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.
Nomination steps
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually - a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Voicing an opinion on an item
Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
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).
The United States Navy and the Royal Navy strike thirteen Houthi locations across Yemen, damaging underground facilities and vessels, killing at least two people and wounding ten. (NPR)
Sweden announces a package of $1.23 billion in military aid to Ukraine, the largest given by Sweden so far. (AP)
France and Germany announce that French and German weapons sent to Ukraine, including long-range missiles, are permitted to target bases inside Russia. (CNN)
Brazil recalls its ambassador to Israel amid an ongoing diplomatic crisis between the two countries. (Reuters)
Law and crime
Amnesty International says that the number of executions recorded globally in 2023 was the highest since 2015 and up more than 30% from 2022, with Iran carrying out 74% of the global total. The figures exclude China, because execution numbers are considered a state secret. (BBC News)
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.
A very run-of-the-mill example of a modern United States federal judge. BD2412T 02:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fixed up the article a bit, expanded lead. Looks good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:34, 30 May 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.
Nominator's comments: Obit published 29 May. Thriley (talk) 21:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article is a stub and needs ref work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:35, 30 May 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.
Venezuelan film director. Considered one of the most important filmmakers in the country, recipient of a Cannes Award in 1959. NoonIcarus (talk) 14:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Georgian parliament overrides a presidential veto of the foreign agents law, thereby requiring president Salome Zourabichvili to endorse the bill within five days. (DW)
Closed as duplicate nom; please see and make any further comments on previous nomination from May 25. Happily888 (talk) 02:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
Film/TV producer, announced on May 28. Needs sourcing work for the filmography and awards sections. Natg 19 (talk) 20:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did some sourcing but still needs more. Natg 19 (talk) 21:06, 29 May 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.
Recognition of Palestine by Ireland, Norway and Spain
The previous nomination (from May 22) was closed because the event hadn't happened yet. Mika1h (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sufficient update in terms of the added table parameters and details on diplomatic foreign relations with Ireland. Decent article that is maintained. Kingsif (talk) 21:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, although only the table has been updated and I would like to see prose about it. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:43, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Relevant table has been updated. The article does not include individual prose for each country that recognizes Palestine - the updates to the article seem sufficient Schwinnspeed (talk) 23:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even though this is covered by ongoing, it is notable enough to merit its own blurb. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose They’re neither the first EU/NATO states (most of Eastern Europe) nor the first “western” states (Sweden, Iceland) to do so, and none of them (except debatably Spain) are major regional/international powers in the same way as the USA, Germany, or France (whose recognition I probably will support when it happens). I don’t really see how this is especially notable as a result, beyond the context of the war, at which point it becomes a question of whether it overrrides the ongoing item, and (perhaps somewhat circularly of me) for the reasons previously stated I don’t really think it does. TheKip(contribs) 00:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article looks good enough, plus given the current climate surrounding Palestine/Israel conflict, this does have some more 'heft' to it. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per The Kip. I get the point that this was done by three countries at once in response to Israel's mishandling of the war against Hamas, but countries recognise the State of Palestine all the time in support of the two-state solution (for instance, Barbados, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, and The Bahamas have very recently done it). A total of 145 out of 193 UN member states have recognised the State of Palestine, and these are no firsts in any category.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Out of all the countries that recognise the State of Palestine these three are the 'certain step towards a two-state solution'? Traumnovelle (talk) 08:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my humble opinion, even if lasting peace is light years away. Others may disagree. Brandmeistertalk 08:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Article really needs an overhaul, may have to wait until vote is over. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support has been preceded by notable protests, fits ITNR Ion.want.uu (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, but the protest article needs just a few more fixes (four {{cn}} paragraphs in the Russia and US reaction sections, some proseline issues). For people using cite highlighters like me, note that some sources show up as unreliable even though they might not be, as the Facebook share link of the sources got archived instead for some reason. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for multiple reasons. Firstly, this is domestic politics with no major international impact. Secondly, if there were mass-scale protests and people really condemn the bill, they could vote against the ruling political parties on the parliamentary election later this year to change the political climate. That’s how it works in a democratic country, which Georgia pretends to be. Thirdly, the wording of the blurb with “controversial Russian-modelled” is very confusing (Did Russian officials participate in the proposal?) and not neutral. Fourthly, posting this implies that we should consider posting the potential repeal of the law in the near future if the composition of the parliament changes, which would be too much navel-gazing on a topic within a single country. In general, we don’t post such events. Protests always have the potential to merit inclusion in case they escalate, but this is still not it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It quite clearly means it's modelled on a Russian law, not that Russians had any direct involvement. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanilla Wizard: Even if it's modelled on a Russian law, this is an event with a minor impact in global politics, and "controversial" isn't a word that should be included in a blurb. Wikipedia should remain impartial. There are hundreds of similar laws around the globe which push countries closer to Russia, China, the United States or any other global player. I also don't see how my argumentation violates WP:ITNCDONT.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If people are protesting the law it is evidently controversial... Traumnovelle (talk) 06:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those people can punish the governing parties on the parliamentary election later this year. That’s how democracy works. The protests have potential for posting if they turn violent with casualties or end up in a change of government, and the law itself has potential if international sanctions are imposed against the Georgian government, but the events have clearly not reached that state yet. A milder way to oppose this would be to wait how things develop in the coming days. Otherwise, a law on NGOs resulting in mass-scale protests is very much a run-of-the-mill event, especially in times when we have major ongoing armed conflicts.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It has major international impact in light of EU enlargement and the threat of Russian aggression. This law has put Georgia away from the EU membership they have been striving for until now and back into the arms of Russia, who still occupy 1/3 of the country. The fact that several heads of state as well as international organisation have widely commented on this repeatedly reflects this. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:08, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Georgia's accession to the EU would increase its population by 0.83 per cent, area by 1.65 per cent, GDP by 0.18 per cent, and would reduce its GDP per capita by 0.65 per cent. That's all but definitely not a major impact. Furthermore, it won't happen in foreseeable future given that there have been candidate countries for more than 20 years now. Also, if you take a look at the opinion polls on this year's parliamentary election, it doesn't seem likely that the ruling party will lose and the government will change. So, it literally boils down to whether these protests can overturn the government and/or something big happens in the country's international relations (e.g. imposing of international sanctions). As it stands, there are no signs for that happening other than diplomatic notes, but we can wait to see how the story unfolds further.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's the closest transcontinental country to EU membership, polling in Georgia has EU accession at 80% support levels consistently. The protests have been huge given the relatively small population, consistent, long-term and widespread; the 2023 protests were successful at the time; this time time will tell but inclusion on ITN is not solely based its success rate. Every major news outlet in most countries has covered this, which is rare given it's a small far-flung state for most, nearly all top politicians in the EU, Russia and US have commented or are monitoring the developments. I think given Russia's increasing influence Georgia is seem as a litmus test for many, so it is hugely important geo-politically. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:18, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still not entirely sure what kind of protests are considered notable enough for inclusion on ITN. Does it have to have a death toll? Does it have to lead to regime change? Obviously, we can't predict the latter, so it remains vague Scaramouche33 (talk) 12:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was pinged, but I'll only make this one reply as it seems this back-and-forth is long enough already. Re: "I also don't see how my argumentation violates WP:ITNCDONT" Because your first and foremost argument against posting was that you believe this story only affects one country and has no international impact. WP:ITNCDONT clearly outlines this is not an acceptable reason to oppose. "Please do not... 