrated economy in the world and has massive leverage over EU capitals. The AU Commission, though undoubtedly important enough to be considered a "change of head of government", has no such power This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:11, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. Yakikaki (talk) 21:33, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality In its current state, the article is not ready for ITN --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:25, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Needs work The comparison we should make is not with the EU but microstate elections like Liechtenstein, which we are currently blurbing. But the articles I've looked at, such as 2025 African Union Commission Chairperson election, are not ready. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose until quality issues are fixed (in particular the article on the Chairperson themself, but the articles on Youssouf and the elections could use some work), then support alt blurb 3. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 13:58, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Neutral on notability, strong oppose on quality African Union is definitely not yet on the level of the EU in terms of notability. It's more comparable with OAS or ASEAN, whose changes in secretaries-general have never even received an ITN nomination yet—maybe they should, but that's for another time. What really needs attention is that both the Chairperson of the African Union Commission and the 2025 African Union Commission Chairperson election articles are mostly just lists and tables, and Mahamoud Ali Youssouf's is still marked a stub plus has an entire section with no citations. Yo.dazo (talk) 14:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support altblurb3 on notability. However, I want to also comment that the EU and AU are not equal in nature despite the similar names; the EU is far more integrated and quasi-federal than the AU will be any time soon. That does not mean that the AU is not largely influential/notability, just that a "double standard" does not exist. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 17:27, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- I concur, ITN is just only Western the rest of World is just DNE. QalasQalas (talk) 17:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Youssouf’s article and the Chairperson article are in better shape but the election article is still very poor, I’m going to try to add more about the debates. I think the Chairperson one is okay quality-wise, but struggling to improve Youssouf’s one further if anyone can help out
- Kowal2701 (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Appreciated man QalasQalas (talk) 23:11, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, Wait on quality per above. --SpectralIon 01:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support due to the quality. ArionStar (talk) 16:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Thoughts on quality now? Not sure it can be improved much further given the sourcing issues
Kowal2701 (talk) 21:08, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Think its okay when compared to articles like UN Secretary General. At least not embarrassing to have on the main page I hope. Kowal2701 (talk) 21:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support altblurb3 per Nice4what, who sums it up nicely. I think the quality concerns are now rectified per Kowal2701; both potential target articles are more expansive and well-sourced for example than the currently bolded and pictured Ilie Bolojan. Also, many of our current blurbs are pretty stale and involve week(s)-old news, so getting this up promptly seems prudent. I see a rough consensus on notability - @Admins willing to post ITN: maybe there is one among you who agrees with the quality assessment and might be willing to post. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
February 14
[edit]
February 14, 2025
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents:
|
(Posted) RD: Kevyn Major Howard
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TMZ
Credits:
- Nominated by Ollieisanerd (talk · give credit)
- Created by Kenwork (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 2600:1700:1b2a:e4b0:b88e:bf5b:38e5:595b (talk · give credit) and Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Canadian actor. Article is not ready yet but I'll work on it. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 16:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support The article is a bit short but the sources seem fine. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 20:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:00, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Associate Press excluded from Oval Office over Gulf of Mexico naming dispute
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: U.S. president Donald Trump revokes Associated Press access to the Oval Office in response to the news organization's continued use of the name "Gulf of Mexico" instead of "Gulf of America". (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/14/media/white-house-ap-ban-air-force-one-oval-office-gulf-of-mexico/index.html
Credits:
- Nominated by Ironic sensibilities (talk · give credit)
- Oppose fail to see how this is significant enough to post to ITN. Scuba 15:24, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose and snow close trivial and not ITN-worthy. Good faith nom. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:05, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
I perceive that there is some need for ITN to address whatever we want to call recent events in the US Federal Government (hereafter referred to as "antics"). I also acknowledge some difficulty in deciding which of the antics are most appropriate to cover. Yesterday's retaliatory exclusion of an internationally important news agency from the Oval Office and Air Force One is being reported globally and could possibly offer a relatively uncontroversial angle on the antics that ITN has so far been ignoring. Ironic (talk) 13:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Not the first, and won't be the last. – robertsky (talk) 14:08, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- These links are reporting exclusion of specific reporters from specific events, not indefinite exclusion of an entire internationally significant news agency. Not the same. Ironic (talk) 14:48, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - Per Robertsky. EF5 14:19, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There are far more worse things going on involving the Trump presidency that are seemingly leading to a constitutional crisis, this is but one drop in the bucket. While there is a potential for a ongoing on all that, things are moving too fast, with many legal challenges, to have a decent quality article about it at this point. Masem (t) 14:35, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- This is exactly the difficulty I was trying to address with this proposal. Perfect is the enemy of the good.
- I won't bludgeon with any further response on this submission unless I am pinged for further comment. Ironic (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant drone strike
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A drone strike hits the New Safe Confinement structure at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Volodymyr Zelenskyy alleges that a Russian drone strike causes damage to the New Safe Confinement structure at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant.
News source(s): NYT, Reuters, BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Flipandflopped (talk · give credit)
- Oppose for now - As of the last report that I’ve read, no deaths, injuries, radiation levels are normal, and the only lasting impact of this besides potential radiation release is a dissolution of the ceasefire, which I don’t see being confirmed yet from agencies (WP:SYNTH). EF5 19:51, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Here’s a reliable source for the “normal radiation levels” reasoning, since I’m fully aware it’ll be questioned. EF5 19:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Barring any immediate concerns for a runaway reaction and disaster, this would be covered by the ongoing. --Masem (t) 19:53, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm actually surprised that there is a stand-alone article for this and not just an update to the Chernobyl article. --TorsodogTalk 19:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Covered by ongoing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:40, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per MtPenguinMonster. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:14, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Post-closing comments
- Russian Federation attacked strike drones sarcophagus of the 4th reactor of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, as a result of which the outer and inner layers of the shelter facility were significantly destroyed, fire extinguishing and control measures are underway in terms of the level of radiation contamination (February 14)
I don't understand why the Flip nomination was ignored, because it was the first ever combat attack from the air on a nuclear power plant, and an emergency plant, and the opponents of the nomination don't understand the meaning of what happened at all. The integrity of both layers of the 50 sq m shelter facility was destroyed, which was built over 20 years by the efforts of dozens of countries to replace the old radioactive shelter, which already posed a threat to the world in the 1990s, a new shelter can be built in peacetime for at least 10 years, and the old one has long been unreliable, of course, the official authorities' statements are aimed at reassuring the public. However, for a large-scale radiation leak, even one more blow may not be needed - there is enough precipitation, and it is falling every day now, firefighters and repairmen are working in dangerous conditions for themselves, but they will not eliminate the hole, but only localize the problem
- TSN
- RBC-Ukraine
- Kyiv Independent
- TSN
- BBC News
- RBC-Ukraine
- WFXRtv
- WFXG
- The New Voice of Ukraine
- Associated Press
- Le Monde
- Oman Observer
- Euro News
- Japan Times
- Censor.NET
- IEU Monitoring
- France24
- Instagram .--Yasnodark (talk) 14:39, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- I continue to oppose. Radiation levels are still normal, which is literally the only significant part of this. If it “breaks down the plans of ending the war”, we can reconsider, but that hasn’t happened yet as of my last check. Several sources you gave were unreliable, by the way. EF5 15:06, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Russia commits war crimes every day, but such an attack has never happened in history. I'm afraid you don't understand what radiation is and what nuclear incidents are and informing the population during them. The normal level of radiation is 12-40 roentgens, and the radiation level under the old sarcophagus is up to 20 thousand roentgens, the integrity of the new sarcophagus that was built for 20 years has been violated and there are no obstacles...--Yasnodark (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- You do realize that official testing of radiation levels post-strike have revealed acceptable levels, right? Chernobyl has a secondary shield, if I remember correctly. If anything, all this strike did was make the public paranoid. I’m fully aware of what radiation is and what it can do, and this event just isn’t significant enough to be featured, sorry. EF5 16:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Agree that Russia commits war crimes every day, and this particular strike was incredibly reckless and irresponsible, even by its own medieval standards. But the radiation levels are not dangerous. It may cost millions of dollars to fix but, compared with the cost of repairing all other damage already inflicted on Ukraine, perhaps a tiny percentage. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:41, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Russia commits war crimes every day, but such an attack has never happened in history. I'm afraid you don't understand what radiation is and what nuclear incidents are and informing the population during them. The normal level of radiation is 12-40 roentgens, and the radiation level under the old sarcophagus is up to 20 thousand roentgens, the integrity of the new sarcophagus that was built for 20 years has been violated and there are no obstacles...--Yasnodark (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Yasnodark, please format your nomination in accordance with the ITN format TNM101 (chat) 15:30, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- I have gone ahead and given names to all the external links, since it was becoming a bit of an eyesore TNM101 (chat) 15:37, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- TNM101 Thank you, but could you make the top part in the format, because there are problems with the internet?-Yasnodark (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- I have gone ahead and given names to all the external links, since it was becoming a bit of an eyesore TNM101 (chat) 15:37, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- I continue to oppose. Radiation levels are still normal, which is literally the only significant part of this. If it “breaks down the plans of ending the war”, we can reconsider, but that hasn’t happened yet as of my last check. Several sources you gave were unreliable, by the way. EF5 15:06, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Reluctant oppose as per my comment above. A very lucky escape, it seems. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- You think we should only post bad news? Andrew🐉(talk) 21:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- This could have been very, very bad news. The fact that it wasn't, makes it somewhat less notable, I think. And no. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- We should understand that this shield, which was supposed to last for generations, now has a huge hole in it of 540 square feet. The NYT explains, "
Oleksandr Tytarchuk, the chief engineer at the plant, said his team and other specialists plan to do a “preliminary analysis and temporarily seal the opening” to prevent more moisture from entering the structure, which can speed corrosion. But this would not be a radiation-proof seal, meaning the shell would no longer serve the function it had before the strike. ... Workers will then have to figure out a more permanent solution — one that didn’t appear obvious on Friday afternoon.
