Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click here to nominate an item for In the news. In the news toolbox
Shortcut

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

The American Eagle aircraft in 2022
The American Eagle aircraft in 2022

view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary

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

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

Nomination steps

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

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

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

[edit]
  • 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

[edit]

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

Please do...

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

Please do not...

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

Suggesting updates

[edit]

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

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

Archives

[edit]

Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives

Sections

[edit]

This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.

January 30

[edit]
January 30, 2025 (2025-01-30) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Law and crime

January 29

[edit]
January 29, 2025 (2025-01-29) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Salwan Momika

[edit]
Article: Salwan Momika (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Hindu, NYT
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Atheist anti-Islam activist Assaisnated. Maybe not a blurb, but RD-able for sure. Well cited. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 11:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 13:09, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) American Airlines Flight 5342 mid-air collision

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2025 Potomac River mid-air collision (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American Airlines Flight 5342 crashes on approach over the Potomac River, Virginia, United States, killing an unknown number of passengers. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ American Eagle Flight 5342 collides with a helicopter over the Potomac River, Virginia, United States, killing an unknown number of passengers on both aircraft.
News source(s): CNN, Reuters, BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Unknown number of casualties, but it certainly appears that this will be a mass fatality incident, sadly. The first commercial plane crash on US soil since 2009. RockstoneSend me a message! 03:15, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait for details regarding victims/survivors/circumstances to become more clear, and for the article to update as such. An utterly horrifying day for my home - I was in the vicinity of DCA just a few hours ago. The Kip (contribs) 03:21, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added altblurb to clarify it was a collision. The Kip (contribs) 03:24, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's awful to hear about this. Per the video, I doubt there will be many survivors.
Side note: Rockstone, you beat me to ITN by a mere three minutes. Well done. JayCubby 03:25, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for more details as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:36, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate to air on the side of caution, but new details are coming in every few minutes. This is being covered by global networks. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - As per above. TheHuman630 (talk) 03:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb 2. Mid-air collisions involving commercial aircraft are rare and notable. -insert valid name here- (talk) 03:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say wait, knowing damn well all onboard died here. Write that down as a support vote once the obvious is confirmed. I definitely support using the CCTV footage in the blurb - Wikipedia is not censored and a short video showing the event going down is much more relevant than an image of the plane involved. Departure– (talk) 03:48, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's admittedly grainy (but not as bad as when the screen of a monitor is filmed by someone with Parkinson's), but does the job. JayCubby 03:52, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Just wow SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 04:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - although maybe wait a little bit until we get more info on deaths and such. This is the first major aviation incident in the US in 16 years, meaning that this accident will likely be extremely notable in the future. Definitely warrants being on ITN. interstatefive  04:06, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mid-air collision ... it's not been confirmed it's an accident. And the video linked above of the collision doesn't look like an accident - I don't see how the helicopter didn't see that plane coming. How do you fly into the side of well lit plane? Nfitz (talk) 04:19, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At the press conference, 4 hours later, they couldn't identify any survivors. And it's been reported that helicopter was on a training flight - so that might explain what the helicopter pilot was doing. (at the same time, this seemed to have been posted too fast). Nfitz (talk) 08:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull and Wait There are usually so many opposes about having the clarity on the death toll in other noms, this shouldn't be any different. If we're not going to pull this, at least remove the 'unknown number of people' part from the blurb until we have more info TNM101 (chat) 04:54, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it'll be long before we get a RS on actual number of casualties though. — AP 499D25 (talk) 05:01, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There is never a need to rush an ITN blurb to post when there is key information missing - we are not a news ticker. This should not have been posted as soon as it was until we had an idea of the number of fatalities. Obviously once that is known, then there's not an issue with it, so it doesn't make sense to pull when it will be put back, but please let us not be rushing on posting events without the normal thoroughness we expect for details of other blurbs. --Masem (t) 05:15, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Would this be ITN if there were no deaths? I would still think so - a mid-air collision of two aircraft (whether fixed wing or otherwise) is so rare nowadays that it happening is the newsworthy event. I agree that it was not necessary to include "unknown casualties" at the time of posting. But the fatalities could be updated as information comes in, like with any other ITN blurb. I don't see why waiting to confirm someone died was necessary when this would've been (and is) newsworthy on its own for being such a rare occurrence, regardless of the deaths. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 07:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Because ITN is about featuring quality articles that happen to be in the news, not to report news as it happens. Unless there was already an established article, it takes some reasonable time for a quality article to be built up, and that includes waiting for the bulk of the details from actual news reports to roll in and have a substantial how-and-why about the event, during which the article would be undergoing a lot of editing so its near impossible to judge quality. There's no way in the hour this was posted that enough details were known to have a stable, quality article. At this time (now about 12 hrs out), there's more than enough that we have a reasonably good article that while likely still will have high rates of editing, has all the core details that would be expected to showcase it as a quality article and would be more resilient to new edits. — Masem (t) 13:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Posted after less than an hour and with most key information missing? This isn’t a news ticker and there is no rush to post something just because it’s happened in the US. - SchroCat (talk) 05:22, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What was posted is not liable to be wrong, and it's a really significant event. The rush is not because it's American, but because it's a plane crash that may very well have killed 75. JayCubby 05:27, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    But, key is that WP nor ITN is a newspaper. ITN is here to feature quality articles that are in the news. Aircrashes like this are the type of article that routine has a high quality product after some time as details filter in, so its common to post them, but this was posted before any confirmed number of deaths or survivors, a key data point, was known, so for all purposes, the article was not yet at the quality we'd expect. In under 12 hrs from the event, I would expect those to have settled into place, and then it would make sense to have judged the quality of the article and post then. Posting without that key info was a bad decision, though because we know the details will be added, not a reason to pull at this point. Just something to not repeat. Masem (t) 05:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) Nonsense. I’ve seen bigger disasters and events happen in places like Africa and not passed at ITN. The geography is a damned clear metric when posting way too quickly on this. As to ‘not liable to be wrong’: that’s phooey. It’s incomplete which with anywhere else in the world would receive calls to wait before posting. ITN IS NOT A NEWS TICKER. - SchroCat (talk) 05:35, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it the geography that determines how quickly it's promoted, the availability of sources, or the relative interest of editors? I do think it's hastier than most, but not to the point of being faulty.
    Though I think we may have posted it before it made its way to the NYT's top spot. We're not a news ticker, we're faster than one. JayCubby 05:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Faster than a news ticker? That’s such a ridiculous boast: do you have any idea what an encyclopaedia is? It’s about as far away from a news ticker as you can imagine. - SchroCat (talk) 05:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Would do you better to read the fundamental WP:NOTNEWS policy. Gotitbro (talk) 10:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @SchroCat: This isn't ITN-worthy just because people died. It's also ITN-worthy as a mid-air collision between two aircraft - which is exceedingly rare. Even if by some miracle everyone survived, it would still be ITN-worthy. For clarity, I would've supported posting as soon as the article on the event was minimally complete (i.e. what happened and what is known at the time). There is no need to wait for the article to be complete, because it never will be. Arbitrary "gates" such as "wait for confirmation someone died" may be reasonable for an event that would not otherwise be ITN-worthy. But for an event like this that is ITN-worthy regardless of deaths, there is no use waiting. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 07:33, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Where did I mention "just because people died"? There is significant information missing and this has been fast-posted (less than an hour). I get it's only newsworthy because it happened in the US, but this was posted too quickly when not enough details were known. As to mid-air collisions being "extremely rare", they're not all that rare, although they may be uncommon. Just noting that neither the 2024 Lumut mid-air collision or 2023 Alaska mid-air collision (to take two recent examples) made the front page. - SchroCat (talk) 07:37, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    How "complete" must the article be? What "details" must be known before it can be posted? Was the article actually incomplete? And they're uncommon when involving airliners, which is the comparison to be made here. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 07:57, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can be blurb be changed to "collides with a military helicopter...near Washington DC"? The accident did not occur in DC, but nearby, and want to emphasize that it was a military helicopter. Natg 19 (talk) 06:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The collision occurred over Washington DC, @Natg 19. According to Geography of Washington, D.C. (and King Charles I in the 1630s), the boundary between D.C. and Virginia is such that the entire river is part of Washington DC, and it only becomes Virginia at the shoreline. Nfitz (talk) 08:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Absurd rush to post (another phenomenon of Wikipedians trying to be the first which does not an encyclopedia make), second behind Queen Elizabeth's death I suppose though atleast that article was an FA rather than a newly minted one with half the info. And WP:TROUTing Ad Orientem especially when so many editors cautioned waiting despite voicing support on notability. Gotitbro (talk) 09:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The rush was really unneeded. 'Unknown' should never have went to the Main Page. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Only 2 editors stayed their wait. The consensus was to post it right then. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment 56 minutes between time of nomination and time of posting, for anyone keeping track. Bit fast, in my opinion. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 11:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sigh Why do we do this over and over again? We know it's going to be posted, there's no rush, we are not a news ticker. Incidentally, the version that was posted onto the main page contained the phrase "At least four survivors were reported to have been recovered from the water and taken to local hospitals" which doesn't actually appear to be sourced as far as I can see. Black Kite (talk) 11:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Aaron Liu: Combined edits of 3 editors who said Wait= 97k, Combined edits of (9+1) editors who said Support= 23.5k (excluding only Knowledgekid87). In other words, those were bunch of novice editors, decision should be made in terms of consensus based on reason and guidelines, than just counting number of votes. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 12:36, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • To add, none of the support !votes at the time of posting expressed any evaluation of the quality of the article, only "omg this is a big air accident". Quality review is essential requirement for ITN items and that clearly wasn't taken into account in posting. — Masem (t) 13:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • That means the consensus was flawed, not that there wasn't a consensus. If I was in this position as a "wait" !vote, I would add a reply questioning the article quality. Here, it seems like the !voters just dropped their doubts on the consensus. I understand that Ad Orientem probably should've IAR'd, though. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Considering everyone's comments above, I cannot help but wonder why we couldn't have a sort of 'minimum time limit' for posting ITN's. We could avoid so many of these incidents if there was one. Instead of just citing WP:NOTNEWS, we could just have a simple criterion on WP:ITN/A that blurbs should only be posted after a certain time, maybe two hours or so, even after there is consensus present. This would have two advantages IMO, i) We would not have these discussions again and ii) There would probably be sufficient info about the event mentioned in the article for an accurate blurb. I know this might be controversial, but we need to find a way to end these unproductive debates that occur when admins post early (Ad Orientem, no offense intended) . TNM101 (chat) 12:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mavai Senathirajah

[edit]
Article: Mavai Senathirajah (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Daily Mirror Sri Lanka
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: prominent Tamil politician in Sri Lanka and was a key political figure who advocated for separatist Tamil Eelam. Abishe (talk) 02:40, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support: The article is well cited, but could be expanded a bit more. Thanks, 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, the article doesn't discuss his work when holding the positions. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:16, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Marina Colasanti

[edit]
Article: Marina Colasanti (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): G1
Credits:

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

 ArionStar (talk) 23:09, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose! Has been expanded since, thanks to ForsythiaJo, but the 'Works' section needs to be cited, with other improvements to quality. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) IShowSpeed honored as Mayor of Lima

[edit]
(NON-ADMIN CLOSURE)
Fairly obvious WP:SNOW. The Kip (contribs) 16:15, 29 January 2025 (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.

Proposed image
Article: IShowSpeed (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ IShowSpeed is declared honorary Mayor of Lima for an hour and receives the Ambassador of Lima Award during the city's 490th anniversary celebrations, with a massive crowd chanting his signature "SIUU". (Post)
News source(s): Complex, Times of India
Credits:

Article updated
 sheagolddigger (talk) 15:19, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose and SNOW close per all above. We don't post any mayoral election on ITN or even Current Events I don't think, even for capital cities and other large and important communities. Being the honorary mayor for one hour doesn't seem to be any more important. Departure– (talk) 15:53, 29 January 2025 (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.

2025 Light Air Services Beechcraft 1900 crash

[edit]
Article: 2025 Light Air Services Beechcraft 1900 crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A plane crashes in Unity state, South Sudan, killing 20 of the 21 occupants onboard. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

 ArionStar (talk) 15:19, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on quality. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 21:36, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sufficient enough now? ArionStar (talk) 23:11, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) ECOWAS

[edit]
No consensus to post a duplicate. Stephen 23:27, 29 January 2025 (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: ECOWAS (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger formally exit the West African regional bloc ECOWAS (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The three members of the Alliance of Sahel States, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, formally exit ECOWAS
News source(s): [2]
Credits:

Article updated
 CMD (talk) 10:11, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
support it is formal now. shouldnt have been on announcement. Also togo/benin (?) was to join them as an observer.Sportsnut24 (talk) 12:43, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The countries leaving said that it was effective immediately. It's not clear that this latest formality has any practical effect as the nom's source says "The remaining member states were called upon to continue to grant citizens from the three countries the privileges of membership, including the free movement of people and goods." Andrew🐉(talk) 15:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If this is posted, ECOWAS should be expanded to Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) as it was when previously posted. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 14:04, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - These states have not been in ECOWAS for over a year, and we have posted this blurb two times already PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:09, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt 1. This is much more significant than an election, which affects one country, where it’s pretty much guaranteed the winner will be inaugurated. Will have massive ramifications for the region, as countries can now more easily switch neo-colonial partner from France to Russia
Kowal2701 (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Hōshōryū Tomokatsu

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Hōshōryū Tomokatsu (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In sumo, Hōshōryū (pictured) becomes the 74th yokozuna. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Hōshōryū (pictured) becomes sumo's 74th yokozuna.
News source(s): Kyodo News, Japan Times, AFP
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Nomination per WP:ITN/R. Blurb uses the single name Hōshōryū, which is how sumo wrestlers are usually referred to (by their shikona, or ring name). JRHorse (talk) 03:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support ITNR and the article is of sufficient quality. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Stephen: Can you add {{transl}} or just italize yokozuna as it is a not a common english per MOS:JAPAN. Thanks Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 11:16, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done, thanks. Stephen 11:34, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting note Not sure why for this and Terunofuji's ITN promotion entries they include the full shikona/ring name when none of the news sources, nor even the official online banzuke [3] show it (unless you click through to a full bio). Would a piped link or redirect of solely the main part of the shikona not suffice? Omnifalcon (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because full name, not shikona, is used for official and ceremonial occasions, such as promotion. Stephen 00:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source for this? The 3 news sources used in this nomination only use the name Hoshoryu and not his surname. Natg 19 (talk) 00:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Prayag Kumbh Mela crowd crush

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2025 Prayag Kumbh Mela crowd crush (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A crowd crush during the Prayag Kumbh Mela (pictured) in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, India, kills 30 people and injures 60 others. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ 30+ people died and injures 60 others in a stampede during the Kumbh Mela-2025 in India.
News source(s): BBC,The Guardian,Al Jazeera, CNN Independent,NYTimes
Credits:

 ArionStar (talk) 03:20, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • For one, there is yet no confirmed deaths per the BBC running article. Second, given that there have been at least 6 of these events that have a had a crowd crush, that it seems like any single one is not more notable than the others. And with how little the other crowd crush articles contain (and seemingly failing NEVENT), it feels that this does not need to be a separate article from the article Prayag Kumbh Mela where there is a section on stampedes/crowd crush that would seem to be a better place to summarize that these events happen, that unfortunately people have died, but seems like is a given outcome with that many people in one place that it will happen. But that's all barring actually having a firm number of people injured or killed. Masem (t) 03:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Article is nowhere near ready for the front page, and among other details, the death toll is mostly unknown at this point. The Kip (contribs) 04:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We can wait until we have stronger words than "feared" for these tolls. Departure– (talk) 05:07, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) Ahmed al-Sharaa

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Ahmed al-Sharaa (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ahmed al-Sharaa (pictured) is appointed as president of Syria of the transitional government, succeeding Bashar al-Assad. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Reuters, Al Jazeera.
Credits:

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.

 Ghazi Malik (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support on notability - First president outside of the Assad regime in decades. Departure– (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ITN/R. There is one CN tag on al-Sharaa's article though, but I don't see that being an issue that would prevent it being posted. Aydoh8[contribs] 00:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support First president since the fall of Assad regime. HurricaneEdgar 00:09, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ITN/R. Good article. ArionStar (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 28

[edit]
January 28, 2025 (2025-01-28) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: Muhammad bin Fahd Al Saud

[edit]
Article: Muhammad bin Fahd Al Saud (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Asharq Alawsat
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Saudi prince and governor of Eastern Province. 240F:7A:6253:1:683C:F9E5:E842:477D (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) XB-1 Supersonic

[edit]
Consensus to post will not develop. Aydoh8[contribs] 00:14, 30 January 2025 (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.

Proposed image
Article: Boom XB-1 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Boom Technology's XB-1 trijet (pictured) becomes the first private jet aircraft to break the sound barrier. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
 ArionStar (talk) 13:24, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose! Before anything, the article quality is bad and filled with a variety of tags. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 13:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not all that significant. Concorde did it more than 50 years ago. I'd support if the jet starts to be used in commercial settings. Ca talk to me! 14:01, 29 January 2025 (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.

Miloš Vučević resignation

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2024–2025 Serbian anti-corruption protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Miloš Vučević (pictured) resigns as prime minister of Serbia following anti-corruption protests over the Novi Sad railway station canopy collapse. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: I aimed at Slovak Robert Fico, but I hit Serbian Vucevic. 😂 ArionStar (talk) 12:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking further at this, I notice that the resignation has to be confirmed by the Parliament to be effective and that hasn't happened yet. I also get the impression that the President Vucic is an autocrat and target of the protests while the PM is just a scapegoat.
Andrew🐉(talk) 18:50, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it'd still be nice to have a non-tagged article on the front page, assuming this gets posted. EF5 19:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) DeepSeek

[edit]
Consensus to post will not develop. Black Kite (talk) 19:11, 29 January 2025 (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: DeepSeek (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A new open-source AI, DeepSeek, disrupts the market for AI technology (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The emergence of a new open-source AI, DeepSeek, wiped $1tn in value from the leading US tech index
Alternative blurb II: ​ The open-source LLM DeepSeek is released, performing at the same level as ChatGPT for one-tenth of the computing power
Alternative blurb III: ​ DeepSeek, an open-source LLM, tops global App Store downloads, triggering market reactions
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC, DW, The Economist, Financial Times, The Guardian, TechCrunch
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This was the top read article yesterday as it's in the news for several reasons including a cyberattack, market crash and more. It is being compared to the Sputnik crisis. What I find interesting is that it's open source and uses open data like Common Crawl. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Once again, Andrew: our own readership levels for particular articles are not, and should not be, a source for what is in the news. While this morning's headlines are flashy, very little has actually happened. This story is 99% WP:CRYSTAL stuff. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:08, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Very little of "what" has actually happened? The stock market definitely dropped. All the models definitely got released. The app definitely got No.1 on the Apple app store. CRYSTAL? There's no prophecy in the article. pony in a strange land (talk) 10:26, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The stock market drop is only temporary and it's going to recover sooner than later. This really has no long-term impact, the only long-term impact I can see that this has is that it forces OpenAI and other companies to be less greedy and accept the fact that DeepSeek now exists on the market, but that's pretty much it. I'd argue this falls into Wikipedia:CRYSTAL. TwistedAxe [contact] 10:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The high readership is evidence that the topic is prominent in the news and the sources confirm this. ITN's primary purpose is "To help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news." Andrew🐉(talk) 11:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If it was a top-read article, that means readers that are interestered are able to find it without ITN's need to help. — Masem (t) 12:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So we shut down ITN? What the purpose of ITN if not to highlight articles readers might be interested in because they've come across them in the news? Khuft (talk) 13:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    ITN is about featuring high quality articles for WP's main page that happen to be in the news, not to be a news ticker to report anything that has happened in the news. --Masem (t) 13:14, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    By the same token, I guess we shouldn't have posted the US presidential elections? Khuft (talk) 13:13, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support I might not always agree with Andrew, but this nomination is spot on. It's major news in mainstream media, and it fulfils the primary objective of ITN: to guide readers to items that are in the news and that they might want to know more about. There's also no WP:CRYSTAL to it - DeepSeek has already upended the American strategy to contain China's technological development. It's in the news everywhere, it's a technological break-through in a key technology, it's a disruption to a key business sector, and it changes the geopolitical game. What more do we want from the articles we feature? Khuft (talk) 12:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. They've announced a decent advance in reducing CPU requirements and power consumption. That's it. This tool hasn't revolutionised anything yet and there hasn't been any third-party verification of the claims. The financial markets have over-reacted based on nothing more than speculation and paranoia among investors who have bet too much on US companies. We wouldn't post an ITN blurb every time an electric vehicle manufacturer brought out a model with improved range or similarly incremental technological advances. Modest Genius talk 12:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • When I saw DeepSeek first reported, the take-away message was that they had created their state-of-the-art AI remarkably cheaply, without needing the billions and trillions of capital that the US was announcing recently. If it's open source too then the barriers to entry in this field seem low – you mainly need a few smart people -- quality not quantity. Lowering the capital cost by orders of magnitude seems quite significant. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:56, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For me it's the geopolitical angle that makes this noteworthy. After all those exports bans to restrict China's access to the latests chips, the DeepSeek announcement completely upends that policy. Khuft (talk) 13:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AI accelerators are Nvidia's Graphics processing units (GPU) Grimes2 (talk) 15:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Business-level news which is not good for ITN because its based on speculation of long-term impacts. --Masem (t) 12:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a rather poor argument. What's the long term impact of the Turkish hotel fire? We post things that are in the news (the mainstream news, not just business news - I'll grant you that) and are noteworthy, no matter the topic. Thus we have posted business news in the past. Khuft (talk) 13:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    At the same time, WP is not a newspaper (that's what Wikinews is for), and at this stage we have no clue how DeepSeek will impact the world on a more long-term basis. I also do think that we post far too many local disasters like that fire and most of those would not survive a proper NOTNEWS/NEVENT challenge made some months after the event (this is a WP-wide problem), but at least it can be argued that the major loss of life in the dozens does account for some permanence to be ITN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masem (talk • contribs)
    To add, Nvidia and others have already rebounded [4], making this no longer impactful. If there was a long term effect of the stock, that might have been a story, but a short term bounce is definitely not ITN appropriate. — Masem (t) 16:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    NVDA is up 1.82% from yesterday's 17% drop. That isnt a rebound. That was the largest single day decrease in a company's value in history (600 billion USD). nableezy - 16:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose at least with this blurb, "disrupts the market" is too vague and subjective. Even if this was notable enough to be posted the blurb would need something concrete that has happened. Rahcmander (talk) 13:31, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on current wording, neutral on alt2, still a bit too close to business news. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:20, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional weak support posting the market impacts if they continue or worsen, strong oppose mentioning DeepSeek in the blurb if so. I don't think this is going anywhere anyway. Departure– (talk) 15:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • It doesn't qualify for DYK which has strict rules for entry and is still over-subscribed, running 9 fresh hooks every day. It does qualify for ITN because it's In the News while ITN badly needs new content as it runs less than one new blurb every other day and so is still reporting something that happened 12 days ago. So, it's ITN that needs nominations, not DYK. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andrew Davidson No, ITN doesn't "need new content". Despite the name appearing otherwise, we are WP:NOTNEWS. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect to him, it’s been shown multiple times that the community consensus on what ITN/C is and Andrew’s opinions on what it should be divert considerably. The Kip (contribs) 05:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because ITN doesn't run much new content then it is left running old content instead. The few blurbs that get through are run repeatedly day after day when they are no longer actually In the News. This is not a good look. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC
  • Support, business and computing technology and political news that is, well, In The News. But please none of the breathless hype language (for the love of God please do not put "disrupt" which is marketing buzzword crap, on the main page). Keep It Simple, omit needless words: "Chinese company DeepSeek releases its large language model, generating international reaction." The details are what the link to the article is there for. --Slowking Man (talk) 02:57, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt2 Disagree with the CRYSTAL oppose votes. It's making waves on everything from political discourse to the stock market to mass media headlines. How much more ITN could you get? If anything, the crystal ball reading here are the folks saying, "this won't be any different than any other AI software because x, y, or z"... sorry, but that is irrelevant. It's a major development that is being widely reported. FlipandFlopped ツ 06:05, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Editors seem to dislike the blurbs. What are different things based on which the blurb could be formed, taking into account the above discussion? -𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:08, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    How about the blurb...

    Widespread technology sector selloffs occur following the release of the Deepseek model of artificial intelligence.

    No article exists as a target but one should be made. Deepseek's release prompting mass tech sector selloffs is the story here, not Deepseek itself. I personally hope the entire AI sector collapses from this, it's been nothing but bad news for ordinary people like myself. Departure– (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Checkpoint Looking at this after a day, I see that it's still in the news with reports like this DW at the top of my feed. And it's still the top read article with 860,000 more readers yesterday. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Nvidia stock dropping another 5% as I write this. Imcdc Contact 16:23, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    And it's still the top read article with 860,000 more readers yesterday.
    Cool. Doesn't matter, though, as you've been told more than enough times. The Kip (contribs) 18:11, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
support altblurb3 it is certainly in the news worldwide.Sportsnut24 (talk) 12:45, 29 January 2025 (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.

January 27

[edit]
January 27, 2025 (2025-01-27) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) M23 offensive (2022-present)

[edit]
Article: M23 offensive (2022–present) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In an ongoing offensive, the Rwandan-supported March 23 Movement captures Goma, the capital of North Kivu province in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Thanks to many editor's efforts (especially EdwinAlden.1995), this article has been updated with new information in the past couple of days, and I believe it now meets the WP:ONGOING criteria provided updates to the situation are continuously added. Please let me know if I'm missing something. Thanks, Staraction (talk | contribs) 07:25, 27 January 2025 (UTC) (please ping on reply)[reply]

Support congo had also de-recognized rwanda and peacekeepers killd.Sportsnut24 (talk) 08:10, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I saw an article that said a two-party summit between Rwanda (who is supporting M23) and DR Congo mediated by Kenya is planned "within the next 48 hours" so oppose until that does (or doesn't) happen, and then maybe support if it expands further in scope. Departure– (talk) 14:22, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb per above. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 17:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb ArionStar (talk) 18:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb per the Battle of Goma (2025) Johnson524 19:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb, wait on ongoing per Battle of Goma Ion.want.uu (talk) 19:21, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment wouldn't it be better to put the Kivu/Ituri Conflicts as a whole in ongoing? it would then allow us to include the other rebellions/insurgencies like the ADF conflict under one ongoing item Ion.want.uu (talk) 19:23, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support BilboBeggins (talk) 22:04, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb, and, if the same level of activity continues, support ongoing after the blurb dies out. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:01, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Its a shame that we don't care about African wars as much as we do with European ones. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 00:09, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
friendly reminder that the Sudanese civil war (2023–present) is currently in ongoing. Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 26

[edit]
January 26, 2025 (2025-01-26) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Kazuyoshi Akiyama

[edit]
Article: Kazuyoshi Akiyama (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Vancouver Sun
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: A Japanese conductor who conducted not only the Tokyo Symphony Orchestra for 50 years, but also others in Canada and the U.S. for a long time, parallel, taking Western pieces to Japan (Japanese premieres of Schoenberg and Janacek, among others) and Japanese pieces to the world. His article was just a list of posts. It could still become better but I'm out for the day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Australian Open

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2025 Australian Open (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In tennis, Jannik Sinner (pictured) wins the men's singles and Madison Keys wins the women's singles at the Australian Open. (Post)
News source(s): USA Today, The Guardian
Credits:

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.

 Moraljaya67 (talk) 12:25, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose As mentioned in the past, like many tennis articles before it, lacks any prose summary in the main article about the events themselves and very little prose in the singles' articles. It has only just tables and lists of the results from the finals. There are four redlinks of four events of the tournament. LiamKorda 13:11, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2025 Belarusian presidential election

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2025 Belarusian presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Alexander Lukashenko (pictured) is the declared to be the winner of the Belarusian presidential election, securing a seventh term. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Alexander Lukashenko (pictured) is reelected as President of Belarus, with credible opposition figures unable to participate.
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: As the Putin re-election was similarly nominated and posted. ArionStar (talk) 02:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: External links in the Opinion polls section. Shouldn't those be references? Is Chatham House in there the Chatham House? – robertsky (talk) 02:55, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just waiting for the obvious results. ArionStar (talk) 03:01, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for the results to come in. I wonder who's going to win. Departure– (talk) Departure– (talk) 04:19, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Whether the election is a sham or not, it is still notable. Lukashenko is going to be the president for the next term and that's newsworthy. The point of ITN is to highlight quality articles about current events. The election is a current event and the article highlights the fact that it's a sham quite well, not sure how we feel about including that in the blurb? ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:25, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until they officially announce his victory. -insert valid name here- (talk) 17:37, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. The results of general elections in all states on the List of sovereign states are ITN/R, no matter the legitimacy of their results. Keep in mind posting "reappointments" of the leaders of de jure totalitarian states are in ITN/R as well, so even if Lukashenko admitted he was a dictator, we would still post this. As for article quality, there are no unsourced sections, a fair amount of background, and discussion of this election's legitimacy (or lack thereof). I believe it's good enough to post. -insert valid name here- (talk) 18:40, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - WE should have neither posted the Belarussian or Russian elections. It was 100% guaranteed who would win, everyone knows that. This is not exciting, we dont post the North Korean elections either so whats the big deal with Belarus and Russia? More northerncentrism. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 18:20, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
we literally posted the 2024 russian election… Ion.want.uu (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Best as I can tell, the last NK election in 2019 were never nominated, so that's not a good example point to raise. Also, while much of the rest of the world see this as a sham election, we had this discussion just last year that ITN shouldn't be the place to judge that, but the article space itself (see Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 110)) --Masem (t) 18:33, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Offhand dismissing noms you don’t like by accusing them of northcentrism is a great way to eventually get yourself removed from the ITN/C board. The Kip (contribs) 14:38, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@The Kip even without the northerncentrism thing, we all knew who was going to win, this is nothing new. "Oh dictator remained in power again, who would have known??". Also these elections are more census data rather than actual elections. And we don't nominate US census for ITN. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 00:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SimpleSubCubicGraph: Do not mark everything as northcentrim etc, this will only decrease the value of the word, and make the case less effective where it is actually done. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 06:21, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
strong support ITNR elections (particularly head of state) don't matter if you like the result or not.Sportsnut24 (talk) 08:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really an election though, after you banned other parties from running? I don't think it actually meets the definition of the word "election". And thus it isn't ITNR. Nfitz (talk) 07:53, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per ITN/R. I advertised the problem with elections in authoritarian countries and even proposed changes in the wording on ITN/R some time ago, but they were disregarded because it’s not that we shouldn’t post unfair and non-free elections. So, please be consistent and swallow the pill.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Breaking news: dictator is still a dictator. In other news, the sun is expected to rise in the east tomorrow. qw3rty 01:29, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ITNR items shouldn't be rejected on value judgments, changes about/rejection of "sham" elections should be first sought in that space. As of now this is perfectly valid to post based on article quality. Gotitbro (talk) 01:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per ITNR Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment guys we posted the 2024 Russian presidential election, which lets be real was just as rigged, but we argeed that we were going to post these things regardless of legitmacy. Check the archives for the discussion Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:10, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. It's well-attested that opposition parties were prevented from running, and that fact is definitely prominent in the news reporting about this election. It's not RGW to say what is actually being said in reliable sources, including in ITN headlines. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Saying that he was declared winner satisfies WP:NPOV. BilboBeggins (talk) 12:30, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Change The original blurb is neutral and better. ArionStar (talk) 12:57, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the current blurb is neutral and factual while acknowledging the election was non fair or free in a non-editorial way. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 13:53, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 25

[edit]
January 25, 2025 (2025-01-25) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

(Posted) Drents Museum heist

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Drents Museum (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Several artifacts are lost in a heist at the Drents Museum in Assen, Netherlands, including the Helmet of Coțofenești (pictured). (Post)
News source(s): Romania Insider
Credits:

 ArionStar (talk) 00:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support i feel we have reached sufficient prose in the article, plus this artifact is historically significant Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It is like a movie plot. BilboBeggins (talk) 08:23, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - i know i dont really say anything about ITN (i do look at the candidates section every now and then to see whats going on), but i just wanna say a little something here, namely, wouldnt it be better to link the article about the heist instead of the article to the museum? Or both? TrainSimFan (talk) 06:19, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Look at the article Now, the heist part is completely shrunk to two lines because of the new article. Either link the new article or reinstate some more to the section, at least temporarily. --𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:13, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Pulled, and moved to RD) RD: Gloria Romero (actress)

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Gloria Romero (actress) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Filipino actress Gloria Romero (pictured) dies at the age of 91. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Queen of Philippine Cinema Gloria Romero (pictured) dies at the age of 91.
News source(s): GMA News Rappler ABS-CBN News
Credits:

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

 ROY is WAR Talk! 02:03, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a requested move out for that right now – the only other article with the exact name is a California state senator, so it's pretty obvious what the primary reference is. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:25, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure we also have multiple people named "Bill Gates" or "Samuel Jackson" on Wikipedia, yet we don't put "(actor)" in their title and never have – those people don't even need an introduction as to who they are. Infact, I think Samuel is a great comparison to use – we have around 2 dozen people named "Samuel Jackson" who have their own article on Wikipedia; yet if you search up "Samuel Jackson", you'll get the actor that everyone knows. I get Gloria isn't on the same level, but if we were to have 5 more people also named "Gloria Romero", would that move still be even valid? Gloria barely scratches the surface of being famous as shown by the article title as well as other people pointing out that her Wikipages are far lower than other people who were not blurbed in the past on ITN. TwistedAxe [contact] 02:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Second pull: Blurb was posted preemptively with little support. Strong arguments for the blurb have not materialized among supporters. Dr Fell (talk) 18:19, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support – top-importance Phillipine article. Departure– (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Blurb? Are you serious? She has 10 wiki pages, we did not blurb Donald Sutherland with over 80 wiki pages, or Alain Delon with over 120 pages. We didn't blurb James Earl Jones, Christopher Plummer, Ennio Morricone, Angela Lansbury, William Friedkin. Matthew Perry, Shannon Doherty, Andre Braugher, Tom Sizemore and Ray Stevenson, who died relatively young, even Julian Sands. Why do we need to blub lesser known persons just because they are not European or American?
If we need to blurb people from different countries and people of national significance, why we did not blurb Greek actress Irene Papas who won awards, and Anouk Aimee who was nominated for Oscar.
There are people outside of US and Europe who are famous, but we also heard of them and they have more wiki pages and have worldwide coverage. BilboBeggins (talk) 16:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because unlike those others whom all may be popular, Romero is demonstrated to be a great/major figure as well as had a high quality article at the time of nomination. Famous is not a rationale for posting blurbs. Masem (t) 16:19, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I remember your argument that person gets blurb when transformative, not when famous.
But I don't see why we blurb person who we have not heard of while we do not blurb the persons whom we know, whom everyone knows. BilboBeggins (talk) 16:46, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because blurbs are meant for extraordinary deaths, which either are tied to the means of death (like assassinations) or people that are recognized as major figures within their field. Just being famous satisfy neither. ITN is not meant to simply repeat the news but to highlight quality articles that are in the news, and generally for major figures, their articles are going to be of high quality to demonstrate that element. Masem (t) 16:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She is not more transformative than James Earl Jones who had theatre renamed after him, in competitive US
If we got to person being transformative on national level, then why we did not blurb former heads of states in Europe, because there were many that were not blurbed. BilboBeggins (talk) 18:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is literally large section of influence in Ennio Morricone article. BilboBeggins (talk) 18:56, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BilboBeggins: First things first, what do you mean by Wikipages? The pages linked to them? 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor(2) Ping Me🔔 16:20, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the created article related to Romero. ROY is WAR Talk! 16:29, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Articles in different languages BilboBeggins (talk) 16:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Morricone is another good example where I would say we again went off the track, whose article opens with "With more than 400 scores for cinema and television, as well as more than 100 classical works, Morricone is widely considered one of the most prolific and greatest film composers of all time."
The article for Alain Delon also notes in its lead para "His style, looks, and roles, which made him an international icon, earned him enduring popularity."
I am not sure about the other examples, who while popular, do not appear to be transformative.
Amakuru raises an important question below of precedent for a high ITN bar, but bad precedents should be replaced. We did not stick with the Thatcher/Mandela model nor with the White/Fisher one; reassesments can and should be made. Gotitbro (talk) 03:57, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting strong oppose blurb: Romero's death was not extraordinary; she was not a transformational figure nor someone of glittering renown. RD would have been appropriate, but a blurb makes a mockery of ITN. As Bilbo noted above, figures who were actually leading or transformational performers were not given death blurbs. Blurbing Romero simply makes ITN less useful to readers. Dr Fell (talk) 18:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A pity for the past but we should change the guidelines, then. ArionStar (talk) 18:26, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How they can be changed? Some persons who were far more worldwide known were not blurbed with arguments "never heard of him". Why this is not taken into account when it was taken into account with person who were truly not likely to have been unheard, like Delon?
ITN is just not consistent. BilboBeggins (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that ITN is not consistent. What is obvious to an actual news organization – which deaths are newsworthy and to what degree – is completely lost on those voting for RDs and blurbs. All too frequently, trivial third world figures pop up who may have been local favorites but are unheard of outside of their region and have had no lasting impact in their domain. Delon, of course, should have been blurbed. There needs to be some objective measure of reader interest in the figure. Dr Fell (talk) 05:26, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr Fell: "trivial third world figures", really? Better strike this clearly offensive usage. ITN is not a WP:FORUM and basic WP:CIVILITY applies. Gotitbro (talk) 11:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
kinda discrimination or racist ROY is WAR Talk! 11:32, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Royiswariii: Your opinion, but do not label anyone directly as racist, that's defamatory too. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 11:35, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
None of those in that list are people that demonstrate how they meet being major/great figures. Being popular is not a reason on its own for being a major/great figure, nor is simply having a lot of acting credits or having a lot of industry awards. Those are all can lead towards that, but all that still has to be supported by sources to demonstrate how they were a major/great figure to avoid original research on the part of Wikipedia editors. Which we have for in Romero's case (the Legacy section to explain how she's called the Queen of Phillipine cinema). — Masem (t) 18:40, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If she is that transformative, why there are articles only in languages of countries near her, English and Dutch? Why she is not known worldwide? BilboBeggins (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We're a global encyclopedia, not the English-world only encyclopedia. Masem (t) 18:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But there is no evidence of her being known on global level. BilboBeggins (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"known on global level" = "popularity" which is discussed in length by Masem above. Don't just repeat the question. Also, for the supporters, the evidence they need is of her legacy which is available on her article. -𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor(2) Ping Me🔔 21:39, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If somebody transformed a small country, non-influential in world politics, or its culture, like Luxembourg, Monaco, Georgia, Moldova, Bulgaria, CAR, Gabon, will he still be blurbed? BilboBeggins (talk) 21:57, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's a big difference between a country of millions upon millions of people and Monaco, a country with 30,000 people. But yes, I'd sure hope an incredibly influential cultural figure from Georgia or the CAR gets blurbed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 22:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
BilboBeggins, I don't know what is your basis. ITN doesn't required to be "super" famous well known the article of a death person. If your basis is the famous of the person rather than the notability and the quality of the person, you shouldn't do that. Your basis is completely wrong. ITN needs the high quality articles and notability. Is there any guidlines on the ITN that required to be "super" well known article? Because, with due respect, I think you're just creating your own rules and not following the rules of ITN. ROY is WAR Talk! 22:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Donald Sutherland and Christopher Plummer had been in important ground breaking movies. Sutherland in MASH, Klute, Nicholas Roeg film, JFK, he worked with numerous important filmmakers.
Plummer was in Sound of Music, Insider, he was the oldest Academy Award nominee, so this is also encyclopedic content.
And they were Canadians, top actors in Canada.
If the rationale is that person was blurbed because she was famous on national level, then they should have been. BilboBeggins (talk) 08:20, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary – all of the people @BilboBeggins listed are more significant than Romero. But that doesn't mean they all warranted a blurb, of course. It just highlights the absurdity of blurbing Romero and underscores how her blurb is an act of vandalism against the integrity of ITN. The sources you cite betray your own argument. Filipino media called Romero the 'Queen of Philippine cinema' because she was popular. It's not a statement of transformational value. And unlike Betty White, the 'First Last of Television,' the reach of her impact was limited to a trivial national cinema. But even your statement on popularity is wrong: the death of a popular public figure is potentially newsworthy and potentially blurb-worthy. Forced blurbs for trivial figures must be opposed. Dr Fell (talk) 05:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr Fell: Do not vote pull/oppose multiple times. Mark one as comment or strike it. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor(2) Ping Me🔔 20:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb Obviously one of the biggest figures in the Filipino cultural scene Udder1882 (talk) 18:50, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb – given our level of notability required for blurbing in the past. Ultimately, it would be nice if we had some consistency on which people we blurb, rather than just going with whatever the "consensus" amongst people who happen to show up at the discussion is. I'm not actually as fussed as others about which side of the fence we land on with respect to blurbing quite a few names or only a very few, but ultimately if we make the decision to set the bar high and not blurb influential figures such as Kirk Douglas and Vera Lynn, then we shouldn't a few years later turn around and blurb someone whose impact is fairly clearly the same or lower.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:07, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As long as we have documented sourced evidence that such figures were influential within their field - not simply because they got a lot of awards or appeared in a lot of films - and their article is of the required quality. What is happening here and many previous ITNC RD blurbs is trying to insist that fame or popularity is equivalent to influence, as the case of Douglas or Lynn, or that the lack of such fame is equivalent to non influential. ITN is to work like TFA, we dont feature what's popular but to try to cover a global range of topics with quality articles that are in the news, and that should mean we should be featuring blurbs of some people that few Westerns likely have heard of, as long as their article establishes their legacy, influence, or the like. The bulk of those people we didn't blurb, there simply was the lack of such sourced information in their articles to support such. Masem (t) 16:05, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Douglas and de Havilland were the last leading actors from Golden Age, in my opinion this is exactly encyclopedic and a sure reason for blurb. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:43, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "in my opinion" is 90% of the problems around urbs for deaths of people that dues from old age; that's not an objective measure for us to start with. Asking for sourced information about the legacy or impact to demonstrate how the person was considered influential and transformation is absolutely necessary to have a starting. Otherwise we will keep having editors hand waving reasons for a blurb without any evidence.
    and simply being part of a specific era of filmmaking is not an indication of importance on its own, just as being in a lot of films or winning several awards. Those are indicators that there might be sourced info about their legacy but that has to come from reliable sources, not the original research of editors. When we do that, we start getting g into popularity voting contests, and that's not ITN or any main page section works. Masem (t) 20:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support – Some notable figures not getting blurbs in the past is no reason why we should decide not to feature an extremely influential cultural figure. 'Other stuff (doesn't) exist' shouldn't apply. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 22:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Generalissima I don't really undersand on the people who vote opposed that they required on ITN "super" well-known article rather than the quality of the article and the notability. Tell me, is there any guidlines on ITN that requires "super" well-known person of article? Because, we all not informed on that rules, lol. ROY is WAR Talk! 23:01, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The rules are quite open-ended. See WP:ITNRDBLURB.—Bagumba (talk) 03:49, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Bagumba, I think it's passed on blurb and like I said, her major contribution in Philippine Film Industry, culture and arts are big loss of her death, but her legacy on Philippine culture and film industry is a extraordinary and also her awards are phenomenal. ROY is WAR Talk! 03:57, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "The Queen of Philippine Cinema" can't passed easily to a newbie actress or let's say in mid actress like Susan Roces was also a legendary too, but it's almost like Gloria Romero and with her during the Golden Age of the Philippine Film Industry . ROY is WAR Talk! 04:02, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    'The Queen of Philippine Cinema' doesn't mean anything. This is like saying the 'King of My Neighborhood' deserves a blurb because he scolded everyone to keep their lawns tidy. Local heroes do not get blurbs. She may have been a popular, long-standing figure in Philippine cinema but her impact on cinema is nonexistent. No real notability. No real transformational impact. Dr Fell (talk) 05:06, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per Dr Fell, BilboBeggins and others. Given the deaths noted that are not blurbed, I agree that this posting makes a mockery of ITN. I suggest the blurb be pulled and the name listed in RD. Jusdafax (talk) 23:48, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb, support RD: When looking at her legacy section, all I see are articles written in Philippine media which explicitly qualify her legacy as solely Filipino. She has absolutely no international influence. Described by The Manila Times as one of the most iconic figures in Philippine film industry, Romero was one of the last surviving stars from the first Golden Age of Philippine cinema... Critics named her the longest reigning Philippine movie queen... There is absolutely no better way of defining the Filipino movie queen than Gloria Romero... Often referred to as the "Queen of Philippine Cinema". I could go on and on but I think I made my point. Not a single reference talking about her impact internationally. In fact, I googled Gloria Romero and even though I'm in the US, not a single non-Filipino news source popped up reporting her death. Even when I changed my search region on Google to the Philippines, the the California politician shows up in the results. Alain Delon was not blurbed even though his legacy section talks about his influence outside of France. Many baseball and basketball players are not blurbed because those sports are American despite the fact that those sports have significant cultural impact in non-US countries.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 03:40, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in Brazil and I found a Pakistani report. ArionStar (talk) 05:27, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ArionStar So, it means it is passed and can blurb of Romero. ROY is WAR Talk! 05:52, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is AI-generated slop. Unlikely that Romero has received any siginificant coverage outside the Philippines. Though that shouldn't impede ITN process or criteria. Gotitbro (talk) 09:27, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I already said this, the ITN criteria state that an individual made a profound impact on their national culture or field of work can merit inclusion. Gloria Romero's legacy as the "Queen of Philippine Cinema" her status as the longest reigning movie queen, and her pivotal role in Philippine cinema Golden Age cement her impotance as a cultural figure in the Philippines. Her influence is undeniable within her national context, which aligns with ITN inclusivity for non global yet significant figures. While Romero may not have had international recognition, her death remarks the end of an era for the Philippine Golden Age of Cinema. Her major contribution to Philippine Film Industry and culture of Philippines fits well within these parameters. ROY is WAR Talk! 03:53, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Just like Susan Roces who was with her in the Golden Age of Philippine Film Industry who is also dead. If you do research or read the biography of Romero, you'll know that her legacy was a major impact on Philippine Film Industry and also in Television since she's appeared on some programs on Philippines. ROY is WAR Talk! 04:05, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    International renown has never been an ITN criteria, impact in the field of work is. We posted Dilip Kumar without much hassle for example. And Delon should have been blurbed.
    The US basketball/baseball players who were not posted perhaps did not meet this criteria (popular and known but not with lasting impact on the sport). Gotitbro (talk) 04:07, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's different on the legacy of sports and film industry. I'm talking about the Film Industry. With due respect, International renown is not ITN requirememt, what matters is the individual's impact in their field, notability and high quality article. She wasn't just a star, she was a defining figure of the Golden Age of Phililpine cinema, often described as "Queen of Philippine Cinema". These titles are not mere to accolades but reflection of her profound influence on the development and legacy of the Filipino film industry. Like I said, If you comparing to a US basketball or baseball is so obviously off topic since those example pertain sports rather than the arts. Film is a medium with a nation cultural identity, and Romero's influence is evident in how she shaped the cinematic narrative of an entire country. ROY is WAR Talk! 04:15, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I really think it's time to cease the death blurbs… so subjective and exhausting… ArionStar (talk) 05:05, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of them aren't, like we had of Jimmy Carter or Manmohan Singh. -𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 06:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, it is posted and let the blurb alone. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb, support RD RD exists precisely because it would be too much to blurb every notable person's death—that's also why it only requires a good quality article ever since Wikipedia talk:In the news/2016 RD proposal. Global relevance is not explicitly stated in current guidelines, but is actually a very good line to draw considering the explicit intention that blurbing deaths should be rare. And frankly, we should stop treating RD as some kind of second-place finish—being important enough to have a Wikipedia article of good quality is already a very high bar, as proven by the amount of RD candidates here that don't make it to the main page. Yo.dazo (talk) 08:19, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I second this. TwistedAxe [contact] 08:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb, support RD per all above. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:22, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, Neutral for Pull: Voting just to have a say, that this discussion has become overstretched because of repeated unnecessary comparisons. However, focus could be on if her legacy is enough to account for a blurb. I see there are various other old Filipino actors/actresses whose legacy is at par or exceed that of her, and I am sure that not everyone deserves a blurb. Popularity, at the end, does have a role to play, at least in her home country where not all the generations might know her as a true blurb worth person usually is. If "Queen of Philippine Cinema" by a media house is the only quote getting repeated again and again as a proof of her legacy here, then maybe she shouldn't have a blurb. --𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 11:40, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull blurb How was this posted after a few hours with only 4 votes? This one is really puzzling. It was not even a breaking news story, it was already almost a day old when nominated. There's nothing on the BBC, nothing on AP or Reuters (the biggest news agencies in the world), nothing on CNN. In fact, none of these outlets seem to have EVER written about her, at least in recent decades. I'm sure she was notable in the Philippines but she was not well-known internationally. This should be pulled immediately and moved to RD. Johndavies837 (talk) 11:59, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, ABS-CBN, Rappler and GMA News are generally reliable. I don't know why need to be sources like BBC or CNN if these I mentioned are obviously reliable. WP:FUCKVOTES or much likely WP:IGNORE. ROY is WAR Talk! 12:06, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see consensus here for a pull, and the observation that this was posted hastily is quite valid, in my view. And the personal attack of “racist” calls for a stern warning from an admin, or even a block. Way, way over the line. Jusdafax (talk) 13:27, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ridiculous, you are simply WP:BADGERING the discussion here and the personal attacks are simply uncalled for. Gotitbro (talk) 13:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at this a bit further, I see the pejorative “racist” is being used against those suggesting a pull on the posting admin’s Talk page, in an attempt to shut down further discussion. Sanctions are in order asap, as I see it. Jusdafax (talk) 13:50, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody not agreeing with your point of view is not a racist...everyone made good points, including the pulls & keeps. Keep it respectful. TwistedAxe [contact] 14:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody interested in collapsing this part? 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 15:44, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull and support RD - Doesn't seem significant enough for a photo spot. EF5 14:30, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull and support RD Extremely hastily-posted, and doesn’t seem to have the global or even regional fame we typically require for death blurbs. “Only famous in one country” has often been used to oppose death blurbs and with all due respect, she seems like a prime example of that. I’m similarly unimpressed by the user above accusing oppose votes of racism. The Kip (contribs) 14:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no requirement, and should not even be taken into consideration, about a "global" factor for any ITN nomination much less death blurbs. Of course someone who has a significant impact worldwide likely will have sources to show that their global impact is part of their legacy (eg someone like Pele), but requiring a global impact is creating an unnecessary bias towards Western topics. Masem (t) 16:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is honestly a valid concern, but would an overall lower standard for blurbing deaths do anything to address that? Because to me at least, this would just significantly increase the number of blurbed deaths without increasing the proportion of non-Western nominations all that much. Yo.dazo (talk) 16:44, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - with the flurry of recent calls to pull this I think there is a clear absence of consensus for this item to be blurbed and it should be removed down to RD IMHO. Marking as attention needed.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:51, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment thats not racism, thats just capitalism. everyone knows that with enough desire (and a little bit of money) you can put pretty much anything on wikipedia, or indeed remove pretty much anything. hence situations like these occur (inb4 this gets removed instantly cuz wrongthink) Udder1882 (talk) 15:41, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Racism, capitalism? Why these words in this discussion? ArionStar (talk) 16:20, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    well, u know... "Under capitalism, everything turns into a commodity."
    A friend of mine paid like a hundred bucks (pennies for him) back in the early 2010s and got himself an article (about himself) that was bigger and better written than the one about Gandhi (at the time)
    cant imagine what shitfuckery's going on here in 2025 lmao Udder1882 (talk) 19:36, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If anything, our standards for notability are a lot stricter in 2025 than in 2010, and things like new pages patrolling mean that this kind of stuff gets caught very easily. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:07, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull – Who? How did this blurb make it through? 5225C (talk • contributions) 15:54, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull but support RD Definitely the article is of a good standard for RD but I just don't see her as transformative in her field and the awards seem to be fairly localised rather than global. I'd support pulling the blub but putting the article in RD instead. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:30, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb The headline of yesterday's main page featured a picture of a white dude from a one hit wonder metal band that got a shoutout from Metallica, but is otherwise just another band in the crowd. I don't think being Filipino should count against her. Butter made from smashed nuts (talk) 18:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The "white dude" was on another part of the page. —Bagumba (talk) 02:57, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose pull, suggest plan B The previous two blurbs about the hotel fire and cartel violence in Colombia are nearly a week old and don't seem prominent in the news since the initial events. Rolling back to such stale blurbs doesn't seem like a good plan.
As a compromise, I suggest that, when we get a new photo blurb posted, we push the subject down to RD rather than retaining the blurb in the scroll. She will have had plenty of exposure but there's no need to overdo it. The fact that she was posted in the first place is debatable, but that's history now.
Doing it this way, will mean that the Gaza ceasefire won't be pushed out of the box quite so quickly. That seems much the biggest of the blurbs and so should be retained longest.
Andrew🐉(talk) 18:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Supporting this if no one comes up with a better plan. -𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 18:44, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull I simply cannot find strong evidence that she was transformative in the history of cinema. The 'Legacy' section demonstrates significance in the cinema of the Philippines, which doesn’t regularly produce internationally acclaimed films, and she’s never won or starred in a film that won a major international award. I’m really surprised how editors with years-long experience are fighting to prove her significance when this is a clear-cut case of a non-transformative figure in the field of cinema. In the absence of arguments, some editors even argue with technical remarks about the timeline of posting the current blurbs. What a shame!--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:38, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    theres plenty of evidence she was a widely known household name in the philippines, a country of more than 100 million people. We've posted far lesser known people from far smaller countries, countries that only got posted cuz they are in the WEST Udder1882 (talk) 19:31, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you give me some examples of 'lesser known people from far smaller countries' whose deaths got a blurb?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:59, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Prince was one. I've never even heard about the man before htre posting Udder1882 (talk) 23:17, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The film industry is highly segmented into national film segments, so I would not expect that in defining the field that we'd look at the global POV. In contrast if we were talking cricket or association football, being vastly international sports that readily merge across county lines, I'd expect to look towards the athlete's legacy towards the global stage, those that may be simplifying the situation too much. Or if we were talking academics or musicians, those are far less nationalized compared to film, so global significance would be fair there. Remember we don't do anything like what is suggested for the Main Page items like TFA. We are trying to avoid the western bias that requiring global importance would lead to. Masem (t) 20:48, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Palme d'Or, Golden Lion, Golden Bear and the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film are film awards targeting ‘national film segments’. None of the films she starred in won any of these or any other equivalent award. She’s not supposed to appear in Hollywood films to be significant or transformative, but her work in films has to be recognised internationally to a certain degree. That’s clearly not the case here. Your point makes sense for fields that are endemic to specific regions and cannot be truly brought up to international contexts (e.g. manga, sumo etc.). I’d really like to counter Western bias by posting the death of a highly influential manga artist, but cinema is definitely not that kind of a field.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:56, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull Not a transformative figure on the level we'd expect for a blurb. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:04, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Pull and Support RD per others since I think most of my thoughts have already been stated. --SpectralIon 20:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull There was hardly time given for a proper discussion. I am not seeing evidence meeting the high bar for a blurb. Thriley (talk) 21:38, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull, support RD Hardly any discussion before the posting. This is a mockery of the ITN process, and it's absurd to think we have had a fair process when people are wildly throwing around accusations of racism. There are plenty of notable figures from the Global South that could merit a blurb (someone like Umm Kulthum comes to mind), but I cannot even find any articles from non-Philippine sources. --Varavour (talk) 22:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Andrew's plan B above, but seriously... this was a poor posting - after 7 hours while all of Europe and most of America was asleep. Please don't do that again. Black Kite (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Your comment sounds Global North-centric. ArionStar (talk) 23:04, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Not necessarily, there's a difference between pointing out that people in Europe/NA might not have had time to comment, and saying that only their opinions should be centered. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ArionStar it’s not northern-centric to acknowledge that a massive part of enwiki’s userbase had no chance to comment on this nom between its proposal and its posting, and to argue that it is is almost to imply that non-“northern” users’ opinions should carry more value than “northern” ones. The Kip (contribs) 00:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Are there many people from developed countries interacting in this section? ArionStar (talk) 00:05, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, because a large majority of enwiki’s userbase comes from what would be defined as developed countries. Does that mean their opinions should be devalued? The Kip (contribs) 00:19, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    When those arguments boil down to "Oppose blurb, never heard of this person", then yes, we should be ignoring them. WP is a global work, ITN is to feature quality articles that are in the news, and thus we should expect a wide range of topics including from less-developed nations. When editors complain that they haven't heard of a topic and thus oppose, that is harmful to the purpose of ITN. I never heard of Romero before this was nominated, but I read through the article to educate why she was nominated for a blurb without letting lack of awareness about her to influence that. I expect that to be the case for all editors, and the same rationale and approach to fight against "popularity contest" !votes like for Betty White or similar extremely well-known people. Masem (t) 01:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, ITN is not an obituary and this was established 8 years ago. This is quite literally why we established RD to begin with. Blurbs are meant for people who hold extraordinary importance (as seen in the discussion and where examples such as Thatcher, Mandela, Michael Jackson are given). I don't think most people are opposing because they aren't aware who she is. I'm sure alot of us here weren't even aware of who she was - but one look at the article, especially under "legacy", really does show no clear sign of any global impact. I'm sure (or atleast, I hope) the other editors also took a look at the article before they posted their votes. This is not a case of a popularity contest, but mere importance, impact and legacy that impacted more than just the Philippines. TwistedAxe [contact] 07:10, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    When "extraordinary importance" is taken to read "must be known worldwide", that's creates a massive bias for Western nations, as well as emphasizes the popularity contest issue. We use "in their field" in the guidelines for ITN because it recognizes that not all fields get the same type of coverage worldwide. We would judge someone in politics (which I would expect that such people have at least influenced the global stage, like Thatcher, Mandela, or Carter) far differently than we would judge someone from the arts, for example (who may be limited to extremely well known in their country, but we should not expect the fame that we readily is only present for American actors) --Masem (t) 12:59, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masem even if we move away from the "globally known" standard, there should still be some degree of wider coverage in order to merit a blurb - as has been stated a few times throughout this section, editors here found virtually no news coverage of her death outside of the Philippines. There's certainly a degree of grace that we should give to notable non-western figures owing to the disparity in fame, but that isn't it in the slightest. The Kip (contribs) 07:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ArionStar Not in the slightest; I would have said exactly the same regardless of the time-zones involved. There needs to be time for a wide range of editors to comment, or (except in the most obvious of cases) consensus cannot really be said to have evolved. Black Kite (talk) 00:07, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The quorum was too small to have posted so early, regardless of who may have been asleep. —Bagumba (talk) 07:52, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pulled, and moved to RD, consensus has evolved. Stephen 23:57, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb I really wanted to support a blurb, on the basis that I think ITN should have more global news stories than it currently does. With this being said, the "In the news" part of "ITN" simply is not there. The press coverage of her death is limited to the Manila Times and other smaller websites, as opposed to the front pages of the global press - which in my view, is the standard for a natural old age death of a celebrity or public figure death to become ITN-level notable. FlipandFlopped ツ 06:27, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Cinema has always been language-centric, and Philippine cinema has always been dominated by Tagalog speakers based in Metro Manila. This makes it very insular and for what it's worth, works of actors of Romero's age have not been distributed elsewhere. In the 21st century, this is different as Filipino entertainment has been exported elsewhere, yes not as widespread as K-drama but exported nevertheless. Now, you'd ask, is Romero is the preeminent Filipino actress of her generation? You can probably say she has had a lengthy career, and several generations (not just hers) know about her. There are several cinema awards in the Philippines; I'm using the FAMAS Award for Best Actress as it's the oldest, and was giving out awards on Romero's heyday in the 1950s. Romero won the FAMAS Award for Best Actress in 1954, and did not win again until 2000. Filipino cinema awards have the credibility of the Philippine government; even actors nowadays don't necessarily care about it, awards shows are not even live TV specials. As for the question if she is preeminent Filipino actress of her generation, the answer is a resounding no. Three people won 5 FAMAS Award for Best Actress, and Romero won two 46 years apart. Aside from her two wins, she was nominated three more times; the actress with the most nominations has 17. Romero is well-loved and well-known in the Philippines, and we want to have arts and culture death blurbs from the Global South, but she may not be it. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dražen Dalipagić

[edit]
Article: Dražen Dalipagić (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Eurohoops, Sportando
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Dražen Dalipagić, a Yugoslav basketball player, one of best players during 1970s. FIBA Hall of famer Marko Mlinarić (talk) 10:25, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Anastasios of Albania

[edit]
Article: Anastasios of Albania (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

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

 Teemu08 (talk) 17:53, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 24

[edit]
January 24, 2025 (2025-01-24) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Iris Cummings

[edit]
Article: Iris Cummings (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SwimmingWorld
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Good article. Connormah (talk) 07:17, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Curtis Halford

[edit]
Article: Curtis Halford (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

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

 Jon698 (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Unk

[edit]
Article: Unk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American rapper, the article is quite short but might still pass. Mooonswimmer 04:41, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Slovak protests

[edit]
Article: 2025 Slovak protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Protests took place across Slovakia after prime minister Robert Fico's pro-Russia policies. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Protests took place across Slovakia in opposition to prime minister Robert Fico's pro-Russia policies.
News source(s): AP
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Nationwide protests are always ITN blurb worthy. ArionStar (talk) 02:45, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These have been going on for a while, and there's nothing to indicate that anything in the last day is more notable than the rest. These aren't violent either (at least, the article doesn't suggest there was any violence). There are peaceful protests happening everywhere in the world at any time, so it doesn't make sense to highlight any specific one. Masem (t) 02:52, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Nothing special. Ordinary peaceful protesting. It happens all the time, everywhere. Only big protests that spiral into revolutions are really covered. Its not in the news for a bunch of people in slovakia to be contesting pro russian policies. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 04:14, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alternate Blurb - Mass protests of this scale are significant enough to be newsworthy even if they don't lead to revolutions (yet). The original blurb needed some polishing, the alternative blurb offers this. Huertanix (talk) 20:26, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oppose nothing of consequence but an usual right to protest.Sportsnut24 (talk) 08:12, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mimis Domazos

[edit]
Article: Mimis Domazos (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Greek Reporter
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Greek Footballer Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article could do with improvements to reduce fluff, but is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until WP:NPOV and tone concerns are addressed. UndercoverClassicist T·C 14:15, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 23

[edit]
January 23, 2025 (2025-01-23) (Thursday)

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Jean-François Kahn

[edit]
Article: Jean-François Kahn (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telerama Gala
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: French journalist TNM101 (chat) 15:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2025 Jalgaon train accident

[edit]
Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 22:53, 28 January 2025 (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: 2025 Jalgaon train accident (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Rail accident kills 12 in Maharashtra, India (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ 12 dead as passengers get down on tracks, run over by another train Maharashtra, India
News source(s): CNN, BBC The hindu, Indian express
Credits:
Nominator's comments: 12 people were killed after being run over by the Pushpak Express in Maharashtra, India Spworld2 (talk) 09:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, it is very short. History6042😊 (Contact me) 13:33, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality – somewhat stubby. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 19:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Although tragic, it is common in India that people die due to trains. The only ones that get posted are record breakers. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 02:12, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SimpleSubCubicGraph:Oversimplification wrt this case. This was not an accident in a sense that it happened by mishap, but chain of sequences which could happen in any country. -ExclusiveEditor (talk) 05:29, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SNOW? ArionStar (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Half or more opposes are on quality, which is a 'fixable opposition' and should be allowed to stay open per WP:ITN/A§ITN/C. It will eventually lapse whatsoever. -𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 06:09, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Same-sex marriage in Thailand

[edit]
Consensus to post will not develop. Stephen 01:51, 23 January 2025 (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: Same-sex marriage in Thailand (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Thailand becomes the 38th country and the first in Southeast Asia to legalize same-sex marriage. (Post)
News source(s): TIME Metro
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Historic event. ArionStar (talk) 00:06, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "38th". Enough said. Masem (t) 00:45, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, I do not see how this is important. It is the 38th and we don't post every single change in the law of every single country. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:19, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Micheal Martin elected Taoiseach

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Micheál Martin (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Micheál Martin (pictured) becomes Taoiseach (prime minister) of the Republic of Ireland as leader of a Fianna Fáil–Fine Gael coalition government. (Post)
News source(s): CNN BBC RTÉ
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Change of national leader (Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administers the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at List of current heads of state and government except when that change was already posted as part of a general election) – the election took place in December but Taoiseach was not elected by Dáil (parliament) until now. Sheila1988 (talk) 21:25, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support in premise lets fix the article then this is just a usual ITNR Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

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

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&oldid=1272852567"