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." I was going to argue against the idea that there's "no international impact" to what's going on in Georgia right now when the geopolitical implications seem fairly obvious, but doing so would be besides the point. Even if I agreed that this story is only related to Georgia alone, that's not a valid reason to oppose it. That is why I asked that you reread WP:ITNCDONT. Vanilla Wizard 💙 18:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You’re clearly overreacting here and hanging on to my argument on the limited impact of this event. Please read my other arguments and the whole discussion before rules-lawyering. In general, we don’t post protests, unless they turn violent or result in major changes. Furthermore, the Georgian government began normalising the relations with Russia when they lifted the sanctins and re-introduced air travel between the two countries last year. This law is relatively insignificant compared to what was happening over the past year, but people get deluded that this is a break-even point because of the protests (there are always protests when authorities clamp down on the NGO sector, but that doesn’t imply any greater significance).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's notable enough, especially with the EU and USA reaction. Should the bill pass, which it looks like GD will do everything in their power to do so, then that effectively scuttles any and all chances of Georgia approaching the west or having friendly relations with the EU, which has stated this will kill their EU membership bid, and the US said if it passes it will warrant sanctions on Georgian leadership. Scu ba (talk) 05:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article is pretty hard to read, grammatically, narratively and organizationally. Longer than it has to be, too. I don't think many people going in without a prior understanding of the plot are going to leave with one, either, just "plenty of snippets" and disjointed parablocks (chunky pseudographs). InedibleHulk (talk) 09:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article is a mess, and the update given by the blurb is a whole two sentences. The bill itself likely needs to be its own thing from the protests, and that's going to be a lot of work. --Masem (t) 12:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality and it's just a domestic thing, not really ITN worthy (maybe good for ongoing though for the protests?) Sharrdx (talk) 13:05, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ongoing means there would be several blurb-worthy (or close to blurb-worthy) updates, so that's an even higher bar to clear. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:16, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, oppose on quality Very much in the news, I feel like I've been seeing an endless stream of new articles about it even though Georgia isn't exactly a country I'd expect to see nonstop news about. It definitely has major geopolitical implications, but I'd also like to remind some editors that it also doesn't need to in order to be notable enough for ITN. As for quality: the page isn't unsalvageable, but it definitely needs some work. It doesn't take a lot of skimming to find some confusingly written sentences that were probably translated very roughly from Georgian. I'd say most of the article is okay (or at least intelligible) but I'd like to see some improvements made before posting. Vanilla Wizard 💙 18:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality as the article needs work for readability. Support on notability, but oppose current blurb - IMO the protests should be the focus, not the law itself. TheKip(contribs) 01:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The parliament with most members in the Maldivian history with an amount of 93 and People's National Congress has a super majority with 75 members making an history. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 08:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an ITNR, the election was last month. The inauguration or taking of the oath of office is rarely considered significant enough for a blurb if the election was already reported. --Masem (t) 11:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose On technical grounds, the article nominated isn't even included in the proposed blurbs. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:28, 29 May 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.
Papua New Guinea asks for international help following the landslideinEnga Province three days ago, and reports that more than 2,000 people were buried alive and are now presumed deceased. (AP)
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.
Weak oppose The article's body isn't bad in terms of sourcing, just one cn tag overall. However the filmography section is unsourced and needs ref work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:31, 29 May 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.
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.
Weak support Awards section lacks inline citation, but most of it is cited in the prose. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:23, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support updated and sourced some things. I do see two citation needed tags, but they are likely sourced within the next sentence. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 23:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Impressed with this article & its excellent and thorough sourcing. But I agree that the Awards section lacks inline citations at this point (as GreatCaesarsGhost mentions above), but as soon as this section is corroborated it should be Ready to post. Trauma Novitiate (talk) 00:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added inline citations. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At least three people have been confirmed dead in Armenia following flooding on the Armenia–Georgia border, with several bridges collapsing as a result of the flooding. (Reuters)
Hosts Czechia wins the title for the seventh time after beating Switzerland 2–0 in the final. Czechia ends their 14-year gold drought by winning it for the first time since 2010. (TSN)
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.
Vermont politician. Obituary published 26 May. Thriley (talk) 03:27, 28 May 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.
Josef Newgarden, once again wins the Indy 500, I didn't watch the race, apparently another last lap pass? But, he gets it 2 in a row. Altblurb is for if we should mention it. User:TheBlueSkyClub (Talk) 00:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Would like to see more expansive sourcing in the "Summary" bullets, rather than just one tag at the end of the paragraph(s), but otherwise seems good to go. Good amount of prose regarding the race itself. TheKip(contribs) 05:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support looks good enough, decent summary of the race and all the other preceding action, and more than good enough sourcing. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:49, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article is very extensive and is in a great shape. PrinceofPunjabTALK 09:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternate blurb as it seems relevant to mention he got two in a row. Tableguy28 (talk) 19:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are reference gaps all over the article. Length doesn’t imply good shape.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:38, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When you tagged the article, you added tags to sections which already have multiple references? I don't understand this oppose anymore. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 15:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oppose pet Kiril. Not ready yet. — Amakuru (talk) 10:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There are a lot of sources, but there are equally a significant amount of statements which lack them. Black Kite (talk) 12:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb (oppose altblurb). The article is comprehensive and has ample prose updates. Yes the referencing isn't perfect, but it more than meets ITN standards - we're not demanding Featured Article level. Seems ready to me. Modest Geniustalk 11:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, we're not, but there's a whacking great paragraph ("Race Background") that is practically unsourced (as is the "Race statistics" table, but that shouldn't be too difficult). Black Kite (talk) 18:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now that I'm back home, I've further trimmed some bloat and added the missing ref in the section in concern. I genuinely don't know what more you guys want. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 04:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality as the article is substantially lacking in prose. I'll see if I can rally the troops at WikiProject Ice Hockey to improve it. TheKip(contribs) 05:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both on quality and importance. Neither the main event or final articles have any substantial prose, so are way short of meeting WP:ITNQUALITY. Also no evidence that this event gets enough coverage to justify inclusion on ITN. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability I think the event is of importance but Oppose on quality as the article has very little prose. PrinceofPunjabTALK 09:56, 27 May 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.
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.
Congrats to KKR. ITNR event. Ktin (talk) 18:51, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article text on the match is sourced solely to a scorecard. The nested tables violate MOS:ACCESS and the colour schemes of the table violates WP:COLOUR (and not enough contrast between black text and green colours). Background section also needs some more sources, and more context to explain each team's route to the final. Also bunch of WP:WEASEL words in the match summaries (thus causing an orange tag to be appropriate). Parent article is also junk with no decent text, and we shouldn't really be encouraging people to create a final article that's just slightly less junk just so they can post it here. And image in infobox is possibly not a valid fair use. All in all , way short of WP:ITNQUALITY. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:04, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have fixed the weasel words issue, if any. Do not agree with most of the other assertions above. Ktin (talk) 21:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging MNWiki845 as well. I think I have fixed the colors issues and the MOS access issues with nested tables. Good to go imo. Ktin (talk) 02:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Text is still sourced almost entirely to scorecards, better sources that actually verify the information in text should be used. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The sourcing/tables issues seem to have been fixed, and there's a good amount of descriptive prose for a sports article. TheKip(contribs) 05:18, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article look good to me but I'm not happy with both blurbs. PrinceofPunjabTALK 09:51, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this should be on the news section because this is quite an important event in the Indian Subcontinent and other parts of the world. This was also there last year, when CSK won the IPL, and it wasn't too bad. In fact, it made a few more cricket fans in the world. One thing, is that the blurbs have a lot of scope for improvement. SunnyMoon404 (talk) 18:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's ITN/R, so notability is assumed. TheKip(contribs) 19:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. Still a few citations needed. Could do with an "Aftermath" section too, which is standard for sporting events, for reactions and suchlike. — Amakuru (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amakuru: thanks. I have fixed all the [citation needed] tags. None of the prior IPL finals (which we have posted) had aftermath sections. I have not introduced one such. e.g. 20232022Ktin (talk) 22:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it still ought to have one, that is part of the basic structure of a sporting final article and would certainly be required for a GA run and to be considered as covering all aspects of the topic... But I guess for the "minimum" standard of ITN it's OK. Striking my oppose and you can go ahead and post as far as I'm concerned. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 22:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Italy restores €35 million (US$38 million) of funding for UNRWA several months after it suspended the aid due to allegations linking UN staff to the October 7 attacks. (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.
Note:Aduplicate nomination of this article was previously created, the nominator's cmts were: Film/TV producer, announced on May 28. Needs sourcing work for the filmography and awards sections. Natg 19 (talk) 20:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC) * Did some sourcing but still needs more. Natg 19 (talk) 21:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC). Happily888 (talk) 02:53, 30 May 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.
Strong Oppose article is no way near ready to be posted. Article has 92 word long prose, of which nearly 45 words are about his death. Also, Filmography is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 10:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Article needs more prose and some other work. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:14, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability for now but wait until some more work is done on the page, then I'll support it. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 10:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is WP:ITNR, so only consideration is article quality. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not enough prose compared to the enormous amounts of tables. Thus, fails WP:ITNQUALITY. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:09, 26 May 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.
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.
Sudden death of a professional golfer. Natg 19 (talk) 20:05, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed suicide. Anyway, I support posting this tragic death. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 16:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments: Can we have a sentence with footnote(s) in the main body of the prose on the date and place of birth, please? The info is in the infobox already and should be sourced in the main prose. Thanks. Also, the boxes above the "PGA Tour career summary" section need sources. Please add more REFs. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 04:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added date and place of birth and place of death to the prose. It appears that Tewapack has referenced the tables. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the additions. The tables on the results from the majors could use some sources, but it's just minor things. Posted, anyway. --PFHLai (talk) 11:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Closed) Canonisation of Carlo Acutis
This will likely get support to be posted, however, as it has been correctly pointed out in the comments, the canonization has not yet happened, what happened was the second recognized miracle which is a prerequisite. Happy to renominate when the process concludes. --Tone 12:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article:Carlo Acutis (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Carlo Acutis is canonised by Pope Francis, becoming the first millennial saint recognised by the Catholic Church (Post) Alternative blurb: Pope Francis recognises a second miracle attributed to Carlo Acutis and canonises him as the first millennial saint in the Catholic Church Alternative blurb II: Pope Francis starts the canonisation process to recognise Carlo Acutis as the first millennial saint News source(s):Reuters, Credits:
The first millennial saint made news worldwide, I'm more than happy to agree to any changes of the wording but I think this is newsworthy for ITN. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:05, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think we should at least wait till he is officially canonized, as far as I understand, process has just started and the ceremony will take place later. Also, have we ever posted a canonization story before? PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is notable for being the first millennial, but has Acutis actually been canonised? It does not seem like it. Looking through the archives, the canonisations of the Martyrs of Otranto and Laura Montoya (first canonisations of Francis), Francisco and Jacinta Marto, Marie-Alphonsine Danil Ghattas, and Mariam Baouardy were not posted; canonisations of Mother Theresa, John XXIII, and John Paul II were posted. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:35, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Classicwiki: I believe that the Pope just started the process by recognising the second miracle and that's why I worded ALT2 to cover that eventuality because I knew there might be a discussion about the correct wording/tense for it. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'll 100% support this once it actually happens. That's what we did for John Paul II in 2014. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability but wait until canonisation has occurred, as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:30, 25 May 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 European Union makes a decision allowing Ukraine to use interest funds from frozen Russian bank accounts, totaling €2.5 billion ($2.7 billion) per year. (Al Jazeera)
Hundreds of international students from Pakistan and other Asian countries leave Kyrgyzstan following attacks by Kyrgyz nationalist mobs on student hostels in Bishkek earlier this month. (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.
Support An unfortunate amount of sources seem to be affiliated with the late artist but aren't claiming anything that would warrant doubt. This C-class article has a lot of one and two-sentence paragraphs, but the issue isn't bad enough to prevent main-page posting. Bremps... 02:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Closed) RD: Doug Ingle
Not looking viable and fresher RDs could use the attention. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:22, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article 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.
Much of the prose is unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 00:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't ask me, I'm the nominator (and usually a sculptor, not a mason). There weren't any tags back then, so it didn't seem so big a problem, but yeah, I get it, it still sucks now about as much as it ever has. Withdraw. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:15, 28 May 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.
May want to wait until the death toll is a bit more settled (and the article lengthened), but reports are suggesting at least 100–300 and potentially up to 1,000 people were killed. TheKip(contribs) 17:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, mainly due to the high death toll. Quake1234 (talk) 17:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If 3,000 are still buried, it's "potentially up to" 3,000 dead. Maybe a source doesn't say it, but people need air to live. Do any sources say 100 are confirmed dead? If not, neither should a blurb. Leaning Wait here. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article is reasonably sourced, probably will get longer as the search for survivors continues. As long as the blurb uses "at least X" where X is the confirmed number of dead or missing, we're good - updates to that number can be made per request at ERRORS. --Masem (t) 17:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability and quality. I'm not opposed to waiting a little while, but this is an incredibly rural area -- it's hard to say how long it will be before there's an accurate death toll. Estreyeria (talk) 18:52, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article looks good and 3,000 buried is a huge toll. Tragic event. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:23, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for grave loss of life. Hyperbolick (talk) 20:01, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - article looks decent enough for posting. BabbaQ (talk) 20:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Major disaster, definitely noteworthy. Hope the death toll is lower than feared. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look into it. Schwede66 03:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted I'm surprised that nobody here commented on the article's lead; it was a complete mess. I had to rewrite that so that the original hook (which I've chosen) has any resemblance to what the lead says. It sounds like we'll be updating this item frequently as more info becomes available. Schwede66 03:41, 25 May 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.
The dog behind the Doge meme. No doubt famous enough but I'm not sure if the target article is problematic for RD because the subject is the meme. There's a section about the dog.Johndavies837 (talk) 07:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the section about Kabosu can probably pass GNG if split off into its own article. Juxlos (talk) 08:05, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a biographical wikiarticle on the deceased dog? I think we need that for RD purposes. --PFHLai (talk) 08:07, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose due to lack of a separate article. That's the basic bar to clear for RD. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can't help thinking that if we had a person who was only notable for their face appearing in a famous meme, we wouldn't have an article per WP:BLP1E but they would have been mentioned at the article about the meme instead. No doubt I'll be proved wrong on this because of the amount of total trivia that finds its way into WP, but technically we shouldn't. IAR, but I think this would have been fine to post with a link to the meme (when it contained the dog bio). Black Kite (talk) 09:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My concern too. The notability of the dog is just barely there, yet all of the content of that article, within context of the Doge meme, is wholly appropriate there. It would be far better for not having a standalone article. Given that the coverage of the death has been covered in major sources (I've added the BBC and NYTimes articles), its clear that a mention at RD is appropriate, even if the section about the dog was religated to a section of the Doge meme page. Remember that RD doesn't require a separate article, that's only one of the conditions that we look for to automatically consider for an RD, but we're not bound to post an RD that doesn't have a separate article. --Masem (t) 12:01, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the very similar case of Balltze was originally written by me with the dog's real name, then it was moved in discussion to Cheems, the dog's internet meme personality. I said I supported that move as long as the page was structured and categorised as if it were talking about a meme. There is honestly no need for two articles as they're symbiotic of each other - the meme could not exist without the dog nor would the dog be anything without the meme. Unknown Temptation (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a dog not a person. Harizotoh9 (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ITNRD: An individual human, animal or other biological organism that has recently died may have an entry in the recent deathsSWinxy (talk) 15:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One has to remember that the ITNRD standard is only establishing an automatic guideline to quickly pass RDs as long as quality is met. Other "deaths" absolutely can be considered but they don't have the simple RD test, and significance or appropriateness will need to be debated in addition to quality. So should a major body of water completely vanish due to global warming or some other means, it would seem reasonable to argue a possible RD (though depending, a blurb might be better). I think editors are more comformable with "death" being attributed to when a living biological thing ceases to be, rather than a metaphorical death (such as the proverbial death of Twitter with the recent changes to domains at X.com), but we should not be blind to where such cases may merit being in the RD line. Just that it will take a bit more debate to judge significance. — Masem (t) 16:37, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, it's not a major body and will outrun us all, thanks to its protective lawmakers! InedibleHulk (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article looks good, adequate coverage and everything looks to be fine. Ornithoptera (talk) 15:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The ITNRD is explicit that individuals with an article are automatically eligible for RD. This dog did not have an article until today, and is really only notable for 1 event so probably shouldn't have one. The split out into a separate article was done in good faith, but I view it as not correct and we should never be changing article structures out of the blue just to satisfy ITN rules. I don't think we should post this unless it's as a blurb. — Amakuru (talk) 15:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This wasn't automatic, though, the humans decided it manually (and 18 is old for a dog, so you know how I'll vote). InedibleHulk (talk) 15:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having a separate standalone article is only a criteria to quickly allow for an ITNRD, but an RD is not required to have one. Masem (t) 16:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Kabosu was clearly a very important dog, definitely passes GNG. Rest in peace. Di (they-them) (talk) 15:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Amakuru, and further, this was... almost corrupt. Splitting off a portion of an article just to qualify for WP:ITN, deliberately creating a coatrack? Nonsense. The day what's important to us is what the erstwhile "internet community" tells us is the day we should — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serial Number 54129 (talk • contribs)
At least two people are killed in a Ukrainian missile strike on Alushta, Crimea. Explosions are reported across the peninsula and Ukrainian media reports that multiple targets were hit. (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.
Support: a huge name in his field: search his name on Twitter and you'll find just about anyone who's anyone in Classics mentioning and mourning his passing. Article is in a reasonable state, certainly not a problem for the front page. UndercoverClassicistT·C 22:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The intro needs more than a single sentence. The middle paragraph of the Career section needs footnotes after the first sentence. The list of publications needs sources. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 04:41, 30 May 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.
Considered the last female socialist militant and, apparently, one of the last of the veterans of the Spanish Civil War. Her article is not long, but I think it is long enough to be posted. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:02, 25 May 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.
Well known American author. The article needs some work but is not in dreadful shape. (The Alienist may be the best work of historical fiction I've ever read.) Ad Orientem (talk) 21:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as the nominator said, article needs some work. Publication section needs more sourcing and the career sections needs to be divided into multiple subsections. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I and others have done some extensive copyediting and sourcing. All of his works appear to be now sourced either in the tables directly or are already cited in the body of the article. Also, I've broken up the career section into three subsections for easier navigation per the suggestion by PrinceofPunjab. I did add a single CN tag for a claim that I could not find the source. But the claim doesn't strike me as controversial, and I don't think that's enough to stop posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither date of birth nor place of birth appear to be referenced. Schwede66 07:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is now a footnote on the sentence with the date and place of birth. And, there is 1 {cn} tag remaining in the Early career section. --PFHLai (talk) 22:25, 29 May 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 documentary filmmaker and television producer. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 15:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support given his critical acclaim on his documentaries. Lunsel (talk) 15:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: the lack of sources across various sections is a concern, but he's definitely notable enough, and the article is generally in good shape. Oltrepier (talk) 16:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Super Size me was huge at the time, it was nominated for an Academy Award, and it actually impacted the fast food industry. Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article not in good quality. Needs sourcing. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've made improvements to the article's sourcing, and it no longer has any citation needed tags. Anyone else is free to make improvements to the article. Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still a couple CN tags and the tables at the bottom are completely unsourced.-Ad Orientem (talk) 01:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support There's still ten unsourced entries in the filmography section, but overall the article quality has improved.Support Three unsourced listings in filmography should make the article good enough for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support filmography section still needs few more sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a couple of tags re: unreliable WP:IMDB.—Bagumba (talk) 16:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba, it was just one credit as far as I can see. I added another source. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 19:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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
