Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/January 2025
This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.
January 2
[edit]
January 2, 2025
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Pippa Garner
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Art Net
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Created by Wovenbone (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Yoshi876 (talk · give credit) and Erksahin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American artist, illustrator, industrial designer. Death reported 2 January. TJMSmith (talk) 22:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
RD: Louis Schittly
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: French physician and humanitarian. One of the founders of Médecins Sans Frontières. Death reported 2 January. Thriley (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
RD: Buddy MacKay
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American politician, governor of Florida for three weeks (1998–99), dies at age 91. Davey2116 (talk) 04:02, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Several areas that need more references. SpencerT•C 05:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Wilhelm Brückner (luthier)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): MDR
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Rundstef (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German luthier in Erfurt. He worked until 90 in his workshop. Grimes2 (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support, I came to nominate, and perhaps update, but you did it all! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:09, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Article looks fine, nice work. Not sure if bibliography like this is needed, but that's not an issue here. Posting. --Tone 13:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Well sourced, informative, ready to post. Jusdafax (talk) 13:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Rosita Missoni
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, NY Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Italian knitwear designer. With her husband Ottavio Missoni, she co-founded Italian luxury fashion house Missoni. Death reported 2 January. Thriley (talk) 19:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality Way too short to be posted to the Main Page. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: Article is still a stub. It also merely says that she died, but not the causes of death or any reactions to it. Cambalachero (talk) 13:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Unless something has changed here recently, cause of death does not need to be mentioned for people who die of old age. RD does not require that degree of depth. Curbon7 (talk) 18:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- She was 93. RachelTensions (talk) 09:08, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- We do not require cause of death. But we do require that it’s at least start class, which this one is not. Schwede66 20:53, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Article has been expanded. Looks ready. Thriley (talk) 21:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
RD: Ján Zachara
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): "Vo veku 96 rokov zomrel bývalý slovenský boxer a olympijský víťaz Ján Zachara". Denník N (in Slovak). 2 January 2025. "Legendary boxer Ján Zachara passed away". rtvs.sk. Retrieved 2025-01-02.
Credits:
- Nominated by Di (they-them) (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: 1952 Olympic gold medalist, died on the same day as another 1952 gold medalist (Ágnes Keleti) Di (they-them) (talk) 16:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Current page size is 1427 B (243 words), generally still barely considered a WP:STUB.—Bagumba (talk) 18:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: Article is very short, and does not mention the causes of death. Cambalachero (talk) 14:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- We don't post stubs. Schwede66 20:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ágnes Keleti
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1] blikk portfolio hvg
Credits:
- Nominated by 94.44.118.57 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: The oldest living Olympian in history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.44.118.57 (talk) 07:50, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Second and and third citation above from Spworld2 (talk · contribs)'s duplicate nomination. His comment was
Ágnes Keleti has died, at the age of 104 , Hungarian Olympic champion, gymnast and Sportswoman
. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 09:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Comment Actually, she wasn't the oldest at the time of her death. Both Yvonne Chabot-Curtet and Iris Cummings were older then Ágnes Keleti. She was the oldest living champion, however. But its almost there, the article. TheCorriynial (talk) 10:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support, she's a notable Hungarian athlete who not only won 10 Olympic medals, but was also inducted into the International Jewish Sports Hall of Fame, the Hungarian Sports Hall of Fame, the International Women's Sports Hall of Fame, and the International Gymnastics Hall of Fame. Di (they-them) (talk) 16:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- This is a recent deaths nomination, and so as per the notice, only the article quality should be considered (every person with an article is eligible to be nominated). Joseph2302 (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Procedural oppose as per WP:DENY. The nominator is blocked for sockpuppetry/block evasion, so we shouldn't be supporting that by allowing this nomination of theirs. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- If they verifiably died, they qualify. It doesn't help readers in this case to DENY. Per the WP:EVASION policy:
This does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor (changes that are obviously helpful, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand), but the presumption in ambiguous cases should be to revert.
—Bagumba (talk) 18:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- If they verifiably died, they qualify. It doesn't help readers in this case to DENY. Per the WP:EVASION policy:
- Support Article is in quality to post. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support denying a non-offending article's RD eligibility just because it so happened to be initially nominated by a sockpuppet account is a bad precedent to set. It sends a message that if you really dislike someone and don't want them to be memorialized, the solution is for you to quickly create a sockpuppet account and push out an RD nom, so that the target article is never allowed on the main page. The article is well sourced and ready. FlipandFlopped ツ 20:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Joseph2302, WP:BMB applies here. Rewarding a banned editor by posting this will only encourage more sockpuppetry. This should be closed and an editor in good standing can renominate. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- How about simply withholding the ITN nom credit template? No need to close and renominate the same candidate. -- PFHLai (talk) 17:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Looks like that's what Stephen has done.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't give credits to IPs as I assume they're transient. Stephen 22:36, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Looks like that's what Stephen has done.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- How about simply withholding the ITN nom credit template? No need to close and renominate the same candidate. -- PFHLai (talk) 17:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Yoav Gallant resigns from Israel parliament
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Yoav Gallant, member of the Israel Parliament (pictured), resigns at the age of 66, after being fired in November. (Post)
News source(s): NDTV The Times Of Israel
Credits:
- Nominated by ArPerfectlyEdits (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose Thanks for the information, but resigning from parliament is not ITN-worthy. He was already ITN with the fact, that the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant. Grimes2 (talk) 14:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Resigning after being fired is hardly the news bombshell he might have hoped for, even if he is an international criminal. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose first this doesn't meet WP:ITNSIGNIF. Also, this nomination was made by an editor with 29 edits, and so violates WP:ARBPIA (need to have 500 edits to edit this topic area). Joseph2302 (talk) 17:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't understand your last sentence. Why should an ITNC editor have 500 edits? Grimes2 (talk) 17:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- That's coming from the Arbcom decision on anythibg related to the Israel/Palestine conflict, which includes when these topics appear on ITN. — Masem (t) 18:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I don't understand your last sentence. Why should an ITNC editor have 500 edits? Grimes2 (talk) 17:43, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
January 1
[edit]
January 1, 2025
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Jean-Michel Defaye
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Figaro
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Versatile French composer, pianist, arranger, conductor, - awards when young but only a short obit now that he died at age 92. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ripken (dog)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Nominated by History6042 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Skynxnex (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Baseball retrieval dog History6042😊 (Contact me) 14:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support Good depth of coverage. "List of occupations" section covered by references in the main text. SpencerT•C 21:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 01:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
RD: David Lodge
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Euronews
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:3531:2BB0:7F04:241F (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: British author and critic. 240F:7A:6253:1:3531:2BB0:7F04:241F (talk) 02:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Several unreferenced paragraphs. SpencerT•C 21:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- All dealt with now. Chaiten1 (talk) 09:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support High quality and well referenced article Chaiten1 (talk) 08:39, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- The bullet-points after the prose are largely unsourced and orange-tagged. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 00:32, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- There are no remaining tags, and the article is fully referenced Chaiten1 (talk) 08:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Wayne Osmond
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS, YourErie, ABC
Credits:
- Nominated by TheAstorPastor (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The AP (talk) 08:41, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support Appropriate depth, fully referenced. SpencerT•C 21:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 00:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 Trump International Hotel explosion
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: One person is killed and seven others are injured when a Tesla Cybertruck explodes (pictured) outside of the Trump International Hotel Las Vegas in Paradise, Nevada, United States. (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times BBC ABC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Spworld2 (talk · give credit)
- Strong oppose This was deliberated before but it was taken down. Now a few hours on, we have more coverage than smoke being reported by The Mirror, but it still doesn't appear that important. Also, the article is at AfD, but that appears to be SNOW keep at the moment. Departure– (talk) 05:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Departure– This is in favor of the AfD discussion, but the article should maintain its current status.
- This does not appear to be a normal explosion, there is international media coverage[2][3][4][5], one person was killed and 7 were injured, and there are reports that this is related to the 2025 New Orleans truck attack Spworld2 (talk) 05:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Whether it was intentional or not, a single death is not significant to post as a story, unless it was determined to be an act of terrorism (which doesn't seem to be the case at this point). --Masem (t) 05:09, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem Was it determined to be intentional or not? There was one death and more than 7 injuries, and this did not happen near a normal hotel. 2025 New Orleans truck attack still under investigation -
- FBI is trying to determine if the incident was an act of terrorism, CNN [6] reports Spworld2 (talk) 05:35, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting MINIMUMDEATHS > 1? Banedon (talk) 08:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - this nomination has already been closed once. This could easily be just an accident or a grandiose suicide. The only reason there may be more coverage than local is because of the (possibly conincidental) timing with the New Orleans attack; which would make it the same story if there is a link. Nfitz (talk) 05:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfit It seems that the previous nomination was terminated due to lack of quality. This does not seem to be a normal occurrence. Spworld2 (talk) 05:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- The previous nom was withdrawn by the nominator.—Bagumba (talk) 08:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose as per the previous one being withdrawn in the face of unanimous opposes. I share the sentiments of one of the original comments. A car fire? Some Tesla cars seem to have this issue. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- To be fair, mass shootings (and other kind of mass-murders) are objectively more common in the US than car fires. 51.154.145.205 (talk) 11:57, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- In 2021, 650 Americans died in motor vehicle fires and 48,000 by firearms, but most are suicides; only about 480 were in mass shootings. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- To be fair, mass shootings (and other kind of mass-murders) are objectively more common in the US than car fires. 51.154.145.205 (talk) 11:57, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose as a single item, merge with the New Orleans blurb IF a connection is officially confirmed. Johndavies837 (talk) 10:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose we do not report incidents where only one person died unless if it is the assassination of a notable person.
- Djprasadian (talk) 11:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, Vice President Elect Musk has "broken silence" to reassure us that Tesla Cybertrucks are perfectly safe. But he is still alive. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Vehicles explode (and cause injuries from said explosions) all the time, I don’t see what makes this particular instance so special. I may reconsider if concrete proof of the explosion being intentional comes out, but I doubt it. Hungry403 (talk) 13:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I also see that this nom was closed already, another reason for opposition Hungry403 (talk) 13:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: I'm pretty sure that Tesla Cybertrucks are not concrete-proof. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I also see that this nom was closed already, another reason for opposition Hungry403 (talk) 13:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Wait It seems fairly clear that this wasn't a routine vehicle fire as the explosion was set up with fireworks and gas canisters. It seems conceivable that it's connected with the other truck terrorism incident and so we should await further investigation. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Wait @Andrew is right. Some new articles are now calling this a possible act of terrorism. [7], [8]— Preceding unsigned comment added by IDB.S (talk • contribs) 17:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- The police are saying this is likely a Suicide. I'm horrified that people keep recreating the article and reopening the discussion, when this was pretty obviously a good likelihood at the time this discussion was reopened! Close this abortion now. Nfitz (talk) 19:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose This was already previously nominated, discussed, and quickly closed. --SpectralIon (talk) 19:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support I was rejected from nominating it, however now that it was a terrorist attack and one person died, it only makes sense for it to be nominated. Two terrorist attacks in one day, sad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk • contribs) 20:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- There's no indication, User:SimpleSubCubicGraph, that this was a suicide. Why do you think this wasn't a suicide? Nfitz (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz well I've heard from some news sources that it is a terrorist attack. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 20:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Do you have any references, User:SimpleSubCubicGraph? I haven't seen any since they declared that they believe it's a suicide. Nfitz (talk) 20:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz well I've heard from some news sources that it is a terrorist attack. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 20:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- There's no indication, User:SimpleSubCubicGraph, that this was a suicide. Why do you think this wasn't a suicide? Nfitz (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support my alt blurb. ArionStar (talk) 20:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose (again) that altblurb. These attacks are not related in method or scope (active attack with 10+ deaths vs. a suicide with no additional deaths). Also, while most know where New Orleans is, Paradise in English internationally overwhelmingly is not used to refer to the Nevada location. Departure– (talk) 20:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, I don't live in the US and I'm not familiar with American cities. ArionStar (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Our article Trump International Hotel Las Vegas says it's in Paradise, not Las Vegas. Our blurbs shouldn't be factually wrong. Though why anyone wants to ITN a suicide I don't know. That's highly concerning. Nfitz (talk) 21:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Trying to think of it as an explosion rather than a suicide might alleviate some of that concern. People nominate exploding meteors, exploding pipelines, exploding all kinds of stuff. Humans are often involved, but they're not the basis, like in pure death cases. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose (again) that altblurb. These attacks are not related in method or scope (active attack with 10+ deaths vs. a suicide with no additional deaths). Also, while most know where New Orleans is, Paradise in English internationally overwhelmingly is not used to refer to the Nevada location. Departure– (talk) 20:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The authorities have officially announced that this incident was not linked to the New Orleans incident. With that in mind, this is not nearly important enough for the main page. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:25, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm just...appalled with this discussion, between the last nom and this one. I do agree with the consensus that this is a single isolated incident and not really ITN worthy, I really think the civility was lost some time ago with this one. Just a recommendation everyone - let's chill out a bit. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- It's free forum open to divergent opinions. The only civility lost was due to the tragedies. ArionStar (talk) 20:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- When divergent opinions go to reopening closed debatess and glorifying suicide, then that's a step too far. The article is a huge violation of MOS:SUICIDE. Nfitz (talk) 21:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- The original nomination was withdrawn, not closed otherwise. Reporting by major reliable sources has improved since then so reopening this wasn't quite as big of a problem as that, in my opinion. Departure– (talk) 21:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- When divergent opinions go to reopening closed debatess and glorifying suicide, then that's a step too far. The article is a huge violation of MOS:SUICIDE. Nfitz (talk) 21:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- It's free forum open to divergent opinions. The only civility lost was due to the tragedies. ArionStar (talk) 20:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - This is now being reported as an isolated incident. As no-one but the victim/perpetrator died, I don't think it comes anywhere near the usual threshold for ITN, and I'm rather suprised it's still being debated. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose -- this really ought to be closed; clearly consensus won't develop to post this. --RockstoneSend me a message! 05:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) Schengen Area expansion
[edit]Blurb: Romania and Bulgaria join the Schengen Area, the European passport-free zone. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Romania and Bulgaria join the Schengen Area and lift land border checks.
Alternative blurb II: Romania and Bulgaria both become full members of the Schengen Area.
Alternative blurb III: Romania and Bulgaria both become full members of the Schengen Area by removing land border checks, seven months after their initial admission.
News source(s): CNN, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by UCinternational (talk · give credit)
- Updated by WikiContributor0830 (talk · give credit)
- Support, I would argue that any changes to the composition of the Schengen Area are inherently relevant as the largest area with free movement in the world, and for years it has been a major topic of discussion here in the European Union that Romania and Bulgaria were the last EU members to not have been admitted (excl. Ireland who have an opt-out) because of a veto from Austria in the Council of the European Union. So it was very significant when the vote finally passed last month in the Justice and Home Affairs Council.
- However, that wording is probably not ideal—in a legal sense, Romania and Bulgaria joined the Schengen Area on 31 March 2024 when border controls were lifted for air and sea travel. The news are that land border checks have also just been lifted, granting the countries full participation on the same level as all other 27 member states.
- So I would propose re-phrasing the blurb to something like Romania and Bulgaria become full members of the Schengen Area, with land border checks lifted on 1 January 2025.
- BochiBochiGalaxy (talk) 05:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support, but agree with BochiBochiGalaxy, so also added altblurb 1. Yo.dazo (talk) 10:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability This is a major change in international policy. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support ALT1 as a major change in policy that is in the news, so meets WP:ITNSIGNIF. And target article has enough information about this event to pass WP:ITNQUALITY. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose This item is misleading because, currently, many major EU nations are actually operating border controls – Austria, Denmark, Germany, France, Netherlands, Sweden, etc. – see EU Commission. Schengen is effectively in abeyance and the article/blurb do not explain this. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Positive news, and any complaints about the article or story being misleading can be addressed in the article itself. Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support - important moment for those countries. Very notable event. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 18:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support per Eugen. ArionStar (talk) 20:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - 2 nations joining the Schengen isn't that exciting. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 20:09, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support Major development. @SimpleSubCubicGraph: ITN articles do not have to be "exciting", they simply must be important. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support altblurb2 as nominator. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 22:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support Both are major European countries with relatively large populations. I like the original blurb the most, but I'm fine with any of them. This is certainly a development worthy for ITN. --SpectralIon (talk) 22:55, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- With the edits to the blurbs, I now prefer Altblurb 1 to the others. SpectralIon (talk) 06:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support alt2 - Significant development in international relations. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- NB: Since I made the above post, the blurbs have been edited by another user to be more verbose than they were previously. I liked the conciseness of alt2, which is why I voted for it. The current alt2 is not what I voted for; I would support the original blurb in preference to it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- @GenevieveDEon: I've restored altblurb2 and moved the appended altblurb2 to a new altblurb since it was significantly appended by another editor without my knowledge. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 02:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- NB: Since I made the above post, the blurbs have been edited by another user to be more verbose than they were previously. I liked the conciseness of alt2, which is why I voted for it. The current alt2 is not what I voted for; I would support the original blurb in preference to it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 00:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Posted ALT2. Schwede66 07:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Surprised by lack of wikilinking on the country names, so dropping by to comment. They are major but there's a large population which isn't very familiar with them. NativeForeigner Talk 22:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've brought this up on WP:ERRORS. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 01:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
RD: John B. O'Reilly Jr.
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [9]
Credits:
- Nominated by History6042 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Moeqas (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: 6th mayor of Dearborn, Michigan. History6042😊 (Contact me) 22:41, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- In its current form, the article isn't ready. Date and place of birth are unreferenced. There is absolutely nothing about his early life, education, or work history. Schwede66 19:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
RD: Chad Morgan
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-01-02/chad-morgan-australian-country-music-singer-dies/104778248
Credits:
- Nominated by HiLo48 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Australian comedy country music performer known as "The Sheik of Scrubby Creek". HiLo48 (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Discography lacks a single reference. Stephen 22:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 Cetinje shootings
[edit]Blurb: Thirteen people including the perpetrator are killed and four others are injured in spree shootings in Cetinje, Montenegro. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Thirteen are killed in spree shootings in Cetinje, Montenegro. The shootings are the deadliest in Montenegro since 1944 during Nazi occupation.
News source(s): [10]
Credits:
- Nominated by SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk · give credit)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality Quite similar in scope as the 2022 Cetinje shooting, also taking place in Cetinje. Removed mention of terrorism in the blurb as it's not in the source beyond the involvement of counter-terrorist government agencies. The second shooting targeted the restaurant owner's family. Departure– (talk) 22:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Departure– Changed it once more to deadliest shooting in Montenegro since 1944. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 22:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- That's almost certainly not relevant. "Deadliest since X" isn't needed in a blurb. Departure– (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Departure– Please clarify if I am wrong but doesn't blurb mean short description? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 22:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Blurbs are almost always a single sentence and typically don't contain context in the blurb. For instance, we wouldn't have the second sentence read "Shootings in Montenegro are rare due to strict gun laws" either - that can be implied from the source or the article. Departure– (talk) 22:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- I turned SSCG's changes into an altblurb. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:33, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Departure– Please clarify if I am wrong but doesn't blurb mean short description? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 22:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- That's almost certainly not relevant. "Deadliest since X" isn't needed in a blurb. Departure– (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. Article is all of eight sentences. Notability is unclear. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ad Orientem how is a terrorist attack that has killed as many people as the New Orleans truck attack not notable? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- The article does not indicate that this is a terrorist incident. If that is established I would likely support on the merits, though article quality does not meet the customary standards for ITN as of this comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ad Orientem its still people dying... SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 22:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- I am not questioning the basic notability of the subject for inclusion in the encyclopedia. But we have a higher bar for blurbs at ITN. All of which said, the immediate problem is article quality. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ad Orientem its still people dying... SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 22:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- The article does not indicate that this is a terrorist incident. If that is established I would likely support on the merits, though article quality does not meet the customary standards for ITN as of this comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Ad Orientem how is a terrorist attack that has killed as many people as the New Orleans truck attack not notable? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality. This is the worst shooting in the country since World War II, so it definitely warrants inclusion. However, the article is way too short for the main page. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: I oppose the altblurb, since those facts may not be correct. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Oppose- there's no mention in the article about these being the largest shootings since WWII. Perhaps because 11 died in the same location less than 30 months ago - 2022 Cetinje shooting (which was ITN). Also there were higher death counts for sprees murdering Albanians during the 1990s Yugoslav wars. This nomination is WP:OR. Nfitz (talk)Oppose per Nfitz. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 contribs 23:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Changed to Support on notability due to increased death count. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 contribs 18:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC)- Support original blurb on notability, wait on quality. This is definitely notable with 10 dead, but the article is a very short stub. I also oppose the alternative blurb per Nfitz. --SpectralIon (talk) 00:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I now fully Support the original blurb seeing as the article quality has improved and the casualty count has risen. SpectralIon (talk) 20:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
OpposeWeak Oppose - This doesn't seem terrorism related at all, and is rather a crazy person with a gun angry at the world after perceived slights. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC) (Note: with the updated death count, I only weakly oppose posting-- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC))- @SpectralIon he killed as many people as the new orleans truck attack, what makes this not in the news? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 03:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I supported this for ITN, did you mean to ping Rockstone? SpectralIon (talk) 03:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SpectralIon Yes, I am sorry. @Rockstone35 read above please SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 03:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @User:SimpleSubCubicGraph we typically don't post things that are notable only for the number of deaths without something more. We wouldn't have posted a mass shooting that killed 10 people in the US, for example. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 03:57, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Rockstone35 so 10 people dying mean nothing to you? What if you were a family member of those people? Wouldnt you want everyone to hear what that person did? You cant be apathetic to these people just because they dont affect you. You need to understand how that not only affected the family and friends of the 10 but the entire city and nation of Montenegro. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 04:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Opposing this doesn't mean I don't condemn the attacks or mourn the lives lost. Please don't set up a strawman. Of course I feel awful for the victims, as anyone would. But ITN isn't a newsticker. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 16:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SimpleSubCubicGraph, please read WP:RGW. The Kip (contribs) 19:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Rockstone35 so 10 people dying mean nothing to you? What if you were a family member of those people? Wouldnt you want everyone to hear what that person did? You cant be apathetic to these people just because they dont affect you. You need to understand how that not only affected the family and friends of the 10 but the entire city and nation of Montenegro. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 04:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @User:SimpleSubCubicGraph we typically don't post things that are notable only for the number of deaths without something more. We wouldn't have posted a mass shooting that killed 10 people in the US, for example. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 03:57, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SpectralIon Yes, I am sorry. @Rockstone35 read above please SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 03:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I supported this for ITN, did you mean to ping Rockstone? SpectralIon (talk) 03:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SpectralIon he killed as many people as the new orleans truck attack, what makes this not in the news? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 03:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Ad Orientem and Nfitz. Beyond deaths, special notability seems shaky. The Kip (contribs) 03:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality. Wait until the article is not a stub to post it. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 06:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support The deadliest shooting since World War II is notable itsslf. Article looks better now.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is no indication this this is the deadliest shooting since "Workd War II (sic)". And this isn't stated in the article. Nfitz (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- The government of Montenegro declared three days of mourning, which is a sign that this is a serious incident on national level. Furthermore, there's no reason why lives of Americans should be valued more than lives of Montenegrins as we already have a similar incident in New Orleans posted on the main page. After careful examination, there's indication that the opposition to this nomination on significance comes from editors who regularly support shootings in the US and complain about anti-American bias when they don’t succeed.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please answer the question. I'm not sure what the USA has to do with this. The nomination is seriously flawed - that's the issue I have. Nfitz (talk) 21:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz: You state that something isn’t the case without providing any evidence that proves the contrary. The 2022 Cetinje shooting you’re referring to had 11 deaths, which is clearly less than 13 deaths in this one. Moreover, there were no murders of Albanians in Montenegro during the 1990s. Montenegro was part of Yugoslavia whose authorities committed murders in Kosovo. You’re welcome to provide additional evidence if you don’t agree with it. There are reliable sources reporting this as ‘the greatest massacre’ in the history of Montenegro (see this as an example), so you need to better elaborate your view that it’s not the case. After all, we typically don’t include such lines in the blurbs we post, so this is a relatively minor issue considering how the story is unfolding (there are three days of mourning, and a country-wide gun ban was proposed).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you are say that there were no murders of Albanians (contrary to our own Encyclopaedia), I have concerns. My point here is that the article nowhere mentions that this is the deadliest shooting since Work War II, itsslf (sic). Surely, User:Kiril Simeonovski, looking at the article makes that clear (at least at the time that posted). The deaths are indeed now higher than the other recent shooting in this town; I don't see the relevance to my comment. Nfitz (talk) 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz: I think you should learn some geography and history before participating in such discussions with claims that what you don’t like is flawed (note first that Montenegro and Albania are different countries that haven’t been part of the same political entity over the past 100 years).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, of Albanians. There's no reason to be rude, and for you to violate one of Wikipedia's most basic principles, just because I've correctly pointed out that the article didn't mention that it was the biggest shooting since World War II. Nfitz (talk) 09:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not rude, just honest, and I wasn't bothered by your repeated sarcasm ("Workd War II (sic)"). Fair enough. Let's leave some room for others in this discussion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, of Albanians. There's no reason to be rude, and for you to violate one of Wikipedia's most basic principles, just because I've correctly pointed out that the article didn't mention that it was the biggest shooting since World War II. Nfitz (talk) 09:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz: I think you should learn some geography and history before participating in such discussions with claims that what you don’t like is flawed (note first that Montenegro and Albania are different countries that haven’t been part of the same political entity over the past 100 years).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you are say that there were no murders of Albanians (contrary to our own Encyclopaedia), I have concerns. My point here is that the article nowhere mentions that this is the deadliest shooting since Work War II, itsslf (sic). Surely, User:Kiril Simeonovski, looking at the article makes that clear (at least at the time that posted). The deaths are indeed now higher than the other recent shooting in this town; I don't see the relevance to my comment. Nfitz (talk) 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz: You state that something isn’t the case without providing any evidence that proves the contrary. The 2022 Cetinje shooting you’re referring to had 11 deaths, which is clearly less than 13 deaths in this one. Moreover, there were no murders of Albanians in Montenegro during the 1990s. Montenegro was part of Yugoslavia whose authorities committed murders in Kosovo. You’re welcome to provide additional evidence if you don’t agree with it. There are reliable sources reporting this as ‘the greatest massacre’ in the history of Montenegro (see this as an example), so you need to better elaborate your view that it’s not the case. After all, we typically don’t include such lines in the blurbs we post, so this is a relatively minor issue considering how the story is unfolding (there are three days of mourning, and a country-wide gun ban was proposed).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think the situation in New Orleans is significantly different than the situation in Montenegro. Namely, the one in New Orleans is a terrorist attack, while this is a domestic violence incident that became a spree shooting. Would you support posting a similar shooting that happened in the US? Personally, I would not. Also, please don't cast aspersions, I do not appreciate your insinuations. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:07, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Rockstone35: Is there a specific Wikipedia policy that terrorist attacks should be assigned higher significance in ITN nominations? Innocent people died in both incidents, so the motives shouldn’t matter.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kiril Simeonovski: there isn't a specific policy that we shouldn't include mass shootings in countries where they're common, and yet that's consistently what happens, so I don't know what your point is. If the motive doesn't matter, then neither should how often it happens or where. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 00:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- My point is that you cannot dismiss a shooting if it’s not a terrorist attack as we don’t have such policy. There are other indicators of notability, such as public response and policies. If there are days of mourning and proposals for country-wide gun ban, then it’s clear that this is a serious incident that affects the whole society.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- The main reason I opposed posting was because these types of shootings are routinely not posted if they happen in the US, despite the fact that they had the same number of deaths. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 15:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- My point is that you cannot dismiss a shooting if it’s not a terrorist attack as we don’t have such policy. There are other indicators of notability, such as public response and policies. If there are days of mourning and proposals for country-wide gun ban, then it’s clear that this is a serious incident that affects the whole society.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Kiril Simeonovski: there isn't a specific policy that we shouldn't include mass shootings in countries where they're common, and yet that's consistently what happens, so I don't know what your point is. If the motive doesn't matter, then neither should how often it happens or where. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 00:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Rockstone35: Is there a specific Wikipedia policy that terrorist attacks should be assigned higher significance in ITN nominations? Innocent people died in both incidents, so the motives shouldn’t matter.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please answer the question. I'm not sure what the USA has to do with this. The nomination is seriously flawed - that's the issue I have. Nfitz (talk) 21:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- The government of Montenegro declared three days of mourning, which is a sign that this is a serious incident on national level. Furthermore, there's no reason why lives of Americans should be valued more than lives of Montenegrins as we already have a similar incident in New Orleans posted on the main page. After careful examination, there's indication that the opposition to this nomination on significance comes from editors who regularly support shootings in the US and complain about anti-American bias when they don’t succeed.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:46, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- There is no indication this this is the deadliest shooting since "Workd War II (sic)". And this isn't stated in the article. Nfitz (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on Quality. Significance seems to be there, but as many of noted, the article is fairly short. DarkSide830 (talk) 21:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support - While the article would still benefit from expansion, it's just about sufficient. Despite the fact that Cetinje has had two of them in four years, shootings of this kind are generally very rare in Europe, and this is clearly more than noteworthy. I am not impressed by arguments attempting to differentiate the New Orleans killings from these by applying the politicised label of 'terrorism'; in a murder on this scale, the puported reason for the killings should not generally be a deciding factor in whether to post. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support - As noted above, the article is short and could benefit from more people writing to expand it, but it is more than enough to understand the event. Regardless of whether Cetinje was unlucky enough to have two modern shootings, these shootings are still extraordinarily rare in Europe. I will also note that I do not understand why so many people have tried to argue on the semantics of the word terrorism when twelve people have died, and that to most of the world this and the New Orleans terrorist attack have equal relevance – I think there is very clear U.S.-centrism at display in this discussion. BochiBochiGalaxy (talk) 05:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- It isn't Americentricism, please don't cast aspersions. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 15:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability; weak support on quality per GenevieveDEon and BochiBochiGalaxy. The article could and should be further expanded, but I think it conveys the basics of what happened sufficiently with some recent additions by editors. It is a landmark mass casualty event for a country that has caused a day of national mourning. The ripple effects of the shooting are also spurring a nationwide conversation about banning firearms. The call for gun reform are in turn attracting global news coverage, e.g. from the Washington Post to the Toronto Star. Opposing votes have mentioned the attack being motivated by mental health or family issues, but I point out these were also motivations of the Sandy Hook or Aurora shooters in the USA, attacks which had a lasting impact and which we did post without question. A non-terror motive does not negate that it is an impactful event, with casualties, that is leading to global media coverage. FlipandFlopped ツ 18:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support - I'm changing my vote as the death toll has increased and I'm sold on the arguments of how rare such events are in Europe compared to other areas. Support blurb - I'm concerned the alt-blurb about WW2 is neither mentioned in the article, nor necessarily correct. Nfitz (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Do we have a consensus now? SpectralIon (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Even though I opposed posting... I think we do have consensus. --RockstoneSend me a message! 03:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Rockstone35 What is the consesus? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 03:54, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SimpleSubCubicGraph that it ought to be posted. --RockstoneSend me a message! 04:13, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Then we need someone to ping an admin. SpectralIon (talk) 04:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SpectralIon can you please ping an admin SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 05:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what the rules are regarding that so I'm not gonna risk it. You should mark this nom as (Ready) though SpectralIon (talk) 05:11, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but someone needs to alert the administrators.; SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what the rules are regarding that so I'm not gonna risk it. You should mark this nom as (Ready) though SpectralIon (talk) 05:11, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SpectralIon can you please ping an admin SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 05:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Rockstone35 What is the consesus? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 03:54, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Even though I opposed posting... I think we do have consensus. --RockstoneSend me a message! 03:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Do we have a consensus now? SpectralIon (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support original blurb or a variation thereof. I'm not sure the comparison to World War II makes a lot of sense even were it factually accurate - certainly what larger massacres occurred in 1944 were of another nature than this one. This is bad enough on its own. Khuft (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- Posted, but with a rewritten blurb as we don't count perpetrators in the number of people killed. Schwede66 22:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 New Orleans truck attack
[edit]Blurb: 11 people are killed and 36 others are injured in a vehicle-ramming and shooting attack in New Orleans, Louisiana (street pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: Eleven people are killed and thirty-six others are injured in a vehicle-ramming and shooting attack in New Orleans, Louisiana (intersection pictured).
News source(s): [11][12][13]
Credits:
- Nominated by Personisinsterest (talk · give credit)
Wait on quality,support on notability. Going through some international news websites, this is the very top story on most of them and one of the top on all of them.I think a bit more information is needed in the article, but it's a matter of time as new information comes in.Heythereimaguy (talk) 13:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)- I, along with other users, have edited the article as more information has surfaced to the point where I believe that the article is of high enough quality. Support. Heythereimaguy (talk) 17:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment We typically do not post shootings in the US due to their frequency, but I will note that the fact that they found improvised explosives in the truck and the suspect was wearing armored gear suggests this is more than a run of the mill shooting, very likely premeditated. Should at least wait until some more info on the motive (if they can figure it out, the driver was killed) --Masem (t) 14:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, this was more a vehicle attack than a shooting. Heythereimaguy (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- The article is called "car attack" (actually now "truck attack"), so it is puzzling why one would ignore that central aspect when assessing the article's notability. Einsof (talk) 17:39, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Wait on quality and support without image for notability, however, the current image of just the street is, in my opinion, irrelevant. We don't need an image for every blurb. 31.44.227.152 (talk) 14:48, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Use Terrorist attack instead of 'Car attack' if confirmed. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support quality is ok now. ArionStar (talk) 15:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support: This is the worst terrorist attack on American soil in years. BOTTO (T•C) 15:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Personisinsterest: Would you be able to change the link in your nomination to 2025 New Orleans truck attack? The article has been renamed since you nominated it. BOTTO (T•C) 17:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Got it! Personisinsterest (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Personisinsterest: Would you be able to change the link in your nomination to 2025 New Orleans truck attack? The article has been renamed since you nominated it. BOTTO (T•C) 17:54, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support Its the new year and a terrorist attack happened. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 17:39, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Quality is fine given the amount of publicly available information. Notable based on high number of casualties for a vehicle-ramming attack. Einsof (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Support Similar to the 2024 Magdeburg car attack that was posted at couple weeks earlier. Even more dead though and with an ISIS flag, bombs and guns, this is not run-of-the-mill in any way. Quality is good considering the amount of info available at the moment. --TorsodogTalk 17:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 18:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- I somehow didn't get notifications for my prior discussion at Errors on whether to add things related to the Islamic State to the blurb, and it looks like the discussion was archived to the page history for not being an error, so I guess I'll discuss this here:
There's a lot of suspicion that the attack was done to further jihad and there's descriptions of a video in which the perpetrator pledges allegiance to the Islamic State the day of the attack. As such, I think we should modify the blurb to reflect this, maybe by adding the detail that the truck was attached with the jihadist flag of the Islamic State. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:34, 4 January 2025 (UTC)- @Admins willing to post ITN: since there's no opposition, should consensus to mention the flag be assumed? Aaron Liu (talk) 17:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- No, it’s detail best left to the article. Stephen 19:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- But it's quite critical detail on the motivation. It makes it the biggest IS-brand extremism–fueled attack in years. Though either way, I guess it doesn't matter that much since it'll roll off in a few days. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- No, it’s detail best left to the article. Stephen 19:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: since there's no opposition, should consensus to mention the flag be assumed? Aaron Liu (talk) 17:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 Trump Tower fire
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A cybertruck catches on fire near the Trump Tower with casulaties still unknown. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/breaking-trump-tower-explosion-horror-34403879]
Credits:
- Nominated by SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk · give credit)
- Oppose and topic ban User:SimpleSubCubicGraph from ITN. A car fire? And the sole source in the nomination is from a somewhat questionable tabloid list as WP:MREL. Nfitz (talk) 18:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose WP:NTRUMP - no casualties confirmed or reported yet, damage unclear but doesn't appear much, reporting is coming from inside the tower implying most inside are more or less safe but they're saying that the fire wasn't even at the tower. The "big story" is literal reporting on smoke via The Mirror. Departure– (talk) 18:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Wow Great to see some serious sources wading in: GB News, Daily Star, and Wiki's Favourite. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz I assumed it was a terrorist attack given that another one happened in New Orleans just a few hours ago. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 18:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- ^ "Meghalt Keleti Ágnes". Blikk (in Hungarian). 2 January 2025.