". This is still not good news. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:25, 15 February 2025 (UTC)- Yes, it is clearly damaged and there are concerns of either radiation release, radioactive waste release, hydrogen gas buildup, etc. all associated with nuclear systems. But at the current time, there's no indication of any immediate concerns of a bad situation immediately arising. Masem (t) 02:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- We should understand that this shield, which was supposed to last for generations, now has a huge hole in it of 540 square feet. The NYT explains, "
- You think we should only post bad news? Andrew🐉(talk) 21:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support This seems quite a significant structure. The NYT explains that "
completed in 2019, built with the help of 45 countries to make sure that a nuclear accident like the one that occurred in 1986 would not happen here again ... at about 40,000 tons, is the largest movable structure ever built
". We don't need to wait until it's actually breached. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:56, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Should I close the nomination above this one and keep this open? TNM101 (chat) 11:34, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Your user page says that you're a relatively new editor. So, you shouldn't be closing discussions here, please. If people want to comment then please leave the discussions open so that they can do so. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:59, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- I thought that the discussions are usually closed and then outside the closure box there are new comments. Well, if it isn't so, thanks for the heads up. Other than that, I've been here for around 9 months, so not really a new editor I guess but I'll remove that from my user page TNM101 (chat) 15:13, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Your user page says that you're a relatively new editor. So, you shouldn't be closing discussions here, please. If people want to comment then please leave the discussions open so that they can do so. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:59, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
In fact, the integrity of both shells of the new shelter has already been significantly violated, the hole cannot be closed, because when it was built, it was built remotely due to extremely high radiation levels. These levels are still preserved above the old shelter, if it really still exists, because according to another version, it was dismantled by workers after the construction of the new one, there is a certain contradiction here. But most sources speak of the existence of an old ultra-radioactive shelter, built almost 40 years ago at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives of liquidators.
This is the first case of nuclear air terrorism in the world and in history, and this will radically change relations in the world of nuclear relations if there is no reaction from the world. Just as there was no reaction to the seizure of the Zaporizhzhia NPP or the explosion of the Kakhovka HPP, which resulted in the death of over a million organisms and probably hundreds or even thousands of people on the occupied left bank.
The fire still cannot be extinguished even by the shelter, repairs are possible only at the cost of the lives of new liquidators, only the long-outdated one probably holds back 20 thousand roentgens, but the shelter itself is super-radioactive and by normal level we mean that the super-high level of radiation is still maintained at the previous level, but nothing is holding it back at the moment, because the shelter is not intact. Fire, snow and frost only make everything worse.
As for official reports, you can look at the same reports about Chelyabinsk, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Fukushima, everything was fine everywhere until it became completely bad. However, all previous cases were not the consequences of external attacks on the reactor, the first time this happened during the capture of Energodar in 2022. However, there is a completely different level of protection there and the attack was of a different nature.
My mother was going to Kyiv in early May and was surprised why there were so few people on the train. Because the official reports were just as good and everything was fine. And Chernobyl was burning and people were dying...
Now the zone is a unique reserve, and most likely it will be infected again, although possibly without risk to the capital. IF of course there are no new attacks. However, the reserve will be lost. And this is very likely. Just as dozens of reserves in the east and south were reduced
Tens of thousands of dolphins died in the Black Sea only in the first months of aggression https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/10/23/7373104/ and this is of course also unimportant. Similarly, the unimportant news was the seizure of Manchuria by Japan, Ethiopia by Italy, the Saar by Germany, the Anschluss of Austria, and then the time came for the wonderful Munich Agreement, someone here fears a new Munich Agreement, but I will say that pray that there will be no truce desired by the whole world at the expense of Ukraine, because you can consider world-class events as unimportant incidents only until a nuclear mushroom blooms next to you. Good luck in waiting for peace, keep your fingers crossed for a new Munich conspiracy and ignore the facts, flying in the clouds if you are sad without war on the doorstep...
None of the news presented today:
- The Baltic states complete synchronization of their power grids with continental Europe's (map pictured), disconnecting from Russia's.
- The ruling Vetëvendosje party, led by Albin Kurti, wins the most seats in the Assembly of Kosovo.
- The Patriotic Union, led by Brigitte Haas, wins the most seats in the Landtag of Liechtenstein.
- In American football, the Philadelphia Eagles defeat the Kansas City Chiefs to win the Super Bowl.
- Former president of Namibia Sam Nujoma dies at the age of 95.
, and even the first one, has global significance compared to the one proposed here, none of them carries such risks as this and will not have a similar impact on the future of humanity, because nuclear safety and the precedent of nuclear terrorism are unprecedented. And those 4 bottom news items are regional in nature without any impact.
And the fact that the news should be good... I haven't heard that for a long time, the last time was when I read Joe Haldeman's memoirs after a visit to the USSR and Kyiv in particular in the 1980s. I recommend reading it - it gave me a sense of nostalgia, and here it is again.
I hardly have anything else to add, and I've already spent too much time on people who don't understand the gravity of the events, but I'll mention people from different fields of knowledge, maybe someone will be interested in speaking out : Yakudza, User:Oleksiy.golubov, User:Yukh68, Білецький В.С., Ата, Олег-літред, Yasnodark (talk) 14:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Why do you keep assuming bad faith and assuming everybody who’s opposed is stupid? 2/3 of your reply has nothing to do with the nomination and is completely irrelevant. Radiation levels are normal, I don’t have any other way to say that more clearly. EF5 14:36, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- I completely agree with you, everything is normal: attacks on nuclear facilities have already happened thousands of times, sorry 0 times, the fire continues in the usual emergency mode, only 2 shells out of 2 of the only new shelter, which was built in just a couple of decades by only 45 countries, have been destroyed, repairs are possible only in other conditions and not above the reactor, but quick repairs can only take place in wartime conditions in anticipation of new attacks, only after the fire stops, only after the onset of positive temperatures and in the absence of heavy precipitation and only at the expense of the health of people who voluntarily agree to sacrifice themselves. You do not understand the situation at all and I still do not understand why this news is less important than the previous ones, which is why I gave a number of examples of news that were also considered unimportant. I appreciated the truce because my opponent mentioned it, although - the impact on a possible criminal conspiracy called a truce is the least of the world's concerns, it is ignoring the unprecedented event of nuclear terrorism and its possible consequences that is the most important thing in the event. And that is exactly what is happening here, because as my opponents pointed out to me - the news should be good...--Yasnodark (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Is the situation predicted to worsen considerably? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- If there are no new attacks - an uncontrolled radiation leak is predicted with a high probability of new contamination of the Chernobyl zone with probably good forecasts for the capital if there are no deteriorations. Tomorrow the council of scientists will meet for a detailed analysis of the response to the situation. On the morning of the 14th they said that the fire was extinguished, and I didn't believe it then, and every day they said that the fire was extinguished again, today they don't say anything anymore - they say that the fire has not been extinguished yet, but they still say about the normal level of radiation, and each time they are less confident, and in the absence of new attacks, I think a certain number of volunteers will save everyone and then everything will not be very good, almost all the Russian military who dug trenches in 2022 in the zone - later died, and they were told that everything was fine with the radiation--Yasnodark (talk) 15:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keyword is “predicted” not “happened”. We don’t post events till they have actually happened. EF5 15:48, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- I still don’t think you understand. Radiation levels are normal. It doesn’t matter if the shells are damaged, because levels are normal. We don’t post future events like this at ITN. Research reactors in Iraq were bombed by Israel in 1981, so your assertion that this is the “first strike on a nuclear site” is a blatant falsehood. EF5 15:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- I completely agree with you, everything is normal: attacks on nuclear facilities have already happened thousands of times, sorry 0 times, the fire continues in the usual emergency mode, only 2 shells out of 2 of the only new shelter, which was built in just a couple of decades by only 45 countries, have been destroyed, repairs are possible only in other conditions and not above the reactor, but quick repairs can only take place in wartime conditions in anticipation of new attacks, only after the fire stops, only after the onset of positive temperatures and in the absence of heavy precipitation and only at the expense of the health of people who voluntarily agree to sacrifice themselves. You do not understand the situation at all and I still do not understand why this news is less important than the previous ones, which is why I gave a number of examples of news that were also considered unimportant. I appreciated the truce because my opponent mentioned it, although - the impact on a possible criminal conspiracy called a truce is the least of the world's concerns, it is ignoring the unprecedented event of nuclear terrorism and its possible consequences that is the most important thing in the event. And that is exactly what is happening here, because as my opponents pointed out to me - the news should be good...--Yasnodark (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Not sure your mother on a train to Kyiv is really pertinent here. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Because it was in May 1986 and she was going to Kyiv because there had been a minor incident somewhere nearby and the radiation level was also normal. She obviously believed these reports and went to work on her dissertation, having ended up in a place where it was impossible to leave. Because there were no return tickets, because everyone in Kyiv already knew, but only the chosen ones had the opportunity to leave. So she ended up living where she shouldn't. Because outside of Kyiv, it wasn't news, just a barely noticeable incident with a normal radiation level.--Yasnodark (talk) 15:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- You don't understand what is meant - it means that the radiation is just as high, no, it didn't increase from the impact, but now nothing is holding it back, if the old shelter still exists - it was old 20 years ago and it is so radioactive that it was impossible to build a new one over it, it was built separately and then moved. The fire is still going on and it will take years to build a new shelter
- However, the main thing in the event is not the level of radiation, but the fact of a deliberate attack on an emergency nuclear facility with unpredictable consequences.--Yasnodark (talk) 15:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Yasnodark It's probably a really bad thing that has happened but sadly Wikipedia cannot run ITN like that. If ITN was just based on how bad the situation is, we would have new blurbs every day. If you see below, the nom for the bus incident in Guatemala has not yet been posted as of my posting of this comment, even after it killed a lot of people. On ITN everything must be judged based on ITNSIGNIF and ITNQUALITY. The problem here is, that EF5 has been trying to explain for a while now, is that the radiation levels are perfectly normal right now and there are no imminent threats to anyone or anything around the plant. Along with this, the only significant thing this could cause would be affecting the peace treaty. Since WP:NOTCRYSTAL, we cannot post the blurb just because there could be problems in the future. If there was a major issue such as a radiation leak that was expected to have an instant impact in the area around Chernobyl, there probably wouldn't have been any issues getting the blurb posted. Hopefully you understand now TNM101 (chat) 15:34, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comparisons are irrelevant, I explained something above. The accident in Guatemala is a typical traditional unintentional incident that has no impact on global security or the health and lives of other people and the environment. But this event has, and that's not the main thing.
The essence of the event is an unprecedented attack on a nuclear facility by a combat drone with an explosive charge. Radiation leak is a probable new event. This event consists in the destruction of the shield, which cannot be restored quickly, and in the attack itself, and in the consequences not for the health of individual people, but for the nuclear security of the world and the world order in general, in the event of non-implementation of the highest level sanctions against Russia and Rosatom.-Yasnodark (talk) 15:53, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Do you have reliable sources that state this event is “unorecedented”, that radiation leak is probable, that this event has compromised nuclear security of the world and that sanctions will be pursued? EF5 16:00, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note that nothing confirms if it was an attack or not yet, it remains a claim. Masem (t) 16:03, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. This is a highly irresponsible and dangerous event, whether it was a deliberate attack or an accidental collision. Fortunately, the damage has not led to a major nuclear incident. It's possible that the situation might deteriorate, but so far the impact has been limited to accusations and speculation. Unless some major nuclear leak occurs, this isn't significant enough to post in ITN. Modest Genius talk 16:06, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per all above. Covered by ongoing, given the lack of major effects. The Kip (contribs) 18:47, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- I advise you to read the statements of
"Greenpeace"
- https://www.greenpeace.org/ukraine/novyny/3386/condemns-russian-explosive-drone-strike-on-chornobyl-shelter/
- https://www.greenpeace.org/ukraine/en/news/3380/condemns-russian-explosive-drone-strike-on-chornobyl-shelter/
- https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-ukraine-stateless/2025/02/3d163c50-20250214_mis_chornobyl-analysis-of-drone-strike_v1_2-2.pdf
“We condemn Russia’s action and its war machine for this strike, and we call on the international community to take action – by ending Russia’s threat to Ukraine’s nuclear plants, and prosecuting the Russian government for international war crimes,” said Shaun Burnie from Greenpeace Ukraine.
“With this outrageous attack, Russia is escalating its war against Ukraine to a new level. It proves that there are no limits to Putin’s aggression and the Russian government is willing to put the Ukrainian and European population at risk. This could be the final wake-up call to the international community to urgently send more support to Ukraine to protect its critical infrastructure, including its highly vulnerable operating nuclear power plants,” said Jan Vande Putte, nuclear expert at Greenpeace Ukraine.
I find it very funny to hear all this, any Russian attack is just as random as ISIS or Hamas attack, if anyone doubts the unprecedentedness of the event, let them find similar cases in history and give these examples.--Yasnodark (talk) 15:11, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Geraldine Thompson
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): FOX 35 Orlando, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Yoblyblob (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Florida state Senator Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 14:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose on quality for nowArticle has a big uncited paragraph in the Career section and the article does not even have a sentence mentioning her death. If this is fixed, please let me know and I will change my vote to support. (Side note: I added a level-four header to the nomination) TNM101 (chat) 15:12, 14 February 2025 (UTC)- @TNM101 updated that paragraph with citations and created a separate section for death. It was in the life and career section before Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 17:50, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Changing my vote to support per above TNM101 (chat) 04:15, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Looks sufficiently sourced and meets length standards. --Engineerchange (talk) 19:35, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article's quality is good enough for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Sam Walton (talk) 15:40, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
February 13
[edit]
February 13, 2025
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: David E. Sellers
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Valley Reporter
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American architect, based in Vermont. Major figure in the design/build movement. Obit published 13 February. Thriley (talk) 20:34, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose, there are 12 CN tags, there seems to be a COI issue, and there also seems to be way to many images. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:16, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Wally Gabler
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Detroit News, The Albertan
Credits:
- Nominated by Cbl62 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Canadian football quarterback (1966-1972) Cbl62
- Support - looks good ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 13:52, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 21:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Sukri Bommagowda
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hindustan Times The Hans India
Credits:
- Nominated by TNM101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kelisi (talk · give credit) and Julius Barclay (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian folk singer TNM101 (chat) 04:39, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - I think it looks just long enough ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 13:53, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 02:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Taichung department store explosion
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A gas explosion (pictured) inside of a Shin Kong Mitsukoshi department store in Taichung, Taiwan, kills 4 people and injures 39 others. (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press, New York Times, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by SpectralIon (talk · give credit)
- Support on notability Pretty rare for a store to explode like that. Multiple news orgs are covering this, so passes the notability bar in my opinion. Although, I would like to see the article just a bit longer in length. TNM101 (chat) 04:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose a tragic accident of no lasting encyclopaedic relevance. Stephen 06:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Stephen: Has there been any discussion about raising the bar for inclusion for disasters/mass casualties events? As I can't find any in the archives. A common criticism of ITN is that it's death-obsessed. My concern is that if ITN regs are more conservative on this front, non-Western events are more likely to fail while Western events, which typically get more !votes by non-regulars, are more likely to succeed. Would it be worth having a wider discussion? I don't see anything about encyclopedic relevance at WP:ITN Kowal2701 (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Kowal2701 There is a discussion on the ITN talk page TNM101 (chat) 07:59, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Stephen: Has there been any discussion about raising the bar for inclusion for disasters/mass casualties events? As I can't find any in the archives. A common criticism of ITN is that it's death-obsessed. My concern is that if ITN regs are more conservative on this front, non-Western events are more likely to fail while Western events, which typically get more !votes by non-regulars, are more likely to succeed. Would it be worth having a wider discussion? I don't see anything about encyclopedic relevance at WP:ITN Kowal2701 (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Stephen. _-_Alsor (talk) 08:43, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Stephen, "people died" is not a reason to promote something to the main page (or even create an article for that matter). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:20, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Tragic, but doesn't rise to the level of ITN. The Kip (contribs) 18:48, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 Munich car attack
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A car rams (aftermath pictured) into a crowd during a trade union demonstration by ver.di in Munich, Germany, resulting in 2 deaths and 37 injuries (Post)
Alternative blurb: A car rams into a crowd at a trade union demonstration in Munich, Germany resulting in two people being killed and 37 others being injured
News source(s): Sky News NBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by TNM101 (talk · give credit)
- Created by MemeDab99 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ShoBDin (talk · give credit) and Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Oppose- While definitely notable enough for Portal:Current events, not a single person died, and I don't see a major impact besides Germany tightening security.
- Changing to weak support per below. EF5 14:41, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support but I think the blurb needs to be clarified. From the summary in the linked article, it states that the attacker drove into a demonstration by the ver.di trade union. Attacks on union members in Germany, a place about to hold a federal election in 10 days, are going to be in themselves well more impactful than attacks on groups of otherwise unconnected civilians. Oppose on quality - everything's cited but the length isn't where I'd be comfortable supporting to put on the front page. Departure– (talk) 14:51, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- I added an altblurb based on what you said TNM101 (chat) 14:59, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait Per above, an attack like this just before a G7 country holds an election is pretty unexpected but the article right now is very short. (For transparency's sake, I remember the Magdeburg attack article being way longer than this when I nom'd it.) The blurbs could do with a fair bit more brevity too. Yo.dazo (talk) 16:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Needs work Seems quite significant due to its proximity to the Munich conference and the coming election. But its prose is still quite rough. I started copy-editing but was getting edit conflicts so it will need a while to become settled and stable. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:45, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Checking back on this, I found that some copy-editing was still needed. And there seems to be significant confusion as to whether the perp had a criminal record. The article says that a minister has back-tracked but there's no citation for this. The German language article has more but it's based on liveblog proseline rather than consolidated analysis. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:03, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - Some unique aspects, but impact seems comparatively limited versus past attacks. Article is also nowhere near long or detailed enough. The Kip (contribs) 18:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Not of encyclopedic significance. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose simply because there isn't a single death. I could reconsider if one of the critically injured victims die in hospital, considering it is likely to somewhat affect the results of the upcoming election. Update 2/16/25: I maintain my oppose despite the deaths because there are seemingly no election-altering polling boosts resulting from this attack. It has no real impact. --SpectralIon 22:31, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Incidents like this are way more than just their fatality/casualty count. Please see WP:MINIMUMDEATHS for more details, irony fully intended. Yo.dazo (talk) 10:49, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability due to lack of fatalities and no clear motive. –DMartin 00:13, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support as it's been widely reported in news, meets notability criteria. DarkSpartan (talk) 06:26, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support the attack is following on from one before Christmas, in a country with a popular/dangerous far right party (AFD) and feeding into anti-immigration sentiment. Important global meeting happening in Munich on the same day. It's not about the death count. Secretlondon (talk) 08:08, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait - Basically a sum of everything noted above - notable event in the context of the current German political climate preceding the election, but there haven't been any reported casualties yet, and the article itself still needs to be worked on in terms of quality. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 10:43, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Ramming attacks have been on the rise, including in Germany. I'm doubtful this will have much of an impact beyond those directly involved. We posted the 2024 Magdeburg car attack and 2025 New Orleans truck attack, but those killed multiple people and injured many more than this one, which seems comparatively minor. The article has only three sentences describing what happened, the rest is personal information about the suspect - in so much detail that it makes me uncomfortable about WP:BLPCRIME and WP:NPF. I've tagged the article accordingly. Modest Genius talk 13:25, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - Two people died in hospital from the attack, possibly affecting the notability and the blurb. Yeshivish613 (talk) 19:45, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- According to opposing votes added in the nomination above, "'people died' is not a reason to promote something to the main page (or even create an article for that matter)". Is it valid here too? ArionStar (talk) 05:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- strong oppose posting this is like posting any shooting attack in the usa that features in the news. Knife and car attacks are not notable in europe anymore unless the casualty count is significant (of note, 2 people were stabbed in Austria this weekend. Don't even think there is (or should be) an article). Converserly 18 people, including kids were killed in a stampede in regards to that omen that is kumbh mela 2024.Sportsnut24 (talk) 13:12, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
February 12
[edit]
February 12, 2025
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and Technology
|
(Closed) Elon Musk and unions
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Several unions are suing to stop Elon Musk from accessing personal data of workers, students and retirees in different agency IT systems in his role as the head of the newly created DOGE agency. (Post)
News source(s): CBS, Politico, Forbes
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Shushugah (talk · give credit)
- Oppose There is a huge mass of lawsuits thrown at Trump and Musk/DOGE that focusing on any one would be inappropriate. The idea of there being a constitutional crisis has gained traction in the media, so that itself may be an appropriate ongoing if readily confirmed and a good article was there for it. Masem (t) 23:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose trivial lawsuit. Scuba 00:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per @Masem plus WP:STUB QalasQalas (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose good-faith nom as per Masem. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) AMAN (naval exercise)
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: AMAN 2025, a multinational naval exercise organized by the Pakistan Navy, concluded in Karachi, featuring naval forces from more than 60 nations. (Post)
News source(s): Arab News, AA, GT, The News, Dawn
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
- Oppose - Article has not been updated (it is still in future tense even though the exercises presumably already happened) and this exercise seems fairly routine so I'm not sure how notable it is ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The article states that it is
held every two years
and the section on the 2025 drill has only about 3-4 sentences about it TNM101 (chat) 15:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC) - Oppose The section that's about this year's AMAN is only 2 paragraphs. I'm also noticing a few errors in the sentences, Doesn't look like it has been updated very well. TheHiddenCity (talk) 17:28, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Routine event, no indication of any lasting impacts, very little information available in the article. Modest Genius talk 17:31, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - if it's not even notable enough for it's own article, it's not ITN. And only one independent (and local) reference about it? Nfitz (talk) 17:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 Greek presidential election
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Konstantinos Tasoulas (pictured) is elected President of Greece by the Hellenic Parliament. (Post)
News source(s): Ekathimerini in English
Credits:
- Nominated by Moraljaya67 (talk · give credit)
- Comment Is this ITNR? Even the article about the President states that it is mainly a ceremonial role TNM101 (chat) 14:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Per WP:ITN/R, the election of whoever administers the executive of their state/government qualifies (whether that be the head of state or head of government). That then references this list which says that the Greek PM is the office that administers the executive, not the president. So long story short: no, it's not ITN/R and I am going to remove that from the nom. Thanks for catching that TNM101. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:32, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, all changes to head of state are ITNR. even ceremonial ones like the King of England, or President of Greece. Scuba 20:00, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- No, they are not. Read the criteria again. Repeating the same thing despite what everyone is telling you is a bad look. --RockstoneSend me a message! 06:25, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose This is not ITNR per TNM101 above, and seems to be a very ordinary and ceremonial election procedure which will not have any lasting significance. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:23, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Greek President is head of state, qualifies for ITNR. Scuba 20:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- The President of Greece is not a head of state that falls within the ITNR definition as it is currently worded. Because there has not been a "change, reelection or reappointment in the holder of the office which administers the executive of the [Greek] state", this is not ITNR. WP:OTHERSTUFF examples of times when we have incorrectly treated changes in head of state as ITNR despite them not actually administering anything, do not overrule the plain language of the ITNR rule itself. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Greek President is head of state, qualifies for ITNR. Scuba 20:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait until he becomes president. Sakellaropoulou is still currently the president. Scuba 20:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support since we post changes of ceremonial heads of state (president of Ireland or GermanyP routinely This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Please take note that the current president of Ireland has been there since 2011, and the current president of Germany since 2017; the relevant ITN/R guideline meanwhile was agreed upon in 2021. (This is probably also a good example of why we shouldn't put too much stock in precedent when it comes to ITN.) Yo.dazo (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality, but I see no reason why this isn't an update to an encyclopedic subject. What ITN has done in the past is an "other stuff" argument in either direction. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:15, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- ??? Was this posted under the wrong section? we have a change in the head of state, that's ITNR. Scuba 00:22, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- No, only the change in the office that administers the executive is ITNR. This is not, because the President of Greece is the head of state, not the head of government.-- RockstoneSend me a message! 06:25, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- ??? Was this posted under the wrong section? we have a change in the head of state, that's ITNR. Scuba 00:22, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - not ITNR. The President of Greece does not administer the executive, the PM does. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 06:25, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose It is only a ceremonial position, without any real political power, he is just a decorative plant chosen by the prime minister.--Μιχαήλ Δεληγιάννης (talk) 13:45, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Rockstone and Mikedelis. Seems to be an entirely ceremonial position, with the PM wielding the real power. The Kip (contribs) 18:04, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per others as it is a ceremonial position. --SpectralIon 22:29, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support per my reading of WP:ITN/R. "Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administers the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above[which includes all sovereign states], as listed at List of current heads of state and government", The President of Greece is listed as head of state in the article. –DMartin 00:16, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- The changes in the head of state is not ITNR; and I can't believe you ignored what you had just copied and pasted (LOL). The "Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administers the executive of their respective state/government" (emphasis mine) is, which is not always the head of state. Above, there's a legend specifying that " Green cells indicate leaders whose offices constitutionally administer the executive of their respective state/government (emphasis mine). The President of Greece is not shaded green; the prime minister is.
- This is not the first time I've seen this criterion misrepresented. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:21, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose since this is a ceremonial role. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:30, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm surprised this isn't closed yet. All supporting opinions are based on a misreading/misremembering of WP:ITN/R criteria, and there's no single word on how the new president is relevant enough for a normal blurb as well. Yo.dazo (talk) 13:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
February 11
[edit]
February 11, 2025
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Sigrid Metz-Göckel
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): foundation
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ipigott (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Pioneering sociologist for women's studies from the 1970s, professor in Dortmund. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:57, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support, article is well sourced and long enough. History6042😊 (Contact me) 23:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Helen Hays
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
- Updated by CAWylie (talk · give credit) and Neutrality (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American ornithologist and conservationist. Obit published 11 February. Thriley (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - looks good enough to post ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Can't see any issues. Nice article. Yakikaki (talk) 21:25, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 02:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Donn Moomaw
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Football Foundation
Credits:
- Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced. Death announced on this date. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - well cited ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:08, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - wel cited. Cbl62 (talk) 05:05, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support more information would certainly be useful, but the article generally looks good enough for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Sam Walton (talk) 15:41, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Margarita Forés
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABS-CBN News
Credits:
- Nominated by Moraljaya67 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: She was a Filipino chef. The article looks good. Moraljaya67 (talk) 05:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There's some cn tags since a major source that was used throughout the article was a deadlink that redirected to a car ad and no longer supported some of the article's statements. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- er... that source can be accessed through web.archive.org though? – robertsky (talk) 05:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak oppose 1 CN tag remains in the article. Once fixed, consider this a support. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:25, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- The CN tag has been resolved. toweli (talk) 18:14, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support No remaining issues as far as I can see. Good article. Yakikaki (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 02:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Moses Lim
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNA
Credits:
- Nominated by Robertsky (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Justanothersgwikieditor (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: A household name in Singapore, and likely was well-known to varying extents in other countries as he was part of the cast of the Under One Roof (Singaporean TV series) that was exported to multiple countries. – robertsky (talk) 03:54, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support One cn tag shouldn't keep this article from getting posted. Overall, well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - yep, looks good enough ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:07, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Sam Walton (talk) 20:26, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Philip Brady
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5], [6]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TVHead (talk · give credit), Afterwriting (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Happily888 (talk) 01:10, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There are still a few uncited statements in the article. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Unsourced section and some cn tags. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, there is a whole uncited paragraph. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:19, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
References
[edit]Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com]
rather than using <ref></ref>
tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref>
tags are being used, here are their contents: