Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions
→Judicial reform bill in Mexico: As suggested in the comment Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
|||
Line 244: | Line 244: | ||
| ongoing = no |
| ongoing = no |
||
| ITNR = no |
| ITNR = no |
||
| altblurb = Amid [[2024 Mexican judicial reform protests|widespread protests]], Mexico ratifies '''[[2024 Mexican judicial reform|constitutional changes]]''' that will see the entire |
| altblurb = Amid [[2024 Mexican judicial reform protests|widespread protests]], Mexico ratifies '''[[2024 Mexican judicial reform|constitutional changes]]''' that will see the entire [[Judiciary of Mexico|federal judiciary]] chosen by popular vote. |
||
| altblurb2 = <!-- A second alternative blurb. Leave blank if not needed --> |
| altblurb2 = <!-- A second alternative blurb. Leave blank if not needed --> |
||
| sources = [https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/11/mexico-senate-approve-changes-judiciary Guardian], [https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4y9q74j2ko BBC News] [https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/08/30/mexico-proposed-constitutional-changes-threaten-rights HRW] |
| sources = [https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/11/mexico-senate-approve-changes-judiciary Guardian], [https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4y9q74j2ko BBC News] [https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/08/30/mexico-proposed-constitutional-changes-threaten-rights HRW] |
Revision as of 09:43, 13 September 2024
Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
In the news toolbox |
---|
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
Headers
Voicing an opinion on an itemFormat your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated. Please do...
Please do not...
Suggesting updatesThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives
September 13
September 13, 2024
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
|
RD: Pravin Gordhan
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): news24
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Sportsnut24 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Twice former fin min of africa's then-largest economy.Sportsnut24 (talk) 08:13, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Provisional oppose: significance is granted by having an article, but there are CN tags needing to be addressed. Would support once fully sourced. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
September 12
September 12, 2024
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
(Withdrawn) Ongoing: Typhoon Yagi
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by HurricaneEdgar (talk · give credit)
- Oppose As you say, the storm has dissipated. All the subsequent daily death in the world won't change that. Every event has an aftermath. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It’s currently the top blurb & it’s dissipated, so there’s no need to put it in “Ongoing“. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 00:17, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose What's ongoing about a storm that is no longer ongoing? RachelTensions (talk) 02:15, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Stephen Peat
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Province, Sportsnet
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by GhostRiver (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Troubled ex-NHLer was struck by a car two weeks ago. Succumbed to his injuries today. Have spent the afternoon buffing up the article and making sure everything important is cited. — GhostRiver 21:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Well-buffed, GhostRiver. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:25, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support: article looks in good shape. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Polaris Dawn
Blurb: Jared Isaacman and Sarah Gillis conduct the first commercial spacewalk during the Polaris Dawn private space mission. (Post)
News source(s): NYT, Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Sandstein (talk · give credit)
No strong feelings either way, but we normally post space firsts, right? Sandstein 15:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: data in the table of launch attempts seems only sparsely cited. Do we feel that this qualifies as a "first", given that spacewalks themselves are routine -- the difference here is who has organised/funded it? UndercoverClassicist T·C 15:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- That's certainly up for debate, although the media do treat this as a "first", reflecting the increasing commercialization and privatization of spaceflight. Sandstein 16:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support a first for space exploration. Scuba 16:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - In The News, major milestone in human spaceflight PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - It's not a major milestone in human spaceflight. It's a small milestone in the organisational backing of human spaceflight. Operationally, a spacewalk is a spacewalk. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I guess every major news outlet is just lying in saying that the first commercial spacewalk is a major milestone. Scuba 16:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's hype. News outlets frequently produce hype. Of more interest on the operational front is that this was a spacewalk without airlocks. To my mind 'first commercial spacewalk' is one of those excessively-specific superlatives, like 'tallest actor' or 'first Frenchman to cycle around the world'. I don't see the operational activity's dependence on the commercial organisation supporting it as especially remarkable. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand the point you're trying to make, the superlatives that you listed exist and aren't that ridiculous. It being commercial is the whole point, the commercial space race has been proof that the age of big bloated government agencies dominating every aspect of space travel is over. SpaceX doesn't get 0.48% of the US budget every year to only make one rocket every 4 years like NASA with SLS. Scuba 03:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's hype. News outlets frequently produce hype. Of more interest on the operational front is that this was a spacewalk without airlocks. To my mind 'first commercial spacewalk' is one of those excessively-specific superlatives, like 'tallest actor' or 'first Frenchman to cycle around the world'. I don't see the operational activity's dependence on the commercial organisation supporting it as especially remarkable. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with GenevieveDEon. This is just a hyped up news story because of SpaceX, and because of a billionaire who is part of the team. What is fundamentally different from this and other spacewalks, which have been done numerous times by NASA or Roscosmos astronauts? We have already posted other "firsts" for commercial spaceflight, but this to me is an insignificant "first". Natg 19 (talk) 16:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Because it isn't being done by NASA or Roscosmos or any governmental agency, it's being done by a private company. Scuba 03:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- I guess every major news outlet is just lying in saying that the first commercial spacewalk is a major milestone. Scuba 16:34, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - This is still a big deal; it really doesn't matter if a billionaire was involved. Inspiration4 was blurbed as it was the first all-civilian spaceflight, I feel like the first ever commercial spacewalk should get the same treatment. qw3rty 17:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - in addition to the big media coverage for the first commercial spacewalk, also of significance is that the earth orbit achieved an altitude of over 1,400 kilometres - breaking the 1,370 km crewed record set in 1966 by Gemini 11/Agena. (of course the moonshot orbits were technically higher, so technically the Apollo missions were further away while trans-lunar or in lunar orbit. There's also been a new record set of 19 people in earth orbit simultaneously (on two space stations, with 5 capsules - Polaris Dawn, Soyuz MS-25, Soyuz MS-26, SpaceX Crew-8, and Shenzhou 18. Arguably, each of these three records should be blurbed. Combining into one seems more than reasonable. Nfitz (talk) 18:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think any of those should be blurbed. They're all just 'mosts' of things we don't normally pay attention to measuring at all. And if we're talking about the achievements of private space flight, one of the things it has done is to raise the number of people currently in Earth orbit by stranding two people on the ISS for six months. I also don't think that an altitude record that arbitrarily excludes the Apollo astronauts is a record at all. GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Apparently also the most people in vacuum at once, per the article. Sandstein 18:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well - other than Columbia, which was in near vacuum when it broke up. :( Nfitz (talk) 05:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Apparently also the most people in vacuum at once, per the article. Sandstein 18:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment per our article it wasn't a space walk... The cabin was open to space, and both persons stood at the opening but dud not leave the ship. It's a progressive step but not really a full space walk. Masem (t) 18:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- And yet the couple in the part of the unpressurized Mir station (coming from a pressurized Soyuz after the Progress M-34 collision) are called spacewalks. And what about Apollo 9? Nfitz (talk) 19:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Both of those cases have crew moving between two vessels, even if the distance was short. — Masem (t) 20:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- the crew moved here too. Isaacman stuck himself out the hatch, and then went back in. How is that any different? Scuba 03:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- And yet those are classified as space walks. I don't see the issue here ... he was only touching the tether at points, just like any other space walk outside the space station. But yes, his legs were dandling down into the hatch. I feel this is splitting hairs, and ignores the three other firsts in relation to orbit height, number of people in orbit total, and also the first exposure of 4 people to the vacuum of space at once (assuming the Columbia explosion doesn't count). Nfitz (talk) 05:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Both of those cases have crew moving between two vessels, even if the distance was short. — Masem (t) 20:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I feel like this is an arbitrary distinction to be made. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 23:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- And yet the couple in the part of the unpressurized Mir station (coming from a pressurized Soyuz after the Progress M-34 collision) are called spacewalks. And what about Apollo 9? Nfitz (talk) 19:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per GDE above, especially then finding out that it wasn't actually even a full space walk, per Masem. Slidinghorn (talk) 18:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: Billionaire does spacewalk. Nothing incredible. Tofusaurus (talk) 06:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't see what makes a commercial spacewalk so special compared to something like a routine one done at the ISS where they actually leave the spacecraft. Hungry403 (talk) 06:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's in the news, unlike the stale stuff that we're currently blurbing. And when reliable and respectable sources such as the NYT describe it as a milestone, that beats the OR/POV above.
- As for the spacewalk, our article tells us that this mode is called a "stand-up EVA (SEVA)". Me, I'm more impressed that they've chosen to fly through the Van Allen belt to see how bad the radiation is.
- Note also that we have pictures of the crew and so can use and rotate them.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 08:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Sitaram Yechury
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Indian communist leader Sitaram Yechury dies at the age of 72. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Sitaram Yechury General Secretary of Communist Party of India (India National party), dies at the age of 72.
News source(s): BBC,Indianexpress
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
- Updated by SerChevalerie (talk · give credit), Pachu Kannan (talk · give credit) and Spworld2 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian communist leader Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait - The 'Books' section of his article is entirely unsourced. Would support once this is fixed. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 11:50, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Added sources in the "Books" section. Pachu Kannan (talk) 14:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Communist Indian leader (Major figures) (WP:ITNRDBLURB) ~ Spworld2 (talk) 9:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb : Not notable enough to warrant a blurb. Tofusaurus (talk) 06:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Aussie Malcolm
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Missing exact date of death, announced today; otherwise good article. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Looks good. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks in good enough shape, though could use a bit of expansion (I'll try to do that if I have the time). Kiwichris (talk) 10:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Adequately sourced and overall in good shape. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 11:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Structure looks good enough and no problems found. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 21:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
September 11
September 11, 2024
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Joe Schmidt
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:7C78:E248:64B1:15 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mrman717 (talk · give credit) and Goosedukeee (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Hall of Fame Detroit Lions linebacker and two-time NFL champion. 240F:7A:6253:1:7C78:E248:64B1:15 (talk) 22:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support meets basic ITNC criteria of citations, format, etc. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 00:07, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
RD/blurb: Alberto Fujimori
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Former President of Peru Alberto Fujimori dies at the age of 86. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Former President of Peru Alberto Fujimori dies at the age of 86.
Alternative blurb II: Former dictator and President of Peru Alberto Fujimori dies at the age of 86.
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Namealreadytak (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and Moscow Mule (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former Peruvian dictator. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 00:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready Multiple tags and issues including serious gaps in referencing. This one is going to need some work before it can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support because he was a former head of state who assumed power in a self-coup, and has exceptional notability for RD. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 03:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Per ITNRD, posting is automatic subject only to article quality. The question here is whether or not the article's overall quality meets the customary standards for posting on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think this was in relation to the blurb, given the quality isn't up to scratch Abcmaxx (talk) 06:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Per ITNRD, posting is automatic subject only to article quality. The question here is whether or not the article's overall quality meets the customary standards for posting on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support on principle I could make a number of connections, but for ITNC, I think that if AF could be improved by the end of this week, it would merit a blurb. Not ready because we need to debate dictatorship, controversy, etc. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Update: nearly there If not for the deletion tag, I think that Fujimori's article is just about ready to go. If necessary, we could drop the death fork of Fujimori and add it when it's caught up. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 00:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- support blurb. Former head of state.Sportsnut24 (talk) 05:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Almost there -- would support for RD if remaining CN tags were addressed. Weak support for blurb: do we normally post blurbs for any former head of state? If not, would need some convincing. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Quality issues have been addressed in terms of sourcing from what I can see. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:08, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. We should not be venerating dictators, and his death in itself is not significant, he has been very ill and in prison for a long time and was 86. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:50, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have no strong opinion on the posting, but I want to make it absolutely clear that posting a blurb to ITN is not 'veneration'. If Vladimir Putin drops dead tomorrow (or at any other time, in fact), I would absolutely !vote for a blurb; I would certainly not regard that !vote, or the subsequent appearance of such a blurb at ITN as 'veneration'. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- @GenevieveDEon: But Putin is currently in power and would certainly die suddenly and not as an imprisoned, terminally ill 86 year old man who hasn't had political power for a long time. Huge difference. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:06, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have no strong opinion on the posting, but I want to make it absolutely clear that posting a blurb to ITN is not 'veneration'. If Vladimir Putin drops dead tomorrow (or at any other time, in fact), I would absolutely !vote for a blurb; I would certainly not regard that !vote, or the subsequent appearance of such a blurb at ITN as 'veneration'. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Abcmaxx: Right - which is why I would vote for Putin, and I'm not voting either way on Fujimori. But you used the word 'venerating', and I think that's not at all a fair characterisation of what ITN does. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:37, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb OLDMANDIES This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 06:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb in principle, with no comment on article quality or sourcing. Alberto Fujimori was, for better or for worse, a major figure in modern Peruvian history. He was a consequential enough figure to merit a blurb. Kurtis (talk) 07:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb He was definitely a very notable leader in Latin America who made drastic changes in the politics of his country, so he's certainly more notable than routine leaders that simply adapt to the system as given. The fact his presidency is considered "dictatorship" is irrelevant. There are other "dictators" in the world whose deaths were given a blurb (e.g. Fidel Castro, Robert Mugabe, Jiang Zemin etc.).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I believe it should at least be acknowledged in the blurb. President for life is not what someone thinks when reading the title "president". Added altblurb2 Abcmaxx (talk) 07:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know where did you get that information from. He wasn't president for life as his presidency ended in 2000 when he resigned.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah but his actions indicated he sure wanted to be. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:30, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know where did you get that information from. He wasn't president for life as his presidency ended in 2000 when he resigned.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- I believe it should at least be acknowledged in the blurb. President for life is not what someone thinks when reading the title "president". Added altblurb2 Abcmaxx (talk) 07:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Needs work Lots of work. I started today by reading the NYT's account. That read quite well and it was certainly an interesting life. Then I read through our article and it came across as much more unpolished for which "never mind the quality, feel the width" seems appropriate.
- Note that the Spanish language article has a much larger readership and seems influential as the leads of the English and Spanish versions are remarkably similar. It's not clear which language is the original and which the translation or whether there's two-way traffic. There's a similar issue with the man himself – whether he was the master of his fate or just a figurehead controlled by others.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 07:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Quality issues have been addressed in terms of sourcing. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- There's a lot more to it than that. What matters is what the article actually says rather than how many footnotes it has. Adding lots of footnotes that no-one reads just adds to the "never mind the quality, feel the width" vibe. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:23, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Quality issues have been addressed in terms of sourcing. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb: An extremely polarising figure that has been made notable around the world. Article does need a lot of work but will support in principle. Tofusaurus (talk) 11:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb This one should be a no-brainer. A former head of state who was a notorious political figure in his region, convicted of human rights abuses and was a consequential political figure in Peru and possibly in his respective continent. Article does need quality work though. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality, far too many CNs and unsourced paragraphs throughout. I am glad to see a legacy section which helps towards supporting a blurb though I'm not sure its written in the way to make sure it presents him as, as TDKR Chicago says, "a notorious political figure", and should be retouched to try to strength that approach if we are going to post as a blurb. --Masem (t) 12:54, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Quality issues have been addressed in terms of sourcing. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, just looked through and see one "needs context" but that's not a show stopper. Can't easily edit my vote above right now but that's a support for RD, weak support on blurb (don't think we need the separate death article, and like to see that "criticism" section titled something else buy don't know what) — Masem (t) 22:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Quality issues have been addressed in terms of sourcing. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose on Quality per concerns mentioned previously. However, I really think Fujimori is the sort of person worthy of a death blurb at ITN. Impactful and controversial politician that had a heavy hand in shaping modern Peruvian politics and it's discord. The human rights abuse charges obviously stand as the massive events of his tenure as president, as well as the coup that got him in power. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Quality issues have been addressed in terms of sourcing from what I can see TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Man has an entire political ideology named after him and was the longtime president of a country. If that doesn't warrant a blurb for an RD than nothing should ever warrant a blurb for an RD. Scuba 16:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb I would say that alternative blurb 2 should be posted Egg470 (talk) 16:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Using loaded terms is not for articles, let alone the main page.Sportsnut24 (talk) 00:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb Head of state of 30 million people for a full decade. Judicial issues about his presidency lasted for the rest of his life, so he hardly died quietly and remotely. See Fujimorism for how many parties claim his ideology or have had it attributed to them. Comments about whether his rule was democratic or pleasant are neither here nor there. Nobody can doubt that Putin and Assad have influenced the 21st century, for what many people would say was for the worse. Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:28, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- A Life Story As with the voice of Darth Vader, the body of Darth Vader or Big Van Vader himself, these are also past accomplishments. When most people think of "news", they think "current events". What's recently happened to Fujimori (the blurb you're voting on) is what happens to all of us, sooner or later. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's why ITN is about featuring quality articles that are in the news, not about featuring the news. That a (likely) great figure died, as reported in the news, and we have an article that is nearly there for quality and demonstrating the great figure-Ness, is exactly the reason to post. It just still has some quality issues to resolve first — Masem (t) 20:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- By the time this article's quality is even good enough to post, it won't be much in the news anymore. Then there's the two weeks or so it'll sit even staler on the Main Page after most editors figure there's no reason to improve it beyond passable. It might make his fandom happy for a day. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- The article appears to be well sourced now. With a quick look, there's no orange tags or cn tags/unsourced statements from what I can see. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- As a nonfan (nor love-to-hater), that's happiness enough for one day for me; still can't support blurbing it on account of the two weeks or so it'll seem staler later; I'll Support Normal or Photo RD, though, on your word. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- [ideally a good it item that is due to an existing topic now being in the news (like RD blurbs) show already be close to high quality for posting and just needs a bit of intense polish withon 24hr to post it more timely. We've had RD blurbs before that were so far off the quality mark that posed a problem. Not the case here — Masem (t) 22:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Whatever you said, it doesn't sway me. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- The article appears to be well sourced now. With a quick look, there's no orange tags or cn tags/unsourced statements from what I can see. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- By the time this article's quality is even good enough to post, it won't be much in the news anymore. Then there's the two weeks or so it'll sit even staler on the Main Page after most editors figure there's no reason to improve it beyond passable. It might make his fandom happy for a day. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's why ITN is about featuring quality articles that are in the news, not about featuring the news. That a (likely) great figure died, as reported in the news, and we have an article that is nearly there for quality and demonstrating the great figure-Ness, is exactly the reason to post. It just still has some quality issues to resolve first — Masem (t) 20:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb He's a household name. Even in my native Mauritius, everybody knows who he is. His rule has left quite a mark
- Support blurb article seems ready. A democratically elected president, who becomes dictator after a self-coup, who is overthrown by Congress, is exiled in the country of his parents' origin, is convicted of crimes against humanity, is the patriarch of a nysaga of politicians and his pardon brings a lot of controversy is, without a doubt, a perfect candidate for his death to have blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb A notorious former president of a country. ArionStar (talk) 03:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb, if consensus on quality now exists. But not the alt blurbs: the "Death of..." article isn't fit for the main page. Moscow Mule (talk) 06:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Consensus is clearlu on the side of keeping it. It should be closed now as the article has been greatly expanded since my first comment on the discussion.Sportsnut24 (talk) 08:25, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Judicial reform bill in Mexico
Blurb: The Congress of Mexico approves sweeping reforms of the country's judiciary after protestors storm the Senate chamber. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Amid widespread protests, Mexico ratifies constitutional changes that will see the entire federal judiciary chosen by popular vote.
News source(s): Guardian, BBC News HRW
Credits:
- Nominated by Moscow Mule (talk · give credit)
- Created by ElijahPepe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by EchoLuminary (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Senate chamber stormed; constitutional amendments criticized by HRW, etc., passed. Moscow Mule (talk) 17:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait — I expected this to appear here. This is not law yet; a majority of state legislatures need to approve it. However, it will very likely pass. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- True on both counts. But the Senate was the major hurdle to overcome: the ruling coalition controls 27 (?) of the state congresses, so it's just a matter of time. And the storming of the Senate chamber is big news this morning, although its treatment in our articles is somewhat cursory. (Not going to be that guy who replies to every comment, I promise.) Moscow Mule (talk) 18:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait for final passage but agree this is a major change in Mexico's govt particularly on the corruption angle. Masem (t) 18:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Needs work There's repeated reference to amparo as an issue but this Spanish word and concept is not explained. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:38, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Congrats to Mexico getting rid of it's independent judiciary, I look forward to seeing the backlash to their one-party state with an unchecked executive. Scu ba (talk) 21:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- The personalized commentary is unnecessary. The Kip (contribs) 06:05, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - it's a long way from ratification. Rather wonky isn't it? Nfitz (talk) 02:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait per above - we don't post things prematurely, but it's objective a massive moment in Mexican politics. The Senate storming/protest received fairly widespread attention as well. The Kip (contribs) 06:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait until passed into law. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait until ratification. As Nfitz points out, it's still a long way from there. 31.44.224.222 (talk) 11:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Update: 18 of 32 states have ratified and the plan is to enact it on 15 Sept. Moscow Mule (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- So we should update the hook then. Also, I'd specify at least a direction of changes, even Szmenderowiecki (talk) 02:25, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- OK, better. Senate storming is stale news now anyway, and its exposition here never got much further than cursory. But I'd link it as _federal judiciary_ in the alt blurb. Moscow Mule (talk) 06:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, fixed that Szmenderowiecki (talk) 09:42, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- OK, better. Senate storming is stale news now anyway, and its exposition here never got much further than cursory. But I'd link it as _federal judiciary_ in the alt blurb. Moscow Mule (talk) 06:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Didier Roustan
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): L'Equipe, Le Monde (both in French)
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Joseph2302 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Died this morning, and article looks reasonable enough. Very little info on his death seems to be available right now. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
September 10
September 10, 2024
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Jim Sasser
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Senator from Tennessee Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready. Due to the usual reason. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 21:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Emi Shinohara
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Anime News Network, Nikkan Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by Miraclepine (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Voice of Sailor Jupiter, announced today. Page biography is sourced, but filmography will need to be sourced. ミラP@Miraclepine 01:21, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per the usual reason. Filmography is the only thing holding this back, though - rest looks good. The Kip (contribs) 06:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. The missing citations have been added and the article structure looks good enough. Great work. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 21:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
September 9
September 9, 2024
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
|
RD: Friedrich Schorlemmer
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ZDF
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
One of the people who made the the Peaceful Revolution in East Germany possible, said the German President. Don't miss the video in the source that shows some key events. - The article was mostly there but too many things were translated that were clearer in German, refs were lost, others needed expansions including finding their titles, - plenty of work, took some time. We added publications, more awards, more obits. Still room for more detail if you have time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I like people, who have done so much for peace. Grimes2 (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Article looks alright to me. Cheers. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 21:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Raja Petra Kamarudin
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Star
Credits:
- Nominated by Tofusaurus (talk · give credit)
- Updated by FarGah1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Tofusaurus (talk) 03:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready. Quite a few sections are unsourced. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
(RD posted) Blurb/RD: James Earl Jones
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: American actor James Earl Jones (pictured) dies at the age of 93 (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Masem (t) 20:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support for RD. Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Harizotoh9: Is this a "support RD only" or a "support blurb"? Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 05:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- [1] – Muboshgu (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Needs some more sources, but shouldn't be too far from ready. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:02, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose There are several unreferenced paragraphs. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- note article is not yet ready for RD due to several unsourced paragraphs and a few cn's. Also I did not nominate for a blurb as though an actor with a large number of important roles, he did not have the type of impact that someone like Sidney Poitier had to the industry and doesn't met the major figure aspect. (I have a gut feeling this will draw lots of "he's famous/popular so he should be blurbed" type votes so stating my concern for this now) Masem (t) 20:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- from his lead,
"one of the greatest actors in American history"
but not a major figure. (eye roll) Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)- From the source:
Alec Baldwin and Close each praised Jones, with Baldwin calling the 80-year-old "one of the greatest actors in American history."
One person's opinion is not a consensus. The article's lead should provide some attribution. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)- Let's be honest and serious, it's not only one person's opinion. "James Earl Jones doesn't get enough credit for being a path-blazer for actors like Denzel Washington who came after him"[2]
- And we will find more of this in countless obits that will follow. BilboBeggins (talk) 21:22, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed, though I was being hyperbolic, his influence and prominence both onscreen and offscreen make him suitable for Blurb nomination. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Which right now, the article lacks any significant discussion of his importance or impact beyond a few statements in the lede. I'd be willing to support a blurb but if only a section that fully goes into that depth with multiple sources on the matter (which may originate from these obits) is included so that these factors are clearly demonstrated rather than hand-waved as "trust me". — Masem (t) 21:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would have suggested going with, "Pray that I don't alter the deal further." However, that seems reasonable enough. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- And of course I should add, the quality overall must be fixed. That's a show stopper right there. — Masem (t) 21:36, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would have suggested going with, "Pray that I don't alter the deal further." However, that seems reasonable enough. Kcmastrpc (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Which right now, the article lacks any significant discussion of his importance or impact beyond a few statements in the lede. I'd be willing to support a blurb but if only a section that fully goes into that depth with multiple sources on the matter (which may originate from these obits) is included so that these factors are clearly demonstrated rather than hand-waved as "trust me". — Masem (t) 21:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- From the source:
- To say Darth Vader did not have the same impact as someone most people probably don't know is an insult to James Earl Jones. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 22:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think anyone was even remotely trying to insult JEJ, and I'm struggling to see how anything written above can be construed as such. - SchroCat (talk) 07:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Darth Vader isnt JEJ, he Voice acted him but Darth Vader is not JEJ so shouldn’t be considered in that regard. 27.96.223.192 (talk) 08:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hard to tell that he was a black man under that mask. Perhaps his extensive stage acting made him more notable? 205.239.40.3 (talk) 08:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't him under the mask Varoon2542 (talk) 22:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- from his lead,
- Support Blurb The citation issues have been cleared up and the article quality improved. JEJ Death and Legacy section outline why this individual is a major figure in his field and how his work is deserving of a blurb. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:22, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Kcmastrpc: Was this a "support RD only" or "support blurb"? Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 05:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Updated Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:22, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb. Obvious blurb. EGOT achiever. Had theatre named after him during his lifetime. Had many iconic roles,had distinguished career on film, TV, and stage. And last but not least, he was Darth Vader, after all. BilboBeggins (talk) 21:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb. EGOT winner and without a doubt he was at the top of his field through his iconic roles and performances beyond film such as in broadway too. Death is making international headlines. However I do believe a legacy section and/or the article needs to address how influential he was in the acting field. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not EGOT, given his Oscar was an honorary one only. - SchroCat (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Non-competitive EGOTs are still considered one, just not quite the same as the actual thing. The Kip (contribs) 22:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not EGOT, given his Oscar was an honorary one only. - SchroCat (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support blurb per BilboBeggins and TDKR, but I won't be unhappy if it's just an RD. The Kip (contribs) 21:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Was he a real actor or did he just do Darth Vader? Thank you. 86.187.239.81 (talk) 21:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, he was a real actor, he got Tony and Oscar. BilboBeggins (talk) 22:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Even if he hadn't performed multiple other roles (as you could see even just from the lead of the article), voice actors are (also) considered "real actors". Funcrunch (talk) 23:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait then Support Blurb one the most well known actors. While he is most known for Darth Vader and Mufasa’s voice, he has an incredibly long, extensive, and iconic acting career. Just needs more sourcing and expanding, specifically on his death. Kybrion (talk) 21:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- RD ONLY, when the article is ready. I’m sure we’ll see a Carrie Fisher rerun, with lots of fans voting for a blurb, but there’s no real call for it. - SchroCat (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Carrie Fisher is not on the scale of being transformative and not of the same level of productiveness and versatility. It is basically her only famous role. BilboBeggins (talk) 05:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- And yet, just like Fisher, we see an influx of fans saying "he was famous!!", "he was Darth Vader!" and wanting a blurb for that reason. People are not given a blurb for being famous or versatile or productive. I see nothing in the article that suggests he was transformative. So we're back to the fanboy cries of "blurb because he was in Star Wars!!" line of voting. - SchroCat (talk) 07:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- The main argument for him being indeed transformative is that he got a theatre named after him during his lifetime. Getting something named after a politician or actor while they are alive is rare. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thats absolutely no indication of a transformative aspect of his career. Having something named after him isn’t an indication of suitability for a blurb. - SchroCat (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, just small fry? But, looking ahead... Martinevans123 (talk) 19:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thats absolutely no indication of a transformative aspect of his career. Having something named after him isn’t an indication of suitability for a blurb. - SchroCat (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- The main argument for him being indeed transformative is that he got a theatre named after him during his lifetime. Getting something named after a politician or actor while they are alive is rare. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- How was he transformative ? He's a relatively obscure figure outside the US. The world doesn't limit itself to the US Varoon2542 (talk) 22:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- And yet, just like Fisher, we see an influx of fans saying "he was famous!!", "he was Darth Vader!" and wanting a blurb for that reason. People are not given a blurb for being famous or versatile or productive. I see nothing in the article that suggests he was transformative. So we're back to the fanboy cries of "blurb because he was in Star Wars!!" line of voting. - SchroCat (talk) 07:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Carrie Fisher is not on the scale of being transformative and not of the same level of productiveness and versatility. It is basically her only famous role. BilboBeggins (talk) 05:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb once the issues are fixed. I'm not a Star Wars fan, but he was Darth Vader, dammit. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 22:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Funny, I don’t remember any calls for David Prowse to have a blurb, although he was Darth Vader, dammit. - SchroCat (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Blurb He is a Black historymaker and one of the most distinguished voices to ever grace the screen and stage. He is an EGOT winner. There is a theatre named after him. He played many more characters beyond his most iconic roles. Rest in peace. -TenorTwelve (talk) 22:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- A black history maker ?
- He's a relatively obscure figure outside the US. Even the voice acting he did was dubbed in local languages Varoon2542 (talk) 22:37, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Re: the inevitable discussion over whether Star Wars actors should be blurbed , I think the following living or recently deceased are blurbable: George Lucas, James Earl Jones, and Samuel L Jackson. Harrison Ford is debatable/possible, but not as certain. Possibly Warwick Davis for representation for people with Dwarfism. Not as much for other folks (though some are debatable). The standard I would set for blurbing Star Wars actors is 1. Are they a history-maker? 2. How much have they contributed to the acting/directing field outside of Star Wars, such as other franchises or major films. James Earl Jones fits both of these. This should be an easy decision to blurb. -TenorTwelve (talk) 22:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'm surprised that you put Harrison Ford as "debatable/possible", but are certain about Samuel L. Jackson. Ford not only was Han Solo but was the lead roles in the Indiana Jones and Blade Runner series, not to mention starring in The Fugitive and Air Force One. Nonetheless, support blurb when ready. Natg 19 (talk) 22:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- There is zero reason to make any assumption that people that have starred in Star Wars should automatically be consdiered for blurbs. That's not a criteria at all. Having starred in Star Wars may have launched major careers (like Ford or Hamill), or may have cemented their place as an actor, but it is absolutely wrong to claim being in Star Wars is important enough. We're not TV Tropes or a pop culture musuem, we are an encyclopedia. — Masem (t) 02:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb - I may be a bit biased as a Star Was fan, but Jones had one of the most recognizable voices in cinematic history. - ZLEA T\C 22:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb There’s no legacy section that explains why he was transformative in his field (Ismail Kadare’s dismissal earlier this year raised the bar for a blurb).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose blurb old man dies. Death not notable as an event. This is what the RD line is for, people This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is not true.
The death of major figures may merit a blurb
per WP:ITNRDBLURB. Whether Jones is a "major figure" or not is debatable, but there is no blanket prohibition against death blurbs for "old people dying". Natg 19 (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is not true.
- Support blurb when the article is ready. Not many people are recognized all over the world by their voice alone, this makes him unique. Cart (talk) 22:52, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- RD only. Very notable actor, but not on par with a world leader. 31.44.224.222 (talk) 23:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb once any remaining article issues are cleaned up. Highly notable and recognizable, winner of multiple major awards across stage and screen; not just known for his unique deep voice. Funcrunch (talk) 23:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb, best EGOT. Hyperbolick (talk) 23:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb — Not significant enough. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb After cleanup. Promethean (talk) 23:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Blurbing support. Worldwide household name. Who doesn't know Darth Vader??? Kasperquickly (talk) 00:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- @MtPenguinMonster: Is this a "support RD only" or a "support blurb"? Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 05:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, neutral on blurb. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 06:23, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @MtPenguinMonster: Is this a "support RD only" or a "support blurb"? Thanks. —Bagumba (talk) 05:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb per above. Very well-known roles, EGOT, household name and recognizable voice, etc. Davey2116 (talk) 00:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, Oppose blurb because he's notable in cinema, but not worldwide. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support RD, Oppose blurb per WP:OLDMANDIES. Jones was not superstar level in the US and is barely known outside of the US. — AjaxSmack 01:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb I'm a bit surprised his notability is even being debated. Even discounting his roles as Darth Vader and Mufasa, the guy had a whole slew of other roles such that it was separated into its own list article. — Gestrid (talk) 01:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Notability is not in question. But he is a great figure, that's the debate. We normally do not consider aspects like fame or popularity in posting blurbs, since that is favoritism towards Western and English topics, though if that fame/popularity can be demonstrated as being part of a great figure, great. — Masem (t) 01:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb, since I would argue that his notability alone, given his various prominent, world-known roles (i.e. Darth Vader, Mufasa, etc.), would merit a blurb. The referencing issue seems to have been sorted out as well given the voters' shift from issues of referencing to issues of notability. PootisHeavy (talk) 02:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sourcing is better than when I posted the nomination but it is still missing citations and has CN tags throughout. Its not yet ready for an RD posting, much less a blurb. — Masem (t) 02:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb, Has starred in prominent films notably Coming to America that has been a Box Office seller including voice overs in The Lion King, documentaries and Darth Vader in Star Wars.Kampolama(talk) 04:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- EGOT club member, easy choice for blurb (w/ usual conditional re article quality). WP:ITN:
If the person's death itself is newsworthy for either the manner of death or the newsworthy reaction to it, it may merit a blurb.
"Front page" of CNN NYT NBC News BBC, at quick glance. --Slowking Man (talk) 03:22, 10 September 2024 (UTC) - Support blurb. He is well-known outside the US and not only within it, and should be an obvious case of WP:ITNRDBLURB as a major figure (definitely not another WP:OLDMANDIES as claimed above), there are few people who wouldn't recognise his voice or characters; only 2 cn tags remaining which will likely be resolved and should not be barrier to posting. Happily888 (talk) 03:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Not Quite ReadyA handful of CN tags.Support Blurb once up to scratch. 1 Acadamy Award, 3 Emmys, a Golden Globe, a Grammy, a SAG, and 3 Tonys plus a plethora of second tier awards. That is more than enough for a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)- Not a serving head of state/government. Manner of death not notable. ITN items should be events in their own right This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb a very widely known actor/performer even in the counties outside of the anglosphere. One of only 27 people to ever EGOT, that makes quite notable. However, there are some cn tags that needs to be resolved before posting this. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 04:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Appears that the quality issues have been addressed in terms of citation tags/unsourced statements. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb: One of the most iconic actors. Connor Behan (talk) 05:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Marking as Ready. Natg 19 (talk) 05:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support for RD. Not totally convinced by the WP:ITNRDBLURB case -- his life was clearly the main story here, and while Darth Vader is universally known, I'd need more convincing that his voice actor qualifies as such a major figure. I would certainly struggle to list JEJ as (for example) one of the greatest actors of all time/the twentieth century or so on, despite being a much beloved figure. Edit: to make it formal, I would oppose blurb.UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb. Per most of the above. Legendary actor with dozens of award received and as the voice actor for Darth Vader. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb I think he was a high-profile actor with a commanding presence. I don’t think he was a transformative force in acting. The article does not show that he was. I think a lot of people are mentioning that he played Darth Vader, or that he had lots of film roles, but not explaining how that makes his death blurb material. I have to wonder what this discussion would look like without the Star Wars factor - Star Wars is a phenomenon bound to appeal to Wikipedians. There are a lot of top-level theatre actors who have played high profile roles in films - are we going to blurb all of them? humbledaisy 07:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)~
- Per the article, Jones has been recognised as an early pioneer in African Americans in stage and television, with his career spanning back to the prejudiced years of 1965. This take does speak to notability outside of his various roles and I don't think could be said for many actors. Promethean (talk) 12:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb per above. A popular actor with EGOT. LiamKorda 09:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- all EGOT winners are popular in some sense. What is it that makes James Earl Jones transformative and more deserving of a blurb than most popular actors? Humbledaisy (talk) 09:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. Hyperbolick (talk) 10:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'm asking what the rationale is. What is it that lifts James Earl Jones above the likes of Kirk Douglas, another American actor who had a long career with various awards and died at a very advanced age, or Michael Gambon, another veteran who was not a consistent leading man but is world-famous for playing a central character in a genre film franchise? I haven't seen anyone make a case - people are treating this as if it's a dead cert. Humbledaisy (talk) 11:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. Hyperbolick (talk) 10:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- all EGOT winners are popular in some sense. What is it that makes James Earl Jones transformative and more deserving of a blurb than most popular actors? Humbledaisy (talk) 09:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb. Not transformative. (Also not well known in UK apart from Star Wars). Martinevans123 (talk) 09:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb His article got over a million readers yesterday and that's a fairly reliable rule of thumb for whether someone has sufficient fame to get a blurb. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Extended discussion of the significance of such statistics
|
---|
|
- Note that, on day 2, the readership of his article has gone up and is still over a million. This will not be because of the RD posting, which will have barely made the needle twitch. It's more likely due to the impact of tributes and follow-ups across the global media which tend to follow the death of a major figure. You don't usually see this pattern for ordinary deaths which typically have an initial spike and then a steep decline.
- And note that these numbers are huge compared to everything else on Wikipedia. If you look at the top read articles, then Jones is way out in front with 1.35 million while the #2 is Cecilia Hart with just 197K. And why is she #2? That's because she was Jones' wife! You have to go to #3 to find a different topic and that just got 166K views.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 07:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- RD posted Blurb discussion can continue.—Bagumba (talk) 11:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Decent actor? Yes. Transformative? No. I really don't like to criticise other editor's reasoning, but let's be clear here - Kirk Douglas didn't get a blurb because "old man dies". Is Jones on a higher level? I really don't want to mention the Carrie Fisher effect here, but - oops, sorry. But really, how many non-Star Wars fans outside the US would even know who he was? Black Kite (talk) 12:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'd agree, except for the fact that his career stems back to 1965 and, per the article, he's been recognised as a pioneer for African Americans in stage and film. Promethean (talk) 12:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- He lived a long life and continued to work into his dotage. I don't think that's all that unusual when it comes to notable film actors. There are hundreds of notable screen stars working right now whose careers span 50+ years. Donald Sutherland's career stretched back to the 1960s too but it didn't make him blurb-worthy. James Earl Jones' screen career did start during the civil rights era in the United States, but I don't think it's enough. In contrast to Sidney Poitier (whose death we blurbed), he was not a notable star at that time, he wasn't closely associated with activism and he isn't known for any major firsts as an African-American actor. Humbledaisy (talk) 12:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- He was a second Black actor go get nominated for Oscar. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well yes, that's my point exactly - not a first. Humbledaisy (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- The changes do not happen immediately, he can be regarded as first Black actor to have achieved that much success on stage. And he was active at the same time as Poitier, so they both contributed. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well yes, that's my point exactly - not a first. Humbledaisy (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- He was a second Black actor go get nominated for Oscar. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Loads of actors have careers of many decades, I'm not seeing that as something blurb-worthy. And "being a pioneer for African Americans" is sourced to an obituary. I'd be far more likely to take that seriously if I could see RS saying that from when he was still alive. Black Kite (talk) 14:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- In a 1998 interview, [Denzel] Washington said, “There weren’t a lot of serious Black actors for us to emulate, to follow, to admire. There was Sidney [Poitier]; it was James Earl Jones on stage. That’s what I remember.”[4]
- Washington said this in 1998, long before 2024. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- He lived a long life and continued to work into his dotage. I don't think that's all that unusual when it comes to notable film actors. There are hundreds of notable screen stars working right now whose careers span 50+ years. Donald Sutherland's career stretched back to the 1960s too but it didn't make him blurb-worthy. James Earl Jones' screen career did start during the civil rights era in the United States, but I don't think it's enough. In contrast to Sidney Poitier (whose death we blurbed), he was not a notable star at that time, he wasn't closely associated with activism and he isn't known for any major firsts as an African-American actor. Humbledaisy (talk) 12:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- The thing is that, Star Wars is worlwide phenomenon, and the set of Non-Star Wars fans is not large, even outside of US. And the set of people who don't know about Star Wars is even smaller. There will be few people who don't know who Dart Vader is. BilboBeggins (talk) 16:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I'd agree, except for the fact that his career stems back to 1965 and, per the article, he's been recognised as a pioneer for African Americans in stage and film. Promethean (talk) 12:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb EGOT recipient is a very rare achievement and signifies the pinnacle of the entertainment industry. In addition, the subject is known for portraying several iconic characters that are universally known worldwide. Blurb is warranted.RachelTensions (talk) 13:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- It represents the pinnacle of the *American* entertainment industry and that alone. Humbledaisy (talk) 15:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- A little late to the party here, but support blurb - the man was/is a household name with several worldwide famous roles and characters under his belt. He's extremely well known not only in the acting scene, but in popular culture overall. Rest in peace. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 13:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I can assure you that Jones was definitely not a household name, at least outside the USA. Black Kite (talk) 14:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think what User:Masem said earlier applies here; "We're not TV Tropes or a pop culture musuem, we are an encyclopedia". JEJ was the voice of a very well-known character in popular culture. He wasn't a transformative figure in acting and he wasn't among the best-known and most globally significant actors of his generation. Humbledaisy (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb he wasn't Olivier. Sheila1988 (talk) 15:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- He was a Shakespearean actor and won an award for playing Othello, just like Olivier. What's the difference? Andrew🐉(talk) 17:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Olivier was white? (until be blacked up, of course)... Martinevans123 (talk) 17:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- What a trite question. Olivier was one of three who dominated British stage acting in the C20th, before moving into theatre management by setting up and running the National Theatre. That’s transformation and a good reason for a blurb, not just for being famous because he voiced Darth Vader. - SchroCat (talk) 18:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- He was a Shakespearean actor and won an award for playing Othello, just like Olivier. What's the difference? Andrew🐉(talk) 17:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. RD is more than enough here we go again. He was a very popular actor, but not transformative, he did not mark a milestone in the history of American entertainment. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not the New York Times. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- What does "transformative" mean? Who is an example of a "transformative" actor, or someone who
marked a milestone
? Natg 19 (talk) 17:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)- Laurence Olivier mentioned in the comment just above. — AjaxSmack 19:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Besides the fact that we aren't supposed to be doing x vs y arguments for death blurbs, why exactly was Olivier so much more important than Jones? DarkSide830 (talk) 19:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Again, see the comments above about one being transformative and the other not. - SchroCat (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- You seem to have explained why Olivier was noteworthy enough, but reducing Jones's impact to one acting credit seems to almost completely diminish his larger body of work. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have done nothing of the sort. A number of people voting for a blurb have done exactly that, ironically enough. - SchroCat (talk) 04:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- That's...exactly what you said in response to the previous vote. You said Jones was notable explicitly just because he voiced Vader. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:06, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- ”
You said Jones was notable explicitly just because he voiced Vader
”: that’s just not true. JEJ was a notable actor because of his entire career (that’s just obvious); it’s an outright lie to say I have only said he was notable because he played Vader. - SchroCat (talk) 18:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- ”
- That's...exactly what you said in response to the previous vote. You said Jones was notable explicitly just because he voiced Vader. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:06, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have done nothing of the sort. A number of people voting for a blurb have done exactly that, ironically enough. - SchroCat (talk) 04:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- 1 Acadamy Award, 3 Emmys, a Golden Globe, a Grammy, a SAG, and 3 Tonys plus a plethora of second tier awards. I'd say he was in the same league as Olivier. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Then you don’t understand what Olivier’s impact was. Aside from dominating the British stage for much of the twentieth century, he was a formidable producer and director. He worked to set up the National Theatre and then ran in, and completely changed theatre in the UK. That’s what a transformative figure does. I see nothing in JEJ’s article that suggests he was transformative. - SchroCat (talk) 04:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- You seem to have explained why Olivier was noteworthy enough, but reducing Jones's impact to one acting credit seems to almost completely diminish his larger body of work. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Again, see the comments above about one being transformative and the other not. - SchroCat (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Besides the fact that we aren't supposed to be doing x vs y arguments for death blurbs, why exactly was Olivier so much more important than Jones? DarkSide830 (talk) 19:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Laurence Olivier mentioned in the comment just above. — AjaxSmack 19:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- What does "transformative" mean? Who is an example of a "transformative" actor, or someone who
- Support Blurb. Titan in his field, long career with an EGOT to boot. You want transformative? How about the fame he got from one of the most famous VA roles ever as Vader? Probably one of the first to achieve that level of fame in an off-screen acting role. Seems pretty slam-dunk to me. DarkSide830 (talk) 19:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Very famous for his voice acting roles of Mufasa and Darth Vader but was not transformative in his field.
- Noah, BSBATalk 22:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Anyone with an EGOT merits serious consideration. Even if his "O" in the EGOT was noncompetitive, the fact that he voiced Darth Vader and had notable roles in critically acclaimed films such as Field of Dreams, The Lion King and Cry, the Beloved Country puts him over the top for me. --Pats2017 (talk) 00:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Leaning support blurb. I just wanted to comment that I don't think WP:OLDMANDIES is applicable here. While the subject was indeed "old", he was not long-retired and out of the spotlight. He appeared in both live-action and voice roles in the 2020s, and his voice continues to be used by an agreement reached before his death. I also do think that his success as an American black actor beginning in the 1960s is inherently more transformative than that of non-minority actors in the same time period. BD2412 T 03:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb - This is not about his two widely-known voice acting roles. This is about a long and distinguished career on stage and screen, his role as a trailblazer for African-American actors (qv Denzel quote above), and his overall stature in the field. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb not even close to being in the same league as Alain Delon, whom we did not post. So no, definitely not blurb worthy. 2A02:8071:6362:54A0:E829:76AA:FD43:F219 (talk) 11:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Main reason why Alain Delon was not blurbed was due to the article quality being bad/not in good enough shape for posting to be fair. Jones's article is in better quality. Also not a fan of "x didn't get blurbed so neither should y" rationale. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- There was consensus leaning to not blurbing Delon back then and there is consensus leaning to blurbing James Earl Jones now.
- It's not that I agreed with the arguments for not blurbing Delon, because there was evidence of him being transformative in the article, but the discussion on that ended and the main problem was that it couldn't even be posted to RD. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well, if this is going to end up being blurbed and we are going to make the Carrie Fisher mistake a second time, does anyone want to explain the rationale? Most of the votes here are just "he was Darth Vader, duh!" or "He was very famous" and those strike me as very weak arguments. I've seen very little genuine rationale for a blurb in this discussion aside from the Denzel Washington quote. That doesn't seem enough - it could be said of several other actors, more strongly Sidney Poitier who we previously blurbed - and, as I mentioned before, JEJ was not a notable star during the Civil Rights era, he wasn't closely associated with civil rights or activism and he isn't known for any major firsts as an African-American actor. Humbledaisy (talk) 15:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- There's a similar Denzel quote already in the article. Not sure which is the more notable. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- The mistake will be not to blurb him.
- Could you give rationale why Poitier was bigger than Janes Earl Jone? In last twenty years of his life Poitier was not active except for occasional Oscar ceremony appearances. And before that his only significant, or blockbuster role in another twenty years or so was being third-billed role in Jackal.
- One of the rationale was that he got theatre named during his lifetime. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- “If you were an actor or aspired to be an actor, if you pounded the payment in these streets looks for jobs, one of the standards we always had was to be a James Earl Jones," — this is from no other than Samuel L. Jackson.
- “The first play that I saw was ‘Fences,’” said Tony-winning director Kenny Leon of Jones’ performance in Wilson’s seminal American play. “I was a country boy from Tallahassee, Florida, came here as a National Endowment for the Arts fellow, and I saw ‘Fences.’ It changed the directory of my professional life.”
- "Of the theater luminaries in attendance, including Brian Stokes Mitchell, LaChanze, Norm Lewis and playwright Suzan-Lori Parks, many reflected on Jones’ indelible influence on their careers" — from Variety on opening of the theatre [5]. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:22, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- After bringing this up with Tone, who previously closed it, I'm BOLDly re-opening this nom. Just believe it was closed a tad early and do believe we may have been close to consensus with a little more debate. [Admins, feel free to smite me for doing this as an involved editor, but I really believe more dicsussion is worthwhile. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Post-reopening support + blurb Globally known voice. Obviously, we would prefer not to be in touch with the rest of the world, but we can't always get it our own navel-gazing way. SerialNumber54129 16:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb: Any EGOT-winning actor who has married two women who played Desdemona to his Othello deserves a blurb. This could be an ITN/R rule. :) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 17:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support blurb His roles in Star Wars, Field of Dreams & The Lion King, his awards & what’s written in the “Death and legacy” section make me think he merits a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb His voice is recognisable in the English speaking world but he was dubbed in local languages albeit in his style. Otherwise, his name and identity are relatively obscur. This is not a fan page— Preceding unsigned comment added by Varoon2542 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- First of all, I'm happy to see this discussion was reopened. I think it was a very poor decision to close it.
Going through the discussion, I see many reasons to blurb, including:
1) Major/iconic figure in the field. 2) EGOT recipient (even though one of his awards was noncompetitive, such recipients are still generally recognized as having an EGOT). 3) Pioneer for the Black community in acting. 4) Death is making international headlines. 5) Internationally recognizable voice 6) He was Darth Vader
I don't see the last two arguments as valid; they hinge on one or two roles (Vader & CNN bumper voice) so I'm discounting their weight
Reasons opposed to blurbing:
1) Not significant/transformative enough 2) Poitier was an earlier pioneer--I can see a case for these. 3) He's not worldwide--somewhat of a stretch considering the reach of the Star Wars franchise & CNN but I'll concede it. 4) Not on par with a world leader 5) We're an encyclopedia, not The New York Times 6) We're not a fan page These are weak rationales. We've always blurbed the occasional entertainer, all encyclopedias include articles on cultural/entertainment figures, and despite what some people seem to think we've never limited death blurbs to world leaders. 7) He's only known for Vader. Not true, he won many awards for other roles. 8) If we didn't blurb X, then we shouldn't blurb James Earl Jones. Not necessarily true. We've made poor decisions not to blurb someone in the past; doesn't mean we should repeat the mistake.
Either way, whether counting all !votes (by my count 36-18 in favor of blurbing) or just the votes that are more compelling arguments (33-10 for a blurb), there's a supermajority of at least 2-1 to blurb James Earl Jones. While I know there's no "hard number" for making a determination, this certainly seems to me like a consensus to blurb. --Pats2017 (talk) 01:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
September 8
September 8, 2024
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Ben Thapa
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph, the Independent, RTE, Metro
Credits:
- Nominated by Ollieisanerd (talk · give credit)
- Created by Carly1710 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Cleanupbabe (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: English singer, member of G4. Article looks adequate. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 15:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support: article looks OK; Metro isn't a great source for notability/news coverage but also reported in Telegraph, the Independent and RTE. UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Ed Kranepool
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS Sports, AP News
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:6C33:5504:7A1B:88BA (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Rlendog (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Former first baseman for the New York Mets. 240F:7A:6253:1:6C33:5504:7A1B:88BA (talk) 02:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready. For the usual reason. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ana Gervasi
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Infobae
Credits:
- Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Strattonsmith (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 09:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support article is in a good enough shape. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Short, but good enough. Grimes2 (talk) 11:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not ready: Biography has no citation for her birth date or location. Ideally there should be an early life section. Flibirigit (talk) 13:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Flibirigit: This information was not there when I nominated this article. I've removed any unsourced information as I myself did research to find a reliable source to confirm birthplace and birth date to no avail. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Death date properly marked as "circa" since exact date not specified.—Bagumba (talk) 07:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
US Open Tennis
Blurb: In tennis, Jannik Sinner (men's singles) and Aryna Sabalenka (women's singles) win the 2024 US Open. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, CNN (for Sabalenka)
Credits:
- Nominated by UndercoverClassicist (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Both articles are GAs, and US Open wins (men's and women's posted together) are covered by ITNR. Not sure how to do it with two pictures -- I assume in practice we would alternate them? UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:19, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- In practice, both images will be combined into one, and the combined one will be used. – robertsky (talk) 07:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. The article for this news story and the ITN/R candodate is not the bios of the winners, but the tournament article 2024 US Open (tennis). And this is not remotely up to scratch. No prose summaries of the events at all. — Amakuru (talk) 09:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Obviously we should do more work on the U.S. Open article itself, but the fact that we have not one but both of the winners' articles at GA status means I'd love if we could find a way to highlight them as well. DecafPotato (talk) 09:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose the WP:ITNR item is the event 2024 US Open (tennis), and that article is nowhere near WP:ITNQUALITY. It needs a substantial amount of prose added to it before meeting ITNQUALITY. The 2 player articles have only a few sentences about this tournament, and so should not be used as the bold links in order to circumnavigate the inadequacy of the 2024 US Open (tennis) article, and the player articles are not ITNR. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:02, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I must admit, this line of argument seems overly procedural to me -- yes, a nomination for the US Open article would have quality issues, but running the the players' articles gives us the chance update ITN with an unquestionably noteworthy event and to direct readers to two of our better articles. I don't see any guidance in WP:ITNR as to precisely which article needs to be nominated: as I read it, it's the event that has consensus to be posted, not a specific article. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- No it isn't "overly procedural". The ITNR is for showcasing the event 2024 US Open (tennis), and putting 2 articles about people that have around 1 paragraph about that event doesn't achieve this. WP:ITNR lists the event as recurring, so the event article needs to meet WP:ITNQUALITY. The solution to avoid any more discussion would be to fix the event article, because like almost all tennis articles nominated here, it has zero prose text about the events. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I must admit, this line of argument seems overly procedural to me -- yes, a nomination for the US Open article would have quality issues, but running the the players' articles gives us the chance update ITN with an unquestionably noteworthy event and to direct readers to two of our better articles. I don't see any guidance in WP:ITNR as to precisely which article needs to be nominated: as I read it, it's the event that has consensus to be posted, not a specific article. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:28, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose lead article(s) listed in the nomination are wrong as mentioned above. The tournament is the INTR item and not the winners. The main tournament article is no way near ready to be posted. There are all tables and scores but very little prose. I would suggest the nominator to check out the 2024 French Open and 2024 Wimbledon Championships articles (the two grand slams that were posted) to see what kind of improvements this article needs. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:06, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose the US open article has very little prose. Fails to met the WP:ITNQUALITY. Also, since there has no work done on the article since it's nomination, I don't think it will get in shape to be posted. LiamKorda 09:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Ongoing: Israel–Hezbollah conflict
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by Roncanada (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Even if there is clear link with the Gaza war, this is still a different conflict, widely covered. --Roncanada (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- The linked article asserts this is part of the Israel-Hamas conflict that started in Oct 2023. I'm not seeing how it is different. The linked article above is linked in one of the top navboxes of the main Israel-Hamas page as well. Masem (t) 15:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Soft oppose Problem I have with including this in the ongoing section is that currently the conflict is little more than drone and artillery strikes by both sides. If the Israeli army launched a ground offensive into Lebanon, or vice versa, than I would support inclusion. Scu ba (talk) 15:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose unless conflict escalates - Right now it's confined to skirmishes and not a full-scale conflict. If we must post this I say we include a spillover link in the ongoing item PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above - thus far it's just been exchanges of rocket fire and airstrikes, which is pretty much what it's been for a long time - just that they've gotten more frequent that normal. The Kip (contribs) 16:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose more similar to the Kashmiri conflict then a full scale war. Wait until a proper invasion by ground troops and then we’ll add it to ongoing. 27.96.223.192 (talk) 05:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support it's an ongoing event and notable in itself, and is getting regular updates. Nowhere does it say it has to be full scale war for an event to be considered. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Abcmaxx. This is an ongoing event with regular updates. I would also accept bringing back the "Spillover of the Israel-Hamas war" ongoing item. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:04, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment While, I leaning oppose as of right now, I would say that there are already three ongoing entries. Four would be far too much. I suggest we should one of them before adding this one. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- The number of ongoing items currently listed shouldn't be a factor, merely that there's just a lot going on in the world right now. Each nomination should be decided on its own merits. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:57, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support merging with Israel–Hamas War ongoing. I don't see that we need two different ongoings for two different aspects of essentially the same conflict. What to call it though? "Israeli-wars"?, "Israel-Palestine conflicts"? "Palestine situation"? - it's hard to think of a title that is both encompassing and neutral. Nfitz (talk) 13:14, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's not even an Israeli-Arab war it is much more nuanced than that. However, not convinced it is the same conflict. Yes, Hamas and Hezbollah are linked, and obviously one conflict escalation led to the other, but Lebanon isn’t Palestine and it brings a whole different set of issues and potential outcomes. I would argue even that what happens in the West Bank is not the same conflict as what happens in Gaza; different political forces, different area, different issues to contend with. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Scu Ba and PrecariousWorlds. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose for now per Scu ba & PrecariousWorlds. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per above. SpencerT•C 04:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Henny Moan
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NRK
Credits:
- Nominated by Oceanh (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Norwegian actress. Seems sufficiently cited, except for filmography section (which needs citations). Oceanh (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Per MOS:FILMCAST, a citation isn't required (though there's nothing stopping us providing one) as long as the role is credited. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- FILMCAST applies to pages about films, not to BLP, which have higher standards for sourcing. Masem (t) 15:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- They do, but FILMCAST applies to
film-related articles
, not exclusively articles about films (an article on a film actor qualifies as "film-related", in my view, under any reasonable reading). The BLP sourcing standards in question are thatany material challenged or likely to be challenged
must be sourced. Putting those together, a citation would of course be welcome in any case, and required if there was a reasonable chance that someone would dispute whether she held a particular role. UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:39, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- They do, but FILMCAST applies to
- I don't see where it says a citation is not required. Can you quote the excerpt? —Bagumba (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- For uncredited roles, a citation should be provided in accordance with Wikipedia's verifiability policy. This is a case where the exception proves the rule -- by specifying that uncredited roles need a citation, it follows that credited roles do not (necessarily) require one. It's also covered by WP:PRIMARY, which has a primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge: if a credit to the person is visible when watching the film, the film itself is a sufficient citation for the statement that they held a credited role, unless there is good reason to require further (dis)proof. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- So, the essence in what you are saying, is that citing the film itself (say, a dvd, or an online version) is sufficient for a credited role. But if there are no citations at all, we can not know whether the information is just taken from an «unreliable» source, such as another wiki or imdb. Oceanh (talk) 11:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I suppose that would be a good way to do it, and within the spirit of WP:PRIMARY. Not required doesn't mean that it's required not to be included. UndercoverClassicist T·C 13:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- So, the essence in what you are saying, is that citing the film itself (say, a dvd, or an online version) is sufficient for a credited role. But if there are no citations at all, we can not know whether the information is just taken from an «unreliable» source, such as another wiki or imdb. Oceanh (talk) 11:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- For uncredited roles, a citation should be provided in accordance with Wikipedia's verifiability policy. This is a case where the exception proves the rule -- by specifying that uncredited roles need a citation, it follows that credited roles do not (necessarily) require one. It's also covered by WP:PRIMARY, which has a primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge: if a credit to the person is visible when watching the film, the film itself is a sufficient citation for the statement that they held a credited role, unless there is good reason to require further (dis)proof. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- FILMCAST applies to pages about films, not to BLP, which have higher standards for sourcing. Masem (t) 15:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support article looks alright to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. No problems found. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 06:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 07:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) Typhoon Yagi
Blurb: Typhoon Yagi (pictured), leaves at least 40 people dead in China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Post)
News source(s): ChinaNews VNExpress GMA News
Credits:
- Nominated by HurricaneEdgar (talk · give credit)
The storm made historic landfall, the death toll continued to rise, and the article is in good shape. HurricaneEdgar 00:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Article looks good and I feel like with 30 deaths, it should definitely be mentioned on the main page, IMO. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 00:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Much better. The article structure is good and the death and damages are notable enough for the main page. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 03:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Major storm. Looks ready to post. Thriley (talk) 03:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support both on quality and significance - compared to the last typhoon at ITN, this has a much wider spread of damage. --Masem (t) 03:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Is this the same as the below Typhoon Yagi nomination? Can the other one be closed? Natg 19 (talk) 04:01, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Uh oh. Yes it is the same exact one. What now? Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 04:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes it is, and it was clear there was consensus to wait to see if there were more impacts from further landfalls. This one is more appropriate to keep in terms of the date of nomination since this is post-impact. Masem (t) 04:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above. 🌀TyphoonAmpil🌀 (💬 - 📝) 04:24, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per previous vote to wait until the story develops -- it now has. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Its a current weather event, so it should be recent. Sources are reliable and the context is notable. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 16:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support as Yagi is absolutely notable enough to be in ITN. Shouldn't this be closed now? OhHaiMark (talk) 17:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 17:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Post-posting Support - as I didn't support it last week, but now it's reeked some serious damage and death on north Vietnam, it's significant. Nfitz (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
September 7
September 7, 2024
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
2024 Algerian presidential election
Blurb: Abdelmadjid Tebboune (pictured) is declared the winner of the 2024 Algerian presidential election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Abdelmadjid Tebboune (pictured) is declared the winner of the 2024 Algerian presidential election which the opposition boycotted.
News source(s): ReutersAPAl Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by Scu ba (talk · give credit)
- Created by Sundostund (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: A national election that deserves to be ITN per WP:ITN/R Scu ba (talk) 22:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nominator, the article looks OK. Trepang2 (talk) 04:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support seems fine MAL MALDIVE (talk) 04:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wait the lede of the election article needs to be expanded as it is about only 10 words as of now. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nominator, and as the creator. It does look OK to me. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 14:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The main story seems to be the feud pitting all the candidates against the electoral authority over voter turnout (announced as an "average" of 48%, but calculated as less than a quarter of registered voters). Perhaps it would be wise to wait until there is agreement on turnout... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 14:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Checks results; 95% of the vote. Sounds very legitimate lol, but that doesn't affect notability. ITN/R, let's post but I think we should also consider adding something in the blurb about the fraudulent nature of the election PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @PrecariousWorlds: I stand by to my support vote, but I do agree with you that some note about the (fraudulent) nature of the election should be considered. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 17:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment added a new altblurb about the election not exactly being free and fair. Scu ba (talk) 19:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @Scu ba: This is obviously an improvement, but consider using stronger language and label the election as "so-called" or "fraudulent". — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 19:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- We didn't do that for the Russian election, why would we do it for the Algerian election? Scu ba (talk) 23:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- There was a very long discussion as to not try and accidentally convey that the Russian election was anything more than a sham from what I remember. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @Scu ba: This is obviously an improvement, but consider using stronger language and label the election as "so-called" or "fraudulent". — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 19:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support: I think "which the opposition boycotted" is sufficient for the reader to join the necessary dots, and is nicely factual and verifiable, whereas "the election was fraudulent" is much trickier. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, fraud is a crime and labelling something fraudulent requires a legal process usually (as would e.g. murder or theft); given this is a de facto dictatorship we may never get any closure ever even if the regime falls as to how fraudulent or not this election is. At the same time I have long argued not to mislead by suggesting equivalency between fair and sham elections. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I would say that an "election" like this, where even the winner complains about irregularities alongside opposition candidates, should be subjected to stronger language than what is usual. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 10:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It seems to have been a shambles with even the winner querying the bizarre variation in the figures. And the formal result is under appeal. Presenting this as a legitimate and respectable election is misinformation. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: I think we all agree that we categorically should not present this as a legitimate and respectable election; the question is how do we present it? Abcmaxx (talk) 10:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- I looked at the BBC site to see how they presented the result and it doesn't appear that they have done so yet. So, that's a good clue that we should wait on further coverage rather than rushing to judgement. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: I think we all agree that we categorically should not present this as a legitimate and respectable election; the question is how do we present it? Abcmaxx (talk) 10:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support altblurb - article is fine quality-wise. On the fraudulent nature, ALT1 uses the "declared the winner" language I personally prefer for questionable elections, while "which the opposition boycotted" sends the whole point home. The Kip (contribs) 06:09, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Diondre Overton
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:6C2D:D568:97D0:2125 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit) and Rusted AutoParts (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Former Clemson wide receiver. 240F:7A:6253:1:6C2D:D568:97D0:2125 (talk) 03:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support the article seems fine to me. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Dan Morgenstern
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Thriley (talk) 02:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Not Ready. Too short at the moment. The article needs some expansion. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 03:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose the awards section lacks citations. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ready to go. All cn tags now sorted and all statements have citations. Vladimir.copic (talk) 01:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
September 6
September 6, 2024
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
(Posted) RD: Rebecca Horn
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Monopol Magazine, Der Spiegel
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Wuerzele (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
German visual artist. Grimes2 (talk) 10:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support, detailed and referenced --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support looks sufficiently cited and detailed, I've also fixed a few references and added wikilinks. Aydoh8[contribs] 02:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ready the article appears ready to be posted. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Just readied a bunch of unready stuff and noticed a new CN tag (with room for more yet), but it's seemingly good enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- Posted Not by me, just for the record. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Ron Yeats
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:6C2D:D568:97D0:2125 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Scottish footballer. 240F:7A:6253:1:6C2D:D568:97D0:2125 (talk) 03:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Several uncited statements, have added cn tags. yorkshiresky (talk) 10:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose due to outstanding CN tags. Aydoh8[contribs] 02:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose orange and cn tags needs to be resolved. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:33, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Cathy Merrick
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Ornithoptera (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Indigenous leader in Canada and Grand Chief of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs. Ornithoptera (talk) 06:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support looks good 27.96.223.192 (talk) 11:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Article has enough length and sources for posting. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 13:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support: article is generally in good shape, perhaps some very minor POV in places but nothing serious. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. No problems found. The structure looks good enough. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 03:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 12:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Paul Goldsmith
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cbsnews.com/news/paul-goldsmith-indianapolis-500-nascar-icon-dies-at-98/
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by RegalZ8790 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by DH85868993 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
RegalZ8790 (talk) 01:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Not quite ready. No problem with the length. However, there are several sections that are unsourced.Changing to Support. Well done and Cheers! 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 03:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)- I've added citations for the flagged passages. RegalZ8790 (talk) 21:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support no apparent issues left, looks good enough now. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:35, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- I've had to place to citation needed tags. In addition, what's referenced in the prose is that he was born in West Virginia, whilst the infobox gives a specific place. Schwede66 01:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I've added or improved citations for the flagged passages. RegalZ8790 (talk) 05:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Schwede66, I've expanded the prose and added an image. RegalZ8790 (talk) 02:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nah, that won’t do. Ancestry.com is a user-generated database and therefore not a reliable source. If there aren’t reliable sources that can confirm those details, I suggest that this needs to be referenced for 1925 and West Virginia, assuming that those sources exist, RegalZ8790. Schwede66 16:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Schwede66, please consult the new citation, an article published by the United States Auto Club announcing Goldsmith's death. Please let me know what else, in specific, remains to be done in order for this article to garner your support. I am concerned about the time we have left remaining. Thank you for your input. RegalZ8790 (talk) 02:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nah, that won’t do. Ancestry.com is a user-generated database and therefore not a reliable source. If there aren’t reliable sources that can confirm those details, I suggest that this needs to be referenced for 1925 and West Virginia, assuming that those sources exist, RegalZ8790. Schwede66 16:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 04:27, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: Brazilian investigation into Elon Musk
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): Vide previous candidate
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
- Oppose We’ve already had a nomination for this. 27.96.223.192 (talk) 01:08, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose We have never put ongoing court actions on the ongoing line, nor would this be a case of that much import to be the first such one. --Masem (t) 01:32, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose already discussed below with no consensus to post. This nomination is just trying to game the process. Natg 19 (talk) 02:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Already proposed Aug. 31. No means no. --Pats2017 (talk) 03:02, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Article discussion has already been closed with no consensus to post, no need to add this to ongoing after that. Hungry403 (talk) 03:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose there was no consensus to post this less than a week ago, and with all due respect the nom was one of the users lobbying for it. The Kip (contribs) 05:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
RD: Sérgio Mendes
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety, LA Times
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:E121:3DD7:6095:EC33 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit), Rblourenco (talk · give credit), Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit) and Martinevans123 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Brazilian musician. 240F:7A:6253:1:E121:3DD7:6095:EC33 (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support once ready: A front-figure of bossa nova and one of the most famous Brazilian musicians of all time, together with Antônio Carlos Jobim and Vinicius de Moraes. The article still needs a lot of sources, though, and I'm afraid I won't be able to help myself... Oltrepier (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Oltrepier: notability isn't a factor in RD nominations, as having an article is proof of notability in itself Abcmaxx (talk) 17:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose, article has sourcing maintenance tag, citation needed tags and several unsourced paragraphs. Suonii180 (talk) 20:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose orange tag, unsourced awards section and only 8 references for a bit long article. ਪ੍ਰਿੰਸ ਆਫ਼ ਪੰਜਾਬ (PrinceofPunjab | ਗੱਲਬਾਤ) 11:37, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
(Closed) San Marino national football team
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: San Marino national football team, the lowest-ranked FIFA-affiliated national team, wins the first competitive victory in their 36-year history (Post)
News source(s): ESPN.com
Credits:
- Nominated by Holapaco77 (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Sports trivia. --Masem (t) 12:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose We should not be posting the results of individual games, unless possibly it is a championship game. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose whilst one of the worst sports teams in history winning did garner some coverage, this doesn't meet WP:ITNQUALITY, not least because it's probably not important enough to have its own article. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - seems more like a Did You Know. Nfitz (talk) 14:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose big news for all the Tim Traveller fans out there, but ITN isn't the place for this, belongs in a did you know blurb. Scu ba (talk) 15:58, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose target article football is the world's biggest sport and San Marino has a unique place within it. However, if this singular win is that notable, then really there should be an article about the match itself. Abcmaxx (talk) 17:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Re-opened after closure (Much as I love San Marino, consensus to post won't develop. The Kip (contribs) 19:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)}}); maybe it won't reach consensus, but really not even half a day is certainly too short a time span to be closing any nomination. Let's give a chance for others to comment. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. 31.44.224.222 (talk) 21:10, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Congrats to San Marino! Cool story, but more fitting for DYK than ITN. --Pats2017 (talk) 01:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose while this is probably significant news for San Marino, I fail to see how this is really significant for the rest of the world. Editor 5426387 (talk) 04:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Ten to nothing, "remarkable". InedibleHulk (talk) 05:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose While interesting, it's more suited for DYK than ITN, as per Pats2017 and Nfitz. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com]
rather than using <ref></ref>
tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref>
tags are being used, here are their contents: