Wikipedia In the news Candidates

Source From Wikipedia English.

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.

Iberian lynx
Iberian lynx

Glossary

  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually - a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

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

Please do...

  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Archives

June 24

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections


Aricell battery factory fire

Article: Aricell battery factory fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A fire at a lithium battery factory in the South Korean city of Hwaseong has killed at least 22 migrant workers, most of them Chinese nationals. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, BBC, NY Times, CNN, Al Jazeera
Credits:

Ainty Painty (talk) 17:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 23

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections


RD: Dennis Deer

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

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 16:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Sergeant Cecil

Article: Sergeant Cecil (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Racing Post, At the Races
Credits:

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

British racehorse. Needs some inline citations. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 03:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support sure it needs some inline citations, otherwise article good enough to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dagestan attack

Article: 2024 Dagestan attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Dagestan, Russia, 27 people die in a coordinated attack. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Islamic terrorists stage a number of attacks across Dagestan, Russia, killing 21 people and injuring dozens of others
Alternative blurb II: ​ Islamic terrorists attack a number of locations, including a church, and a synagogue, across Dagestan, Russia, killing 21 people and injuring dozens of others
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Article updated
  • Wait Article is barely more than a stub at this point, and situation is still quite vague. Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt As more details have emerged this has been headline news for nearly 24h and the story is still developing. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. No indication of significance. This should be a bullet point in a list of terrorist incidents in Russia, not an article featured on the main page. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We've posted terrorist incidents in the us where like 4 people died even thought hundreds die every day in Chiraq
    An islamist attack with 10 deaths and a burned synagogue and a church is clearly significant, even if you think otherwise Kasperquickly (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Casually throwing around the term "Chiraq" isn't exactly something indicative of an editor fit for Wikipedia. The Kip (contribs) 20:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the equivalent of saying hundreds die everyday in Ukraine, so an attack where 10 people died isn't significant. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 23:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's in the context of the war. The ISIS insurgency in the North Caucasus doesn't usually have attacks like this Personisinsterest (talk) 10:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't care how many people died, and I don't care what we've posted in the past. Neither of those are relevant to whether this has any encyclopedic significance. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At least 15 police officers died, around 30 people overall. Of course it's a significant attack. BilboBeggins (talk) 06:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Very short article, and seems comparatively minor in the grand scheme of terrorist attacks. The Kip (contribs) 20:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changing to Support, the article’s been expanded and since my initial comment the death toll’s increased from seven to 27. The Kip (contribs) 17:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Wait Article needs expansion, but otherwise significant enough. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 01:46, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Significant event. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:13, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 28 deaths are enough Braganza (talk) 05:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability but it is wise to wait until the article is of higher quality and more information is known. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 06:15, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for more information on the perpetrators and aftermath. Jaguarnik (talk) 07:22, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Major attack. Harizotoh9 (talk) 09:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Deadly terrorist attacks targeting religious buildings (churches and a synagogue) are a very big deal.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a tragic attack targeted against specific people and a large death toll. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:16, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment given events Russia is involved with the blurb needs more clarity as to who dud the attacks or their intent. Eg this appears to not be tied to the Ukraine conflict directly. Masem (t) 16:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Gave it a go with 2 altblurbs. Note that I've purposefully foregone the mention of 6 dead terrorists because I don't think it's fair to count them among the people that they've murdered Kasperquickly (talk) 17:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Forgor to vote. clearly a significant event. Kasperquickly (talk) 17:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I oppose the proposed Alts at this time. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 17:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 22

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


RD: Howard Bernstein

Article: Howard Bernstein (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Manchester Evening News
Credits:

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

British politician. Manchester City Council chief executive. --Classicwiki (talk) 10:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article seems to be of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:26, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article looks alright now. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:16, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Kamala Hampana

Article: Kamala Hampana (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deccan Herald, The Hindu
Credits:

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

Indian writer. Still needs citations. --Classicwiki (talk) 10:29, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 21

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Jamie Kellner

Article: Jamie Kellner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety, Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

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

American TV executive. Founded Fox and the WB. Article still needs some details and would be nice to have infobox with photo. --Classicwiki (talk) 10:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support looks okay to me. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Spiridon Vangheli

Article: Spiridon Vangheli (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Președinte.md, TVR Moldova
Credits:

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

Moldovan/Bessarabian/Romanian writer and prose writer. Known worldwide for his book Guguță. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.55.27.113 (talk) 02:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: I have updated this nomination to direct to the correct article. Unfortunately, I do not think this article will make it to RD in its current state. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as Classicwiki said, article needs a lot of work. PrinceofPunjabTALK 16:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: James K. Irving

Article: James K. Irving (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Globe and Mail, CBC
Credits:

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

Canadian businessman and member of the Irving family in New Brunswick; last living son of K. C. Irving, his younger brother died a month prior.B3251(talk) 00:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Darren Lewis (American football)

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

American footballer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait - lacking inline citations. Staraction (talk | contribs) 23:45, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose College section have no source at all. PrinceofPunjabTALK 16:26, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Keith Locke

Article: Keith Locke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff, Radio NZ
Credits:

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

New Zealand politician ecologist. Died June 21, 2024. Kiwichris (talk) 02:24, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've beaten me to it by 12 minutes, Kiwichris. Schwede66 02:37, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ready article is in a very good shape. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Cn tags have been sorted now. Kiwichris (talk) 04:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 20

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports


Tamil Nadu alcohol poisoning

Article: 2024 Tamil Nadu alcohol poisoning (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Tamil Nadu, India, at least 54 people have died in an alcohol poisoning incident. (Post)
News source(s): BBC TIME
Credits:

Article updated

High number of fatalities warrant an ITN posting. | Mfarazbaig (talk) 18:22, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Per List of alcohol poisonings in India, these are regular events, and I can't see that we've previously posted any of these (some of which had much higher fatality counts). Black Kite (talk) 18:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • We did post a similar incident in Russia in 2016. —Cryptic 20:32, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The non-posting of alcohol incidents with mass deaths, which happen in India at an average frequency of 2 years, as I will term it, is not evidence of its non-notability, rather the lack of an ultra efficient reporting by ITN. Using the predecessor as an argument may be a good way to judge if the current case, doesn't matter if more or less severe, should be added or not. However that may not be the case with this particular case, prior incidents related to which were severely neglected in the past few years. Rather discussion surrounding this case may serve as a landmark decision for future incidents related to it, maybe for those from India and abroad. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 06:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Black Kite. Unfortunately a routine event in India. --Masem (t) 20:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. No indication of significance. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support inasmuch as building fires are also common but we posted the one in Kuwait This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support While sadly "common", the whopping death count is substantial and rare. In fact, given that these happen every few years, it seems to be an endemic problem in India, ie it's a specific example of a significant consistent problem in Indian society. That means it's significant. Also, building fires are common but ones that kill over 50 are rare events. It's more notable than "American celeb dies" stories. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please do not compare one nomination to another like that per WP:ITNATA — Masem (t) 00:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support More than 50 deaths. Besides, alcohol deaths are not that routine in India, especially when you take into account that 50+ people died at one go. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 01:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Clear indication of notability, and not a regular routine in India in a way that 1) the high Fatality Count, 2) the overall media attention it is getting, 3) reported by international media highlighting its newsworthiness and broader public interest, 4) the further political and technical and legal implication it has caused and will likely cause in near future, 5) societal inequalities and public health disparities that get highlighted with this case. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 06:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • For the cases with higher death counts, previously unreported, read my response above to Black Kite. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 06:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As an Indian myself, it is unfortunate for me to say that alcohol poisoning is common in India. While 50+ deaths may seem like a rare occurrence, it is unlikely to have any significant long-term impact. Case in point, it is not even the biggest news topic in India right now. In fact, it ranks behind the 2024 NEET controversy, Speaker election, Euros and the T20 World Cup in term of converge by the Indian media. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Large number of casualties (250+) and by all indications there appears to be significant political and community reactions from this incident (as opposed to other incidents). Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per PrinceofPunjab and Masem, it does not appear to have any sort of long term impact. LiamKorda 16:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dylon Powley

Article: Dylon Powley (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV News, Northern Tribune
Credits:

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

Former Canadian soccer player. Died in a motorcycle accident. --Classicwiki (talk) 10:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Joshua Wade

Article: Joshua Wade (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Anchorage Daily News, AP
Credits:

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

American serial killer. Article published 20 June, but appears to have died 14 June. Disclaimer: Nominating this article does not imply that I endorse or support this individual. It is just a recent death I read about.--Classicwiki (talk) 09:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Johnson (cricketer, born 1971)

Article: David Johnson (cricketer, born 1971) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

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

Former Indian cricketer. RIP. Ktin (talk) 16:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Brief career" Oppose Iadmctalk  16:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What does "Brief career" mean? All that was accomplished in his career has been included. Unless you are referring to his career being brief and hence not important to post? If so -- I would request you have a look at the note above i.e. Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post. Ktin (talk) 04:22, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's not enough here to warrant his inclusion — Iadmctalk  06:26, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Obviously notable, but too stubby and vague ("owing to different issues, he couldn’t prolong even his coaching career), and a lot of the text is identical to this article, that needs fixing. Black Kite (talk) 09:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've removed the plagiarism (which has left it even more stubby, of course). Black Kite (talk) 09:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Taylor Wily

Article: Taylor Wily (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Associated Press The New York Times
Credits:

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

Staraction (talk | contribs) 04:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - But the article needs a lot of work. I've expanded it with the various obituaries that have been written about him. Harizotoh9 (talk) 06:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I sourced selected filmography list. BilboBeggins (talk) 06:44, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article looks good now. PrinceofPunjabTALK 16:26, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two {cn} tags remaining. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved the last two tags. Also for those who don't know, he was more than an actor, as he was part of the first UFC fight broadcast, the first knock out, as well as an American who competed in sumo competitions in Japan. Also, he got local coverage in Hawaii during his high school football days as an up and coming player, and was the third heaviest high school football player in the country at the time. So he got fairly consistent news coverage throughout his life. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Russell Morash

Article: Russell Morash (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WGBH
Credits:

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

American television producer and director. Created/produced/directed The French Chef, The Victory Garden, This Old House, and The New Yankee Workshop. Thriley (talk) 03:30, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait there are two cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks good now. --Vacant0 (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we have sources for Date and Place of Birth, please? --PFHLai (talk) 17:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted RD) Blurb/RD: Donald Sutherland

Article: Donald Sutherland (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Canadian actor Donald Sutherland (pictured) dies at the age of 88 (Post)
News source(s): Deadline
Credits:

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

Natg 19 (talk) 17:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality Article needs major ref work done as there are unsourced statements in career section, award section and a bit in the early life section. Might support blurb if article reflects his impact/how influential he was. Support blurb once article is up to shape. Defitnely notable and influential based on legacy section and per other arguments. Real shame. RIP President Snow. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:36, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Top of his field, the best actor that we had. His body of work tells you lot, his films are jewels of world cinema. And he was active to last years of his life, so it is decades-spanning career. Him dying is a very big news. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not much point in talking about a blurb until the sourcing is improved.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support RD sufficient quality now. Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb as RD proposer. A good/famous actor but does not rise to the level of a blurb. Will try to do more sourcing work later today. Natg 19 (talk) 19:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb simply having numerous films under their belt, nothing in the article indicates he was a great figure in the acting world (eg no legacy or impact) Masem (t) 19:35, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But he was a great figure in acting world, we know it. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:08, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's nowhere stated in the article. Simply being an actor with a lot of roles and even a few Oscar's isn't enough, that's handwaving. We need an indepth coverage to explain why he has a legacy or impact from his career. — Masem (t) 20:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He is a brand, it's as simple as that.
    The point of blurbing deaths of famous people is to inform that person known worldwide died, like in case of Sydney Poitier, Henry Kissinger, Jiang Zemin, the Queen.
    We blurbed former Greece King, surely we can blurb Sutherland? BilboBeggins (talk) 20:29, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The RD line serves that purpose. Blurbs are reserved for cases where the death has draw attention or in the case or great figures that represent transformative ppl on their field — Masem (t) 21:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ironically, Sutherland did not win an Oscar, and actually won few traditional awards. He is noted as one of the "best without an Oscar", though he got an honorary one in 2017. Natg 19 (talk) 23:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not Ready for the usual reason. Oppose blurb on merits. Sutherland was a good and well-known actor, but not in the top tier of the profession. Not that long ago the community turned down Kirk Douglas and Olivia de Havilland, two giants from the golden age of Hollywood. I'm interpreting that as setting a very high bar for blurbs for actors. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Two giants were turned down wrongly, it's bad to refer to wrong decisions.
    He passes Sidney Poitier threshold and is bigger than Betty White whom we blurbed. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Betty White was a bad post because it was based on popularity. Poitier has a significant impact on Hollywood due to his acting skills and race, which he extended after his career, creating a clear legacy. There is not really anything to say the same for D. Sutherland here, which is needed to post a blurb — Masem (t) 21:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Poitier was famous for lead roles in films that were nominated for Oscar in important categories or won. Poitier had activism, Sutherland was active in anti-Vietnam war movement.
    They both won honorary Oscars.
    But unlike Poitier, who in his last thirty or thirty five years only had one prominent role in Jackal, Sutherland had dozens of them. Pride and Prejudice, Six degrees of separation, Cold mountain, and I am listing only Oscar nommed films. BilboBeggins (talk) 22:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Correct. Hollywood actors are known figures, but they're still just actors, and we shouldn't overstate their world impact. Sutherland is worthy of being listed on the front page as RD but not with a blurb as a top story. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:37, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per above and as a matter of principle This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The irony here, of course, is that we almost certainly not going to blurb Sutherland, a very famous and widely loved actor, but we have just blurbed Mays, someone about which the vast majority of the planet would say "who?". (That's not a comment on Americentrism by the way, we have blurbed two non-American sportspeople this year as well). We really do need to think about how illogical this process is. Black Kite (talk) 22:29, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    100% agreement although I don't accept it as a foregone conclusion based on several votes. If several days are needed to improve the article's citations and make his legacy clearer, we should allow that, but his death is major news and that's the entire point of ITN. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 22:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I also thought about this. Why we blurbed Mays, who has 30 wikipages, Shane Warne, who had 30 wiki pages at the moment of his death, but we didn't blurb Vangelis, we didn't blurb Christopher Plummer (in my opinion we should jave blurbed him).
    Donald Sutherland has 80 wiki pages, he is household name worldwide. BilboBeggins (talk) 23:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I definitely feel that this process is odd and unintuitive, so either we should get rid of death blurbs altogether, or codify the process to which one gets a death blurb. Currently, it is seems arbitrary and based on "transcendence" and "significant impact", whatever that actually means. I personally am biased in favor of sportspeople, but there needs to be a way to eliminate personal biases from ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 23:36, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ITN is not about fame or popularity. Blurbs should be for great figures with articles that are some of our best content, even if the person is obscure or not well know outside their field. Otherwise when we use fame or name recognition, ITN blurbs favor western people and those in highly public area like politics or entertainment. We have to fight that bias by not considered fame or obscurity as long as the death is reported by multiple sources and the article respects our best work to be featured on the main page. — Masem (t) 00:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But this is my biggest issue though, what makes someone a "great figure"? Some here would argue that Sutherland is. Not sure how you define "best content" either. Does the article have be a GA or FA? Natg 19 (talk) 02:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The two main factors specified on WP:ITN are a) the quality of the article, including material added or updated to reflect the recent event, and b) the general significance of the developments. The article has already been significantly improved and it continues to improve. Two days ago, it had an ORES predicted quality of C (3.74), but it's now B (3.88). There are 80 language links on the article. It's front page news on Le Monde (French), The Times of India (Indian English), and The Asahi Shimbun (Japanese). That is not indicative of Western bias. It shouldn't be up to anyone here to overrule the news to decide he's not a "great figure". It's major news and replacing an old news item such as the NBA finals with a blurb about Donald Sutherland's death would significantly improve the main page. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 02:33, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:ITNRDBLURB is the criteria for RD blurbs, which are in addition to the main ITN criteria we don't have to use fame, popularity, role count, or other factors, we consider what their impact was in their field, and honestly, there is nothing in our article that demonstrates that. That type of content and sourcing from secondary RSes is how we determine a "great figure", and not simply by how much coverage an RD gets. — Masem (t) 03:20, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My points about the international significance and coverage remain valid. I'm not arguing based on fame, popularity, or role count, so I'm not sure why you're mentioning those. The selective approach often taken here towards recent deaths reads as elitist and disregards the impact of films and television on culture. Discounting his role in M*A*S*H which had a major impact on views of war and authority, his performance in Ordinary People, and his other contributions seems shortsighted. As to his impact on the field, he was honored with an honorary Academy Award for lifetime achievement in 2017. The Academy doesn't award those to any old schlub that's famous. His recent death is newsworthy and would serve as a more compelling current use of the ITN blurbs than several entries currently featured. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 05:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    we consider what their impact was in their field, and honestly, there is nothing in our article that demonstrates that Sutherland had a massive impact in the field of cinema, as is indicated by news publications worldwide prominently reporting on his death. The fact that our article wrongly doesn't reflect that point doesn't mean anything (cf. WP:ARTN). voorts (talk/contributions) 08:40, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For purpose of what ITN is and that blurb RDs are meant to be exceptions from the rule, and that blurbed items are supposed to reflect the best of WP's work, the failure of the article to be properly sourced as a BLP and the lack of content from secondary sources on how he impacted the industry or left a legacy in clear format is a major roadblock in considering this as an a blurb. International coverage US inly a indicator if a famous name, unkess all that coverage speaks to his legacy and not simply talking about his death or reprintimg wire stories. — Masem (t) 09:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I will add that since this ITN was started a Legacy section has been added which starts bring this more in line with demonstrating"great figure". But it is still miles away in terms of sourcing to be even included as an RD. — Masem (t) 11:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And Mays certainly did not deserve a blurb as I’ve repeatedly said This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. The New York Times has not one, not two, but three features about him on their front page right now. The Canadian The Globe and Mail has him featured at the top of their front page. The BBC has him featured top left. The man is a giant, one of the most famous Canadian actors of any age. I don't know if it's a bias disfavoring entertainment figures, Canadians, or both, but not doing a blurb would be doubling down on previous bad decisions. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 22:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Not remotely of the level of significance for a blurb. I was pleasantly surprised earlier, when I saw that he was nominated for RD only, but clearly I raised my hopes too soon. Just to be clear, being a famous person that people have heard of does not mean you're automatically blurbed. Blurbs are for the exceptional few who transcend all others.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Receiving broad coverage at most news sources, and these stories about his career and death are the most-read stories at those sources. Sutherland was a household name, widely respected and richly honored. While the current ITN selection process is biased, public interest is an inherent factor is newsworthiness. To be useful, ITN must grasp that. Other-language ITNs do a much better job of this. Dr Fell (talk) 00:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, weak oppose blurb Big hunger games fan but unfortunately not notable for blurb (I would argue he's more notable then the locked baseball player, though.....) Sharrdx (talk) 01:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb a popular actor but he was not on the top of his field. LiamKorda 03:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He was top of his field. BilboBeggins (talk) 05:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    His field was acting. Meryl Streep and Daniel Day Lewis are the toppers in this field but he isn't. LiamKorda 10:45, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That of course is an entirely subjective opinion. Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A non-subjective opinion held by editors who you want to silence. Abductive (reasoning) 19:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's why we need the coverage of why reliable, secondary sources consider a person to be top of their field, which must be present in the article, as to avoid the handwaving either way that a person does or doesn't deserve a blurb. We want to take editors' personal options and IHATEIT/ILIKEIT type arguments (which are occurring even in this blurb discuss) out of the picture and focus on if we are providing the reader the right justification for a blurb. — Masem (t) 21:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Photo RD Only He was certainly one of Canada's oldest best actors, but far enough from the top of any easily Googlable list. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You know we don't do photo RDs. He was top Canadian actor. BilboBeggins (talk) 05:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And you know what Keanu Reeves, Rachel McAdams, Jim Carrey, Sarah Polley, the Trailer Park Boys, Evangeline Lily and Bret Hart say about making our dreams a reality. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose article is tagged as needing more sources. Not what we need for ITN— Iadmctalk  05:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK the More Sources tag has gone as more have been added. Weak Support now — Iadmctalk  07:42, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb per Bilbo Beggins, Daniel Quinlan and Dr Fell, who all make excellent points. Jusdafax (talk) 06:38, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, blurbs should be reserved for those people whose deaths and/or funerals could support a stand-alone article. Abductive (reasoning) 06:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not the only reason for the blurbs. BilboBeggins (talk) 07:17, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I too still stand by this argument. I have voted to support death blurbs on an WP:ILIKEIT basis before, but I really think these articles are only suitable for blurbing if we have at least an extensive section on the individual's death. That is the work we are featuring in these situations. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That would mean we blurb barely notable people who die in really odd ways and get a long death section in their article, and I don't think that's what you all really want, but please correct me if I'm wrong. voorts (talk/contributions) 08:42, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That doesn't happen. "Death" does not mean "cause of death", instead it is about our response to the event of a famous person dying. Abductive (reasoning) 09:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It does actually include the cause of death. An unfortunate accident or high-profile murder makes something much more likely to blurb. It's not like barely-notable people frequently die by rube-goldberg machine that needs two paragraphs to explain. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:49, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Show me a time when that caused a user to nominate someone for a blurb. Abductive (reasoning) 19:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not anywhere in ITN guidelines at all. That would lead to editors gaming the system to fill a death article with reaction kudzu just to justify that article and a blurb. Further, simply having a legit standalone evdeath article would not necessarily be sufficient if the person simply dies of old age. For example, we know Jimmy Carter is close. As a former US president he will likely have a state funeral and all that for a standalone, but whether he would be blurbed just for that is unckearm — Masem (t) 09:47, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're saying that it would motivate ITN editors to actually update and expand upon the articles they nominate? I'm not seeing the problem there. If the additions are low-quality, the blurb gets rejected for that reason. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:51, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Expanding a proper article with proper encyclopedic content would be reasonable. What I fear are editors, being told a requirement for an RD urn is a separate article about their death (which is not in our guidelines) will create an article with dozens of reaction statements from any possible reliable source to demonstrare the death was significant, with actually writing towards why the person should be taken as one of the greats — Masem (t) 12:14, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a strawman argument. Abductive (reasoning) 19:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We know you think Jimmy Carter is close. How many blurb arguments has this page seen since you started saying so? 30? 50? Give it a rest, please. He's a biographically living person. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:37, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    All I'm saying is that having a separate death article is not any guaranty of having a death blurb, nor a requirement for a blurb — Masem (t) 12:14, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If that was all you're saying, I wouldn't be here. Anyway, after checking to see when you started, I see it's not really a "you problem"; others began earlier and have followed since. Sorry for that. Still, a bit morbid a practice, generally. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, Oppose blurb Certainly RD worthy but I don't think he quite made the blurb -worthy level. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:49, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb on notability per BilboBeggins and Dr Fell. Renewal6 (talk) 11:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb He is evidently and significantly more famous than Willy Mays and the rest. Citing his appearances in well-known movies from M*A*S*H to the Hunger Games is superfluous busywork. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You will notice that no admin has even posted him to the RD ticker. And the rapid posting and lack of opposition to Willy Mays speaks for itself. Abductive (reasoning) 19:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Always with the negative waves..." Andrew🐉(talk) 20:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Accolades section should probably be orange tagged, several missing references to his nominations and awards. Oppose blurb An actor whose had a successful career doesn't rise to the level of ITN mention. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:38, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurb He was certainly not the most prominent person on his field. Also, I opposed Willie Mays's blurb because I knew that the next non-american death blurb will have people cite his blurb as a reason to push their candidate articles. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb A legendary actor, but not quite to the extent of one that we would blurb. The “but Willie Mays!!!” naysayers are silly. The Kip (contribs) 18:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality, support RD, weak support blurb when ready per Daniel Quinlan. Article still has way too many citation needed tags. Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:30, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Natg 19, @TDKR Chicago 101, @Pawnkingthree, @Ad Orientem, @Iadmc, @Kcmastrpc, @Staraction, @Trauma Novitiate, I believe you all opposed RD on the grounds of sourcing. I just added a bunch of citations. I am marking ready for RD at least. Feel free to remove if you still think there are quality issues with the article. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 05:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is better, for sure. Changed my vote to Support but this RD has already been posted. Trauma Novitiate (talk) 11:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Updated my vote since the article quality has improved substantially. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted RD Stephen 11:30, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • post-Posted comment - But now, whether you support or oppose a blurb, I think most of us can agree that this RD/Blurb process does not work. That’s why I posted this on our Talk Page recently: Please join the discussion ~~>Should RD’s have their own section separate from the In the News section?. Trauma Novitiate (talk) 12:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, it seems completely random and seemingly depends on time RD item is proposed. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is all this relevent to the already-posted item under discussion? Shouldn't this now be closed as done? — Iadmctalk  14:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, blurb discussion continues and discussing arguments about choosing whom to blurb is important. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. For an actor largely known for his work in movies, I find the lack of Oscar nominations let alone wins to be a pretty convincing reason why he should not be posted. Michael Douglas and Olivia de Havilland actually won competitive and yet we apparently didn't post them. Blurbs aren't meant to be a popularity contest. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 15:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Michael is alive and is turning 80 this summer. He was also one of those who pour tributes to Donald.
    He was lead actor in 70s and 80s, it was pretty cramped then. He lost his best chance for Golden Globe win for film to Robert DeNiro.
    Having no Oscar nominations while being top actor in his prime is also what makes him encyclopedically relevant — the best actor not to receive an Oscar nomination.
    And he got honorary Oscar, it's more important and indicative than the ones given to Cuba Gooding Jr., Tatum O'Neal, Mo'Nique and others who haven't achieved that much on film BilboBeggins (talk) 20:16, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Be careful not to WP:BLUDGEON the discussion, you've responded to quite a few oppose votes. The Kip (contribs) 21:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support adding photo While I remain opposed to a blurb, I think adding Sutherland's photo until something more interesting comes along or he drops off the RD list, is fine. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's have a photo, I am in! BilboBeggins (talk) 20:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, there should be a photo. Please weigh in on the Talk page ~~> Currently 2 options: RD or RD/blurb. How about a 3rd option: RD/photo but no blurb? so we can have consensus and get this option put in place! Trauma Novitiate (talk) 20:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please, do not WP:CANVASS individual people to weigh on open discussions elsewhere. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 06:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone please close this? It's already in ITN under RD — Iadmctalk  06:18, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion is ongoing about whether or not to have a blurb. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 06:22, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I see. Got it — Iadmctalk  06:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb and photo it's ok just to have an honourable mention as now. Blurb and photo not necessary — Iadmctalk  06:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah but it softens the blow to see a photo for the many who wanted a blurb and it didn’t reach consensus to blurb… Trauma Novitiate (talk) 20:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Post-posting comment) I weakly support a stronger mention than the RD list, mainly because there already is a RD blurb, but that blurb by itself illustrates why "most prominent person in the field" is a poor criterion. Baseball has practically no following outside US, Canada and Japan. Hence, I would reckon a similar amount of people is familiar with both Donald Sutherland and Willie Mays. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Eric Roberts has been seen by far more people than Willie Mays has, even though you very likely don't know who this is. Daß Wölf 16:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Far more amount of people are familiar with Donald Sutherland than Willie Mays. BilboBeggins (talk) 06:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Never heard of Mays. Sutherland is internationally known and acclaimed — Iadmctalk  06:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. In my opinion, this piece by Guardian shows that he was transformative, revered and top of the field [2]. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Iberian lynx

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


Article: Iberian lynx (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The iberian lynx is reclassified from endangered to vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Reuters CBS The Guardian
Credits:
This isn't usually what I see in ITNC, but I think it could be interesting. Inserted more links to news sources to demonstrate that the topic is relevant in the news. Article may need to be updated more with news-relevant information. Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:07, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose while it is a good and positive news, I do not think it a something that is blurbworthy. I would have supported it if it was a news about the cat's extinction (fortunately it isn't). PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support after thinking bout it a bit and reading other users' comments, I have changed my mind. PrinceofPunjabTALK 12:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per above, but sounds like a good dyk! Sharrdx (talk) 15:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For DYK, the article would have to be expanded fivefold in one week (not possible due to its size) or promoted to GA, so that isn't likely to happen right now. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose for this specific case which just doesn't rise to the level of blurbworthiness, but I would be more than happy to see more positive news like this one! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:08, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: Support on principle, to support having more positive conservation news on the encyclopedia's main page. Not everything has to be politics and disasters to be blurbworthy. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose per PrinceofPunjab and Chaotic Enby. Even though it is a positive news and make me happy to read it, I am of the opinion that it is not main page worthy. Also because it is not a popular animal or Species. LiamKorda 16:47, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I think years ago the Great Panda's reclassification was posted but I think it was coupled with Guerillas becoming critically endangered. But this one doesn't seem to be as notable. Scaramouche33 (talk) 17:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is type of news that an encyclopaedia should feature more.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Very appropriate for encyclopedia to include this on front page. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Important and major conservation news. The species was almost extinct not long ago. It's not often that nature topics are on the main page. --Mika1h (talk) 00:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Mika1h. Finally. Bremps... 00:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this is just the kind of good news story INT needs and the article is well written and sourced— Iadmctalk  06:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, a reclassification "on paper" with no lasting impact. Abductive (reasoning) 06:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This “paper” does not aim to have an impact, but the importance is that this reclassification is the confirmation of a reality, which is what is being debated if it is ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 08:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It certainly does, the humans who wrote the report were probably happy, maybe they took their spouses out to dinner. But this is just minor news of no lasting impact. Abductive (reasoning) 09:14, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Good news, and a decent article for us to feature. I would wonder if a move into "Near-Threatened" would be more appropriate for a feature than a move from "Endangered" to "Vulnerable." I hope to see more stories like this nominated, as it's a great way for us to feature our animal articles in ITN. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has been very big news in Spain and Portugal, where the lynx is basically the de facto symbol of environmental conservation. Lynx numbers aren't just growing, they're also spreading out to different areas than the ones they were reintroduced to. It's raised conversations about other areas of conservation, including rabbits, the main source of food for the lynx, which are currently suffering from a disease outbreak. It even has political relevance, as the destruction of the lynx was started in the Francoist period; debates on the legacy of Francoism are a huge issue in Spanish politics right now. I just can't understand the argument that this has "no lasting impact". --Grnrchst (talk) 12:29, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added this information re. hunting, and Franco's influence, to the article. Thanks for pointing it out! Staraction (talk | contribs) 14:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally the "positive news" arguments are unproductive, and, IMO, irrelevant. To this end, I was somewhat of the belief of opposing this as an administrative change (there are several endangered tiers, this is only between two adjacent ones, but Grnrchst's argument on the impact is convincing, so I'm also going to go support, even if the story is somewhat not just about the relisting itself. DarkSide830 (talk) 14:31, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Posted – robertsky (talk) 15:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support something to dilute the constant deaths spam. me likey Kasperquickly (talk) 17:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support Article looks good and I personally find any species on the brink of extinction blurb worthy. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:14, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A "vulnerable" species is three IUCN levels away from the brink of extinction. That's not a post-posting oppose or anything, as a good-looking animal article (especially with fur) is a sight for sore eyes. Just a reminder. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Kiril Simeonovski and BilboBeggins. This is what encyclopedic news looks like. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hear, hear! Yakikaki (talk) 21:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose — Many species have their classification changed each year. The iberian lynx is nothing special. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:34, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As none of those species were even nominated, much less supported and posted, I'd say it's fairly clear how this cat is all that. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:30, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

June 19

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


RD: George M. Woodwell

Article: George M. Woodwell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

American ecologist. Founder of the Woodwell Climate Research Center. Death announced 19 June. Thriley (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Whole uncited paragraphs. Needs some work before getting posted. More independent references needed. Bremps... 00:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose whole article is weirdly written, there are some primary sources and needs a lot of work. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Vandalism of Stonehenge

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


Article: Vandalism of Stonehenge (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The prehistoric Stonehenge is vandalized by Just Stop Oil climate protesters. (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post The Guardian
Credits:
ArionStar (talk) 00:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose besides not posting the other vandalism this group has tried to do in the past, they did not permanently damage Stonehenge compared to Clark Griswold. Publicity stunt which doesn't really make it appropriate for ITN. --Masem (t) 00:13, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, Thank You, per above. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - one of many such acts by that group. This is not notable among them unless the damage was permanent. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The entirety of this event should be one sentence in the main Stonehenge article, if even that. A paragraph if it permanently alters the structure. Beyond this it is not historically significant in any way and I don't know what would possess someone to create an entire article about it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Arvind

Article: Arvind (computer scientist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): MIT News
Credits:

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

MIT computer science faculty for over 50 years. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 18:22, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Other than general notability concerns, a lot of the sources cited on their page are primary sources and need to be reviewed. Scu ba (talk) 00:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Passes WP:NPROF as an IEEE fellow and distinguished chair, so no notability concerns here. Curbon7 (talk) 03:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there are multiple cn tags and also some sources are primary in nature. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Hajj disaster

Article: 2024 Hajj disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 922 pilgrims died due to extreme heat in Mecca, Saudi Arabia during the Hajj (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Saudi Arabia, at least 900 people die due to extreme heat during the Hajj
Alternative blurb II: ​ Over one thousand pilgrims die due to extreme heat in Mecca, Saudi Arabia during the Hajj
News source(s): France24 AP
Credits:

Afif Brika1 (talk) 16:40, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment article quality is not up to par; article is very stubby. Natg 19 (talk) 17:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality as it's a stub. The Kip (contribs) 20:27, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle Yikes! We don't have MINDEATHS but if we did this would certainly exceed it This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality It's not even worthy of being called a stub, it's effectively just a list in prose and then table form of numbers of deaths by national origin. Support in principle, but it's going to take significant work at the moment. Kingsif (talk) 21:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability but oppose on quality This is certainly notable enough for ITN, but the article needs to be developed before it will be suitable to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:19, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, still needs improvement on quality. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:47, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality article needs a lot of expansion but it is blurbworthy event since death toll is extremely high. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:54, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to admin if this ever reaches posting stage, the death toll number has changed and the blurb should updated (could just say, "over thousand people die to extreme heat" if you want to be non-specific). --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 20:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    added alt2 — hako9 (talk) 21:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, Oppose on quality. The high death toll makes it worthy enough for the ITN but the article needs to be expanded more. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 21:27, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The proposed blurbs focus only on the heat when there's more to it than that. See the BBC report which explains that "One reason there are may be many deaths every year at the Hajj is that many pilgrims go towards the end of their life, after saving for a lifetime. Many Muslims also go in the hopes that if they die, it is during the Hajj - as it is considered to be a blessing to die and be buried in the holy city." The article says something of this but it's buried in footnotes such "It is reported that the majority died of chronic conditions." But its lead doesn't mention this and just gives the facile explanation of the heat. A more thorough analysis is needed. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, but the quality is still some way away, but attainable. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 18

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


(Posted) RD: Gerhard Klingenberg

Article: Gerhard Klingenberg (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Burgtheater + several in German papers
Credits:

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

Great Austrian actor, stage director, film director, manager of Burgtheater, - had 2 sentences of an article which was up for deletion upon his death. Much improved by many actually. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment filmography section depends almost entirely on a single source called "Filmportal", is it a reliable source or is it an German equivalent of IMDb ? PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has been treated reliable in other articles. Also: these are films that exist, vs. biographical facts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ps: also, none of the obits even mentions this part of his career, - we could shorten it if that helps. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not every film listed is in that single reference. Stephen 11:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sigh, an IP added many items, - I tried to comment out those not mentioned in the ref. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 01:26, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Daniel Patrick Reilly

Article: Daniel Patrick Reilly (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Worcester Telegram & Gazette
Credits:

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

American prelate of the Roman Catholic Church.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:07, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support article looks alright to me. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support now that the allegations levied against him have been added to the lede. Icky person, but that wouldn't be a policy-based reason for opposing. Bremps... 21:45, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: James Chance

Article: James Chance (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NME, Variety, Rolling Stone
Credits:

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

American saxophonist. 240F:7A:6253:1:C0E7:E4A8:1532:6307 (talk) 18:05, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there are several cn tags and an orange tag. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a handful of {cn} tags in the prose. The Discography is a string of largely unsourced bullet-points. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 11:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Allan Saxe

Article: Allan Saxe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Dallas Morning News
Credits:

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

Article updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 09:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sara Facio

Article: Sara Facio (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Nacion
Credits:

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

Article updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Blurb/RD: Willie Mays

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


Article: Willie Mays (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American baseball player Willie Mays (pictured) dies at the age of 93 (Post)
News source(s): San Francisco Chronicle
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Sey hey. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: don't see any issues pbp 01:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I’d support a blurb. Article appears to be in the usual flux, post death. This wasn’t just any baseball great. Arguably the greatest all-around player in the sport. Maybe even any sport. Jusdafax (talk) 01:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb: Household name even beyond baseball fans. Funcrunch (talk) 01:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Article looks good and Mays is beyond an influential figure in baseball and sports. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb - widely acknowledged as among the greatest ball players of all time. nableezy - 02:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb - cannot add to what's been said. This should be a reverse WP:SNOW situation. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 02:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Article is solid and Mays was one of the greatest figures in sports history. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:27, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb I was born in 1992 and have never really been a sports fan, but I've long known about Willie Mays. Total household name and probably among the top 5 most significant deaths of the last year. 1779Days (talk) 02:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - household name and one of the greatest athletes of all time. The Kip (contribs) 03:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 03:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-Posting Support A legendary and groundbreaking baseball player and a great human who paved the way for so many.-TenorTwelve (talk) 04:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support blurb, as per all above. BD2412 T 04:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fail to see how this is anything other than Americentrism. There is no way a blurb would be posted for an Indian cricketer for example. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shane Warne's death in 2022 was posted. PeteF16 (talk) 04:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Warne died unexpectedly at the age of 52. He was still a very public figure up until his death. HiLo48 (talk) 05:01, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And he wasn't Indian or European. BilboBeggins (talk) 05:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He was Anglo-Saxon, not the best example. _-_Alsor (talk) 05:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good example of anyone, regardless of age, ethnicity or sexual experience, who was blurbed for dying after playing cricket well. Same niche, but polar opposite, like wolves and foxes. What's good for one batsman, and all that. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He was not an Anglo-Saxon. He was an Australian. I agree with The C of E below that it's not constructive to make this a race thing - but also, that's an absolutely ludicrous way to regard his ethnicity. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The existing bias in ITN in favor of certain countries is an unquestionable truism that has often been the subject of debate. This occasion was not going to be an exception. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:04, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It wouldn’t surprise me if Tendulkar’s blurbed when he dies. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And as a white Englishman, I'd be delighted to support blurbing him when the time comes. But can we please not make this a race thing? The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tendulkar's retirement was posted, which is exceedingly rare, and I have no doubt that when he dies, he would deserve an ITN blurb. [3] -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Americentrism can be a thing sometimes, but we actually blurbed the death of a Kenyan athlete only in February, and a German footballer in January. Black Kite (talk) 10:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb not a serving head of state or government, and the death as an event is not notable. Petty sports trivia, and see discussion as regards Jerry West for my thoughts on deathblurbs generally (TLDR: no) This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone else thinks those are the criteria. If you want to make it so that only servign heads of state or people who die in unexpected ways get blurbs, you should propose that in the appropriate place. Saying it here as though it's already accepted won't make it true. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, but surprised that Mays got blurbed so quickly, and Jerry West had lengthy discussion and did not make it. Natg 19 (talk) 04:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As good as West was as a basketball player, Mays was better as a baseball player (though West’s accomplishments as a GM & his status as the inspiration for the NBA’s logo were other arguments that could’ve led to him being blurbed if there’d been enough support). Blaylockjam10 (talk) 06:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Pull because I remember how it felt to have Gordie Howe's posthumous picture "torn away" from "us", but agree with the sentiment; we're too late. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:07, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb per Orbital. He may have been a baseball legend, but he is not a globally notorious figure and it is a sport whose popularity is very local. Far from being comparable to Maradona or Pelé. And let's leave emotions aside, this blurb should be pulled by objective criteria. _-_Alsor (talk) 05:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In terms of how good each player was at playing his sport, he’s easily comparable to Maradona or Pelé. Beckenbauer was blurbed & I’d never heard of him before his death. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is notoriety really the thing you want to focus on here? While baseball is a sport with a deeply parochial region of interest, it's still a very big deal, and Mays was one of the biggest names within it, not just in his own day but throughout its history. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Mays's death is currently the lead story in the New York Times, and has been covered in depth by the BBC, the Guardian, and many other international publications. His significance was derived from baseball but extended well beyond it--the fact that a Black player, so soon after integration, was acknowledged as the best in the game was as hugely important. blameless 05:41, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support He has a good argument for being the greatest baseball player ever. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-Posting Support. Clearly and obviously one of the most influential figures in baseball history - no doubt in the top 4 with Aaron, Robinson, and Ruth, in no order. The only of that group of three to die during the existence of ITN was Aaron, who was blurbed. I see know reason why Mays should not get a blurb. Baseball is substantially globally popular enough to justify us posting two deaths from its ranks as blurbs. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:56, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb third in career WAR, and everyone around him is either dead or a steroid user. Clearly the greatest baseball player of his generation. However, I don't understand why we were so quick to blurb Willie Mays yet just as quick to shut down Jerry West's blurb nomination, when basketball is the more popular and well-known sport globally. Jerry West might not have been in the top 3 players ever, but we didn't blurb Bill Russell either and he was. NorthernFalcon (talk) 06:27, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A key difference is the timing of the nomination. Jerry West's was posted at 14:04 UTC while this one was posted at 01:00. This time zone difference skews the demographic of the voters. And this is very much a voting process in which early momentum is decisive. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:47, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes Europe isn't awake. We just don't play baseball here, nobody has heard of this guy. Secretlondon (talk) 10:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm a Brit who barely follows sports over here, much less in the USA, and I'd heard of him despite him being about two generations older than me. His death is front-page news on the BBC. As I said below, I do think this process was rushed, but that's not the same as no-one having heard of one of the all-time most famous, successful, and acclaimed batters in the sport. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless you live in the Netherlands, Italy, France, Spain, England, Czechia, etc. A player just made the majors after having played Euro ball as a prospect. It's absolutely played there. DarkSide830 (talk) 14:58, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you're underestimating just how much more dominant Willie Mays was in baseball than Jerry West was in basketball. According to basketball reference, there has been a total of 5209 players in NBA and ABA history. VORP and box plus-minus weren't calculated during West's time, so the closest comprehensive stat we have is win shares where West ranks 24th all time. On the other hand, there have been 23,235 Major league baseball players. Willie Mays ranks as the third greatest batter of all time according to bWAR and fWAR.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 09:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support blurb and oppose pull - but this was rushed. There's no need to sprint something like this. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:49, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post blurb support and Oppose pull Yes it was done quick, but the article is in good shape and he is a major figure within the sport so I would have supported the blurb had I seen before posting. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not an internationally known figure. I have no idea why this person is given a blurb and a photo. Secretlondon (talk) 10:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment And William Anders? ArionStar (talk) 13:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Anders article shows very little impact or legacy outside being the photograph of the famous photo. One such accomplishment it not what leads to a great figure, which Mays' article has in spades. — Masem (t) 14:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post blurb support An internationally-known sports figure. Not sure why there's supposed to be a penalty for being an American player. Does that mean we should ban Wikipedia (or the Internet) since both come from there as well? CoatCheck (talk) 14:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pull blurb per Orbital. Also, I didn't like the way this was posted to main page with just about 10 vote when it is clear that death blurb are also contentious topics and should only be posted after a lengthy discussion. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pull blurb, not internationally known, and the posting was extremely rushed. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support pull, this should've only been featured in recent deaths. In the grand scheme of things, featuring sports ball athletes seems to be a waste of space. 68.118.253.248 (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pull/let's all find something better to do. I really do not get why there is such strong opposition to posting blurbs for North American sports people (Howe, Russell, etc.). Can anyone say with a straight face those individuals were not major figures in their field? ~~ Jessintime (talk) 15:44, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some people are so concerned with avoiding the appearance of Americentrism that they circle around into anti-Americanism as a whole. The Kip (contribs) 18:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The result is basically a much lower notability bar for British public figures than for public figures from America (or other countries). Feels like there's some lingering desire to reclaim their status as #1 global cultural exporter. LocoTacoFever (talk) 18:05, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-support blurb and Oppose pull. Clearly a massive figure worthy of a blurb. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Post blurb support, oppose pull. I'm generally anti-death blurb, and not a baseball fan, but Mays was one of the most legendary sporting figures of the 20th century - closer to a Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or a Maradona than to a Jerry West. LocoTacoFever (talk) 17:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In all honesty, neither of those are a good metric for a DB either; the manner and direct impact of their deaths were not significant as events, unless they get like, assassinated, or something This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:01, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-support blurb – A reminder that WP:ITNATA applies and arguing that a figure is not important outside of their home country (which is not true for Mays, as baseball is played internationally) is to be avoided. SounderBruce 19:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It really isn't. Secretlondon (talk) 21:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-support blurb, per above logic and he's one of the last great baseball players from the 1950s-1960s generation of American sports heroes. Surprised and glad to see the quick support for Mays compared to the strange recent lack of support for one of the first three people in the history of humanity to escape Earth's gravity and go to the Moon! Randy Kryn (talk) 22:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Blurb/RD: Noam Chomsky

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


Article: Noam Chomsky (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American philosopher and linguist Noam Chomsky (pictured) dies at the age of 95 (Post)
News source(s): New Statesman (retracted)
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:20, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There seems to be some conflicting reports that he died. There's no official confirmation (at least that I know) that he passed away. Should it be official, I'd 100% support blurb as he was highly influential and his article is good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article at present does not state that he has died. I am seeing that at least one report that he has died has been published, and I know that he had a stroke a few days ago. But we can't blurb this (or even consider an RD) if our own article doesn't actually say that he died. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The New Statesman is a generally reliable source. BD2412 T 19:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is more about there's no official confirmation of his passing. Some articles have jumped the boat without any reliable word of his passing. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that The New Statesman is very unlikely to get this wrong. But if it's the only source reporting the death... I would be cautious, since this one would expect this sort of thing to be covered everywhere. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Along those lines, an ABC News journalist seems to be reporting that Chomsky has not yet died, per Chomsky's wife. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I would support a blurb if he died. An absolute titan of the field of linguistics in a way that even helped to shape the modern field of computer science. And then there's also his political activism and political writings, which were influential in the West. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb if confirmed dead. A giant of an influence in multiple fields. BD2412 T 19:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb if true, extremely influential. Wait for confirmed confirmation before posting Sharrdx (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for confirmation -- I don't see any reports of his death besides the linked source. Support blurb if it's true. Estreyeria (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Unquestionably one of the most recognizable and influential intellectuals of the 20th/21st centuries. Thriley (talk) 19:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment update Statesman article was taken down. Sign that Chomsky might still be alive or a premature obit was published. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:56, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yep, I saw this too. Probably best to close this until we know what happened with more certainty. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Undoubtedly one of the greatest intellectuals of our time.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If he really had died, it would have been in far more and better sources than New Statesman. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted RD) Blurb/RD: Anouk Aimée

Article: Anouk Aimée (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  French actress Anouk Aimée dies at the age of 92 (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

French film actress.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:28, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The article quality is not main-page worthy as of this comment. There are two uncited statements, one in Personal life, one ending in "critical and box-office disaster." The filmography needs citations as well. After those issues are patched up, we should be good to post. Bremps... 13:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Seems similar case to Jean-Paul Belmondo who was blurbed — recipient of major honorary European Awards (Cesar and Berlin), famous in Europe. But unlike him, she had English speaking roles and had roles recently. Won Golden Globe, BAFTA, Cannes Award, was nominated for Oscar. Extemely famous in her heyday. Looks like a blurb to me. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Filmography is unsourced. Article also doesn't establish how influential she was or why she merits a blurb like Belmondo's article did. Support RD Article looks good now. Can't see how she warrants a blurb/not transformative enough. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:37, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb old woman dies of old age This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb – I think being a foremost actor in the 1960s alone is just not quite enough for a blurb. The article quality also isn't up there. If this had been a GA, maybe. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, Netural on Blurb She was/is quite a popular actress who had won a lot of big awards but would understand not posting it as an blurb. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb, being popular and winning awards doesn't equate to being transformative in the field. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legalization of same-sex marriage in Thailand

Article: Recognition of same-sex unions in Thailand (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Thailand's Senate passes a marriage equality bill that will legalize same-sex marriage in the country, becoming the first Southeast Asian nation to do so. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Thailand becomes the first Southeast Asian nation to allow same-sex marriage.
Alternative blurb II: Thailand's parliament passes a bill to recognize same-sex marriage.
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Tofusaurus (talk) 10:52, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Huge step for LGBT rights in SE Asia. Estreyeria (talk) 13:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article quality is okay. I was going to vote "wait", but on second thought the news will probably be stale by then. Bremps... 13:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support a very significant news regarding the LGBTQ+ community in Asia. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:08, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Based upon recent precedence, I have to repeat what I said last time in opposing. Its nothing new, countries have changed that law all the time. Its not like its some big breakthrough. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The C of E I'd argue this is fairly different than the Greece case. Greece was in an area of the world (Europe) where same-sex marriage was already legal in many nearby countries. The only country anywhere near Thailand which has legalized same-sex marriage was Taiwan, which is a special case for many reasons. If you want to look at it from a population standpoint, Thailand has 6 times as many people as Greece, which means it has a larger population than the United Kingdom. I'd argue any country legalizing same-sex marriage with that large of a population is significant. DNVIC (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Legalising same sex marriage s is bigger story in Greece than in Thailand. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:23, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Given ITN blurbs getting coverage for multiple days, I don't see this having nearly enough exposure and headline coverage to be considered for inclusion. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability and updated content in the article. This is the first country in Asia to pass such a law and the second or third to legalize (Taiwan and Nepal both did so through courts and legality in Nepal is incomplete)—a landmark event. And the article is well written and structured.~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 16:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, article looks sufficient. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It's the first in the region and as far as I can tell the first in Asia to happen fully via legislation, without judicial compulsion. It's unique and notable in that way. TheSavageNorwegian 16:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am fine with waiting for royal ascent btw, but waiting till the effective date may make it less of a news item. TheSavageNorwegian 21:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. LiamKorda 17:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It’s the first Asian country to do so legislatively without judicial prompting, and even though it’s the third Asian country to do so, it’s still relatively new for Asia compared to Europe. And it is the first Southeast Asian country to do so.-TenorTwelve (talk) 18:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until royal assent is given. The bill has not yet been approved, though it is widely expected to gain approval from Thailand's king. Waiting would also allow something like Thailand legalizes same-sex marriage, becoming the first Southeast Asian country to do so to be out blurb; the current wording to shoehorn in the Thai Senate comes across as a bit awkward, but is necessary because same-sex marriage legislation has not yet received executive approval. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:18, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support When it becomes official. Apparently there's still some steps needed before it becomes 100% official. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:25, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Nothing that is that surprising occured. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:22, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there's a lot more countries that can and probably will legally recognise homosexual marriages and the last example wasn't posted either. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb, wait until royal assent as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt2 since the first two make it sound like it still needs to get through the lower house This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt1 once royal assent is given. Clearly significant for the whole region. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:27, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 11:37, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on significance, but I too would suggest only blurbing this when the law actually comes into effect. This of course gives us more time to further improve the article too. It looks fine for the main page, but it can definitely be better. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. We aren't going to post every single country that does this.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose do we really need to post every single instance of this? I understand doing it for Taiwan since they where the first Asian country to do so, but this is getting a little pedantic, next up we'll have "the first eastern southeastern Asian country to legalize same sex marriage" Scu ba (talk) 17:45, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If China somehow legalized same-sex marriage tomorrow, I think it would be bizarre to oppose it because Taiwan beat it to "first Asian country to legalize" status. Bremps... 19:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Though these articles get nominated fairly frequently, we rarely actually feature them. I don't think the "every single instance" argument works here, as no one is arguing we would/will also feature Laos/Vietnam/Cambodia/Myanmar/Bangladesh/Malaysia/Singapore when those make changes in their queer rights laws. This is a first in the region, and an influential country with an enormous population to boot. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:14, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Asia is a large continent, and very culturally diverse. You can argue Taiwan has already legalized it, and so this isn't notable, but Southeast Asia is a completely different and unique culture than East Asia, and Taiwan is an even weirder case within East Asia due to its relationship with China. For context, the distance between Taipei and Bangkok is 2500 km, approximately the same distance between London and Istanbul. The fact is, a country has legalized gay marriage without any other country within its cultural neighborhood legalizing it, which is very unprecedented, and thus notable. DNVIC (talk) 21:29, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Could someone explain to me why it isn't merely notable on its own for a country to legalize gay marriage? It's **the** big-ticket gay rights law. We're not talking something more niche like banning gay panic defense, or allowing hospital visitation. It's the most newsworthy, landmark, queer event that can happen to a country, it's only ever going to happen once per country, and it makes the news each time it happens. TheSavageNorwegian 21:56, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus, with exceptions, has been that gay marriage legalization is newsworthy This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:25, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has been huge news and is significant for the region of Southeast Asia. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 17

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


RD: Ricardo M. Urbina

Article: Ricardo M. Urbina (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

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

Will need to be updated. In particular, article does not mention his track career at all. Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Some quotes and specific dates lack sources. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 NBA Finals

Article: 2024 NBA Finals (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In basketball, the Boston Celtics defeat the Dallas Mavericks to win the NBA Finals. (Finals MVP Jaylen Brown pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In basketball, the Boston Celtics defeat the Dallas Mavericks to win the NBA Finals with Jaylen Brown winning the Finals MVP (pictured).
News source(s): NBA, CBS
Credits:

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.

I would wait until the article looks somewhat updated. I will update blurb/image when FMVP is announced. Original blurb basically follows last year's wording/format. Altblurb to bring info out of parenthetical. Feel free to adjust. It is that time of the year when a lot of major sporting events are occurring. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 03:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have went through and updated the article a bit more. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 04:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support One of the world's largest sports leagues, definitely worth an ITN mention. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 04:23, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Royal Autumn Crest just a reminder that this is not a discussion about the notability of the event as the NBA finals are WP:ITN/R event. This is a discussion about the quality of the article and whether it is ready to be posted or not. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The quality certainly meets ITN standards. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 18:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There was an entry about a fire today that had 41 references. As of this moment, this article has 51 references, and there are plenty more out there. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 02:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support although the prose is on the shorter side, article still in a good shape. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Filled with jargon and uninviting to the average reader. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 09:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dreameditsbrooklyn, could you give me some examples? I can try to address. I do not see how it is much different that last year's article. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 12:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The article as a whole seems written for an enthusiast, not an encyclopedia reader. We should not assume people know what 'clinched' and other sports jargon means. My eyes glaze over at the charts which imo are featured way too prominently and maybe are not needed at all. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 13:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Those tables are all the standard; see e.g. the previously posted 2023 NBA Finals or 2022 NBA Finals. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:52, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is "clinched" an AmE term? This is used across multiple sports and is not just basketball-specific ones. I loled at Americans complaining they can't read a cricket result until I realize myself can't.
    The regular season standings does seem to be unnecessary, and the 2024 UEFA Champions League final omitted that and just stated the final position of each finalist in their group stage pool. Otherwise, stats tables are standard fare in tournament final articles and even the stats-agnostic sport of football has one more stat table than basketball, and the latter had four more matches. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:14, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Clinched" is definitely used in the US. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, and this word may be unknown in other variants of English such as BrE. It's not a sports-specific term though so I dunno how it becomes jargon. Howard the Duck (talk) 06:17, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article has some prose but not enough. LiamKorda 17:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's close to 2,000 words of prose. How much is necessary? BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Everything seems up to par. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 21:16, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wouldn't be opposed to more fleshing out, but it's in decent shape considering the Finals ended less than 24 hours ago. Typically (looking at last year's article as an example) there's three substantial paragraphs on each game, as well as in each team's season summary, which often starts with where they finished the previous season--Celtics season preview could use that. Final regular-season standings are always inserted in the Finals article--shows where each team finished compared to other playoff teams. "Clinched" is commonplace in nearly every North American sports season article; and while perhaps not as frequent, I've seen it used in Wikipedia and media articles for sports leagues elsewhere. I have a hard time believing anyone outside North America wouldn't understand what it means to clinch a playoff berth or home field. GO CELTICS! User:Pats2017 — Preceding undated comment added 01:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 West Bengal train collision

Article: 2024 West Bengal train collision (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A train collision near Siliguri in India, kills eleven people. (Post)
News source(s): NDTV, India Today
Credits:

Magentic Manifestations (talk) 11:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose while article is in a good shape, this event is unlikely to have long term implications and effects. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Comparatively low death toll (not even the deadliest rail accident in India within the last year), and comparatively minimal impact. The Kip (contribs) 21:24, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents: