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.
Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
Atarget article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually - a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.
Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
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.
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.
Oppose due to a whole paragraph of unsourced information in the background section. Also, the header of the article only states the preliminary results, so we may want to wait until the final results come out. Gödel2200 (talk) 02:21, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The U.S. Justice Department charges 193 people, including 76 medical professionals, with participating in healthcare fraud schemes totalling $2.75 billion, which include unlawful distribution of Adderall and fraudulent drug addiction treatment. (Reuters)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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 footballer who represented Cameroon at senior international level, and played for Nancy, Celtic and Bordeaux, among other clubs. Unfortunately, the article is still in poor shape, and might use some more citations, but it's definitely nothing "unfixable". Oltrepier (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Niger's ministry of defence announces three days of national mourning following yesterday's ambush of security forces near the village of Tassia in Tillabéri Region, which killed at least 20 soldiers and a civilian and injured several others. (Al Jazeera)
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.
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.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American politician: Louisiana House of Representatives and New Orleans City Council. Could do with a few more citations. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply to me here, please ping me.16:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is already a little bit longer now, although it can still very much be improved. Given the importance and recency of the situation, it should be okay for posting. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:34, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - it has a dozenWP:RS citations now. It's still a work in progress, but it's only a matter of time before this gets to the front page. A short amount of time, if you ask me. Kire1975 (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, if leaning towards wait. The big question for that is the disposition/fate of Luis Arce, which so far no news seems to have reported. (e.g, was he not there? Did he escape? Did the coup capture him?) I suspect that we'll get an answer on that within a few hours anyway. As long as the articles remain as decently-cited as they are now, it should be good to post. Nottheking (talk) 22:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a classic WAIT. If sucessful, then yes to posting. If it all fizzles out in a few hours with no or minimal loss of lives and the arrest of the soliders etc., then that's not something we normally (or should) post. -- KTC (talk) 22:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Troops have pulled out, so it likely failed, but it is still a notable event. If this happened in a similarly-sized country in Europe, it would absolutely have been posted. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. There's enough unqualified support here for a consensus and quality seems OK now. Only the coup article bolded though, not the BLP per usual convention. — Amakuru (talk) 00:37, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
A renowned Kazakh-born Russian poet, a founding member of the "Moscow Time" group of Soviet underground poets. Recipient of several notable Russian literary prizes, said to have been nominated for the Nobel prize.
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.
Oppose - total of one sentence in the entire bolded article referencing the news item. Not to get WP:CRYSTALBALL, but this is a symbolic move that likely will not have many consequences, similar to Putin's arrest warrant (other than restricting travel). In particular, the NYT article states, "That makes it highly unlikely that Mr. Shoigu and General Gerasimov will be taken into custody in the foreseeable future". Also covered by the Ongoing section; could be considered part of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Finally, another article for the arrest warrants does not yet exist (as exists at International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova), and including that article in the blurb, or at least mentioning the subjects of the warrants, would be more appropriate. Staraction (talk | contribs) 06:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The last time ITN was fooled into posting something like this, the most significant consequence was Main Page readers having to look at Putin smiling at them for an unreasonably (and perhaps uncomfortably) long time; I don't know what these guys look like, but I'm pretty anyone smiling in an official portrait is the entirely wrong look for this harmless-yet-ill-intended sort of news. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - As PrinceOfPunjab says, Putin was worth posting as head of state, but this is a subsidiary matter and not suitable for ITN. It very much falls under Ongoing. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
Support At this time of year, the lives of millions of students and their families around the world are dominated by such high-stakes examinations. This is clearly more significant than local sporting events, say, and so it's good to run a relevant item. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh what a mess. I think the main difficulty here is that there's no specific date tied to when this controversy began. Moreover, the article doesn't currently mention any real protests. I think mass protests would be a reasonable date to blurb this, but otherwise the current system of ITN is not really designed for slowly-increasing controversies. Article looks good tho, so I am open for improved blurb ideas. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Paper leaks and student protests are routine and recurring events in India. These have no large significance outside the country. — hako9 (talk) 18:20, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fraudulent issues in the Indian education system are regular. This one has a more coverage than usual but it's still not ITN-worthy. Black Kite (talk)18:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A gunman kills five people and critically injures a girl in North Las Vegas, Nevada, then kills himself upon being confronted by the police the following day. (Reuters)
Thousands of anti-tax protestors assault and set the Parliament of Kenya building in Nairobion fire, as riots begin following the approval of a finance bill. The ceremonial mace is also stolen by protesters. Ten people are killed and more than 50 others are injured as police open fire on protestors. (Al Jazeera)(BBC News)
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.
We did post when it arrived at the moon, and per ITNR, its successful return is also there. Unfortunately, I don't know how much more than a sentence update (both lede and body) can be made here, given that it is China and news from there tends to be iffy. There definitely needs to be a better update before posting. --Masem (t) 04:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per nom, can't see how the realization of what was always supposed to happen on this moonrock-collecting mission gets any bigger or better than this. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The composition of the far side is different and so return of these samples is significant. As this is the main point of the mission and it's ITN/R , we should note its success. Note also that the Starliner is not going so well and so such success cannot be taken for granted. And adding more sentences to the article will be easy – just give me a moment. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It's good news, but we already ran with the moon landing as the major event of this mission, and I don't think we need this as well. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if it had been optimal if we had only blurbed this article upon Chang'e's return, and not on landing. Then we would've had the best of both worlds. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, new frontier in science and a nice break from bad news. I don't think it's newsworthy enough to give it the picture slot too, though. - Moonreach (talk) 13:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, an update to the status of an article about a notable topic of broad public interest. There's no rule that something can only ever be mentioned on ITN once and I don't see why that should be factored into the decision. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Already posted this, and not ITN/R. If and when there are humans landing on the moon and then returning again, that might be momentous enough to post twice. But this is more of an incremental achievement IMHO. — Amakuru (talk) 09:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment removed from ITNR. ITNR does list "Arrival of spacecraft (to lunar orbit and beyond) at their destinations" as suitable events, but that seems to only be referring to outgoing spacecraft. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Earth is beyond the path of lunar orbit. Otherwise we'd crash. The only question (which might not even matter) is whether we're in front of the moon or behind it. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. No rocks have been recovered from the moon since the Apollo and Luna missions in the 1970s, and they are exceedingly rare. This is the only sample return mission from a state other than USA or USSR. Polyamorph (talk) 07:37, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support These rocks are from the far side of the moon and as such are unique in the history of lunar exploration. Very important to cover it — Iadmc♫talk 10:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
American Samoan professional wrestler. WWE Hall of Fame. Needs some more citations (I have added some tags and the banner), but it seems people are updating the article. If you know who should be considered an updater, please add to nom. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me.22:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is an embarrassment that the article on the attack is longer than the one on the buildings. And that the article on the buildings is longer than the one on the parliament itself. Fine set of priorities we're encouraging here. —Cryptic16:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality and possible POV issues. The details of the bill should be sourced to third parties, particularly claims that are not clearly part of the bill's language. Masem (t) 17:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb on basis of notability, but some expansion would be needed. A national parliament of a major African nation being set on fire is certainly noteworthy. International newspapers seem to be increasing their coverage of the event, so hopefully there will soon be more info to beef up the article.Khuft (talk) 21:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, on quality at this time. Support on notability and should the article(s) improve. Kenya Finance Bill protests article needs some work. Some of the details are wrong and some are trivial. The causalities section contradicts the infobox. Parts of the lede are not addressed in the body, making some elements seem undue. 2024 Parliament of Kenya attack is sparse with details. Needs work IMO. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me.23:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the rioters/protestors are killing their own the security forces are behind the deaths. If/when confirmation comes, we should add that to the blurb instead of relying on passive voice. Bremps...22:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Judge needs to approve of this. That's probably the better time to consider. He may be going right back into jail if the judge denies. --Masem (t) 01:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Technically he has already gotten out. He was released from the British prison on Monday afternoon and he's now going to the Northern Mariana Islands to plead guilty and get sentenced to time served. That hearing is at 7 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, less than 24 hours from now, which could be a good time to post a blurb. Johndavies837 (talk) 01:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That seems like a reasonable plan. Would temporarily atopping this section until that time be unusual, or would just removing it for now be preferred? Aaron Liu (talk) 02:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added an alt blurb which is accurate even today as he was already released from the British prison, but the best time to post it would be when the U.S. judge actually approves the deal. And since that's supposed to happen within 24 hours, it should work out well. Johndavies837 (talk) 02:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's my bad. The blurb wording had be thinking otherwise. Probably should have taken a look for myself then. Thanks for the correction, I will strike my oppose and make it a support. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment While his article is well sourced, it is overly detailed and has a lot of proseline. It would be nice if that could be cleaned up before tomorrow. --Masem (t) 02:27, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb which I just added, and post it when the U.S. judge formally approves the deal, which should happen around 7 p.m. ET on Tuesday. Johndavies837 (talk) 02:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support posting after the judge in Saipan approves the deal. Noteworthy, he's already out of prison on his way to Saipan and will appear in about 23 hours. Can someone with more memory of ITN archives comment on whether it's normal to use plea bargain as the "outcome" in this sort of blurb, or perhaps should something like "after pleading guilty (to [charge/s])" be used instead? -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 02:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, that's not great either. We can have a temporary picture (either the old photo or the protesters) and hope someone takes a good photo after his release and freely licenses it. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait There seem to be at least 3 countries involved in this – Australia, UK and US. His article says that there are significant "legal issues in Australia" so what's their status now? There seems to have been some change in the Australian government position as "The Australian government has been pushing hard for a couple of years now for this case to end". Is this part of the AUKUS deal? And the outcome still seems ongoing as it's conceivable that Assange might skip bail now as he's done it before. I don't think we should focus on the plea bargain as many or most US cases end in some such deal. As there seems to have been some sort of unusual multinational agreement, we should highlight that. Andrew🐉(talk) 05:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Numerous sources report that he was released from Belmarsh because the High Court in London granted him bail. See the BBC, for example. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - While it's a long-running and occasionally high-focus case, this ending to it is something of a damp squib, and I'm far from convinced it's ITN material. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeCriminal gets released from prison - so what. If he got exchanged through a major swap for a russian spy in our custody i'd maybe reconsider my vote, but this is just a minor thing in the grand scheme of things Kasperquickly (talk) 10:02, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...how the hell would Assange even factor into the US "swapping" him for a Russian spy. The US wanted him in prison, not out of prison and was trying to get him from the UK, not Russia. --110.141.157.50 (talk) 10:41, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kasperquickly does seem to be having some difficulty telling countries apart - see below for where he seems to be confused between the USA, Iraq, and Russia. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle as a very significant event. However I have no opinions on the timing of posting given what Andrew & Red-tailed hawk said. Too complicated for me to decide on that. S5A-0043Talk10:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait (lean support) This is a positive development overall, but let's wait until he's actually released and makes a public statement since it's possible that there is the possibility of the deal falling apart or another State indicting him.Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pleads guilty and has agreed to some dubious terms as part of his release isn't that notable or historic. In addition that the linked article is a dumpster fire, the chilling effect of his conviction (and aforementioned plea deal terms) should have its own article and subsequently blurbed more than anything else.
Why should the aftermath have its own article? That's like splitting out Collapse of Smile again. I also don't see how that makes the article a dumpster fire, nor why you claim both that the terms aren't notable or historic and that the repercussions are apparently big enough to have their own article at the same time. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed on the contradiction. I'm forecasting, but I still believe the main article is too broad for ITN and if we were to blurb this event it should only be because it's significance is such that it would stand alone on it's own (which it might, and is partially what I'm arguing for here). My apologies if that is confusing.
Saying that doesn't make it true. I'd be impressed to see even one reliable source that's independent of Assange's fan-club that claims such a thing. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Namely, which sources would you want to claim that? Would you also want these sources to say that they're sorry they ignored his situation for the past decade and decided to side with state power or do you also want them to say that Wikileaks did more for their jobs than they did themselves? Oneequalsequalsone (talk · contribs) 16:58, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think one can fairly say the press has ignored Assange's situation for a decade. It's been covered with reasonable regularity here in the UK. But I also don't think much of "this is a major event in western history - but all possible sources are in the pocket of the state and won't say so". It's definitely in the news - it's a pretty big story - but I don't feel it's of the towering importance people are making it out to be. It's a relatively quiet end to the whole business. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All humans have a bias in one way or another. Some feel baseball and ice hockey are important enough to be the top page news, others feel like the end of a decade old saga of the persecution of a reporter that dared to expose violations of human rights and civil liberties by various governments is more important Oneequalsequalsone (talk · contribs) 21:07, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A major event in the worldwide history of the freedom of the press? How so? He's taken a plea bargain and is being released. No new precedent is established, no great publication is made. This just doesn't have the effect that you're claiming it does. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's getting a bunch of news coverage, but the actual significance of this seems limited at best. He's pleading guilty and basically being sentenced to time served. Many events get a short term burst of coverage and we don't post them, mainly for want of significance. This isn't an election, a war, or a natural disaster with a high death toll. It's an interesting case that had the potential to clarify some important aspects of the legal relationship between the press and the state. But it is effectively ending in a tactical draw. Sorry, but I'm just not seeing anything here that warrants a blurb on ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are not a news ticker. Just because something gets news coverage doesn't mean it gets posted. What is the practical significance of this? -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:33, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It has been going on for almost 15 years, and from time to time it reoccured in the news. So this is very appropriate to include this In the news section. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb, a major headline all over the world, and a continuing story, since the news will certainly continue to cover his coming and going from the CNMI, touchdown in Australia, and any comments he may have after that. This also raises the stakes for some kind of deal with Snowden, and other possible ramifications. BD2412T19:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment and oppose — This can now be properly discussed. Per Ad Orientem, I do not see how this is a major conclusion to the Assange saga. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him)23:37, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The agreement means that for the first time in American history, gathering and publishing information the government considers secret has been successfully treated as a crime. This new precedent will send a threatening message to national security journalists, who may be chilled in how aggressively they do their jobs because they will see a greater risk of prosecution.
But its reach is also limited, dodging a bigger threat. Because Mr. Assange agreed to a deal, he will not challenge the legitimacy of applying the Espionage Act to his actions. The outcome, then, averts the risk that the case might lead to a definitive Supreme Court ruling blessing prosecutors’ narrow interpretation of First Amendment press freedoms.
Strong support as this has probably been the longest running case about a cornerstone of democracy in my lifetime. Wikipedia was able to move a step closer to its goal of making the sum of human knowledge accessible due to Assange's efforts. All readers should be invited to ponder how they feel about his plea and release. Connor Behan (talk) 02:55, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Article has some serious(?) citation overkill issues. That's not a Hard Wait, mind you. But it is something for at least one of you fixers to think about fixing, before or after it's posted (and possibly pictured). InedibleHulk (talk) 02:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There is no lasting significance to this. I can see that it's fodder for the press, who like a good story, and this one's unusual given his lengthy stay in the Ecuadorian embassy and subsequent incarceration. We've been treated to such breaking headlines as "His feet have hit Australian soil". But ultimately it's just one man, he was neither exonerated nor treated unduly harshly by the US government and this isn't the kind of thing that would usually be covered in ITN, any more than the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination was, or other things that generate a lot of heat on the news tickers. — Amakuru (talk) 10:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are here to showcase quality articles and writing on current, analyzed events. We are not here to decide whether people have endured our own arbitrary standard of torture that we have not experienced. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While the definition of torture is not arbitrary, we are indeed not here to adjudicate that. What we are here to do is point out that !votes are not votes. I.e. that they count for less when they include claims that reliable sources reveal to be false or misleading. Connor Behan (talk) 21:20, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are important global issues arising from the case, some of which affect us as Wikipedia editors directly. The most important is that the United States insists that its laws apply world-wide, even to foreign citizens who have never set foot in the United States. This is especially problematic in the the US ranks lower than any than any other Western country on the World Press Freedom Index. Hawkeye7(discuss)18:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It smokes Mexico, soundly beats Greece and narrowly outclasses Liberia (unless you're of the opinion that anywhere less "free" than the U.S. isn't "West enough"). InedibleHulk (talk) 18:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lord Kelvin is featured on the main page today. The article quotes his maxim that "when you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind..." Andrew🐉(talk) 21:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, alt-blurb. It's a pretty significant event, with Assange being able to come out and meet friends/family etc after serving over five years in prison. This isn't some event where there is lots of news on a day then nothing the next.[2][3] — AP 499D25(talk)13:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt-blurb - I think the nominator here, Aaron Liu, lays out a good case that this latest development in the Julian Assange/Wikileaks story is deserving of ITN/blurb level status. The relevant article continues to be (for the most part) reliability updated. - 14:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trauma Novitiate (talk • contribs)
Marking as Ready Full disclosure: I am opposed to this nomination. However being objective, the discussion has been open long enough and there is a solid consensus in favor of posting. I found two CN tags on an otherwise solidly sourced article, neither of which are enough IMO to stop posting. This is good to go. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AO, I appreciate your input here. I am also opposed to the nomination, but I share your appraisal that it's both well-supported and of suitable quality. Thank you for being measured and constructive. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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.
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.
Support - article is well-sourced and the citations are reliable. There does seem to be a lot of focus on Crews’s disavowal of Freud and psychoanalysis. I’m unsure whether it does or does not deserve a prominent place in the article. Also, as Classicwiki points out, the short section on “Honors and awards” lacks citations, but that should not necessarily keep this RD from being posted. The other citations in the article back up many of these already. If I have time, I’ll try to get to these. - Trauma Novitiate (talk) 14:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Support As an editor on this article, we've been hard at work making sure it's up to par for ITN, and I believe it now is. However, having Florida captain Aleksander Barkov as the photo may be a better choice, given McDavid isn't on the Panthers. TheKip(contribs)04:37, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A precedent has been set which the championship MVP is pictured and mentioned (check the archive from June 17). Connor McDavid just happens to be an outlier, being the 6th overall player and 2nd skater to win the trophy without winning the cup. Additionally, the previous player, Jean-Sébastien Giguère did it when there was only 100,000 articles in the English Wikipedia. LosAnaheimFan 5 (talk) 06:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with The Kip. The pictured player should be from the winning team, that's the story here, we're not blirbing the fact that someone won the MVP award specifically. And the captain is as good a choice as any. — Amakuru (talk) 09:20, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support—And speaking as an Edmontonian who roots for the Oilers: congrats, Panthers! You really earned it. (As an aside, I'm neutral re. the image used, and open to being persuaded either way.) Kurtis(talk)04:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean... why run a story about sports championships if each and single year they happen without fault? It would be better if there was a story about it NOT happening. LilianaUwU(talk / contributions)06:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to argue this, you could open a discussion on the talk page to remove sports from ITNR, but ITNR lists many different sporting events, so that may be a difficult proposal. The entire purpose of ITNR is for "recurring" events that are in the news. ITN is not only for "special events/disasters". Natg 19 (talk) 06:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article's quality is more than enough for ITN, and, of course, the victor of the Stanley Cup has been featured in ITN many, many times. IncompA06:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support (oppose image) McDavid didn't even accept the award, and the article is about the Stanley cup championship not the opposing teams captain. Historically, the MVP has typically gone to a member of the winning team but given the incredibly competitive nature of this series I suppose it makes sense why the league would decide to deviate from the norm. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:07, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support (oppose image) Article is good, topic is noteworthy enough to warrant being highlighted on the front page. McDavid winning the Conn Smythe is worth being mentioned, but the image used should be of a Flames player instead. RPH (talk) 15:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
McDavid or the Panthers logo It's always been standard to picture the MVP. We skipped the NBA one this year, but that's only because a beautiful lynx appeared. Unlike that cat, there's no good reason to arbitrarily highlight any Panther who didn't win an individual award (or a Calgary Flames player). InedibleHulk (talk) 16:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, ideally with Aleksander Barkov as the photo, or perhaps Sergei Bobrovski. Barkov being the captain of the champion club should be the easiest to swing though. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. There is clear consensus to post the blurb text. I've posted without the photograph, since there still seems to be unresolved discussion on which photograph should be used (if any); additional conversation could be useful in attaining consensus specifically on that point. — Red-tailed hawk(nest)02:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I must insist (vainly or not), since the main or only reason for picturing the guy who didn't hold the Oilers to one or score a point at all that night is his general association with the Panthers, we use the free picture of him wearing a Panthers uniform, not whatever getup he has on there. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably biased but there is so much more jargon that could be added. Instead of what we have, we could have "In ice hockey, the Florida Panthers (captain Aleksander Barkov pictured) defeat the Edmonton Oilers to win the Stanley Cup Finals, after winning Game 7 at home, in regulation. Edmonton forward Connor McDavid won the Conn Smythe Trophy." Maybe we could omit the Oilers part but that is important information. LosAnaheimFan 5 (talk) 06:38, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't the Simple English Wikipedia - if we wrote all of our articles solely in wording known to an average English-speaker, our articles would be nearly bare of content. Most sports articles inherently presume at least a degree of familiarity with the sport in question, and if there's no familiarity, there's plenty of Wikilinks to help establish it. Jargon is fine so long as it's not excessive, and this article certainly isn't. TheKip(contribs)06:55, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Breakaway is Wikilinked now. Not in that instance, but in Game 3, where it appears first. I didn't link backhand, but if you can appreciate how the blade of a hockey stick has two sides and players usually shoot with one, I think you can deduce from there. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:23, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's fine. I have no real knowledge of ice hockey at all, and I can understand the article without any problems. Usually issues arise when editors use sporting slang rather than jargon, and this one doesn't. Black Kite (talk)07:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I know comparatively little about cricket but watering down the Indian Premier League article to the point of tedium because of novices like me isn't in the best interest of Wikipedia (I read that article and while I don't 100% understand everything in it I think it's fine. Same with articles on other, non-sports topics; there's a certain base level of topic-specific language that can't be avoided. This Stanley Cup article is solid. It paints a colorful picture of what happened in a short space. -Pats2017 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:56, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – large number of deaths. However though, at least 22 migrant workers is wrong, as the article states 2 South Koreans were among the casualties. Thus I suggest, "A fire at a lithium battery factory in the South Korean city of Hwaseong kills at least 22 workers, including 19 migrants, most of them Chinese nationals.". — AP 499D25(talk)12:43, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support if updates are made. Very tragic accident. 17 Chineses, 6 Koreans dead (1 from Laos but changed nationality to Korea). Didgogns (talk) 13:28, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No indication of significance. This was not a notable factory, there were no notable people involved, and there have yet to be any societal ramifications. Ping me if China sanctions South Korea or something. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:30, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article gives no indication that this will have a lasting impact, and does not mention any major response (such as new legislation) to the fire. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. This one slipped under the radar a bit, but with five supports (including the nom) and two opposes, there's consensus to post. Article in decent enough shape too. — Amakuru (talk) 11:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated 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.
Oppose. No indication of significance. This should be a bullet point in a list of terrorist incidents in Russia, not an article featured on the main page. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We've posted terrorist incidents in the us where like 4 people died even thought hundreds die every day in Chiraq
I don't care how many people died, and I don't care what we've posted in the past. Neither of those are relevant to whether this has any encyclopedic significance. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment given events Russia is involved with the blurb needs more clarity as to who dud the attacks or their intent. Eg this appears to not be tied to the Ukraine conflict directly. Masem (t) 16:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gave it a go with 2 altblurbs. Note that I've purposefully foregone the mention of 6 dead terrorists because I don't think it's fair to count them among the people that they've murdered Kasperquickly (talk) 17:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it kind of is since most people apparently died there, plus they've cut the head of a priest off. More to the point i've actually only added that part because wikipedia has already had individual articles for bot hthe church and the synagogue attacked and i wanted them included in the blurb. Kasperquickly (talk) 10:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The death toll from the storms and heavy rains in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras increases to 30 people, including at least six children. (Reuters)
Three people are missing following thunderstorms and landslides in southeastern Switzerland. (Al Jazeera)
A severe water crisis on the island of Capri, Italy, due to Italian mainland water system failures causes several areas in Anacapri to run dry, and forces the mayor of Capri to suspend tourist arrivals on the island. (AP)
French prosecutors charge a 19-year-old and a minor with planning and collecting arms for a violent "terrorist conspiracy" against Jewish targets. (France 24)
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.
Coverage of the subject's life could use some elaboration in the main prose (with references) on his earlier career before becoming chief executive. --PFHLai (talk) 11:45, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note Removing the Ready tag. Looks like several honors are not sourced. That will need to be corrected before this can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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:
In the news toolbox
Administrator note Removing the Ready tag. Looks like several honors are not sourced. That will need to be corrected before this can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]