Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/July 2015

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

July 31

[edit]
July 31, 2015 (2015-07-31) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports

[Closed] 2015 Blackbushe Airport crash

[edit]
UNANIMOUSLY OPPOSED:

--George Ho (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

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: 2015 Blackbushe Airport crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A private jet crashes at Blackbushe Airport in Hampshire, United Kingdom, killing all four people on board, three of whom were related to Osama Bin Laden. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A private jet crashes at Blackbushe Airport in Hampshire, United Kingdom, killing all four people on board.
News source(s): The Guardian Wall Street Journal BBC (among others)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Low death toll but the Bin Laden connection seems to add a lot of significance. Also this crash is rather strange because as the Guardian noted, the plane was "fitted with hi-tech safety features" and had previously landed at the same airport many times before without incident. Everymorning talk 18:43, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Oppose I'm not seeing anything that rings the ITN bell right now. Bin laden's relatives are not sufficiently notable in their own right to warrant any attention here. Of course this is breaking news so maybe something significant will turn up that makes this a good ITN candidate. For now I'm leaning towards oppose. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:00, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added altblurb to your pleasure. --George Ho (talk) 19:10, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The body count is too low for ITN. Something that hasn't been reported so far needs to come up for me to be able to support this. Still leaning to oppose. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2015 (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] RD: Howard W. Jones

[edit]
No consensus to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:13, 6 August 2015 (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: Howard W. Jones (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today
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: The American surgeon, who died at age 104, created in vitro fertilization (test tube), resulting in some successful results. May he rest in peace. (EDIT: I could not summarize the notable event well. Anyway, I didn't realize he was the surgeon of David Reimer, a male-born sexually reassigned person.) George Ho (talk) 05:24, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Rambling Man, no image shall obstruct the nomination. By the way, I removed the image and added an infobox image. --George Ho (talk) 16:25, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I quote from our IVF article "In 1977, Steptoe and Edwards successfully carried out a pioneering conception which resulted in the birth of the world's first baby to be conceived by IVF, Louise Brown on 25 July 1978, in Oldham General Hospital, Greater Manchester, UK". Jones did create the first IVF baby in the US, but the nominators comments as stated at best oversimplify the situation. Fgf10 (talk) 09:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fgf10, I'm not proposing a blurb. I'm proposing his mere name to be shown as part of RD ticker. Of course, thanks for the heads up. George Ho (talk) 16:30, 1 August 2015 (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] RD: Roddy Piper

[edit]
Article: Roddy Piper (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WWE.com, Variety, Esquire, CNN, The Independent, Associated Press
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: Called #1 best professional wrestling villain by the WWE; Hall of Fame member since 2005  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Support conditional on significant article improvements. Pro-wrestling is not really my cup of tea but the subject does appear to have a decent claim to importance in the field and probably satisfies ITNDC #2. That said, there is way too much unsourced material in the article at present to link on the Front Page.
  • Conditional support He's a notable name in wrestling and meets ITNDC#2. The sourcing, though, I agree is problematic. Is "wrestling-titles.com", for instance, a reliable source? "411mania.com"? – Muboshgu (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wrestling-titles is as solid as the world has, for that sort of thing. 411Mania, though, is hit and miss. It's a freelance deal, like every news outlet on the Internet has lately. Depends on the author. Ranks high in Google News, for what that's worth. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:35, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The page looks much better now than it did two days ago. It'll be nice when this is posted. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:00, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A legendary and long lived figure in pro wrestling. (Sources are reliable enough given the subject; they'd definitely hear about it if they got something wrong.) - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 01:44, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support pending article improvements See sourcing issues above. Just for importance, I think this barely squeaks by given his importance the WWF at its inception. --MASEM (t) 02:08, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - An important figure in his field. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:13, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: Myself and a few other editors are currently working on references and other improvements to the article. Nikki♥311 02:19, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - adding mainstream sources for death to the nomination. CNN said The superstar of the 1980s was arguably the top bad guy in professional wrestling history. The Independent said the actor and wrestling legend ... famed for being one of the best heels, or villains, in his profession. starship.paint ~ KO 02:57, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. They didn't have anything ready when I nominated. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:08, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support not only wrestling , but acting too..a very descent actor, not something you can say about any professional wrestler.--Stemoc 03:37, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Not many, anyway. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:42, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support One of the most notable wrestlers to ever live.LM2000 (talk) 06:21, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once updated. Notable enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:02, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once updated. An absolute legend in the wrestling community and one of the few to speak out against WWE and still return. Miyagawa (talk) 08:47, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article's in good shape. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:00, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support. Headliner for decades, lots of mainstream coverage, etc. It's a pleasant surprise to see a lack of "oppose, wrestling's not notable" votes this time around. -- Scorpion0422 11:05, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Death has four cited paragraphs now. Refs better, but not perfect. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:08, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unmarking sorry, as a BLP this is still under-referenced; just take a look at "American Wrestling Association (1973–1975)" (1 ref for the whole section), "National Wrestling Alliance (1975–1980)" (1 ref for the whole section), "1989–1992" (1 ref for the whole section), first four paras of "Second return to WWE (2005–2015)" (entirely without a single reference). This isn't good enough I'm afraid. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:07, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, if and when the referencing issues are resolved. Roddy Piper was among the top figures in his field and one of relatively few to achieve mainstream fame (i.e., it was common for people who didn't follow professional wrestling to be familiar with him) at a time when that was less common than it is today. However, "reliable enough given the subject" is an unacceptable standard. (Unfortunately, it appears to be one to which many or most of Wikipedia's professional wrestling-related articles have been held.) —David Levy 21:48, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your comment was completely unnecessary. Professional wrestling articles are among the most highly edited on Wikipedia. That's a bit of a double-edged sword. It means people edit them thousands of times a day; unfortunately, a huge amount of this comes from IPs and other editors unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy. However, the professional wrestling project is a small group of active, knowledgeable editors with a thorough understanding of verifiability and reliable sources. The "given the subject" comment did not come from a project member, and it would never come from a project member, because they take proper sourcing very seriously. It's particularly troubling to see this unwarranted attitude propagated by an administrator, who should be able to comment on an issue without taking a cheap shot. I certainly wouldn't say that the problem is no more prevalent in professional wrestling articles than elsewhere on Wikipedia. I just flipped through 10 random articles, and I came up with completely unreferenced articles about a Canadian town, ice hockey, commerce, soccer, religion, and a stadium. One article about a biathlon competition had one reference. Another was about a brewery and had 7 references for the 1270 words. That makes 8 out of 10 articles with reference problems. In fact, the only articles that were well-referenced in that random sample were Bathybuccinum clarki and Robert Alaine, two stubs with a combined three sentences. Nobody in the professional wrestling project would look at the state of the Roddy Piper article two days ago and think it was acceptable, but please note that the number of (unique) references has gone from 63 to 110, with the new references being reliable sources, and several of the old unreliable sources have been replaced. Yes, wrestling-titles.com is an unreliable source. Unfortunately, the history for many of those titles is only available in one book, which is out of print and costs a minimum of $130 on Amazon (one project member owns it but is on vacation). I would hope, however, that the project's activity on this article over the past couple of days has helped you see the extent to which you have apparently misunderstood the project. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:57, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm only guessing, but I think the crux of what David was trying to suggest was that the article contained and still contains a surfeit of unreferenced claims. That fails WP:V and WP:BLP in this case. I believe David's quote was a direct response to Smerdis of Tlön's claim that: "Sources are reliable enough given the subject; they'd definitely hear about it if they got something wrong" which is purely subjective and without foundation. We need WP:RS to support claims within a BLP, especially one that's going to appear on the main page. Please also note, it's never the absolute number of references that defines whether an article meets BLP, it's whether the references provided allow someone to verify the claims made within the BLP, especially those considered controversial. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:41, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your response has me baffled. I'm not sure what aspect of my statement you are trying to address. If you look above, you'll see that I stated that the project members and I are familiar with verifiability and reliable sources (which you have conveniently linked for me, despite my previous statement). I was clear that nobody from the project would be fine with saying, "These sources aren't reliable, but they're good enough for the subject matter." People are working on the article. The number of references was obviously just an indicator of how the project has come together to source the article. My problem is not a complete lack of understanding of how Wikipedia works, but rather with an administrator essentially saying, "The article sucks, but that's par for the course from that project", which is neither civil nor accurate. GaryColemanFan (talk) 18:52, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry to have baffled you, to have patronised you, to have borderline insulted you and clearly upset you. To be fair I was just trying to interpret what David had said. He may be able to explain his position in far more elucidating terms. The bottom line is that until this is referenced per BLP then it "isn't good enough". Hope that unbaffles you. I have no dog in the fight other than not putting an article onto the main page with clear and obvious verification issues. Perhaps it'd be better to focus on that instead of on David's comments, if you really want this to be featured in RD? Just a thought. It is also worth pointing out that numerous other admins may well be happy to post this based on the sheer number of references and the innate reliability of the Wrestling Wikiproject, so it may be posted regardless of my personal concerns. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:23, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your comments have me baffled, given that I neither mentioned the professional wrestling WikiProject (let alone suggested that Ihcoyc is a participant) nor asserted that similar deficiencies don't exist elsewhere in Wikipedia. It may well be true that "IPs and other editors unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy" have inserted most of the problematic material and that the professional wrestling WikiProject works tirelessly to improve the situation. You're defending yourself against accusations that I haven't made. —David Levy 01:05, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and Slam! Wrestling (a lot more reputable than it sounds) has a shitload of useful information (scroll to bottom). InedibleHulk (talk) 06:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • As three days have passed since this nom was opened and this has not yet been posted, close as stale.--WaltCip (talk) 14:26, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Significant (and ongoing) improvements to references make this a good candidate to post while still fresh. GaryColemanFan (talk) 14:59, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for prompt posting. Personally, I'm not sure where I would come down on sufficient notability, but the consensus seems to be that this is post-worthy from that point of view. The referencing has now been improved, and is sufficient for posting in my view, especially that this is coming up on "now or never" time as a "recent death." Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:50, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've tagged those claims which need sourcing. I would hope, in light of recent Arbcom decisions, that they are not "controversial" so the item can be posted as the work done has been impressive. Some other admins may disagree. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:13, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment People ridicule me when I talk about an anti-pro wrestling bias here, but this situation has really strengthened my belief. A month or so ago Dusty Rhodes had sufficient support for posting, then sat ignored for days before being rejected (in spite of several appeals from me for someone to post it). In this case, there is overwhelming support and a number of editors have put in some hard work to bring it up to par. Yet it still sits ignored. Meanwhile, a quick browsing of this page shows that things have made ITN and RD with half the support and in half the time. Can we stop with the games and please just post this already? -- Scorpion0422 23:58, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aye. Time marches on. I hope if this happens again for Arn Anderson, we can close it as brainbustered rather than filibustered. There's a proposal on the Wikiproject Talk about sprucing up the big name articles, pre-obituary, so this wasn't completely in vain. And, if you think about it, being on Wikipedia's In The News means less, the heavier something is actually in the news. It's a drop in the bucket, then. The semi-famous like Lynn Anderson, Billy Pierce and Edward Natapei could better use the recognition. And no, that's not an insult. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support after some improvements. There's still a section in need of attention - otherwise the sourcing looks pretty thorough. One of the most notable of his sport's last half-century, his influence was felt throughout the sport. Challenger l (talk) 09:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted While not FA quality quite yet, that's not the standard we use for ITN. The article has much improved, and most of the major referencing problems seem to have been addressed. --Jayron32 16:40, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't think WP:BLP is strictly related to FA quality. The article had an orange maintenance tag on the free-for-all filmography section. It has been posted with many BLP claims unreferenced and unverifiable, see the recent edits of User:Kww for context on protecting lists of awards from BLP violations. But that seems to be okay on biographies on the main page, just not on lists of awards. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent )User:GaryColemanFan, you've inadvertently stepped into the middle of a surprisingly contentious area. By way of just a small amount of background, when the BLP policy was initially created, it focused exclusively on still-living people, and it especially emphasized that negative information on living people could not be included in an article without a reliable source. Unfortunately, this turned out to be too narrow a policy: When a notable person dies, that should not be a signal that it's now okay to start adding unsourced negative information into the article! This is particularly true where doing so could affect still-living people such as the subject's family. As a result, the BLP policy was expanded to the recently deceased; and also over time, emphasis has grown on how it's desirable to have good sourcing for all content in BLPs (and for that matter, ultimatlely in the entire encyclopedia). That being said, there are obviously issues of prioritizing: if an article about an actor (living or recently deceased) says that he won 20 awards in his career and there are sources for 10 of them, then it would be ideal to source the other 10, but if there's no genuine doubt that he also won the other 10, many editors would consider it a stretch to call the situation a "BLP violation."

A separate issue is whether the existence of an unsourced or only-partially-sourced awards section should disqualify the article from being mainpaged, such as on RD. ITN in general and RD in particular help keep our readers in touch with recent events and Wikipedia's coverage, but regardless of the importance of a event or of a recently deceased individual, our article on the event or the person must meet reasonable quality standards to be worthy of a place on the mainpage. For example, an entirely unreferenced article, or one with very few references relative to its length, certainly would not qualify.

There has been a longstanding debate on this page as to whether that means that to be worthy of an ITN or RD appearance, each and every statement or at least each and every section of the article requires referencing. In the past, I have taken the position that where an article as a whole has a decent degree of referencing, the fact that a given section (such as an "awards section") lacks inline cites should not stop us from including it on ITN or RD. Some other editors, including User:The Rambling Man, have taken the contrary view, opining that substantive unreferenced content is disqualifying for the mainpage—and if the content doesn't get sourced before (for example) the "recent death" is no longer "recent," then so be it. (An effect of TRM's and others position on this, operationally, is that holding the RD listing up until sources are added results in the sources actually being added—whereas if the article went onto the mainpage straight away, the incentive to improve it might not be there.) As with so many things on Wikipedia, this doesn't call for automatic, bright-line rules, but for editorial judgment and common sense. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:40, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply. I sincerely appreciate people willing to take the time to explain a situation in a helpful manner. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] India–Bangladesh land swap

[edit]
good faith, but terms already announced μηδείς (talk) 04:15, 2 August 2015 (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.

Articles: India–Bangladesh enclaves (talk · history · tag) and Bangladesh–India border (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ India and Bangladesh have swapped control of some 162 small pockets of land on each other's territory. (Post)
News source(s): (BBC)
Credits:
 Jenda H. (talk) 21:17, 31 July 2015 (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] RD: Billy Pierce

[edit]
Article: Billy Pierce (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
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: Among the greatest baseball pitchers of all-time. Seven-time MLB All-Star, won Sporting News' Pitcher of the Year Award twice (only one Cy Young Award was given out those years, and he lost both to pitchers from the other league). Not elected to the Hall of Fame, but he arguably belongs there. Article is GA, so we'll be featuring quality content. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:14, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support notability is reasonably clear, even to a non MLB reader, and the article is a tip-top high-quality effort, so this is good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Notable in the field and article is in good quality. Normally, I would consider the fact that he isn't in the Hall of Fame, but MLB HOF voting is a dramafest approaching ITN/C levels (I kid, I kid) and Pierce could conceivably make the HOF in a future vote. SpencerT♦C 21:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are not wrong about the problems with the baseball HOF voting. If anyone who doesn't know about what a farce it has become wants to know more, ping me and I'll show you some stories. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:23, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
ITNDC #2 says... The deceased was widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field. That is well below HoF standards. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:49, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We posted Minnie Miñoso, a teammate of Pierce's, when he died. Like Pierce, Miñoso is on the outside looking in at Cooperstown. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:06, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Minnie Miñoso shouldn't have been posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:57, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Ebola vaccine

[edit]
No consensus to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:09, 31 July 2015 (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: VSV-EBOV (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ebola vaccine VSV-EBOV is shown to be safe and highly effective in the phase three clinical trial "Ebola ça Suffit", which used ring vaccination. (Post)
News source(s): [1][2]
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: More than ten thousand people have died of ebola in the past year and a half, and nearly twice as many people have survived, but may suffer lifelong aftereffects. It has devastated healthcare systems and economies. Wild reservoirs mean that future outbreaks are a near-certainty. A vaccine is newsworthy.

This is a major step, and it was done in a difficult situation using an unusual method. The Ebola ça Suffit (“Ebola, that's enough”) phase three clinical trial uses ring vaccination(stub): when someone falls ill, adults they might have infected are vaccinated. In the trial, "where rings have been vaccinated, the transmission has stopped" according to Marie-Paule Kieny (an assistant director general of the WHO). This paper (in the Lancet) is a publication of interim results; the trial continues, but the control arm (vaccination delayed by one incubation period) has been dropped.

The authors of the paper describing the study thank the people of Basse-Guinée for their participation. The vaccine was developed by the National Microbiology Laboratory of the Public Health Agency of Canada, and the work done with the support of many organizations including the Wellcome Trust, UK Department of International Development, Guinean Ministry of Health, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, US Department of Defense, Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Health Canada, European Commission and the WHO. HLHJ (talk) 15:03, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The words "interim analysis," "preliminary," and "vaccine candidate" are sprinkled heavily throughout the paper. A new vaccine for this would definitely be notable, but I recommend waiting until the vaccine has been further tested and approved. Let's not jump the gun here. Mamyles (talk) 15:29, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @Mamyles: we're not in a hurry. Better wait and see whether the results uphold, rather than posting "preliminary" findings. --bender235 (talk) 15:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait The creation of a viable Ebola vaccine is definitely newsworthy but as the BBC article points out, this is still preliminary results and we usually don't post that. I would expect that something akin to the World Health Org. or the FDA approving the vaccine would be the point of news-worthiness. --MASEM (t) — Preceding undated comment added 15:29, July 31, 2015
  • I agree that there is far too much reporting of tiny early trials in the media in general, but this is a phase three trial; it's not approved yet, but as far as I know this is the trial that will be used to decide whether to approve it. The WHO seem to think that it's news, and they are normally pretty cautious. I've asked for WP medicine's opinions. I've also fixed up the article a bit. If someone created an article for the trial (which is big and reported upon more than enough to be notable) we could link to that instead. HLHJ (talk) 17:03, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless/until vaccine is completed and approved for use. No need for a play-by-play of this vaccine's development. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:09, 31 July 2015 (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.
  • Sorry, edit conflict with the closing; I'm posting this anyway since several people mentioned renomination later: As noted above, the Ebola ça Suffit redlink was in case an article on the trial is written; I've removed it. I've updated the article. I also toned down the blurb after reading a pre-publication review that contradicted part of the published paper (see VSV-EBOV#History on reporting of adverse effects). Since FDA approval will take the better part of a year minimum, it is to be hoped that the epidemic will be over before it gets FDA approval; the continuation of the trial in modified form is broad enough that vaccine may be administered to all the people who would get it were it approved for ring vaccination (whether this is a good idea is another question). When, if ever, do people think this should be nominated? HLHJ (talk) 23:37, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest renomination once the vaccine is approved by the FDA or its European counterpart for general use. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:01, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If by "epdidemic will be over" you are referring to the outbreak in some west African countries, use of the vaccine in those countries doesn't depend on approvals in the US or its EU counterpart. Jytdog (talk) 18:58, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest renomination if the vaccine is approved by regulatory agencies. Jytdog brings up a good point - I would likely also support renomination if an African country decides to vaccinate a significant portion of their populace. Mamyles (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2022 Winter Olympics

[edit]
Article: 2022 Winter Olympics (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Beijing is elected by the International Olympic Committee as host city of the 2022 Winter Olympics. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ During the 128th IOC Session, Beijing is elected as host city of the 2022 Winter Olympics.
News source(s): New York Times NBCSports
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: Host city should be announced at 09:30 UTC on July 31. Only two cities are candidates. Could be a first if Beijing is elected, becoming the only city ever to host Summer and Winter Olympics. Hektor (talk) 20:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:11, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By all means, this is an election. IOC members vote. Hektor (talk) 10:03, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Elections put people into offices. This is neither a person, nor an office being held. This is a group selecting something. Selecting by vote is not the same thing as an election. --Jayron32 19:07, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not all elections put people into offices. The vote takes place, I believe(but could be wrong) by secret ballot. 331dot (talk) 19:54, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then it is your responsibility to find reliable sources and change the text of the Wikipedia article titled Election, the first sentence of which you claim is a blatant lie.(I don't claim so, but you seem to be proposing that it is). And a referendum is a vote and not an election. Not all votes are elections. Just those that put people into offices. --Jayron32 23:52, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not claiming anything is a lie or even that anything needs to be changed on that page; The IOC refers to the selection as an "election". [1] So do most RS: [2] [3] 331dot (talk) 00:03, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looking up the definition on one site, it states "a public vote upon a proposition submitted". [4] 331dot (talk) 00:05, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This was not a public vote. Still not en election then. --Jayron32 00:08, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You should speak to the IOC and RS's then and ask them to use different terminology. My point is that a public vote is not necessarily about people. Merriam Webster lists one definition as "the right, power, or privilege of making a choice" which clearly the IOC had. [5] Other similar definitions not involving people are here [6]. 331dot (talk) 00:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can be right today. I don't need to win. Congratulations. --Jayron32 01:02, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to be "right" or "win". It's about using the terminology used by sources, not about what I want. 331dot (talk) 01:16, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 30

[edit]
July 30, 2015 (2015-07-30) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections

[Posted to RD] RD: Lynn Anderson

[edit]
Article: Lynn Anderson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
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.

 The Rambling Man (talk) 08:09, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find those adorable li'l plastic horses now unstabled and fully supported, (y'all)... ye-hah!! Martinevans123 (talk) 18:39, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment we need to fix those [citation needed] tags, as right now I'm going through an Arbcom mudfest where one specific admin will delete all unsourced BLP claims on sight. Perhaps we should do that here. THen it would be ready. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:12, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can count five. But two of those are chart placings?? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:47, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, so remove those, and we have three. BLP ain't gonna quit, and given Arbcom and "other admins", we're all in danger. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:09, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unable to source her duetting with fiance Mentor Williams on his Drift Away at the 2007 CMA festival. All the rest have now got sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:09, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the unreferenced source as no non-primary sources can verify it. George Ho (talk) 00:23, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Mohammed Omar confirmed dead

[edit]
Article: Mohammed Omar (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Taliban confirms that its former spiritual leader, Mohammed Omar, died in April 2013. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Taliban confirms that its former leader, Mohammed Omar, died in April 2013.
News source(s): New York Times CNN Christian Science Monitor
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Previous nomination by me yesterday was closed due to lack of confirmation from reliable sources. However, now the Taliban themselves are confirming it, and their doing so has been covered in many reliable sources. Additionally, it appears that the consensus among editors of Omar's article is that he is definitely dead. Everymorning talk 18:20, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the world only just found out that Francisco Franco was dead, I would definitely consider that to be blurb worthy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:30, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We still have no reliable source comfirming this, even if they did, that he died two years ago would be stale. Neither a blurb based on facts nor a stale RD is justified. μηδείς (talk) 04:16, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — There're report floating that Jalaluddin Haqqani is dead also. Perhaps we can mingle both in one blurb? --Saqib (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Removed] Remove ongoing: Greek debt crisis

[edit]

Greece has not made news for some time, and no longer seems to be having any impact on the stock markets or commodity trading. Granted, part of the reason for this is due to earnings season having most of the economic impact right now, but if or until Greece threatens default again in the distant future, I see no reason for this to remain as an ongoing blurb on ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 17:27, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD/Blurb: Yakub Memon hanged

[edit]
No consensus to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:36, 4 August 2015 (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.

Articles: Yakub Memon (talk · history · tag) and 1993 Bombay bombings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Yakub Memon, a perpetrator of the 1993 Bombay bombings, is hanged on his 53rd birthday after multiple rejections of mercy petitions. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Yakub Memon, a perpetrator of the 1993 Bombay bombings, is hanged.
News source(s): The New York Times The Wall Street Journal The Los Angeles Times Time

The Hindu
Credits:

Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: The candidacy is the brother of Tiger Memon, a prime suspect of the 1993 Mumbai blasts. He is known to have provided financial assistance to his brother in the execution of the blast. Topic seems to be of international interest, as evident from the sources. —Vensatry (ping) 05:11, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This needs some sort of rationale in the nominator's comments other than that it was updated. μηδείς (talk) 05:21, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done —Vensatry (ping) 06:02, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually executions in India are extremely rare, even for heinous crimes. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, none of the other conspirators were sentenced to death and instead got various lengths of imprisonment. Wer902 (talk) 17:34, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After reading capital punishment in India and Ad Orientem, I'll switch to blurb instead. Yes, the story will be overemphasized. Even with death sentences, executions are rare. This is the first one in India this year (or second). We shall display this obituary and attract readers with this. George Ho (talk) 16:07, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then why do we post the results of criminal trials? -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did we not post Ajmal Kasab when he was hanged? —Vensatry (ping) 18:43, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A blurb implies the news item is notable--it isn't really major news outside India. An RD listing would imply the creep himself were notable. I am happy he's dead, but neither the man nor the hanging will be remembered in the years to come. μηδείς (talk) 20:54, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Being a creep is not incompatible with notability. The man killed 350+ people. That makes him highly notable, in India and pretty much anywhere. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:26, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not a major news outside India? In addition to the listed ones—LA Times, The Wall Street Journal, Time—BBC had covered this. —Vensatry (ping) 08:12, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just re-asking what Ad Orientem had told, "Then why do we post the results of criminal trials?" —Vensatry (ping) 08:15, 31 July 2015 (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.

July 29

[edit]
July 29, 2015 (2015-07-29) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health
International relations
Law and crime

[Closed] Mohammed Omar reported dead

[edit]
No consensus to post at this time; wait for confirmation with reliable sources. SpencerT♦C 16:48, 30 July 2015 (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: Mohammed Omar (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The government of Afghanistan announces that Mohammed Omar, the spiritual leader of the Taliban, died in 2013. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Wall Street Journal
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Not an RD, because the death is, of course, not recent. Still, it seems significant that the "Spiritual leader" of the Taliban, as well as the former head of state of Afghanistan, has died. Everymorning talk 17:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not actually sure Recent Deaths would be applicable here; I think it would need a regular blurb(given his wanted status and career, so to speak). 331dot (talk) 18:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait; while a government agency stating they believe him to be dead is significant, they haven't really said AFAIK why they think that(and may not). I think waiting for that, or a Tailban admission that he is dead, is prudent here. 331dot (talk) 18:35, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They have claimed his son recognised the body. Obviously its not independently verified, but just updating on the latest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.62.18.106 (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2015 (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] Obama speaks to African Union

[edit]
No consensus to post. Everymorning talk 20:33, 29 July 2015 (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.

Articles: Barack Obama (talk · history · tag) and African Union (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Barack Obama is the first US president to speak in front of the African Union. He encourages the world to increase trade with the continent, but also criticises the lack of democracy. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Barack Obama is the first US president to address the African Union.
News source(s): WSJ BBC

White House (among others)
Credits:

Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: This was just yesterday and today really spread across the media, it's highly relevant for the whole African continent and for Obama/US diplomacy in general. Horst-schlaemma (talk) 13:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Seems more appropriate for DYK; calling for more trade and democracy is not significant unless backed up by action. We don't generally post 'firsts' written as trivia. Obama was also the first sitting US President to visit Kenya, but we didn't post that. 331dot (talk) 13:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I think, in diplomacy, the AU is of a whole different weight compared to Kenya. You may read the linked speech notes by the White House to get a more comprehensive grasp. Sometimes speaking can be much more relevant than acting (or induce the latter), as well. This definitely is of historical scale. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Speaking can indeed be transformative(as Obama himself demonstrated in 2004) but I don't think that's the case here, as he is not expressing a new position but one consistently held by the US government. He also spoke on gay rights in Kenya which was already dismissed by the government there. Speculating that it is transformative is crystal ball-ing unless, as I said, there is hard action. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Excepting the fact that he is the first President to address this particular body, which might rate a sentence in an article somewhere, the speech is entirely run of the mill. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose He's also only the second U.S. president to serve during the African Union's existence. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Abductive (reasoning) 18:06, 29 July 2015 (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.

[Closing] RD: Jan Kulczyk

[edit]
Consensus is against posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:21, 29 July 2015 (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: Jan Kulczyk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gazeta.pl, Bloomberg, New York Times, Reuters, Financial Times
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: Wealthiest person of the country with the 34th biggest population and 23rd largest GDP. Died unexpectedly aged 65. 2A02:582:C55:2A00:A96E:DC91:BCFE:94FF (talk) 10:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Richest man in Poland for the last several years. Note: I've added links to English-language sources. — Kpalion(talk) 12:22, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Significance of the subject outside of Poland appears to have been fairly limited. Basically we have a wealthy businessman who died. He was ranked 384 in the list of billionaires, so I'm not seeing his importance in the ranks of the super wealthy. I don't think this nom meets ITNDC. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:32, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Being rich isn't a field. Otherwise, Paris Hilton would make it here some day. I'm not seeing the significance from his business ventures, aside from making him rich. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:52, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hilton almost certainly will be posted, not for being rich, but for the whole socialite/"famous for being famous" thing she does. --Bongwarrior (talk) 18:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, she might. I guess it depends on how we define her "field" whenever that happens. Is "famous for being famous" a field? Anyway, it's not the most apt analogy. It seems this individual built his own fortune. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Being "famous" is not a criteria listed under ITNDC. As of this point I don't see anything that would qualify Hilton for an RD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe society will view her as one of the "founders" of reality television. Or she'll become one of the greatest DJs of all time. Who knows. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The future is unknowable. Maybe she will become a nun and spend the rest of her life feeding the poor in Africa. For now all I can say is that I don't ever remember a "reality TV star" being accepted for RD and being a famously wealthy libertine is not a "field." -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:18, 29 July 2015 (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] Ongoing: Turkey–ISIL conflict

[edit]
we have two open nominations regarding this, close as duplicate in essence. μηδείς (talk) 01:17, 29 July 2015 (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: Turkey–ISIL conflict (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: After failed nominations on post-bombing events, this article should be most suitable for upcoming events. George Ho (talk) 00:08, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose- Why limit it to Turkey? There's a lot more that's going on with battles in Western Syria regarding ISIL recently than Turkey's involvement. If anything we should put ISIL back on ongoing. If not, it would be kind of strange to just put Turkey's involvement on ongoing. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 00:58, 29 July 2015 (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.
    • Comment I think, in diplomacy, the AU is of a whole different weight compared to Kenya. You may read the linked speech notes by the White House to get a more comprehensive grasp. Sometimes speaking can be much more relevant than acting (or induce the latter), as well. This definitely is of historical scale. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 14:05, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Microsoft releases Windows 10

[edit]
Closing good faith nom per WP:SNOW. There is no chance that this will be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:56, 30 July 2015 (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: Windows 10 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Microsoft releases Windows 10, a new operating system offered free to those who own a genuine copy of an eligible edition of Windows 7 or Windows 8.1. (Post)
News source(s): Multitudes available, see e.g. The Verge
Credits:
Nominator's comments: One day late, but since I imagine most of us edit Wikipedia using a computer, and most computers run Windows, that makes the Windows 10 release immediately relevant. Not sure if the fact that it's being offered free is something to mention though: the blurb could simply be "Microsoft releases Windows 10".
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.

July 28

[edit]
July 28, 2015 (2015-07-28) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections

Emergency NATO meeting on Turkey

[edit]

Articles: 2015 NATO emergency meeting (talk · history · tag) and Operation Martyr Yalçın (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NATO holds an emergency meeting in Brussels after Turkey launches airstrikes and police raids (pictured) against ISIL and the Kurdistan Workers' Party. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ After Turkey launches airstrikes and police raids (pictured) against ISIL and the Kurdistan Workers' Party, NATO convenes to hold an emergency meeting in Brussels.
Alternative blurb II: ​ After a suicide bombing in the Turkish district of Suruç, Şanlıurfa, NATO holds an emergency meeting in Brussels.
Alternative blurb III: ​ After a suicide bombing killed 32 people in Suruç, NATO holds an emergency meeting in Brussels while Turkey launches airstrikes against ISIL and Kurdistan Workers Party camps in Iraq.

Alternative blurb IV: NATO allies meet in an emergency meeting at Turkey's request about its ongoing conflicts with the Islamic State and Kurdish rebels (PKK) amid a spike in cross-border regional violence.
News source(s): Business Insider, BBC, VOA, AP
Credits:

Second article updated, first needs updating

Nominator's comments: This is an alternative nomination to the 'change Turkey blurb' section under July 24. This is because this event has now reached a different magnitude of importance resulting in NATO calling an 'extremely rare' (according to the Business Insider) meeting to discuss recent terror developments in Syria and Northern Iraq. I suggest we leave the Suruç bombing entry on the ITN as it is (its towards the bottom now anyway) and post this as a separate entry entirely. Nub Cake (talk) 11:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • support - notable event. ITN worthy.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: rather than a blurb, I think it would be better to bring events in Syria and Iraq back into the Ongoing section. Individual developments such as the Turkish airstrikes don't fundamentally change the war(s), but are part of a long-running conflict. Better to cover that via Ongoing than attempt to select individual events for blurbs. Modest Genius talk 13:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I agree, the main reason why I thought it would be worthy of ITN is specifically because of the NATO security meeting, which apparently is a rather important and rare event that is all over the news. Nub Cake (talk) 14:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on the general blurb - ITN would rather see what the net action is of the meeting than the fact there is going to be one. However, I do generally support the idea of bringing back an ongoing here as the situation develops. --MASEM (t) 14:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per Masem. It would be better to post the culmination of the meeting, if any notable events come of it. Mamyles (talk) 14:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, this meeting was called by Turkey, not called to rein in Turkey. Now, if the outcome is a ground invasion, then that is huge but would require its own article and blurb. Abductive (reasoning) 15:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We don't usually post this kind of stuff until after the event and then only if the results warrant it. Beyond which this is all part of the growing Turkish involvement in the fight against ISIS and their waging war on the Kurds. I am increasingly looking at this situation as a good candidate for ongoing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on conclusion of the meeting - this is a major development in the region and a very important development in the Syrian Civil War. Most of the Western jihadist sympathisers that are recruited to ISIL travel to Turkey and cross the border - Turkey is a key player. -- Callinus (talk) 00:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: A very significant event on its own; only the 5th such meeting in NATO's 66-year history (going back to Korean invasion). NATO can require member states to come to the aid of any other member state, such as Turkey, subject to an armed attack (i.e. 9/11). --Light show (talk) 01:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - How is an emergency meeting bigger news than the incidents, which are subjects in meetings? The background has more context than emergency meeting section. I can't allow this to be posted this way. George Ho (talk) 01:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's bigger news because it's unique and potentially a major turning point. The other "incidents," (aka "slaughters,") throughout the region are happening daily. --Light show (talk) 02:23, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know it's NATO, an intergovernmental military alliance. Still, I don't see how newsworthy a meeting is aside from incidents in Turkey. Also, I already voted on the other nomination way below (#Change in Turkey). — Preceding unsigned comment added by George Ho (talk • contribs) 02:29, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: if we were to post this, neither blurb seems accurate. The emergency meeting was called because of a suicide attack by IS in Turkey. Yet the proposed blurbs make it seem like the meeting was called because of Turkey's response. Calidum T|C 02:36, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still against making the meeting front page news, but here's altblurb2. George Ho (talk) 02:41, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And altblurb3 too. George Ho (talk) 02:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that starting any blurb with "after" some incident, will be misleading and imply a direct cause and effect. NATO wouldn't convene because of any single incident. The phrasing should be more general, ie. "NATO allies met in a rare emergency meeting at Turkey's request about its ongoing conflicts with the Islamic State and Kurdish rebels (PKK) amid a spike in cross-border regional violence." --Light show (talk) 03:39, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added altblurb4, but I made some modifications, like dropping "rare" and using present tense. George Ho (talk) 03:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted to RD] Edward Natapei

[edit]
Article: Edward Natapei (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Radio New Zealand
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: One of the most famous politicians from Vanuatu. Died aged 61. Prime minister three times and president once. 2A02:582:C55:2A00:1DB8:6C86:4933:9E03 (talk) 09:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If we′re against ethnocentrism, then we have to look forward to adding people from all countries. Really, this is how famous someone from Vanuatu can get, domestically at least. 2A02:582:C55:2A00:1CE2:7191:C4B1:20DF (talk) 20:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Light Show. Politician is one thing, world statesman is another. Unless there were some other notable accomplishment than holding office there's no justification for posting this. μηδείς (talk) 21:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Vanuatu is an island (or group of nearby islands). The article doesn't mention greatest accomplishments, even when he was PM for non-consecutive years and an acting President for less than one month. However, as long as his obituary is not a blurb, mentioning merely his name in the Recent deaths list won't hurt much. Also, the article quality is exquisite enough to mention his name. George Ho (talk) 23:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It seems to me that Natapei meets the second death criterion as a person who had a significant impact on, or made a significant contribution to, Vanuatu. Except for Walter Lini, he was probably the most significant and prominent politician Vanuatu has produced, so I find it hard to see how it could be contended that he doesn't meet the criterion. Neljack (talk) 01:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 01:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per IP,Masem and Neljack. -- Shudde talk 06:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 27

[edit]
July 27, 2015 (2015-07-27) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Law and crime
Politics and elections

[Closed] Boy Scouts lifts ban on openly gay leaders

[edit]
Personally, I am surprised this doesn't have support. But the trend here is overwhelming. μηδείς (talk) 17:06, 28 July 2015 (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.

Articles: Boy Scouts of America (talk · history · tag) and Boy Scouts of America membership controversies (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Boy Scouts of America lifts its ban on openly gay adult leaders and employees. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters BBC USA Today (among others)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The BBC link above states that this decision "end years of criticism that the Boy Scouts discriminated against gay people." In addition the USA Today link above describes this vote as "historic". Everymorning talk 02:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when article is fully updated. Significant development for an internationally prominent organization. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the organization has no impact on outside US. Since we posted the supreme court decision, I am not sure what would be the point of posting this too. Nergaal (talk) 03:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This would have been big news twenty or even ten years ago. However, given the shift in cultural norms in the United States, it rates a yawn. As I noted after the SCOTUS decision on gay marriage, I think the whole gay rights battle is pretty much over, at least in the West. Someone ping me if Russia or Saudi Arabia legalizes gay marriage. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, not really true. The pieces of shit still allow individual chapters to discriminate. Abductive (reasoning) 05:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can we please keep the editorializing in check per WP:NOTFORUM. Thanks... -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's religious chapters only, which they have every right to do, and you have every right to disagree with, but this isn't the forum to fight giving offense with more giving offense. 331dot (talk) 12:11, 28 July 2015 (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] RD/Blurb: Abdul Kalam

[edit]
Article: A. P. J. Abdul Kalam (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former India President and scientist Abdul Kalam dies at the age of 83 in Shillong. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Former President of India and scientist A. P. J. Abdul Kalam dies at the age of 83.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Former President of India and scientist A. P. J. Abdul Kalam dies of a cardiac arrest at the age of 83.
News source(s): Times of India
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Highly notable personality. Deserves a full blurb. 117.216.149.112 (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, I've fixed dozens of grammar, spelling and tense problems. I might have missed a few, because the article was in a shocking state prose-wise. Hopefully it's at least acceptable now. Black Kite (talk) 16:40, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had no doubt that coverage existed, but it's not being prominently featured on many of the websites I've checked. Ideally, this should be front page news somewhere besides India (see Mandela/Thatcher), although that's not an absolute requirement. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now that is posted I don't mind keeping it, but for future I think full blurb RD should receive slightly a more substantial consensus and voting pool before being pushed on. This guy should probably be posted because he was quite notable in India where a huge chunk of the English wiki readers are, but otherwise it doesn't really strike me as a full blurb material. Nergaal (talk) 21:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question: Shouldn't the blurb say "(pictured)" (unless the guidelines have changed about this)? It Is Me Here t / c 21:44, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support saying pictured. Not to do so is bizarre. μηδείς (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support keeping blurb: he was a top figure in two different fields, his birthday was officially observed by the UN as "students day", he had been the recipient of highest civilian awards of India and numerous titles from other countries. We did post Hisham Barakat's death (I know his death was significant because it was an assassination), but here you have the death of one of the most influential people in India since 1947. Just read the article and you'll understand why this got posted so quickly. 1.39.61.245 (talk) 22:37, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added another blurb which could be used. Cheers! Jim Carter 04:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting Support for blurb. However... I must join some of the other editors who have expressed concern about the speed with which this was posted. The same thing pretty much happened with Jules Bianchi. And unlike the current nom which does not appear controversial, the Bianchi one was. Had more time been allowed for comments I doubt it would have been accepted for posting as a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:22, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting concerns this blurb was posted within an hour, and while he is clearly a notable individual, we need to avoid this kind of knee-jerk posting of blurbs, particularly as the death wasn't remarkable or unexpected. Add to that the use of an unprotected image on the main page for a while, and, well... messy. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Accepted that it was a slightly quick decision on posting the blurb - It was primarily because the subject/said person was non-controversial, snowballing support so far, this side of the world was heading to sleep; and a very notable world figure, a very popular President to approximately one-fifth of world's population at a time. Again, with all due respect to regulars at ITN, Point taken. -- Tinu Cherian - 08:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I do agree that we may have waited a bit longer for creating consensus; as for the death 'needs' to be unexpected and remarkable - most of the deaths are unexpected (if you discount old age and other medical problems - only surefire way to expect a death is if a person is being hanged or someone is at a hospice), Dr. Kalam was 83 yrs old, but his health seems to be ok for the age, so we may argue that the death was unexpected. Describing 'remarkable' is bit more difficult, lets say it has to be something out of ordinary, so a person's death in a car crash might be considered remarkable, Dr. Kalam died while giving a lecture, so we may argue that the circumstances surrounding his death was out of ordinary, hence remarkable (or at least different than supermajority of other deaths). Legaleagle86 (talk) 08:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please use 'passed away' instead of 'dies'. 'Dies'seems to trivialise the context. --Lahariyaniyathi (talk) 11:00, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Bobbi Kristina Brown

[edit]
SNOW close; notability is not inherited; she was not yet notable on her own. 331dot (talk) 09:54, 27 July 2015 (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: Bobbi Kristina Brown (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
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: Extensive coverage of family life, coma and death. Thechased (talk) 02:44, 27 July 2015 (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.

July 26

[edit]
July 26, 2015 (2015-07-26) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economics
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections

[Posted] RD: Flora MacDonald

[edit]
Article: Flora MacDonald (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News Cape Breton Post The Globe and Mail
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: A trailblazer in Canadian politics. Canada's first female foreign minister, recognized with civilian honors at home and abroad (including the Order of Canada), and key player in the Canadian Caper (dramatized a couple of years ago in the film Argo). Kudzu1 (talk) 00:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose almost no cabinet-level ministers ever get posted, including US House Speakers, who are third in line for the Presidency. A much better rationale is needed. μηδείς (talk) 00:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • In my opinion, the fact that she was the first woman to serve as Canada's foreign minister (a position with international prominence, by its very nature) elevates her above being a run-of-the-mill cabinet official. Her national and international honors are also highly noteworthy. There are fewer than 150 living Companions of the Order of Canada, and it's not every day that one of them dies. -Kudzu1 (talk) 01:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't think your nomination is in bad faith, Kudzu1, but I think "first woman to ex" is about as patronizing and meaningless as one can get at this point, given we've had lesbian PM's, and US supreme court justices and VP and presidential candidates. Merkel, for goshsakes. The implication is that there's some reason why we should not expect female office holders. That's sexist in the extreme. μηδείς (talk) 01:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Which is great, but MacDonald became FM back in 1979, way before the rise of Angela Merkel or Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir or even Madeleine Albright. She was a trailblazer for women in Canadian politics, and pretty much every news story and obituary I'm seeing now makes reference to that. -Kudzu1 (talk) 01:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Or Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi, Eva Peron, Golda Meir, Queen Victoria, Katherine the Great, Joan of Arc, Catherine de Medici, Cleopatra, or Elizabeth I? I suggest a long hot bath with some bubbles, a cat, aromatherapy candles, and a copy of Sexual Personae. μηδείς (talk) 00:38, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support I find Kudzu1's argument convincing. Lots of honors (or "honours", as they say up north), in addition to the position. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - One of the first women... Great accomplishment. This is the RD nomination, not the blurb nomination. Just name her in the front page, and you attract readers. George Ho (talk) 02:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the question of firsts: The Globe and Mail notes that she was "the first woman in the western world to serve as foreign minister". Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 03:49, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not only is this special pleading (Indira Gandhi was a PM of india in the 60's) it's also simply false, as Golda Meir was a foreign minister before McDonald, as well as an Israeli PM before MacDonald was an FM. μηδείς (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to that, even if you don't consider Israel as part of the "western world" (the definition varies depending on where you are) it's still demonstrably untrue, since Karin Söder's stint as FM of Sweden also predated MacDonald's. (The first female FM of a major country in the modern era would be Ana Pauker in Romania, 1947–53.) – iridescent 08:21, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Chris Froome wins the 2015 Tour De France

[edit]
Proposed image
Articles: 2015 Tour de France (talk · history · tag) and Chris Froome (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the 2015 Tour de France, Christopher Froome (pictured) wins his second race (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In cycling, Chris Froome wins his second Tour de France title.
Credits:

Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: ITNR Torqueing (talk) 16:09, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, first time here. BaldBoris 20:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No stress, see next comment... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Mexico win the CONCACAF Gold Cup

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 18:45, 29 July 2015 (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: 2015 CONCACAF Gold Cup (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Mexico national football team win the 2015 CONCACAF Gold Cup, defeating Jamaica 3–1 in the final. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In soccer, Mexico win their seventh CONCACAF Gold Cup title.
News source(s): Sports Illustrated, Reuters (UK)
Credits:
 TheBigJagielka (talk) 11:55, 27 July 2015 (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.

July 25

[edit]
July 25, 2015 (2015-07-25) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Politics and election
Sports

July 24

[edit]
July 24, 2015 (2015-07-24) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
  • A large explosion, which triggers other explosions and a fire (which threatens a nearby forest) at a fireworks factory in southeastern Italy (Modugno, Metropolitan City of Bari, Apulia Region) kills 7 people and injures several more, some seriously. Emergency vehicles were on the scene and the cause is being investigated; it is the peak season for fireworks in Italy because of the summer festivals there. (BBC)
Law and Crime
Politics and elections

RD: Ingrid Sischy

[edit]
Article: Ingrid Sischy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Vanity Fair The New York Times
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: Fashion and art critic for decades for several prominent publications, including The New Yorker, Interview Magazine, and Vanity Fair. Certainly appears to have been at the top of her field. Kudzu1 (talk) 16:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Weak Support" means this should be posted. You don't give a reason. μηδείς (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Having worked in the gay press at the time she was at the New Yorker covering AIDS I can assure you there were dozens of names more prominent. I don't actively oppose this being posted, but I don't see any compelling reasons why it should be either. μηδείς (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Merely mentioning her name is good enough to prevent another obituary blurb, which would have been opposed if not for the "Recent deaths" ticker. Well sourced, writing decent (if not good), and well accomplished as a journalist. Then again, readers may not be familiar with this person, but at least featuring her name in the front page will attract most curious ones. George Ho (talk) 02:04, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am removing the ready, since the net consensus here is two week supports, and two supporting editors have commented on the poor writing. I could just as easily have closed this with my oppose yesterday. A nice overhaul of the article would certainly improve the nomination, but I don't think we should be posting out of acquiescence to "meh"s. μηδείς (talk) 18:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Though claims are made that she is an influential figure in her field as a published artist of long experience - the article seems to be largely a bullet list of places she worked, without really explaining her connections or influence, beyond a vague mention in the lead. My opinion is that the article could use a very thorough re-write by someone familiar with the community and the subject alike. Challenger l (talk) 22:32, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Hulk Hogan

[edit]
Closing hopeless, if good faith nomination. μηδείς (talk) 20:01, 25 July 2015 (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: Hulk Hogan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The WWE terminates Hulk Hogan's contract after a video revealing Hogan going into a racial tirade was leaked. (Post)
News source(s): http://www.rollingstone.com/sports/news/hulk-hogan-fired-by-wwe-over-racial-tirade-20150724
Credits:
Nominator's comments: One of the most iconic wrestlers of all time gets the can by the organization that made him a star. Also making big headlines across the world. RowingHorseman (talk) 18:32, 25 July 2015 (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] Change Turkey blurb

[edit]
Articles: 2015 Suruç bombing#Aftermath (talk · history · tag) and Military_intervention_against_ISIL#July_2015_Turkish_airstrike (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following an explosion in Suruç that killed 32 people and injured more than 100 others, Turkey launches airstrikes against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Following a suicide bombing in Suruç that killed 32 people and injured more than 100 others, Turkey launches airstrikes against ISIL.
Alternative blurb II: ​ After a suicide bombing in Suruç that killed 32 people, Turkey launches airstrikes against ISIL and Kurdistan Workers Party camps in Iraq.
Alternative blurb III: ​ After a suicide bombing in Suruç that killed 32 people, Turkey launches airstrikes and police raids against ISIL and the Kurdistan Workers' Party.
News source(s): Guardian, CNN, Reuters.
Credits:

First article updated, second needs updating

Nominator's comments: The airstrikes article still needs updating. We could also just put ISIL back to Ongoing. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Turkey finally intervening in the Syrian/Iraqi conflict is important considering they are a regional power. I also think we should wait for more information on the reported PKK air strikes and the potential breaking of the ceasefire and maybe mention that as well. Jeanluc20 (talk) 09:12, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is also major development in Turkish-Kurdish conflict, which shoud be included within blurb. --Jenda H. (talk) 11:14, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am open to that, but the blurb will probably get quite long then? Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:02, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Altblurb II including Kurds offered above. Source footnoted in article, which alas mentions these developments only in the concluding Aftermath section. Sca (talk) 14:19, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support switching to alt-blurb II per Sca, but oppose changing the date. It's still at the top of the ITN news feed. It is possible that this could be the beginning of a serious escalation in Turkish military action. If so we may want to consider an ongoing nomination. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb important developments - the involvement against the PKK is noteworthy, and has implications for US led efforts against ISIS and the interaction of the US with the YPG/PKK.-- Callinus (talk) 16:13, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd be ready to post this soon, but would Turkey–ISIL_conflict#July_2015_conflict be a better link for the new bolded article on the airstrikes? The article itself is more directly relevant, fairly comprehensive and well referenced, and has information that seems to be being updated daily. --Jayron32 16:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Operation Martyr Yalçın article is fairly new and currently undeveloped, but I'm developing it as quick as I can. Nub Cake (talk) 08:48, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The article, I think is now up to an appropriate standard to go into ITN. Nub Cake (talk) 09:18, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, NATO has now held an emergency meeting on the issue. This event has reached a different magnitude of importance and I'm of the view that we should be posting a new entry entirely. Nub Cake (talk) 11:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support only airstrikes blurb - The airstrikes article is ready, but the police raids page has one issue, which I tagged. George Ho (talk) 01:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted ALT2. It would be helpful in the future if a particular blurb is identified as "ready" for posting, since in this case there were 4 blurbs and 2 bolded articles under consideration. Thanks, SpencerT♦C 18:43, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The "police raids" story was proposed, so I wrote down "Airstrikes only". George Ho (talk) 21:20, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Burundian presidential election, 2015

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Burundian presidential election, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Pierre Nkurunziza is re-elected president of Burundi in a disputed election that was boycotted by Nkurunziza's rivals. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Pierre Nkurunziza is re-elected president of Burundi, marking his third term.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Pierre Nkurunziza is re-elected president of Burundi, whose third-term is disputed.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Pierre Nkurunziza is re-elected president of Burundi in a controversial election.
News source(s): Reuters New York Times Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated
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: My understanding is that this is ITNR because Burundi is on the page List of sovereign states, as required by Wikipedia:In_the_news/Recurring_items#Elections_and_Heads_of_State. However, given the controversial nature of the election regarding whether Nkurunziza was eligible to run for a third term, I think we should mention the election's disputed nature in the blurb. Everymorning talk 20:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I agree that for NPOV reasons we should mention the disputed nature of the election. Neljack (talk) 22:33, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This ITNR election is especially interesting due to its disputed nature. Mamyles (talk) 23:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once the article is ready. However I would caution that we on ITN have generally avoided making references to controversy in blurbs about elections. Some very hinky elections have gone through with just a bland statement about the official results. I vaguely recall supporting a similar suggestion about an obviously bogus election somewhere or other and getting shot down. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:34, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I wish to reiterate that I have serious NPOV reservations about the blurb which does not appear consistent with normal practice on ITN. We do not generally add cometary about controversies to blurbs about elections.-Ad Orientem (talk) 00:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added altblurb to your pleasure. George Ho (talk) 00:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That works. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:12, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well I have serious NPOV reservations about the altblurb. The original blurb is entirely factual - the election was disputed and boycotted by opposition rivals. Failing to reflect that in the blurb would fail to reflect the various points of view on the election. As is evident from the news coverage, reliable sources are prominently featuring the fact that the election was boycotted. We are not putting commentary in the blurb - that would be if we said something like "in an unfair election" - we are making factual statements about the election being disputed and boycotted. Neljack (talk) 04:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Anthem Inc. buying Cigna

[edit]
No consensus to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:09, 27 July 2015 (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.

Articles: Anthem Inc. (talk · history · tag) and Cigna (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Anthem Inc. announces that it has reached a deal to buy Cigna in a deal valued at at least $48 billion. (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal New York Times Reuters
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Aside from the large amount of money involved (estimates range from 48 to 54 billion USD), the Reuters link above tells us that this deal will create "the largest U.S. health insurer by membership." Everymorning talk 14:32, 24 July 2015 (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.

July 23

[edit]
July 23, 2015 (2015-07-23) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Science and technology

[Closed] RD: Aung Thaung

[edit]
no move toward support μηδείς (talk) 00:34, 27 July 2015 (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: Aung Thaung (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times Myanmar Times
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: Although Burmese-centric, one of influential Burmese politicians involved in only domestic affairs. Well-sourced. Obviously notable, but I hope he is on top of field. George Ho (talk) 01:36, 25 July 2015 (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] LaFayette Grand Theatre shooting

[edit]
SNOW Close. SpencerT♦C 18:11, 24 July 2015 (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: 2015 Lafayette shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A shooting at the Grand Theatre movie theater in Lafayette, Louisiana results in the deaths of 3 people, including the shooter, and 9 injuries. (Post)
News source(s): NOLA, BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Might as well throw this one out there. WaltCip (talk) 14:26, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I think the fact that it's no longer considered unusual is rather unusual in itself.--WaltCip (talk) 14:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't it disgusting how stories like this continue to happen despite all the public outcry?--WaltCip (talk) 16:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but this isn't a place to right wrongs. It's simply not newsworthy, tomorrow it will be completely forgotten about. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:25, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody needs to right these great wrongs. I agree ITN isn't the place to do it but I hate that these shootings keep happening and that the powers that be stop us from doing anything to stop the next one. </rant> – Muboshgu (talk) 16:35, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think most of the civilised world think it's disgusting that this is allowed, nay encouraged, by the free and easy gun laws in the US. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There were 14 reported murder-suicides in the U.S. from July 17-23. And our elected politicians are doing nothing about it, save a few who are being stymied by the majority. Gun nuts even made Buzzfeed back down today. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've no objection to snowclosing it. I mainly just wanted to gauge the response that items like this will get for reference for future nominations.--WaltCip (talk) 17:58, 24 July 2015 (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] Kepler-452b

[edit]
Proposed image
Artist's conception of Kepler-452b
Articles: Kepler (spacecraft) (talk · history · tag) and Kepler-452b (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Kepler finds Kepler-452b, the smallest planet discovered so far orbiting in a circumstellar habitable zone. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Kepler space telescope discovers Kepler-452b, the smallest planet yet found in a habitable zone.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The Kepler space telescope discovers Kepler-452b, the smallest planet discovered so far orbiting the habitable zone of a star similar to the Sun.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: It seems they have found the most Earth-like planet so far. Hektor talk 16:55, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of editing? Which part needs to be improved? George Ho (talk) 19:10, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have modified the altblurb to remove circumstellar as redundant given "around" and "star" are already there. μηδείς (talk) 01:53, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Attention needed: As discussed above, the blurb that was posted is not accurate. There have been smaller planets discovered orbiting within the hypothetical habitable zones of their stars, the difference being that those stars (unlike Kepler-452) are not Sun-like. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the "similar to the sun" phrase can't accurately be ommitted. μηδείς (talk) 19:58, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment please take issues to ERRORS. Also, before marking ready, please ensure a "ready" blurb has been agreed upon. Sorry for posting something that wasn't accurate, but this nomination is a bit of a mess of blurb suggestions. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 22

[edit]
July 22, 2015 (2015-07-22) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and Culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Science and technology
Health and medicine

[Closed] China returns Ai Weiwei's passport

[edit]
No real reason to continue this debate which is almost wholesale in its rejection of the proposal. Once again, DYK seems an appropriate alternative. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:17, 23 July 2015 (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: Ai Weiwei (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Chinese artist Ai Weiwei is returned his passport, four years after it was seized by government authorities. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian NPR CNN
Credits:
Nominator's comments: It seems we posted when he was detained and had his passport seized in April 2011, so now that he has gotten it back it seems significant as well. Everymorning talk 19:08, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well sometimes you do go on a bit... ;-) -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it's all about obfuscation.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 22 July 2015 (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] Birmingham Quran manuscript

[edit]
overwhelming math μηδείς (talk) 01:00, 23 July 2015 (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: Birmingham Quran manuscript (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Quranic manuscript in the collection of the University of Birmingham is identified as one of the oldest to survive. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CNN; Guardian; NYT; many others.
Credits:
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.

July 21

[edit]
July 21, 2015 (2015-07-21) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports

[Closed] RD: Nicholas Gonzalez (physician)

[edit]
Clear consensus against posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:42, 25 July 2015 (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: Nicholas Gonzalez (physician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Official website
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: One of alternative medicine physicians considered to be fraudulent and dangerous. He faced lawsuits. George Ho (talk) 01:58, 25 July 2015 (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] World Santa Claus Congress starts in Denmark

[edit]
Closing per WP:SNOW. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:58, 22 July 2015 (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: Santa Claus (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ World Santa Claus Congress starts in Denmark (Post)
News source(s): ABC
Credits:

Article needs updating
 Count Iblis (talk) 16:25, 22 July 2015 (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] RD: E. L. Doctorow

[edit]
Article: E. L. Doctorow (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, BBC, Vanity Fair, Time
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: Famous. Abductive (reasoning) 01:48, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Theodore Bikel

[edit]
Article: Theodore Bikel (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): New York Times; http://bnonews.com/news/index.php/news/id933
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Important US actor and folk musician. Strongly identified with the role of Tevye from Fiddler on the Roof. Co-founder of the Newport Folk Festival. And he was Lt. Worf's adoptive dad. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 01:04, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on article update/improvements - I think the bar for importance is there (I'm looking at the Austrian medal of honor in the arts as a prime demonstration), but the article is lacking in inline citations and has tense issues. --MASEM (t) 01:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose based solely on article quality/referencing inadequacy. Would support if the referencing was brought up to standard, clearly a major figure. --Jayron32 01:56, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

*Support. Article looks clearly sourced now - definitely both well-known and remembered as well as influential. Challenger l (talk) 05:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are six unrefed entries in the discography, out of 40. At this point my inclination would be to delete them. Sca (talk) 21:55, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 20

[edit]
July 20, 2015 (2015-07-20) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
International relations
Science
Politics
Sports

[Closed] Philip II remains identified

[edit]
This doesn't look like it's going anywhere. No apparent effort to get the article up to ITN standards. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:22, 27 July 2015 (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: Philip II of Macedon (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The remains in Tomb I at Vergina are conclusively identified as those of Philip II of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great. (Post)
News source(s): PNAS, IB Times
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: I've updated the section in Philip, but the article currently has one orange tag. The authors of the study write it's "conclusive", while previous suggestions were uncertain. Brandmeistertalk 11:17, 23 July 2015 (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] Death of Sandra Bland in police custody to be investigated as murder

[edit]
No consensus to post. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:00, 21 July 2015 (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: Death of Sandra Bland (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Texas authorities announce they will investigate the death of activist Sandra Bland in police custody as a possible murder. (Post)
News source(s): [8]
Credits:

Article needs updating
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: Sandra Bland's death has been all over the news and social media, and the coverage appears to be increasing. --Darouet (talk) 19:07, 21 July 2015 (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] Lockheed Martin to acquire Sikorsky

[edit]
This doesn't appear to be going anywhere and no discernible effort has been made to improve the article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:37, 25 July 2015 (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.

Articles: Lockheed Martin (talk · history · tag) and Sikorsky Aircraft (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American defense contractor Lockheed Martin agrees to purchase Sikorsky Aircraft for US$9 billion. (Post)
News source(s): [9]
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Not the largest price tag, and I'm aware of ITN's usual stance on business news and acquisitions, but I feel this is an interesting story involving two notable companies; Lockheed Martin, in particular, is an absolute giant in the defense and aerospace industries. --Bongwarrior (talk) 17:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support once the article is updated and the relevant section expanded beyond the current one sentence. I would also suggest adjusting the link so it goes to the applicable section of a rather long article. The merger has considerable significance in the military and defense related industry. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Striking my "weak" in favor of full support per Medeis' comment below. This is more significant than I had realized. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:31, 21 July 2015 (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.

2015 Open Championship

[edit]
Article: 2015 Open Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In golf, Zach Johnson wins the 2015 Open Championship (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
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: ITN/R and one of golf's four major championships. Article has had the result updated and a brief prose update but could do with more prose, particularly for the third and fourth rounds. Bcp67 (talk) 06:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] UN unanimously approves Iran nuclear deal

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 14:05, 23 July 2015 (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: Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United Nations Security Council unanimously approves the agreement between the P5+1 countries and Iran regarding its nuclear program. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Not all UN resolutions are Wikinewsworthy, right? Out of all UN resolutions, this would affect the US Congress's ability to reject the deal with Iran. George Ho (talk) 02:04, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose We have already posted about the main agreement which we knew was/is going to be hugely controversial. This is just the beginning of a lot of news that is going to surround the fight over this agreement. Congress is going to have a fit over this, and there are reports that the Iranians may try to amend the agreement or reject parts of it. I doubt this belongs on ITN, but if it does it should be in ongoing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Say "support 'Ongoing'" then because I believe there will be updates over this if you like. George Ho (talk) 02:22, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb/weak support for ongoing per my comment above. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This was part of the deal, which we posted the agreement to. If this had not passed, it might be notable, but the deal wouldn't have been made unless the parties agreed this would occur. 331dot (talk) 10:49, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm neutral on Ongoing; I'm not sure there will be regular, incremental updates to this, but I'm not sure there won't be either. 331dot (talk) 10:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Medeis and Kudzu1: What about "ongoing" then? George Ho (talk) 22:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ongoing. Abductive (reasoning) 01:40, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think ongoing is unnecessary. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:50, 22 July 2015 (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.

[Withdrawn] RD: Fred Else

[edit]
WITHDRAWN:

--George Ho (talk) 06:07, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

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: Fred Else (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ITV
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: Had a long football career as a goalkeeper. George Ho (talk) 01:36, 21 July 2015 (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] RD: Alex Rocco

[edit]
Consensus appears to be against posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:09, 20 July 2015 (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: Alex Rocco (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
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: Actor from The Godfather who later won a Comedy Emmy. '''tAD''' (talk) 14:21, 20 July 2015 (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] Suruç, Turkey explosion

[edit]
Article: 2015 Suruç bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A bombing, allegedly initiated by Islamic State militants in Suruç, Turkey, kills at least 31 people and injures over 100. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ An explosion in the Turkish district of Suruç, Şanlıurfa, kills at least 31 people and injures over 100.
News source(s): BBC, RT, The Guardian
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: A major terrorist incident with casualties expected to rise significantly as the event progresses. Nub Cake (talk) 11:13, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: It's almost certain now that it was Islamic State. Nub Cake (talk) 12:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some information in the new 'Background' section of the article. Nub Cake (talk) 13:25, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Sca (talk)
Update: I've fixed them. Most of them were unnecessary and were already dealt with in other citations elsewhere, but I've still added sources from different reliable news sites. Nub Cake (talk) 17:58, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The Rambling Man: The number of deaths seems to be finalised at 32 (though may increase if injuries prove to be fatal), and injuries at 104. Is it possible to alter the blurb to reflect this information, such as 'A bombing in the Turkish district of Suruç, Şanlıurfa Province, kills at least 32 people and injures 104.' Thanks. Nub Cake (talk) 11:30, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Nub Cake: this has been done, but for future reference the best place to ask for this sort of update is WP:ERRORS. Thryduulf (talk) 22:19, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Cuba and United States restore diplomatic ties

[edit]
Articles: Cuba–United States relations (talk · history · tag) and Cuban Thaw (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States and Cuba restore full diplomatic relations after 54 years. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The United States and Cuba restore full diplomatic relations after 54 years.
News source(s): The Miami Herald The Associated Press
Credits:

Both articles need updating

Nominator's comments: Consensus a couple weeks ago was to wait until the embassies were reestablished, and that has now been done. Major milestone that ends one of the world's longest-standing diplomatic freezes. Kudzu1 (talk) 04:55, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 19

[edit]
July 19, 2015 (2015-07-19) (Sunday)
Disasters and accidents

Arts and culture

International relations

[Posted] RD: Galina Prozumenshchikova

[edit]
Article: Galina Prozumenshchikova (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SwimSwam Expressen BezFormata
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: Not much media attention on this death, but Prozumenshchikova won five Olympic medals (including gold) across three Summer Olympics, plus other awards, as a Soviet swimmer in the 1960s and 1970s. She was the first Soviet athlete to win a gold medal in Olympic swimming. Kudzu1 (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support RD conditional on article improvement. (Oppose blurb if one is proposed.) However the article needs work. Although reasonably well sourced it requires updating and the awards section needs to be expanded with her Olympic medals included. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:19, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct. I missed it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:44, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] UNESCO heritage of Timbuktu were rebuilt

[edit]
No consensus to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:49, 24 July 2015 (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: Timbuktu (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Fourteen sufi mausoleums in the city of Timbuktu in Mali have been rebuilt, three years after they were destroyed by Islamist militants. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Mausoleums in the World Heritage Site of Timbuktu have been rebuilt after they were destroyed in the Battles of Gao and Timbuktu.
News source(s): (BBC)
Credits:
 Jenda H. (talk) 13:01, 20 July 2015 (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] Shark attack disrupts surfing contest

[edit]
Snow closing, no consensus to post this trivial story. 331dot (talk) 22:53, 19 July 2015 (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.

Articles: J-Bay Open 2015 (talk · history · tag) and Mick Fanning (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In surfing, the J-Bay Open 2015 is canceled after a shark attacks defending champion Mick Fanning. (Post)
News source(s): CNN The Australian The Washington Post
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Extremely unusual incident receiving worldwide media attention. Individually, it doesn't seem like this particular surfing competition is considered major, but it is part of the World Surf League championships. Kudzu1 (talk) 22:02, 19 July 2015 (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.

July 18

[edit]
July 18, 2015 (2015-07-18) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

[Closed] Westgate, Nairobi reopens

[edit]
Closing good faith nom per WP:SNOW. This does not meet ITN guidelines and there is no chance it will be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:42, 19 July 2015 (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: Westgate, Nairobi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Westgate shopping mall in Kenya, which was damaged in a terrorist attack in 2013, reopens. (Post)
News source(s): BBC CNN
Credits:

Article updated
 Deryck C. 09:49, 19 July 2015 (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] Charlie Hebdo ends Muhammad cartoons

[edit]
SNOW close. SpencerT♦C 15:53, 18 July 2015 (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: Charlie Hebdo (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo discontinues caricatures about Muhammad after the January shooting. (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, Deutsche Welle
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: In a somewhat slow news period I think it's notable, especially after all those events after the shooting and previous attacks. Brandmeistertalk 09:11, 18 July 2015 (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] RD: Yoichiro Nambu

[edit]
Article: Yoichiro Nambu (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
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: He died on July 5, but his death is announced on July 17. He discovered Spontaneous symmetry breaking, and was awarded Nobel Prize in Physics in 2008. 61.245.26.8 (talk) 06:34, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Jules Bianchi

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Jules Bianchi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Formula One driver Jules Bianchi (pictured) dies at the age of 25, nine months after suffering a serious crash and entering a coma. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Formula One driver Jules Bianchi (pictured) dies at the age of 25, nine months after an accident at the 2014 Japanese Grand Prix left him in a coma.
News source(s): [10], [11], [12]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Notable figure in Formula One racing, death at a young age, death is reported worldwide --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:00, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose blurb While a talented figure in his field, it is mainly the circumstances of his death that qualify him for RD under ITNDC. The bar for giving a blurb to the recently deceased is very high. I don't think he meets that standard. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:57, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of Earnhardt's death, he was middle-aged (but successful). Bianchi was too young to die, but it happens to young aspiring race drivers. Still, Bianchi was promising... until his deadly coma. We could have posted Earnhardt's death, but there was no ITN at the time. ITN was created when... 9/11 (or 11/9) happened. --George Ho (talk) 05:26, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull This doesn't seem to meet our extremely high standards for posting deaths as full blurbs. wctaiwan (talk) 05:48, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The main story here isn't the notability or achievement of the driver, but the circumstances of his death. While deaths in motorsport in general certainly aren't unusual, deaths in Formula One seem to be slightly rarer, and that's apparently one of the reasons this received such strong support. Viewed in that light, this is somewhat analogous to the death of Phillip Hughes, the cricketer who died as a result of injuries received during a match. Neither Hughes nor Bianchi meet the death criteria, but the circumstances of their deaths were deemed sufficiently unusual to justify posting. Obviously, racing is more dangerous than cricket, but you see where I'm coming from. (As an aside, I suspect the death of Earnhardt would have been posted quickly, with little to no opposition). --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:50, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support part of the point of ITN is to highlight quality articles that are in the news. Regardless of personal opinion (and nearly falling over when seeing it posted is pretty extreme), this is one such example of a quality article. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:53, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull The topic is not really in the news with any prominence and the subject barely merits an RD entry so a blurb seems quite undue. Some imagery from Pluto would be better as the picture and so that discussion should be reopened. Andrew D. (talk) 10:58, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you'd be better off participating in the discussion over what item is actually pictured at ITN, right now, if we removed Bianchi, we'd put the plutaquark back, and I bet that would really pluta-irk you. By the way, your reasoning against Bianchi is way off, and your clear misunderstanding between RD and a standard ITN blurb lets you down a little, not that you'd be too upset by that. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull- It has to have strong article and notability, and this story is barely RD-level. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 16:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a good article, which is super-rare on articles we post, and if you don't think it's notable, try Googling it, it's in the news all over the world, even the United States. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:44, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would not disagree that the article is well written. Nor would I suggest his death is non-notable. But the standards for WP:BIO and WP:ITN are different. The subject arguably meets ITNDC because of the tragic circumstances surrounding his death. But there is no way this should have been posted as a blurb. And I am somewhat disapointed that it was posted so soon after the blurb was proposed, before most editors had a chance to weigh in. The rush to post has IMO resulted in giving a borderline RD candidate far more attention that he merits. A quick glance at the post-posting !votes makes it very clear there would have been no consensus in favor of posting had some patience been exercised. This blurb is a mistake and really should be pulled. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with the blurb, but the post-posting comments suggest it should be moved to RD. -Kudzu1 (talk) 22:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as is. As suggested by Bongwarrior, the story here is not the person who died, but the manner of death, which is unusual and is being widely reported on. The posting was valid as there was virtually no opposition to the idea at the time; if consensus has changed, okay, but the posting was not improper. 331dot (talk) 22:50, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. The blurb was proposed and approved, all in about 4 hours. But the time frame was in the middle of the night for everyone in North America where you have one of the largest groups of English speaking peoples. In short, outside of Europe and the odd insomniac there was little input. Even in Europe it was very early morning when the blurb was approved. I am not sure how you define "valid" but I would label this as rushed with true consensus being highly doubtful. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:17, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is no requirement for a chance for people in each time zone in the world or even just those with English speakers to post their opinion or otherwise have an arbitrary minimum discussion time before posting(both of which have been proposed before and never gained consensus). A good article with clear support at the time should not be artificially delayed in posting, especially in the recent slow period here for postings. No decision is written in stone here. Again, if you are saying consensus has changed, that's a different subject. 331dot (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's still a clear consensus and if someone would like to propose a 24-hour delay so that all corners of the globe get to weigh in, please feel free to do so. It's something I proposed a while ago which was roundly shot to pieces. The Rambling Man (talk) 04:48, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 17

[edit]
July 17, 2015 (2015-07-17) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Sport

Science and technology
  • University marine scientists observe that a shipwreck discovered off the North Carolina Coast on July 12 may date back to the American Revolution. (NBC News)

[Closed] Tolikara riot

[edit]
Close good faith nomination--the event is not one we hear of often. Unfortunately, regardless of the small news impact the article is also tagged and really needs heavy fixing. Should this develop more we can re-open or have a new nomination. Otherwise this is not quite up to par.μηδείς (talk) 04:26, 21 July 2015 (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: Tolikara riot (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ One child death, 12 people injured, and several house and kiosk burned after a riot occured in Tolikara Regency, Papua, Indonesia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A riot occured in Tolikara Regency, Papua, Indonesia, resulted one child death, 12 people injured, and several house and kiosk burned.
News source(s): Solopos KOMPAS.com
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This news was headline news in several news sites in Indonesia on this week. --Erik Fastman (talk) 06:28, 20 July 2015 (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] Khan Bani Saad bombing

[edit]
Article: 2015 Khan Bani Saad massacre (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Over 120 people are massacred and 130 injured by a suicide bombing in Diyala Province, Iraq. (Post)
News source(s): WP BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: One of the largest death tolls of civilians in Iraq from a single event. Admittedly, a suicide bombing here is not uncommon, but the sheer scale of this is especially notable. Mamyles (talk) 15:39, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Thanks for the updates. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:26, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've copy editted the article for style and idiom.[13]. There are no structural issues to prevent posting. μηδείς (talk) 18:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: why posted with wording 'killing' and not 'massacres'? gruesome crime, referred to as massacre widely in the press...
Because we report the facts, i.e. at least 130 were killed. You could say "massacred" or "slaughtered" or "mercilessly destroyed" or whatever, but here we keep it simple and neutral and link the article. If you still disagree, I'd suggest you add a note to WP:ERRORS so that others can weigh in and determine whether your personal preference for the blurb is more acceptable than the one I posted, no problem at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Alcides Ghiggia

[edit]
Close as uninvolved, no indication of move toward support. μηδείς (talk) 01:56, 19 July 2015 (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: Alcides Ghiggia (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Ovación) (The Guardian) (BBC)
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: Ghiggia scored a goal in 1950 FIFA World cup final at Maracanã, also representing A.S. Roma in more than 200 league matches and appearing in more than 100 for Peñarol and Danubio. MYS77 ✉ 18:40, 17 July 2015 (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] Pluto pic?

[edit]
No longer relevant. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:24, 18 July 2015 (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.

A diagram of what a presumed 5-quark looks like is neat, but should it displace the historical photos of Pluto that will never be seen again (this century) at this res? Nergaal (talk) 16:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, both the artist's image of the probe and the entirely fanciful and useless pic of the pentaquark have been a nadir for ITN. Let's get a picture of Pluto itself, it being the biggest astronomical event since Voyager 1. μηδείς (talk) 02:37, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, let's not discourage a scientific diagram for a scientific pic. As magnificent the Pluto pic is, something newer and fresher would attract readers more. The pentaquark thing seems newer, so a diagram should reflect what's new. I did move this to talk page because it interferes with Candidates page, a page for articles, not pictures. I did request in talk page of Main Page swapping a pic of Serena Williams with another pic of her, but newer stories got in the way. --George Ho (talk) 03:02, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hard to decide if you are trolling considering both stories happened the same day. Nergaal (talk) 04:42, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't trolling, but I knew I shouldn't have moved your message without permission. How can I convince you to forgive me? George Ho (talk) 05:21, 18 July 2015 (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.

July 16

[edit]
July 16, 2015 (2015-07-16) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Closed] Nexen pipeline oil spill at Long Lake

[edit]
No consensus to post.-Ad Orientem (talk) 01:55, 21 July 2015 (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.

Articles: Long Lake (oil sands) (talk · history · tag) and Nexen (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A pipeline leak at the Long Lake facility, owned by the Chinese company Nexen, near Fort McMurray, Alberta, spills around 31,500 barrels of oil emulsion into an area of approximately 16,000 m2 (170,000 sq ft). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A pipeline leak at the Long Lake facility, owned by the Chinese company Nexen, near Fort McMurray, Alberta, spills at least 5,000,000 litres (1,100,000 imp gal; 1,300,000 US gal) barrels of oil emulsion into an area of around 16,000 m2 (170,000 sq ft).
News source(s): AFP via Yahoo CBC
Credits:

Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: This is an environmental impact, but the company is working on the spill, said they. George Ho (talk) 19:14, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You mean km2? George Ho (talk) 03:04, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, three times the square meterage of a football field. μηδείς (talk) 01:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me? Nice to know a football field is 5km² but i dont think its remotely correct. 91.49.94.143 (talk) 02:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You're making a common error. I said five thousand-plus square meters, not five thousand meters squared. George was right I did mean .016km^2 for the spill, the 16,000m^2 figure had already been given. Next time you're driven to anonymous sarcasm, try first figuring out what I might actually have meant if I wasn't entirely bonkers (i.e., AGF) and you might realize the misunderstanding. μηδείς (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Spilt oil is spilt oil, whether from a pipeline, tanker, or oil rig. The source is not really relevant to the damage, which is very minor in the scope of things (not that I'd want it in my town). μηδείς (talk) 01:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I... don't... understand... the logic other than it's-just-an-oil-spill excuse. You guys are relieved that oil didn't spill into a sea or an ocean and that contaminated area is not big. Such opposition makes many environmental news... not cut out for ITN. Of course, I can't advocate such stories to be posted in the news because Wikipedia is not an advocacy or soapbox. George Ho (talk) 04:49, 20 July 2015 (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] 2012 Aurora shootings

[edit]
No consensus to post. Although the nomination has not run too long, it is clear that this won't have consensus to post the item. SpencerT♦C 14:41, 17 July 2015 (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.

Articles: 2012 Aurora shooting (talk · history · tag) and James Eagan Holmes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ James Eagan Holmes was convicted of 12 counts of first degree murder for the 2012 Aurora shooting. (Post)
News source(s): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33561802
Credits:
 Martin451 23:33, 16 July 2015 (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] 2015 Chattanooga shootings

[edit]
Soft close without prejudice to renomination if evidence of some kind of terrorist connection or conspiracy is uncovered. As of right now it looks like a lone gunman and there is clearly no consensus in favor of posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:25, 17 July 2015 (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: 2015 Chattanooga shootings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A shooting in Chattanooga, Tennessee kills four Marines and injures several others. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In a terrorist attack, four Marines are killed in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
News source(s): BBC USA Today Reuters
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Relatively low death toll, but the fact that it is being treated as an act of domestic terrorism seems to make it more significant. Everymorning talk 22:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Mass shooting in the US are sadly not uncommon and I generally look for a high death toll to support. However, Islamic terrorist attacks are not that common here. On that basis, coupled with the extensive news coverage, I think it merits an ITN blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:59, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Ad Orientem. It's already been called "domestic terrorism", which makes this more than some guy who got fired shooting up his office. The shooter targeted the U.S. military. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per the above. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:11, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Mass shootings happen all the time. This may or may not be a terrorist attack, but we do not put all terrorist attacks up. We did not put up the one in France last month, probably because of its low body count.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 23:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Which one is more tabloid-ish, this or conviction of Hungarian bookkeeper helping the Nazis? Ah well, tragic for soldiers, but media has already sensationalized this story toward anti-Arab demographics. But that's not the case for terrorist bombings at the start of Ramadan season in North Africa and Middle East. Nevertheless, even when the blurb may not reveal names, readers would still be curious about the event. George Ho (talk) 01:00, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You know what? I'll oppose this. Isn't there a fresher story not sensationalized? --George Ho (talk) 03:52, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - We should be clear between the difference between domestic terrorism and international terrorism; the latter would be a hugely significant event, while the US has many many domestic terrorism events and this feels like another, sadly, run of the mill case, barring knowing the exact intent of the shooter. I know they're trying to figure out if he was following the ISIS directive to cause chaos during this month, or if this was just his own action. Until we know this, they're just calling it domestic terrorism, and it is a rather minor one in such cases. (Contrast to the shooting last year on Capital Hill in Ontario, which also was termed domestic terrorism, but such is rare in Canada). If it does turn out to be an event directly linked to ISIS or similar groups and elevated to international terrorism, I would be willing to support it. --MASEM (t) 03:11, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose: Tragic, but a fairly low body count and no evidence yet of ties between the shooter and groups like ISIL or al Qaeda. If we don't post occurrences like this in other countries, we shouldn't "bend the rules" for the United States. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support The fact that one can simply walk onto a military base and shoot disarmed armed servicemen is notable enough, and this is by far the top story in the US. The article meets posting requirements. μηδείς (talk) 03:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Point of note: The first shooting was at a strip mall where a Nat. Guard recruiting office was, far from any security of a base; at the base itself he rammed his car into the gate to get onto the base, and did not "walk" onto it. Further, as I understanding the training base was a weapons-free facility so it was a matter until cops actually came around to stop him. --MASEM (t) 05:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until it's confirmed a terror attack (and it would be a shock if it weren't). Shootings happen every day, but it's seldom that the military are targeted here. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:00, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose an unfortunately common occurrence, regardless of the motivations. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support because it seems to be terrorism against military personnel, though I am sympathetic to the reasons in opposition. 331dot (talk) 08:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait somewhat dubious there's an international link, FBI still investigating but nothing conclusive - The 26 June Kuwait bombing and Sousse attack were included, but not the France one as it was lone wolf/unlinked. -- Callinus (talk) 09:00, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Terror attacks on national military is a common occurrence in the rest of the world. Even the death toll is relatively low for such an attack. 117.192.161.191 (talk) 10:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kudzu1. Neljack (talk) 10:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - We've saturated ITN with enough U.S. shootings stories for a while. It needs to be something truly outlandish for a shooting to make it to ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 11:36, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't recall where in the ITN guidelines there's a max on posting news stories by category. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's not in the guidelines, but I think it's safe to say that a number of editors are tired by the continual posting of mass shootings in the US. After all this is English language Wikipedia, not American shooting Wikipedia. Of course, that's with no disrespect to all the victims. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:36, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, I understand that non-US editors are tired of these stories. As an American, I'm tired of them too. Australia had one mass shooting and they fixed their problem, while we can't get around the NRA to do anything. That doesn't make these shootings any less newsworthy, though. (Not all of them, but some of them.) – Muboshgu (talk) 17:15, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • It does make them less newsworthy to English language Wikipedia I'm afraid. If we published every suicide bomb/Boko Haram attack/ISIS killing, we'd have no room for anything else. Sadly, mass shootings in the US are now on that level of frequency which makes them need something beyond just a few people being killed by a lone wolf gunman. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support - terrorism is always notable. the day we start thinking of terrorism in the free world we will go down a dark path.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:45, 17 July 2015 (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.

July 15

[edit]
July 15, 2015 (2015-07-15) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents
Business and economy
Health
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and Technology

[Withdrawn] Heart land of Pluto named Tombaugh Regio

[edit]
WITHDRAWN
I'll nominate this at DYK instead. --George Ho (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2015 (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: Pluto's heart (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The dwarf planet Pluto's surface feature that nearly resembles a heart (pictured) is named Tombaugh Regio after discoverer Clyde Tombaugh by the New Horizons team. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Photos of the dwarf planet Pluto's heart-resembled region (pictured), named Tombaugh Regio after discoverer Clyde Tombaugh by the New Horizons team, reveal 11,000-foot (3,400 m) mountains made of water ice.
News source(s): Sky & Telescope Business Insider
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This should make the Pluto story fresher and more updated, so someone would be pleased to see the heart-shaped region on the photo again. (Never mind, the obituary blurb will make the photo impossible to appear ITN again.) George Ho (talk) 07:36, 18 July 2015 (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] RD: Wan Li

[edit]
No consensus to post. --Bongwarrior (talk) 16:32, 21 July 2015 (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: Wan Li (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Bloomberg) (South China Morning Post)
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: Wan Li, the last of the Eight Immortals (now all mortals...) was the head of China's national legislature between 1988 and 1993; an RD we posted several weeks ago, Qiao Shi, held the same office between 1993 and 1998 (it is the third, or sometimes second highest office of the land, next to the Communist Party's general secretary and the Premier). Was known for his advocacy of constitutional reform, rule of law, and liberal stance during the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Colipon+(Talk) 13:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Comment We don't usually post heads of legislative branches in RD, such as a former Speaker of the House. What makes this individually particularly more notable? Does the Chinese Congress have any political power in the country, or is it like Russia where they are puppets to the oligarchy? Mamyles (talk) 15:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Really? I would say that a former Speaker of the US House of Representatives meets RD standards and would support posting such a nomination. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:57, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Would you also support posting the other 50 countries that have a Speaker of the House? How about 50 countries' Vice Presidents, since they head up the Senate in the American congressional model? That would be a bit much. A role like head of a legislature is not enough justification for RD, alone. Additionally, all politicians advocate for their opinions, so that phrase from the nomination is also not particularly notable. Mamyles (talk) 17:33, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It would depend on the power of the individual. The US Vice-President has virtually none. The Speaker of the House is extremely powerful, arguably 2nd only to the POTUS. ITND criteria #2 says "The deceased was widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field." So yeah I do think the Speaker of the House meets that. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:43, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The "head of national legislature" argument is problematic and I recognize that, especially given that the body is known more to be "rubber-stamp". However, the position in China carries with it a certain level of prestige and is always given to individuals with significant personal clout (cf Zhu De, Qiao Shi, Li Peng, Zhang Dejiang). Wan's importance however is not simply derived from the five years he spent in this office. In my opinion he will be remembered for 1. pioneering the implementation of the household-responsibility system, which immeasurably changed the lives of some 800 million Chinese peasants, 2. attempting to push through constitutional reforms to make the National People's Congress a bona fide law-making body and 3. Almost summoning the body to resolve Tiananmen through constitutional means but being isolated in Shanghai. Colipon+(Talk) 18:56, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This probably belongs on the talk page, not here. Two recent nominations, Jim Wright and Tom Foley were not posted due to lack of serious influence or accomplishment in the office. I would expect Tip O'Neal would have been posted and expect Newt Gingrich will also be posted. But I think the Chinese nomination should be discussed on the merits, not in comparison to the US. μηδείς (talk) 04:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I asked myself the same thing... Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:41, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As Medeis said above, two US Speakers of the House, Jim Wright and Tom Foley, were nominated but not posted due to lack of serious influence or accomplishment. Would you consider those equivalents, or is there something else special with this individual? Mamyles (talk) 00:11, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose per Medeis, plus article has problems. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:05, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: while it may be a long shot now, I will add here that I have updated the article and improved referencing. Even if this does not ultimately end up on ITN/RD, I would like to ask any interested party to review the article to see if there are any further glaring deficiencies to the article. I am especially puzzled by User @The Rambling Man:'s suggestion that there are BLP violations - what are these violations? Colipon+(Talk) 19:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Quick response, last para of the "National politics" section is unreferenced and therefore contains BLP violations. Please be aware that BLP applies to recently-deceased individuals, and V applies throughout. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is now fully referenced and also significantly improved, with an expanded introduction describing his significance. Please reconsider. Colipon+(Talk) 00:25, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am not sure how long RD's stay up but this nom is getting a bit stale. If it is going to be posted, I would do it soon. Otherwise let's close the discussion and move on. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    His state funeral (or equivalent) is sometime this week, so it's not too late yet! Colipon+(Talk) 01:01, 21 July 2015 (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] Oskar Gröning trial

[edit]
Closing as no consensus. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:03, 18 July 2015 (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: Oskar Gröning (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A 94-year-old former SS officer Oskar Gröning, known as the Auschwitz book-keeper, has been found guilty of complicity in the murder of 300,000 Hungarian Jews. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A 94-year-old former SS officer Oskar Gröning, known as the Auschwitz book-keeper, has been sentenced to four years imprisonment for accessory to murder of 300,000 Hungarian Jews.
News source(s): BBC, DW, Sky News, The New York Times
Credits:
 Jenda H. (talk) 09:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's our place to question the outcome, rather to report the facts. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 13:13, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NOTNEWS some editorial judgement is often useful. This time book-keeper, next time they may find and sentence Auschwitz toilet cleaner as well. Brandmeistertalk 13:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have reliable sources which state that the trial was not legitimate(a "kangaroo court")? It isn't for us to act as a second judge or jury and render our own opinions about the outcome. 331dot (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You think they cleaned the toilets? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Would the murder of 300,000 Hungarian Jews have stopped or been disrupted if Auschwitz lacked that money-collecting book-keeper? No. In the grand scheme of things this four-year sentence for a 94-year man is almost nothing. Brandmeistertalk 15:17, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Whether he could have stopped the whole thing or not is not relevant; that's an argument for his trial, not here. This is in the news and involves major war crimes. I would again ask if any reliable sources have said this trial is not legitimate. 331dot (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Widely reported trial related to war crimes from a historic conflict. 331dot (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – This particular trial – not of course the Holocaust itself – is a footnote in history. Sca (talk) 14:10, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support it certainly is more than a footnote in terms of "in the news". Of course, if we had crystal balls, we could all determine which news stories will become inconsequential in fifty years time. I'm seeing it widely reported, and while the sentence is remarkably short considering the crime, it's still newsworthy. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:14, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I didn't think this would draw much attention outside Germany, but it did. Zwerg Nase (talk) 15:05, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this topic tends to be overrepresented in any form of media. A comparable number of Armenians died a few decades earlier yet that one barely reached the news outlets at the centennial commemoration. Nergaal (talk) 15:32, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is likely to be one of the last, perhaps the last, major trial for Holocaust related crimes. Also Gröning is a well known figure for speaking out over the years about what happened and refuting Holocaust deniers with his "I was there" interviews. In response to charges that this was a kangaroo court I would have to strongly disagree. It is a well established principle in law that those who provide material assistance in the commission of serious crimes can be held liable as accessories. Germany's refusal for many decades to apply this principal to the SS guards at the death camps, and only prosecute those who could be proven to have actually killed someone was extremely controversial. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:39, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question – Did Demjanjuk's conviction on May 12, 2011, make ITN? (From cursory skimming of his article, he seems to have been more directly involved in genocide than Gröning.) I don't find Demjanjuk in the ITN archive for May 2011. Sca (talk) 22:27, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. Maybe he wasn't even nominated. I am not sure I see the relevance, unless there is more than an WP:OTHERSTUFF argument here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I found this: Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/May_2011#John_Demjanjuk. I can't tell if it was actually posted or not due to article quality issues but it looks like there was at least consensus to post at the time. SpencerT♦C 15:33, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aha. Thanks for the info. Sca (talk)
Demjanjuk was a big story due to his high-profile trials and legal proceedings. Gröning seems to have been less notorious – but in a way more thought-provoking as the bag-man, so to speak. I do think this should be posted; either blurb would work. Sca (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question is this going to get appealed? If yes, what are the realistic chances that he will actually serve jail time before he dies? Nergaal (talk) 23:44, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support – I've been dithering. Finally decided that Gröning's ostensible bystander status as 'the bookkeeper' – and his conviction nevertheless – makes this notable. And it's certainly 'in' the news, today anyway. (Regarding the sentence, presumably his age was a factor.) Sca (talk) 00:00, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this was on the US nightly news as a feel-good story, with camp survivors forgiving him. It's tabloid level, and certainly in no way of enough historical importance to merit posting. μηδείς (talk) 00:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - Forgiven or not, historical or not, this is a notable story. I prefer altblurb, and I marked it as ready to go. As for "tabloid", I hate to admit that the news tend to overemphasize connections between accomplices and horrific events. But let's use Sydney hostage crisis as a precedent to tabloid journalism already invading ITN, so let's do the same here. George Ho (talk) 03:09, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, it has been sensationalized. While attractive, I guess this is nothing new. There are other living jailed convicts from the Nazi era, but there is nothing special about this story other than... obviously. Changing to oppose. --George Ho (talk) 03:40, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - I have no love towards giving any attention towards this three-ring circus of a trial, but sham or not, it's undoubtedly historical. It's also possibly among the last few news events that will surface on ITN that has origins from World War II.--WaltCip (talk) 11:03, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's confusing. Confusing they would try to convict someone 50 years after the fact, and yes, it reeks of a sham trial - a resurrection of Nuremberg. In the U.S., at least, we have a statute of limitations, so this is rather bizarre.--WaltCip (talk) 11:40, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: This feels like a weird show trial, and while it marks the conclusion of a legal saga, I don't know that it's so hugely notable that we need to put it on ITN. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:29, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The British Schindler was prominently placed on ITN for about two weeks. Do we really need another WWII story? Especially one as inconsequential as this? --Tocino 07:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. We are not here to judge Gröning, we are not here to judge the German judicial system, and it’s irrelevant if someone on the other side of this dreadful equation died recently. And we’re not here to guess whether or not there will be a future prosecution of a camp “toilet cleaner”. The fact that this trial has simply happened at all is notable. That’s why it’s in the news, worldwide. Various experts have said it’s likely to be the last of its type. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:34, 17 July 2015 (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.

July 14

[edit]
July 14, 2015 (2015-07-14) (Tuesday)
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Science and technology
Sport

[Closed] Remove "Schindler"?

[edit]
No consensus favoring the proposal. This is unlikely to change. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:24, 14 July 2015 (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.

RDs get 1 week and this guy has gotten 2 weeks of full blurb, most of which had his face as the ITN pic. Considering that its posting wasn't even close to unanimous, could we take his entry down (next)? There is absolutely no source still mentioning his death. Nergaal (talk) 13:41, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Be patient, my dear. I nominated more stories to push his obituary down or out. Meanwhile, I need your vote on the Chinese stock market crash, or just vote on newer and fresher stories below. --George Ho (talk) 13:52, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The 2015 Indonesian Air Force Lockheed C-130 Hercules crash occured the day before. And I'm pretty sure "there is absolutely no source still mentioning the crash". Shouldn't that be removed first? How many gaps are we allowed to have when news goes stale? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:59, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why is there a more and more clear POV pushing mentality at Wikipedia. If we do not get what we want, we nitpick at the subject... Tiring to say the least.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I don't understand what the rush is. Does having this humanitarian who saved hundreds of children's lives and was given top honors by two countries on the front page for a couple of slow news weeks after his death really hurt and offend you so much? Move on. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:05, 14 July 2015 (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] RD: M. S. Viswanathan

[edit]
No consensus in favor of posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:06, 18 July 2015 (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: M. S. Viswanathan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 1,2, 3
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.
 Rahmanuddin Shaik (talk) 13:19, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While he looks to have had a successful career, it doesn't look like he has many/any national-level awards that put him above average enough for RD. The best he received was a regional lifetime achievement award, long after his career's prime, which I don't think qualifies for RD. Every section needs more citations, so perhaps some more awards will be found while searching. Mamyles (talk) 14:44, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Weak Support' Conceding Mamyles's point about a lack of really big awards, I do think there is enough to demonstrate this was a very important person in his field. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:08, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Switching vote to weak oppose mainly due to WP:V issues raised below. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:44, 15 July 2015 (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] Pentaquark

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Pentaquark (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Scientists at CERN's Large Hadron Collider announce the discovery of a pentaquark. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Scientists at CERN's Large Hadron Collider announce the discovery of the Pc(4380)+ and Pc(4450)+ particles, the first significant observation of pentaquarks.
News source(s): BBC CERN arXiv Guardian NBC Daily Express Wall Street Journal
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The notability of this discovery should be undisputable, if accepted as true. Thue (talk) 09:25, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support in principle per above. Some slight expansion would be nice though. Brandmeistertalk 09:50, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, I guess - This sort of thing is just a bit over my head, but science news is always a good thing to feature, unless there is some sort of major hole in this story. --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:58, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - noteworthy.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:53, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 9 sigma of statistical significance is much better than any pentaquark discovery claim before, and the first to cross the 5 sigma limit. Not peer-reviewed, but very unlikely to be overturned at 9 sigma (the equipment and analysis will of course be world class, and the odds of it being a fluke measurement are 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000). Technically, pentaquark isn't a particle but a type of particle. CERN discovered two pentaquark states (one with more energy than the other - this comes from the fact that the two particles have the same quarks but with their spin arranged in different ways), so it's two for the price of one. I've added a more accurate altblurb. Smurrayinchester 13:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)}[reply]
  • Hold - Where is this in the news and why is it significant? I am not convinced this rises to the level of ITN. Jehochman Talk 13:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added some more popular news sources. Many sites have only broken it in the last hour. Even the Guardian, which has a correspondent based at CERN, only published the story at lunchtime GMT today. Smurrayinchester 13:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(As for significance, it's probably not unlike the Higgs boson - pentaquarks have been predicted for years, but difficult to create. Creating one more-or-less as predicted suggests our theories are correct and gives us a way to investigate previously untestable theories about (in this case) the strong force that binds quarks together.) Smurrayinchester 13:25, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I've expanded, and tried to make (a bit) clearer to the layperson what it means. Probably not yet lay-user-friendly though... Smurrayinchester 14:58, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Read WP:LEAD. By the way, I moved expanded content to body. George Ho (talk) 15:48, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Followup comment After taking a closer look at the article I am concerned that as written, it is likely beyond the grasp of anyone without a PHD in physics. I understand that some articles will by necessity contain a lot of technical terms and jargon, but could we not put something in there that would be comprehensible to the science layman? -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:24, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the article should do that too. To the ordinary reader this is inscrutable. We can't post it in the current condition. Jehochman Talk 17:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For what is always going to be a very technical article, I actually think it's pretty good. I'm no physicist, but I understood most of it, and what I didn't I got through the wikilinks. Support. Black Kite (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no physicist either but I read the first graf and I would say it's not unmeaningless. Sca (talk) 22:01, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I have only a layperson's understanding of physics, but the article largely made sense to me and wikilinks elaborate well on whatever you need - which, depending on background, may be quite a long wikiwalk, but we shouldn't shy from something because the subject is difficult. It is probably true that the vast majority of wikipedians, myself included, will not truly grasp the significance of this, but the same could be said of all variety of business and political stories that go up. It is still worth knowing that great and momentous things took place - and who knows, that extralong wikiwalk may prove fruitful to more people than we guess. - OldManNeptune ⚓ 22:44, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It looks there have been some significant improvements made. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:48, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support is not unanimous. This item should be pulled until the following major problem is addressed: "This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. " You can't put an article on the home page while there's this sort of maintenance tag at the top of it. Please address the issue and remove the tag, or else pull the article until it's ready. Jehochman Talk 12:13, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The tag was not present at the time it was posted (Ad Orientem added the tag, but then removed it when satisfied that the article was cleaned up). The tag was then re-added by an IP user after the article was put on the main page. I don't know should remove the tag - who can judge whether an article is too technical? Smurrayinchester 12:44, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pulled and unpulled, since someone else removed the tag. Smurrayinchester 12:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)Me. I'm a total physics dummy and I was pleasantly surprised that I understood most of the explanation (whether it is accurate is another question, but I shall parrot it to anybody that asks). The only drawback for me was the discovery of the Belle experiment. Help! I don't want to be a guinea pig. Belle (talk) 12:54, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse posting Support doesn't have to be unanimous. There's consensus that the discovery of a new kind of particle is worthy of ITN, and the article has been updated. The re-addition of the maintenance tag was not properly justified; science articles are inherently technical. Cenarium (talk) 18:07, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Iran nuclear agreement reached

[edit]
Article: Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An agreement between the P5+1 countries and Iran regarding its nuclear program is announced. (Post)
News source(s): NBC News BBC CNN Le Monde
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Notable diplomatic agreement; being called 'historic'. 331dot (talk) 08:59, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greece was already in Ongoing; this is not. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Valid point, even though it hasn't always been there, it was rather quite a fight to get it there. Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Congress can pass a disapproval resolution but Obama could veto it; it doesn't need to be approved by them- though as 47 GOP Senators pointed out it can be changed in the future. 331dot (talk) 20:37, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it could use some work, but C on the quality scale is sufficient for posting to ITN. Most articles we post here are not GA-level, and need a significant amount of work. Mamyles (talk) 14:51, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it looks awkward in list format. Should be reformatted to prose instead. George Ho (talk) 15:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the article, the news should be in the first paragraph, not the fifth, IMOEO. Sca (talk) 15:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nine supports, no opposes. (Signing has been moved to first graf.) Sca (talk) 22:10, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Congresswoman μηδείς voted Nay. Count Iblis (talk) 03:24, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I read that as a wait. Sca (talk) 14:14, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
EV – And it even has a link to the full text. Sca (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Go Set a Watchman

[edit]
No consensus for marketing. Stephen 02:50, 15 July 2015 (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: Go Set a Watchman (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The novel Go Set a Watchman, written by Harper Lee, is now available in bookstores of the United States. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Go Set a Watchman, the second published novel by To Kill a Mockingbird author Harper Lee, is released.
News source(s): The Telegraph BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Renowned book goes on sale today: most pre-ordered on Amazon since Harry Potter series final book, all-night store openings, sequel to pulitzer winner To Kill a Mockingbird, unexpected discovery and unexpected nature of plot has added to public interest/controversy. FT2 07:30, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, we got more serious stories than this. George Ho (talk) 13:54, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Already in DYK; I did the DYK nomination. George Ho (talk) 08:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this. I still support it now, but I think it was a bigger story then. Some wanted to wait until it was published, though, so we'll see. --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:51, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of the announcement, it was rejected because it was just a press release. Now that it's for real, it's being reject because it should have been covered when it was announced. Like a Marx Brothers cabinet meeting. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:10, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Baseball Bugs: Actually, all the Opposes say that it is not notable enough or that we should not advertise. The only one who mentioned "we should have posted" earlier was not an Oppose, but a comment. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The earlier opposes were mostly of the "wait" variety. Now that it's here, they had to come up with other excuses. Maybe more newsworthy than the book itself is some controversy around it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:34, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Now there's talk of a third Harper Lee novel. Mercy! Sca (talk) 15:18, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Uhh, I'd like that ;) Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:11, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ITN is not your local Amazon/bookstore front. No prejudice against renom if it goes on to win a major literary award, but "book released by notable writer" is not something I would consider significant enough for ITN. Fuebaey (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this can always be posted if the book wins an award, but we don't post any new book by an author who's previously penned a masterpiece. μηδείς (talk) 19:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is the literary equivalent of a 60s band releasing an album of their unreleased demos. If it becomes the fastest selling book of all time or something, that would be news, but if "something goes on sale, gets press coverage and sells a lot to fans" is the bar for inclusion we may as well reserve a space now for iPhone 6S. – iridescent 20:40, 14 July 2015 (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 to RD] RD: Joan Sebastian

[edit]
Article: Joan Sebastian (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [14]
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: Mexican singer-songwriter who composed songs for himself and other artists that have been well-received throughout the Hispanophone communities in Latin America and the United States. Received a lifetime achievement award on 2001 Lo Nuestro Awards and was inducted into the Billboard Latin Music Hall of Fame in 2006 for his "prolific songwriting and musical arrangements". Received two Latin Grammy awards for Best Regional Song, worked with Vicente Fernandez (a recognized ranchera singer in Mexico) on the album Para Siempre which also won a Latin Grammy Award for Best Ranchero Album, collaborated with will.i.am on the song "Hey You" (source), "Secreto de Amor" was one of the best performing Latin songs of 2000, and has had several of his songs covered by multiple Latin artists such as "Lobo Domesticado" by Tommy Olivencia which ranked on the Latin charts in the US. Erick (talk) 02:49, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fundude99 is handling the updates and expanded on the Illness and Death section. If there's anything else that needs to be done, let us know. 03:58, 14 July 2015 (UTC) EDIT: I will continue to work more with Fundude later it is late where I live after I add some awards and do more clean up. Erick (talk) 05:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support pending improvements I fully support RD tag because the subkect is notable, but the article needs sources. There's huge sections in the lead, Early life, career and awards that need sources. Add more sources and it's a go! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:15, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Ad Orientem: and @TDKR Chicago 101:, have another look and let us know if there's anything else that needs to be done. Erick (talk) 05:39, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Marvelous job. Shall we have four names in RD ticker? I think we should retain the dead Saudi prince for a while until either stale or a new death. --George Ho (talk) 07:12, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until the article is copyedited, phrases like "Before he had a big successful music career", "he soon realized that music was his true calling", "he remains one of the most famous singers and songwriters Mexico has" etc etc don't belong here. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The phrases have been removed from the article.—Fundude99talk to me 07:41, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Those were just a handful of examples, the rest of the article isn't much better, e.g. "His versatility has helped him remain in the popular taste of the public.", "and the positive results came fast when in Ciudad Obregon, Sonora.", "The year 1977 was a transitionary year for Sebastian it was the moment when he stopped using his legal name Jose Manuel Figueroa and picked up his artistic name Joan Sebastian (Joan is how the name John is said in the Catalan language of eastern Spain) and Sebastian from San Sebastian." .... the whole article needs to be copyedited for tone and grammar. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The grammar throughout the article has been fixed.—Fundude99talk to me 08:21, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And I have helped improved the prose with Fundude99. Could you have another look? Erick (talk) 14:48, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Kudzu1: I added a source for his discography from Allmusic. Erick (talk) 16:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thank you. I'd say this is ready to go now, and I support RD. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:34, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] New Horizons' Pluto flyby

[edit]
Proposed image
Articles: New Horizons (talk · history · tag) and Pluto (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ New Horizons performs the first flyby of Pluto (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The New Horizons space probe performs the first flyby of Pluto (pictured).
News source(s): NASA
Credits:

First article updated, second needs updating
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Prior nomination consensus was to wait until this week. It's hard to place an exact start and end to the flyby, but at the time of this nomination the closest approach is 12 hours away (note: it takes 4.5 hours for signal to travel from New Horizons to Earth). The image is an artist's depiction, so I don't know if "(pictured)" is the best way to refer to the image. 208.54.85.185 (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Hard to know when the time to post really is, but since we're already learning things, such as Pluto is bigger than we thought, I see no problem with posting it as soon as it's updated. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, no brainer; suggest we use an actual NASA image, since they are free images. μηδείς (talk) 00:00, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note from nom about above comments: I actually just realized that the communications antenna will be pointed away from Earth during the closest point of the flyby, so data won't be received from the probe until about 1:00 UTC, 15 July (about 13 hours after the closest point of the flyby). But of course, the actual feat will have been accomplished before then and will be widely reported in the news. I think the artist impression is ok for now. It could be changed after data is received from the flyby. Currently-available images of the planet aren't very high resolution or particularly impressive. 208.54.85.185 (talk) 00:06, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'd argue that what we have already from a few days ago (eg as from [15]) is a great image, it's the first time we've seen significant surface detail of the planet. --MASEM (t) 03:00, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'd support when we have news reports that say it happens, but I'd also be okay with when we get the best images per .185 above. --MASEM (t) 03:00, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I would use the alternative blurb, but I suggest you start it off with "NASA's New Horizons space probe" instead of the just "The New Horizons space probe". Also, for the picture, you should use the most recent capture of Pluto (for example, this). Aria1561 (talk) 04:30, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting this shortly before the flyby, possibly right after the TFA is bumped out. Either of these actual images are far more interesting than an "artist" drawing. Nergaal (talk) 05:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. I'm not updating the image yet because we've got Pluto as the Featured Article, and here we've got a picture of the space ship. Once Pluto is no longer the FA the image could be updated. Would be silly to have two pictures of Pluto on the home page at the same time. Jehochman Talk 17:51, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thats fine i didnt notice the pluto on left before. its same image there now anyways -- Ashish-g55 22:31, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 13

[edit]
July 13, 2015 (2015-07-13) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
  • Georgia accuses Russia of violating its sovereignty by placing border markers on the edge of the South Ossetia region, leaving part of an international oil pipeline in territory under Russian control. The area was the site of the Russo-Georgian war in 2008. (Reuters)
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sport

Alaa Bader Abdullah executed

[edit]
Article: Murder of Ibolya Ryan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Female prisoner Alaa Bader Abdullah is executed in her home country, United Arab Emirates, for the murder of Ibolya Ryan, a Romanian-American female teacher. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Alleged perpetrator Alaa Bader Abdullah is executed in her home country, United Arab Emirates, for the murder of Ibolya Ryan, a Romanian-American teacher.
News source(s): Emirates 24/7
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The execution is so sudden in UAE. That's all I can say. George Ho (talk) 04:41, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I'm not sure what makes this item particularly special. I can't say there's necessarily been enormous press coverage about it. Are women usually not executed? SpencerT♦C 14:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Capital punishment in the United Arab Emirates is rare but legal. Too bad that article is inadequately sourced. There is one or no executions per year despite fifty death sentences, according to this source. --George Ho (talk) 15:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Philipp Mißfelder

[edit]
No consensus. Stephen 00:29, 14 July 2015 (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: Philipp Mißfelder (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel,
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: Chairman of the biggest German political youth organisation for 12 years, foreign policy speaker of biggest German political party; please focus comments on notability, I will update the article more later today Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:35, 13 July 2015 (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] Greece bailout

[edit]
Yet another Grexit averted, temporarily, but just another chapter in the story, so our Ongoing covers this. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 13 July 2015 (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.

Articles: Third Economic Adjustment Programme for Greece (talk · history · tag) and Greek government-debt crisis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Greece's creditors and the Greek government agree a third financial programme for Greece. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Greece's creditors and the Greek government agree a third bailout package for Greece.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Greece's creditors and the Greek government agree a third financial programme for Greece to combat the Greek government-debt crisis.
Credits:

Both articles need updating
Nominator's comments: Climax (so far) of a huge news story Smurrayinchester 07:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support: Very much in favour of posting this, but the article should be expanded a little more. Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:53, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Must we wait for EU's approval on this bailout plan? If we post this now, this would show impatience. George Ho (talk) 08:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Greek parliament has to agree a) the package and b) the reforms, and other Eurozone parliaments have to agree the package. That said, most news analysis is saying that the chances of anyone saying no (or nein, or οχι, or perhaps most threateningly of all, ei) is small at this point. No-one wants to go through even more of this. Smurrayinchester 09:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose then. We shall wait for decisions of other Eurozone parliaments then. George Ho (talk) 09:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But at that point it's less likely to be in the news. For complex international stories, we generally post agreements rather than waiting for parliamentary ratification - for example, we posted the announcement that Cuba would be taken off the US State Sponsor of Terrorism list when it was announced, rather than waiting the one-month period that the US Congress had to object (which it ultimately did not). Smurrayinchester 09:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I also say: Post it while it's still in the news. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:39, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Donald Tusk termed it "an agreekment." Sca (talk) 14:49, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tusk? No jokes about that deal being a white elephant, then. Or about Donald being the long pole in the tent. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:57, 13 July 2015 (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.

July 12

[edit]
July 12, 2015 (2015-07-12) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Sports

[Posted] Singles Finals at 2015 Wimbledon Championships

[edit]
(formerly Serena Williams wins Women's Singles)
Proposed image
Articles: 2015 Wimbledon Championships (talk · history · tag) and 2015 Wimbledon Championships – Women's Singles (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In tennis, Serena Williams wins the women's singles and Novak Djokovic (pictured) wins the men's singles at The Championships, Wimbledon.

Serena Williams wins Women's Singles:
In tennis, American player Serena Williams (pictured) beats Spanish player Garbiñe Muguruza, becoming the champion of the Women's Singles of The Championships, Wimbledon.
In tennis, American player Serena Williams (pictured) beats Spanish player Garbiñe Muguruza, earning the championship of the Women's Singles of The Championships, Wimbledon.
In tennis, American player Serena Williams (pictured) beats Spanish player Garbiñe Muguruza, becoming the winner of the Women's Singles of The Championships, Wimbledon.

In tennis, American player Serena Williams (pictured) beats Spanish player Garbiñe Muguruza, winning the Women's Singles of The Championships, Wimbledon. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In tennis, American player Serena Williams wins the women's singles, and Serbian player Novak Djokovic (pictured) wins the men's singles at The Championships, Wimbledon.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In tennis, at The Championships, Wimbledon, American player Serena Williams beats Spanish player Garbiñe Muguruza, winning the women's singles; Serbian player Novak Djokovic (pictured) beats Swiss player Roger Federer, winning the men's singles.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In tennis, at The Championships, Wimbledon, Serena Williams beats Garbiñe Muguruza, winning the women's singles; Novak Djokovic (pictured) beats Roger Federer, winning the men's singles.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: ... I don't know why, but ITN needs something fresher. Now Singles Finals should be featured on Main Page. We need fresher story George Ho (talk) 06:27, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • This being one of most prestigious tennis tournaments, I would think we would post all the winners at once - although Serena's dominance is certainly exceptional. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:57, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment as far as I know, we usually post both men's and women's singles winner in a combined blurb (they are, after all, ITNR) but there'd be no reason not to post the women's result sooner if the article was up to scratch. Men's final will conclude within the next eight or so hours. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:08, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We can update the blurb or merge two blurbs as we did two separate football tournaments. Why else should we not post it soon? George Ho (talk) 09:35, 12 July 2015 (UTC) (I misread; I concur with you. George Ho (talk) 09:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC))[reply]
One question though: is it possible to have two images or someone combining (side-by-side) an image of the two winners? I say this as the last sporting blurb involved both genders but was not changed, with a comment deeming it too US-centric - which ironically could well apply here. Fuebaey (talk) 20:21, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I now recovered and de-struck Williams-only blurbs due to quality concerns. We can post when the Men's Singles portions improve, right? --George Ho (talk) 20:30, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Non notable sporting event, should also be removed from ITN/R. WP is not ESPN. Aaaaaabbbbb111 (talk) 21:56, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Probably the most prominent Tennis competition in the world. I don't know what planet Aaaaaabbbbb111 where this can be considered 'non notable'. 22:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
We have had a lot of photos of men lately, including for the combined soccer blurb. -Kudzu1 (talk) 08:32, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly what I'm getting at. I support switching back to Williams. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:36, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to different Williams pic; admins, take your pick. --George Ho (talk) 08:40, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 11

[edit]
July 11, 2015 (2015-07-11) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sport

[Posted to RD] RD: Satoru Iwata

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Satoru Iwata (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Satoru Iwata, Worldwide president of Nintendo Co. Ltd, dies at the age of 55. (Post)
News source(s): The Verge, Bloomberg
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: President of Nintendo since 2002, credited with helping led the company to be major competitor in the video game industry. RD only even with the death being a sudden loss (due to complications with a bile duct) MASEM (t) 00:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You mean "blurb"? George Ho (talk) 04:52, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] El Chapo escapes prison again

[edit]
Article: Joaquín Guzmán Loera (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Mexican drug lord Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán escapes from Altiplano prison for the second time, resulting in a manhunt. (Post)
News source(s): NBC News CNN BBC The Hindu Le Monde
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The escape of someone described as "one of the world's most notorious crime figures"(NBC) and "the world's most wanted drug trafficker"(BBC) seems to be a big story. We posted his capture last year. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • support - both the dignity of the person and that it is his second escape makes this ITN worthy.--BabbaQ (talk) 09:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose blurb - We can't rush the story as is. Prison escapes... When was the last time these stories were posted? The escape from the Clinton Correctional Facility wasn't posted as a blurb, so why would this one? If you insist, support ongoing until the person is either dead or captured alive. (Must rescind; see further down) George Ho (talk) 09:54, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Clinton escapees did not quite have the stature of this man, and their crimes were not international in scope(I think) as this man was wanted in both Mexico and the US. I don't "insist" on anything; this will either be posted in some form, or not. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Arguably the most-wanted man in the post-Bin Laden world escapes from prison a SECOND time. Prior to his arrest, he headed the Sinaloa Cartel, the largest drug trafficking group in the world. This is huge news in Mexico. This story is headlining a bunch of international media outlets as well. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 14:37, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We can't post this just because it's "huge" in Mexico and elsewhere or he's the second most-wanted man. Not all most-wanted people are featured on front page. Terrorists like bin Laden may have been media's attractions, but I haven't seen yet one prison escapee posted ITN (unless I'm proven wrong). --George Ho (talk) 18:31, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't stay that this should be posted because this is huge news in Mexico. If you read the rest of my comment, you will know that the notability of this man is what makes this worth for the main page. The fact that there hasn't been any prison breaks before isn't a good reason to not post this. He is the first man to escape from that prison, the top one in all of Mexico (he escaped in 2001 from another). He heads the world's largest drug trafficking group. That is pretty notable to me. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 19:20, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The man's notability would not affect how Wikipedia's ITN works. Of course, I did vote for "ongoing", but now I must rescind. If it's posted, we might mislead readers into believing he's unstoppable or frighten readers into fearing for their lives. We did post his arrest, but we had no idea of whether he would escape again. Id est it shouldn't have been posted in the first place, but majority supported it. Probably the best thing to re-feature the BLP is either his capture or death. --George Ho (talk) 19:48, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The WEAKEST of possible supports and with the stipulation that this should not be seen as a precedent. Normally prison breaks, even those by notorious gangsters, would get a quick oppose from me as tabloid news. However I note that we are in an exceptionally slow news cycle and some of the posted blurbs have grown decidedly stale. To that end I think we might give this story a pass. If you like, we could file it under IAR for convenience purposes since I really don't think it meets ITN guidelines. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:46, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you are saying but this isn't a garden variety gangster; he seems to be regarded as #1 in the criminal world. Escaping from prison twice is also somewhat unusual. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You should read this article to understand the significance of his escape a bit more. To add on what 331dot said, he also escaped from Mexico's top maximum-security prison. This is likely going to have big impacts in U.S.-Mexico relations, considering that several U.S. federal courts had requested his extradition. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 15:51, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why would relations between two sovereign states be impacted by one vicious drug lord? He is dangerous, but there are other more hugely dangerous escapees crossing the border. --George Ho (talk) 20:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an expert in U.S.-Mexico relations, but I'll try to provide my understanding of things. At least in the U.S.'s eyes, it shows that they cannot fully trust Mexican officials and that their anti-drug efforts (which are bilateral, by the way) are often pointless if things like this happen. I think it affects U.S.-Mexico relations in the sensitive areas of bilateral law enforcement cooperation and intelligence sharing. In addition, it is frustrating for the U.S. to pour billions of dollars and have Guzmán walk away just like that. They played a pivotal role in Guzmán's decade manhunt, and apparently in his arrest as well. Considering that corrupt officials already let Rafael Caro Quintero go, Guzmán's escape is pretty bad. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 20:33, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What about Mexico's eyes? What do they see the American government? --George Ho (talk) 20:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand your question completely. But it's difficult for me to assess how things will play out at home. The administration's best trophy in the drug war is now gone. The President said an escape would be "unforgivable" in an interview last year, so we'll see. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 22:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, he'll just go back and head the world's largest drug trafficking organization. The fact that we can't predict exactly what will happen after his escape shouldn't be a good reason not to post this. His escape is very notable given the incident and the person involved. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 19:22, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: We don't normally post prison breaks, but this is an independently notable figure, an infamous Mexican crime boss considered one of the world's most wanted criminals, escaping from prison for the second time. This is a big-deal story and the update to Loera's page is certainly sufficient to post. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Conceding this would get some attention in any event, I think one of the reasons this story is getting so much coverage, is again, the incredibly slow news cycle. My God, I think even the sharks have stopped biting! -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:58, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - this guy is more important than the leaders of many countries. I mean, the Mexican cartels are no ordinary gangs - they hold more sway in northern Mexico than the Mexican government. Wnt (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted a bit more quickly and with a slightly weaker consensus than I'd usually prefer, but it does have consensus, the update is there, and we've got to post something. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Collapsing side discussion. SpencerT♦C 16:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Isnt that a matter of case to case basis. Per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. One case is not similar to the next.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed; each case is considered on its own merits. It would depend on the terrorist that escaped, or the extent of the prison riot. Each case is different. 331dot (talk) 01:34, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
George Ho, we report the news here. Would you rather we don't report things that you believe would inspire other news stories, like MH17 or Germanwings Flight 9525 or 2015 Sousse attacks? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:54, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why comparing prison escapes to plane crashes and terrorist attacks? As I said, posting one prison escapee has been unusual, even in this case. What's your point? George Ho (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You were the one making the point George. Perhaps it's lost in translation but your post " Shall we inspire prison escapes to be posted in the future?" seemed to suggest that you thought posting this story would encourage other events of a similar nature to occur. My point was that if you were suggesting that, other posts would inspire other such stories to be repeated. Do you understand? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:38, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I did ask whether this would be a predecessor to many other escapee stories. It would inspire more escapee stories to be nominated, but chances of posting a prison escape is... slim. In this case, since we did post his arrest, we posted his escape just for the heads up. I was thinking: if we hadn't posted his arrest, we wouldn't have posted his escape unless consensus agreed with the escape, not the arrest. George Ho (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 10

[edit]
July 10, 2015 (2015-07-10) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Businesses and economy
  • Greek government-debt crisis
    • A bailout plan is submitted two hours before the midnight deadline. The plan would raise a retirement age to 67 and cut pensions by 15% for those retiring at 62. (LA Times)(Money Control)
  • Ellen Pao resigns as the interim CEO of Internet site Reddit following a user backlash over the deletion of some subreddits for harassment and sacking of a popular admin. Site co-founder Steve Huffman will take her place. (WSJ)
Arts and culture
  • Egyptian actor Omar Sharif dies at the age of 83 after suffering a heart attack. BBC
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sport

[Posted] RD: Jon Vickers

[edit]
Article: Jon Vickers (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times CBS News The Guardian Le Monde Die Welt
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: He was a Companion of the Order of Canada. The WP page List of Companions of the Order of Canada informs us that this is "the highest level of the Order of Canada." He also "received the Governor General's Performing Arts Award for Lifetime Artistic Achievement, Canada's highest honour in the performing arts, in 1998." This seems to indicate he was important in the field of opera singing. Everymorning talk 15:26, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support pending article updates - Importance seems there but the article is virtually unsourced. --MASEM (t) 15:42, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Major Improvement Needed the article has an entirety of seven citations, two of which are about his death and three of which support only two claims in the entire multi-paragraph acreer section. Each stage appearance will need a reference, since a blue link to the Opera will not link us to a primary source in such instances. Even then, that he got a high civilian award from his homeland doesn't strongly establish RD-level notability. μηδείς (talk) 22:30, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very weak oppose largely due to the state of the article currently; but I'm also not convinced that the one award is sufficient. Usually when people get those sorts of awards they already have a lot of other awards. In this case it just seems to be recognizing his long career. If it was clearer how this person is "very important" to their field, I would support. 331dot (talk) 22:34, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support While I agree that the awards would not by themselves establish that Vickers meets the criteria, he easily meets the criterion of having been "widely regarded very important figure" in his field. The Guardian obituary calls him "one of the outstanding operatic tenors of his generation",[16] the BBC says he was "considered by many to be one of the greatest opera singers of the 20th century"[17] and the Washington Post states that his voice "was regarded as one of the finest sounds to fill an opera house in the past half-century".[18] Neljack (talk) 02:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support with improvements. Honestly, I don't see a tremendous case for notability, but the Order of Canada honor maybe just nudges him across the line. However, the article needs some work to track down additional citations, and there may be some BLP issues. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:31, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Article has been improved and should meet acceptable standards for posting. Marking ready as consensus appears to exist; feel free to unmark if there are still problems. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:18, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now that the article has been improved. As for notability, if you read the many obits, Vickers was an opera legend and widely considered the greatest Wagnerian tenor of the 20th century. Among opera lovers he is ranked up there among Callas, Domingo, Pavarotti, Sutherland, Sills, etc. as one of the great voices of the 20th century. Notability is not an issue. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per 4meter4, a legend, - I added sources, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This man died later in Ontario than Sharif in Cairo. George Ho (talk) 22:29, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Excellent update/ref work, suggest posting admin make sure Gerda Arendt gets update credit on her talk page. μηδείς (talk) 01:47, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This has been ready to post for 48 hours. If the page admins are not interested in posting it, it should be closed. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted apologies for the delay. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Roger Rees

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 16:26, 14 July 2015 (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: Roger Rees (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Playbill
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: Tony Award-winning actor also recognizable from roles on television shows like Cheers and The West Wing. Kudzu1 (talk) 05:11, 11 July 2015 (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] Shanghai Cooperation Organisation

[edit]
Closing without prejudice to renomination. No !votes have been cast and as noted by Spencer no real explanation of significance has been offered. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:53, 12 July 2015 (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: Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ India and Pakistan become 7th and 8th permanent members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Reuters
 125.14.52.226 (talk) 02:04, 11 July 2015 (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] RD: Omar Sharif

[edit]
Article: Omar Sharif (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
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: Multiple Golden Globe winner, Egyptian-American actor famous for roles in Lawrence of Arabia and Dr. Zhivago. RD only, not blurb MASEM (t) 14:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Articles do not need to be perfect to be linked on ITN. They do need to be reasonably well sourced and free of any other serious problems. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:39, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then feel free to instigate a discussion to remove "Articles that are subject to serious issues, as indicated by 'orange'- or 'red'-level tags at either the article level or within any section, may not be accepted for an emboldened link." from the instructions. Yes, it says "may not be accepted" because it used to say "will not be accepted" and several admins over-ruled that. If you wish to allow items with orange or red tags and multiple {{citation needed}} tags then I think it's worthwhile capturing that in the instructions so we don't go round this discussion again and again. Please make a proposal. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:45, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have hidden or cited all material with tags and removed the page tag. The only section that may need addressing is the filmography; normally we require refs for films that are redlinked. They can be deleted, and the section changed to selected filmography, which is what I will do if no one else takes action over the next 30-60 minutes. μηδείς (talk) 17:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Listed in RDs of French, German, Dutch, Danish & Spanish WPs. Sca (talk) 17:39, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Once again, irrelevant and knowing the standards of those WPs, worse than irrelevant I'm afraid. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This user no longer responds to, or comments upon, statements made anywhere on Wikipedia by TRM. Sca (talk) 20:38, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And that has no relevance whatsoever to this discussion, your position has been made clear on your user page. Either way, the point remains that your post, while interesting, has no relevance here. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:42, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Idem. Sca (talk) 20:58, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Idem. But thank you for responding now twice despite saying you would not respond at all ever again. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So who exactly is this IDEM? And have they just died? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]
[19], i.e. the same as before. Sca (talk) 00:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]
shucks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:28, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I am good on even numbered days, evil on odd numbered days. μηδείς (talk) 19:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Alas, Medeis, adieu. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:28, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are in no position to talk having nominated an egregiously sub-par article for ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The bar was lowered for such RD nominations so that a five-sentence three-source update is no longer considered necessary. Our hostile anonymous IP is welcome to add to the update. μηδείς (talk) 19:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(To add, specifically only for RDs - as the update for most is one or two sentences that explain the circumstances of their death. For all other topics we do still expect five-sentence, three-source update, hence why ITNR sporting event results we push to have a describe of the winning event). --MASEM (t) 22:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm guessing, but I don't think Brad is blind. He may be, in which case he does a decent job of not making it obvious. For your information IP120, the criteria for RD include the following: "In addition, the article must have been satisfactorily updated and have no major omissions of the person's life and effect. " So, a satisfactory update might be thousands of characters about a tragic passing, or a series of testimonies from prominent B-class figures, or it might just be a sentence to say, sorry guys, he's died, and that's all we have right now. If you'd like to "update" the "update" criteria, feel free to start a discussion mandating an objective and testable update criterion. In the meantime, please stop being so offensive (or puerile), and try to actually do something to improve Wikipedia (rather than expecting everyone else to do it on your behalf). You could even log in to one of your accounts and do something positive! WaltCip makes an excellent point, by the way.... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] BRICS

[edit]
UNANIMOUSLY OPPOSED:

Re-nominate (or re-open) when article is expanded and event starts. (non-admin closure) --George Ho (talk) 00:05, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

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: 7th BRICS summit (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 7th BRICS summit concludes in Ufa, Russia. (Post)
Credits:

Article needs updating
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: Concluded a day ago. 120.62.30.168 (talk) 13:01, 10 July 2015 (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.

July 9

[edit]
July 9, 2015 (2015-07-09) (Thursday)
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports

[Posted] China bans stockholders from selling stocks for six months

[edit]
Article: 2015 Chinese stock market crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In response to the stock market crash on the Shanghai Stock Exchange, the China Securities Regulatory Commission imposes a six-month ban on stockholders owning more than five percent of stocks from selling their stocks. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In response to the stock market crash on the Shanghai Stock Exchange, the China Securities Regulatory Commission bans stockholders owning more than five percent of stocks from selling their stocks for six months.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In response to the stock market crash on the Shanghai Stock Exchange, the China Securities Regulatory Commission imposes a six-month ban on stockholders owning more than five percent of stocks from selling their stocks, leading to around 1,300 firms suspending stock trade.
News source(s): Reuters The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Better late than never. Should not be considered stale; in fact, it has been days after two association football matches but before a prison escape. George Ho (talk) 05:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Christian Audigier

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 16:26, 14 July 2015 (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: Christian Audigier (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Us Magazine
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: One of fashion designers selling or working with many brands. If some Mormon pastor gets mentioned, why not this person? George Ho (talk) 08:43, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Yes, we should obviously take into account the balancing effect that his not being a Mormon has, but the article is far too small, with no awards or proof of standing in the fashion community that would accomplish the desired revisionism. μηδείς (talk) 16:57, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose on notability, and article quality is obviously not quite up to snuff. Fairly well known in the fashion world, it sounds like, but I'm not seeing a ton of awards or evidence of outsize celebrity. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:00, 12 July 2015 (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] RD: Saud bin Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud

[edit]
Article: Saud bin Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Saud Al Faisal, after serving nearly 39 years as the Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Saudi Arabian government, dies at age 75. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Saud Al Faisal, son of the late King Faisal, dies at age 75.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Saud Al Faisal, the Saudi Arabian Minister of Foreign Affairs, also son of the late King Faisal, dies at age 75.
News source(s): Gulf NewsAl-Jazeera
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: Article is in good shape, and the person is a prominent politician in Saudi Arabia. George Ho (talk) 23:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose blurb Important... but not that important. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:36, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Srebrenica veto

[edit]
no trend in support of posting. μηδείς (talk) 17:49, 11 July 2015 (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: Srebrenica massacre (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russia vetoes UN resolution condemning Srebrenica massacre as genocide. (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

Article updated
 198.16.164.205 (talk) 15:42, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. 198.16.164.205 (talk) 16:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support - when updated.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:58, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose This looks like business as usual at the UN and I have serious doubts it rises to the level that we usually look for in terms of coverage and significance. That said, we are in a pretty slow news cycle so maybe we could give it a pass. In a busier news cycle I would oppose this more strongly. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:22, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as significant in the burgeoning historical treatment of one of the most horrific acts in Europe since the 1940s and 1950s. Interestingly, the scuttlebutt from Belgrade is that Serbia agreed to abandon its application for NATO membership in order to obtain Russia's veto here. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:38, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - As said, it's "business as usual". Russia vetoes any UN resolution that is deemed a threat to international security, including sanctions over the Ukrainian crisis. Look at vetoes by the US regarding Israeli–Palestinian conflicts. George Ho (talk) 19:48, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose per above. The massacre is already considered a genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Court of Justice. So UN's decision to adopt a resolution on the 20th anniversary of the massacre and not much earlier looks like a publicity stunt, considering for example four toothless resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh. The famed UN blue helmets of the 90s are unfortunately gone almost everywhere, in time of dire need... Brandmeistertalk 21:10, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose When is the last UN veto we posted? Just because it's obviously craven patronage doesn't make a policy decision into an historical event. μηδείς (talk) 00:38, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This would be interesting if it was tied in any way to the Donetsk People's Republic - but I don't see anything like that reported. -- Callinus (talk) 12:29, 10 July 2015 (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] Ongoing: New Horizons flyby of Pluto

[edit]
No consensus to post item at this time. SpencerT♦C 16:47, 10 July 2015 (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.

I've see 3 different articles on BBC about New Horizons in the last week, and since the actual flyby is less than a week away I think this would be a fine chance to give some spotlight to what some still want to think this is the 9th planet. Nergaal (talk) 15:11, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • support - a blurb however. This is interesting and notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would support a blurb during the actual flyby, which I believe is set for 14 July. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ongoing, support blurb when it happens - It's going to be interesting when the first photos come back to us for analysis and wonderment, but I can't see the leadup to this being a ongoing element, as it only seems to be "it's getting closer -- it's getting closer..." type news until the closest passing actually happens, in contrast with daily violence in conflicts or near-daily match updates for sporting events. --MASEM (t) 15:16, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - One suggestion would be to post it when consensus has been established as it is already all over the news and in fact ongoing until 14 July atleast.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:18, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the article recieving substantive updates, or just changes to the distance figure? Abductive (reasoning) 19:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article now has some detailed pictures of Pluto in it! Which I think rather counts for something. Wnt (talk) 21:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a Pluto blurb to run on July 15. See [20] - there is a plan to cover image returns live on television starting 3 p.m. EDT that day. The probe will actually be OUT of contact on much of the 14th, so there won't be anything for us but the not-news that it MIGHT be recording things, AFAIK. We should be ready to move on the story to feature it the instant the images start coming out... or alternatively, to cover the tragic story of the probe that went into safe mode on flyby day (let's hope not, NASA says it has failsafes...) The first of these blurbs thus should be that New Horizons returns images from its July 14 flyby of Pluto... Wnt (talk) 21:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting the flyby per ITNR (the arrival of a probe at its destination) but I don't think ongoing is appropriate. There isn't a lead up to the flyby warranting coverage; the media attention nonwithstanding. 331dot (talk) 22:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose posting until next week, best pictures are expected Weds. Posting anything now is far too premature, and since this is a flyby, ongoing is also a bad idea. μηδείς (talk) 00:41, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Next Wednesday should be the 15th, so I think we're in agreement. I'll add though that I don't know we'll see the best pictures the 15th - the probe is expected to take 16 months to upload images to NASA, and I have a feeling we'll be contenting ourselves with thumbnails and technical parameters at first. But ITNs tend to hang around a long time, so if there's an incoming stream of flyby images with fresh news coming in daily, it'll be good to have it up from the 15th till whenever it expires. Wnt (talk) 11:29, 10 July 2015 (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.

July 8

[edit]
July 8, 2015 (2015-07-08) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Sports

Ongoing: 2015 Pan American Games

[edit]
Article: 2015 Pan American Games (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: There is a significant international sporting competition around the corner (beginning July 10), and so I figured I would raise it here ahead of time to see if it can be whipped into shape to be Main Page ready and whether there is consensus to post this into ongoing. Floydian τ ¢ 07:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support We need to look at these multi-country several-week-long events and evaluate them for ITN. Having something this big hidden away from the frontpage would seem counter-productive to WP. The ongoing ticker would alert many casual users to the event, and hopefully bring in more editors too. So I fully expect this to be closed by lunchtime today as a "No". Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 07:20, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Ongoing for this regional competition(aside from opposing the presence of sports on Ongoing in general but it looks like that ship has sailed). 331dot (talk) 09:26, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Eh, ongoing is pretty harmless, and we posted the Commonwealth Games. ITN is not very busy at the moment, and that will continue as we dive into silly season. Smurrayinchester 09:58, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is not the highest level of competition in the relevant sports, and is not of world-wide relevance. To get a spot on ongoing a sporting competition needs to tick at least one of those boxes. The opening, closing and/or any significant individual records/happenings can be nominated for a regular blurb if desired. Thryduulf (talk) 12:17, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't they? What's your rationale behind that statement? Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 19:52, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because the reader who is presently interested in the Pan American Games already knows that they are interested in the Pan American Games. Once the games conclude, readers who were not following the games can be directed to the article. Abductive (reasoning) 20:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Same thing for the Women's FIFA Cup? --George Ho (talk) 20:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Same thing for any news event. ITN is not intended to take the place of BBC.com, it's intended to showcase Wikipedia articles. And confining it to murder-and-mayhem is a rather narrow scope. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
One could take your first three arguments as reasons not to post to ongoing.... Abductive (reasoning) 03:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Or not to post anything - to abolish ITN altogether. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:38, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ironically, I have an anecdote to this. I generally just change the url after the /wiki/ in my browser to change pages, rather than searching them. I tried "Pan-am Games", "Pan-Am Games", "2015 Pan-am Games", "2015 Pan-Am Games" and "2015 Pan Am Games" before resorting to the search bar to find "2015 Pan American Games". - Floydian τ ¢ 03:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Posting one item (in my view, wrongly) doesn't itself mean that this item should be posted. We consider each item on its own merits. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even understand this nomination. The games haven't even started yet, so why not nominate the opening cermony? Abductive (reasoning) 10:19, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That doesn't make any sense. The Games are a multi-sport event, which means it is even more a variety of ongoing events, while the Tour is one event split into severeal stages. Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • And if you check any major news site, you'll see that no-one gives a damn about the Pan-American Games, but everyone is reporting about the Tour. And I might remind you that this section is called In the news. For what it's worth, I am against posting any of them to Ongoing, I simply supported the Tour because the Women's World Cup was posted. But since then, a majority of people here have spoken against posting sport events to Ongoing (see the general discussion on it on the talk page), so I say: Let's be stringent and post nothing. Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:15, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Actually, any major news site, like the BBC, are reporting on The Ashes and Wimbledon. The Tour is mentioned in passing on a sidebar. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Still more than I found about the Games, on Guardian.co.uk for example... Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Pan-Am games may not be such a big deal as they once were. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:24, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But the Pan Am Games haven't even started. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I originally posted this for July 10, which is the day of the opening. The intent was to get consensus in advance. The parent article (2015 Pan American Games) is very well updated and cited, so I imagine whomever is taking care of that article will also be updating the chronology. More eyes is always better. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:57, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 7

[edit]
July 7, 2015 (2015-07-07) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
  • 2015 Moncks Corner mid-air collision
    • A United States Air Force F-16 collides with a privately-owned Cessna to the north of Charleston, South Carolina. The pilot of the jet ejects safely, but the Cessna breaks up mid-air, killing the two unidentified occupants. (CNN)
Law and crime

July 6

[edit]
July 6, 2015 (2015-07-06) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports

[Posted] RD: Jerry Weintraub

[edit]
Article: Jerry Weintraub (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times BBC News People AP Variety
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: Major Hollywood producer whose films and TV shows have won awards. Kudzu1 (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Inquiry is there a complete filmography? What's listed in the article seem to be mostly midlevel comedies and remakes. μηδείς (talk) 01:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not seeing him as a leader in the entertainment industry, as Medeis points out, his film work is mid-level works and recieved no direct awards for any specific work. --MASEM (t) 02:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; no sources indicating this is in the news. If there is, please explain how this person meets the RD criteria. 331dot (talk) 06:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Added sources. Pretty widespread coverage. Weintraub was a talent manager and agent who worked with some of the biggest names in music (Led Zeppelin, John Denver, Dolly Parton, etc.) as well as being the producer behind movies like Nashville, The Karate Kid, and Ocean's Eleven, and HBO shows like Behind the Candelabra and The Brink. I think notability is fairly clear. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose What awards did he actually win? Outside of Nashville, I don't see any movies that he was involved with that were award winning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.148.252 (talk) 15:08, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The original Karate Kid won a couple of Young Artist Awards and was nominated for a couple of bigger awards. Oh, God! won a couple of Saturn Awards and was nominated for an Oscar. Years of Living Dangerously won an Environmental Media Award and was Emmy-nominated. Behind the Candelabra won several Emmys. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Had an important impact in the music industry and "made show-business history" with large concerts. Brought us live shows with John Denver, Elvis, Sinatra, Neil Diamond, Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin, Moody Blues, and others. He also won three Emmys during a 50-year career. Currently a top news story. --Light show (talk) 17:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I did not see any reference to his winning three Emmys. It's not in the article. Do you have a source for that? If it's true I might reconsider my oppose !vote. The other stuff is pretty run of the mill. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I too would reconsider if the three Emmys was in the article with sources; right now he just seems notable for being associated with notable things(for the most part). 331dot (talk) 18:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I added some new cites to the lead noting the Emmys, although all three were already noted in the article with sources, so the new cites could be removed. --Light show (talk) 19:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK I see the source of the confusion. You said above that he won three Emmys when in fact the Emmys were won by programs or persons in programs that he was associated with. There is a very big difference. I stand by my oppose !vote. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Light show (talk) 03:16, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed]2015 anti-china protest in Turkey

[edit]
SNOW close. This is substantively the same nomination as the previous SNOW closed one. It is one sentence about a purely run of the mill and non-notable protest. There is zero chance of this being posted on ITN. It does not meet the guidelines. If you disagree take it to the talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:18, 6 July 2015 (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: Xinjiang_conflict#2015_anti-China_protests_in_Turkey (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 2,000 Turkish nationalists protest against China in Istanbul, Turkey which led to China issuing travel warning to its citizens traveling to Turkey. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
  • Nominated by [[User:198.16.164.205|198.16.164.205]] ([[User talk:198.16.164.205|talk]] · [{{fullurl:User talk:198.16.164.205|action=edit&preload=Template:ITN_candidate/preload_credit&preloadtitle=ITN+recognition+for+%5B%5BXinjiang_conflict%232015_anti-China_protests_in_Turkey%5D%5D&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d=Xinjiang_conflict%232015_anti-China_protests_in_Turkey&preloadparams%5b%5d=nominated}} give credit])

Article updated
 198.16.164.205 (talk) 23:08, 6 July 2015 (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.

[Withdrawn] Ongoing: 2015 Tour de France

[edit]
WITHDRAWN:

--George Ho (talk) 23:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

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: 2015 Tour de France (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: If blurb won't be posted, perhaps the event should be listed as "ongoing", like the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup. It's getting a lot of updates, and it brings happy and joy to relieve tensions of the Greek debt crisis. George Ho (talk) 20:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The winner of the Tour will certainly be posted but as an ongoing, the event is far too niche in terms of viewership and interest to merit an ITN ongoing. The scale of the Tour is much smaller than Olympics or FIFA World Cup, too. --MASEM (t) 20:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because unlike the World Cup(which I don't think should have been posted to Ongoing either) the Tour is one continuous event involving the same competitors; the Cup has different teams playing different matches. Ongoing is not for sports events in progress. 331dot (talk) 20:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The general rule of thumb here is that we only post the result of ITN worthy sporting events. In the same vein we don't post the various games of the World Series. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:06, 6 July 2015 (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.

July 5

[edit]
July 5, 2015 (2015-07-05) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports

[Closed] Grateful Dead perform final show

[edit]
No consensus to post. 331dot (talk) 06:42, 7 July 2015 (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: Grateful Dead (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Grateful Dead perform their last public concert, ending a 50-year musical career. (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone The New York Times
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Legendary American rock band. Huge part of pop culture, counterculture, and music history. Kudzu1 (talk) 22:23, 6 July 2015 (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] Hacking Team is hacked

[edit]
happy to see this nomination, but snow close is obvious, as "irony" is (unfortunately) not an ITN criterion. μηδείς (talk) 23:35, 6 July 2015 (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: Hacking Team (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Hacking Team, a company that provides spyware and malware to government agencies, is itself hacked. (Post)
News source(s): ZDNet
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: More than 400GB of the company's data is now available for download, but Hacking Team has warned against doing that as the files contain virusses. Count Iblis (talk) 15:29, 6 July 2015 (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.

@Count Iblis: An interesting story here is that every copy of Adobe Flash in existence had a vulnerability that HT knew about, which was revealed (with complete instructions for use) in the hacked data. They just offered a patch yesterday -- do you have it yet? Wnt (talk) 21:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Withdrawn] RD: Burt Shavitz

[edit]
WITHDRAWN:

--George Ho (talk) 08:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

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: Burt Shavitz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WRAL NY Times
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: This man founded Burt's Bees, a bee honey (oops) personal care products company. George Ho (talk) 04:52, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment little small, 12 refs, personally never heard of the product, and I don't think this would be worthy of inclusion unless his actions have influenced other companies to change environmental practises. -- Aronzak (talk) 05:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Even if the article was more expansive, this is a rather small company and without the influence in the world, failing RD importance of leadership. (compare to Vidal Sassoon who we did post). --MASEM (t) 06:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That was before the RD-era (or RD-implement). His death was posted as a blurb before "Recent deaths" ticker. George Ho (talk) 06:09, 6 July 2015 (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] 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup

[edit]
Articles: 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup (talk · history · tag) and 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, the United States wins the Women's World Cup, defeating Japan 5–2 in the final. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Both articles updated
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Obviously still needs a match summary and removal from ongoing if posted. Fuebaey (talk) 23:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not true that "no one outside the US knows or cares about this", and even if it was, single-country objections are not valid as stated under "Please do not" above. I'm not sure how the linked-to discussion demonstrates that there would have been no stand alone blurb had Japan won, which I don't think is true either. 331dot (talk) 01:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the anon was being facetious. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but not a good thing to do with text communication. 331dot (talk) 01:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@JanderVK: Yes, as TRM states- and if it is posted "within minutes" of the game ending it is because it got updated "within minutes" of the game ending, which did not happen here. If you would like to see something like this posted quickly, please work to adequately update it quickly. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's the top level of women's soccer, and is listed on ITNR. It is also included partially as a matter of fairness with the men's tournament. If you feel it should not be included, please propose its removal. 331dot (talk) 10:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the evening news tonight, they reported that the TV ratings for the women's soccer final were higher than for any of the games in the recent NBA finals. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch! On reflection, I think the answer to your question is probably not. But FTR I don't think the other match should have been posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:41, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lol: Wikipedia:Top 25 Report. Nergaal (talk) 05:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We don't ever really need two "In This Specific Sport..." headlines at once. The US Triple Crown and the Epsom Derby were hugely disparate, but I don't think anyone was damaged by the combined blurb. μηδείς (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it would be absurd for us to feature to consecutive headings commencing "In association football, X wins the Y, defeating Z in the final". Combined blurb is fine. And if the World Cup coincided with another huge tournament result (which it never does) then we would have to consider it similarly. Nergaal's link makes a good point, more than one sports article made our top 25, including a little-known female British tennis player. Who knew (other than us Brits)? Sometimes, just sometimes, we need to stop the snooty dickhead attitude that some people here adopt and realise that our readers like reading about popular things. Without our readers, we're nothing. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Greek referendum result

[edit]
We've got the debt crisis at Ongoing now, this result appears to have made little difference, and there's no clear consensus to post this individual item of the overall "crisis". Of course, if there's a tangible link between this result and some kind of "Grexit", we can go over it one more time, but right now, nothing doing. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2015 (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: Greek_bailout_referendum,_2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In a referendum, Greek voters reject bailout conditions proposed by the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF. (Post)
Credits:

Article needs updating
What's a "newspaper" – ?? Sca (talk) 21:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]
You know, what you get to wrap your doner and chips. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Make mine currywurst & frites. Sca (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]
It is news, but Wikipedia is not a newspaper. --bender235 (talk) 13:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support conditional on the article being free of maintenance tags and updated adequately. As Zwerg notes, this has been all over European news for four or five days. It's certainly ITN-worthy, we just need a quality article to back it up. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, especially as the result is now clearly "No". Black Kite (talk) 20:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Of course it's news, big news. However, like several colleagues heard from above, I can't support a blurb linking to that avalanche of an article – even as pared to a 'mere' 15,000 words. (A good target total would be 2,500 to 3,000 words, IMOEO.) Nor am I qualified to fix it. Alack and alas. Sca (talk) 20:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is another incident in the Greek debt crisis which we already have as an ongoing entry. Whatever the result, this is going to go on through more stages and the point of having the ongoing entry is to avoid covering it blow-by-blow. Andrew D. (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ongoing doesn't prohibit significant, highly noteworthy developments from being elevated to a blurb should they arise. It could be temporarily removed from Ongoing and restored once the blurb falls off(or is removed). 331dot (talk) 01:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what the politicians say, and isn't that what matters? Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:07, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Politicians in all parts of Europe (apart from Greece) confirm just what I said. The Greek referendum does not change anything. The only real "news" will come in a couple of days, when Greece has to introduce a parallel currency. --bender235 (talk) 13:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's the answer! Much better indeed. Suggest we make that the target article and post. Jusdafax 15:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I ask the tagger and others to discuss the tag on the article talk page. Jusdafax 19:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. In the meantime, it's not ready. Please let us know when it's up to scratch. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I specifically invite you to share your specific concerns about the article, aside from the fact that it has been tagged. Jusdafax 19:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I read that, thanks for the clarification. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:53, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jusdafax, there are people there edit warring from what appears to be a POV standpoint and who are removing tags without justification. The best alternative would probably be to remove entire sections which already have sub-articles to get rid of the problematic editorializing and unsupported text, and to remove various unattributed claims. But the problem is not with our efforts here, it's with disruptive editors there hell-bent on making their points. In the meantime the entire matter is still under ongoing, and posting the already well-known results is not a critical matter. μηδείς (talk) 20:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC
  • Tag removed without improvement note that again the general tag has been removed although multiple sections still have citation needed flags. μηδείς (talk) 23:41, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yet again a misleading and non-constructive comment. I argued why I removed the tag. You can also read Template:Refimprove#When to use: "Please consider marking individual unreferenced statements with {{Citation needed}} instead of placing this template" (my emphasis). Overall 90% of the article is referenced and uncontested. One could simply move the contested sections to the talk page, and post the news. --ELEKHHT 00:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for the personal attack, I certainly have not getting enough roughage in my diet. As for you "argument", it was this edit summary: "generic tag not needed as there are inline tags and only minor points are contested". Things like the president approving the referendum are not "minor" and the purpose of the general tag George placed is to bring attention to the fact that this article will not be posted with citation need tags. Rather than removing the orange tag and making personal attacks you should focus on addressing the needed citations. Come back with that done and nothing will stand in your way. μηδείς (talk) 00:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Man, at this rate Greece might solve their problems before you guys post this. Nergaal (talk) 18:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The thing is, it is not "we guys" who are the problem. The unaddressed cn tags and other issues at the article are the problem. When someone makes the issue our actions, but the article is still problematic according to half a dozen explicit complaints by others above, and what is addressed is not getting refs, but edit warring over removing tags, then the process grinds to a halt. I have put a lot of effort into things like the Dal'nij Vostok sinking, The Congolese People's Palace stampede, and the Catalan independence protests even when the sources were largely non-English. But when you are faced with hostility from the local editors there's little incentive to continue. If the article is fully referenced now, maybe it is ready to go up, if not it is still on the sticky. But at this point I am taking the article owners' advice, and am ignoring the issue. μηδείς (talk) 19:09, 7 July 2015 (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.

July 4

[edit]
July 4, 2015 (2015-07-04) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics
Sport

[Closed] Tour de France

[edit]
Consensus appears to be to wait until the race's conclusion. -Kudzu1 (talk) 23:56, 5 July 2015 (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: 2015 Tour de France (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Tour de France begins. (Post)
News source(s): BBC NBC
Credits:

Article updated
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: To add to the ongoing section. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:02, 5 July 2015 (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] 2015 Copa América Final

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2015 Copa América Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Chile beat Argentina to win their first ever Copa America. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Chile beat Argentina to win their first ever Copa America.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In association football, Chile (captain Claudio Bravo pictured) win the Copa América, defeating Argentina in the final.
Credits:

Article updated
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.

 120.62.18.219 (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will you change your vote, The Rambling Man? George Ho (talk) 07:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I think the third blurb is the most neutral, wikipedia-like Cato censor (talk) 20:11, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You must be from the US if you can thing women's football is on equal terms to men's. Nergaal (talk) 05:34, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for one thing, the women's game certainly seems on a par with the men's in terms of violence. And by the way, the women's final outdrew the Copa final by about 8,000. What's up with that? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Both matches sold out, but Canada has larger stadia than Chile. ReadingOldBoy (talk) 08:29, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Their largest soccer stadium holds less than 50,000? How come? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:28, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And for what it's worth, the supposed "last concerts" by the Grateful Dead (already rejected for ITN) each drew over 70,000. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you actually want to make comparisons check the broadcast numbers. The 1994 WC had the highest attendance ever even though the sport itself is far away from being the most popular in US. Nergaal (talk) 14:13, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is hard to believe that the opinions of such poorly informed individuals matters equally. Sigh, Wikipedia:Top 25 Report. Nergaal (talk) 05:53, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
From the list, it's clear the public is well-informed on the latest Terminator movie. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:21, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And is clear that there is more interest in Copa America than in the women's WC. Nergaal (talk) 18:11, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
5th vs. 9th and 21st. Meanwhile, all three soccer articles are considered to be of more interest than ISIS, but not as interesting as various blockbuster movies. It's possible there were more hits on the Copa just because people were wondering what it is. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well there's not consensus on the merge. Please don't rule by fiat.120.62.25.133 (talk) 14:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC) — 120.62.25.133 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

[Closed] Tupou VI now crowned King

[edit]
Closing as no consensus to post. This is the second nomination for the coronation with the same result. It's time to move on. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:44, 6 July 2015 (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: Tupou VI (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Tupou VI (pictured) is officially crowned as the King of Tonga within three years of his reign. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ King Tupou VI (pictured) is given a formal coronation within three years of his reign.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Now is the time to nominate the official coronation of this man. George Ho (talk) 05:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added altblurb. George Ho (talk) 05:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Coverage seems limited; has been King for three years already. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (pending article update) - a coronation is a major event in any country, it's certainly a big event in Tonga (one person here says "Once in a lifetime")[21], and it's not often Tonga is on ITN. The fact that it's 3 years from his ascension is not really relevant. I'm guessing that, for the US president, both the election result and inauguration are in ITN. The article does need updating though. Adpete (talk) 09:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The inauguration of the US President isn't usually posted; an exception being Obama's first one due to its historic nature. Generally inaugurations/coronations are not posted, because they usually occur much closer to the choosing of the successor(and barring some unfortunate event are a certainty to occur) and/or receive much less coverage. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing we'll post every inauguration of a *new* US president, and Obama 2009 is the only time that has happened since ITN existed. As for gaps between ascension and coronation, it's not unheard of, it was 16 months' gap for Queen Elizabeth II. This is a major cultural event in a small country, exactly the sort of thing ITN should be covering because we try to have a global focus. Adpete (talk) 10:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't support posting the inauguration of a "new" President, as their election would have been posted per ITNR a few months prior.(Here the difference is a few years.) Obama's first was an exception as the first black president- I don't think subsequent black presidents would merit posting necessarily. If Hillary Clinton is elected hers would be posted as the first woman. We will have a lot of double postings if we consistently post both elections/successions and inaugurations/coronations of all countries, at least without weighing news coverage(which, in this case, seems limited.) 331dot (talk) 01:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support on the principle we did not post when he was actually named king some years back (not even an ITNC). We are talking the leader of a country here and I think we can make the exception here, but be more attentive when other king-namings are done at that point as we would have done with election results. --MASEM (t) 15:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Coronation of a king, even if he's held the role for some time already, is a significant moment in the history of a monarchy. Resolute 16:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:IAR and WP:COMMONSENSE. Royal coronations are extremely rare events and a big deal. To the extent that this is not recognized by the guidelines, they are deficient and should be ignored or set aside until they can be amended. For the record, I almost never invoke IAR, tending towards the view that with apologies to one of our former presidents, it should be safe legal and rare. But this would seem to be the sort of situation that it was made for. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is an oddity, the coronation is simply a big party, three years after Tupou VI actually became Tupou VI. It changes nothing as far as I can see, it's been mildly reported (in somewhat guarded reports) so is in the news, but it's hardly significant. That Ad Orientem claimed that "royal coronations are extremely rare events and a big deal", I went looking for our own article on List of coronations and drew a blank. Further investigations revealed that they certainly don't happen every day, but mainly they happen in a timely manner, normally following the death of the predecessor. All that notwithstanding, the article is a shambles and is nowhere near good enough for main page inclusion. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As mentioned above, Queen Elizabeth II became queen in February 1952 and only had her coronation in June 1953, well over a year later. I would imagine both her death and (presumably) Charles' coronation will be instantly posted, regardless of the delay. Three and a bit years for Tupou does seem extreme, as far as I can see the previous king of Tonga ascended in September 2006 and had his coronation in August 2008 (nearly two years) and his predecessor ascended in December 1965 and had his coronation in July 1967 (a year and a half). A reasonable gap isn't that uncommon, though this does seem more than usual. Rejecting it by saying "he's been king for years already" or comparing it to the two month delay for US Presidents do seem to be missing the point. --86.188.96.158 (talk) 20:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, ofcourse. a crowning of a king is ITN worthy.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Not big news, given the years of delay. Jusdafax 01:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We don't post inaugurations of presidents, so coronations shouldn't either, especially not for the minor monarchies. Nergaal (talk) 20:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is a ceremony, not a change of head of state. The altblurb is not idiomatic English, and an accurately worded blurb, like "Tupou VI is formally coronated after three years on the throne" points out the stale, anti-climactic nature of the nomination. This makes a much better DYK hook than anything else. μηδείς (talk) 23:31, 5 July 2015 (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.

July 3

[edit]
July 3, 2015 (2015-07-03) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and medicine
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology

[Posted] RD: Boyd K. Packer

[edit]
Article: Boyd K. Packer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP The Salt Lake Tribune
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: President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (a top Mormon religious leader, basically) since 1994. Article seems to be in good shape. Kudzu1 (talk) 02:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support If I understand the Mormon hierarchy correctly he was the #2 man in the church and heir presumptive to the top job. That qualifies for RD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on importance. Article seems mostly fair-minded and establishes his significance as a major figure in the LDS church. I tagged a sentence in the article as wanting clarification: the article says that he died "a martyr" of old age, and I'm not sure how that works. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 04:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - A mere name mentioning is fine. I've never seen one of influential figures like this man. And the quality is nice. --George Ho (talk) 04:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Yes, a long-serving member of the old guard, (From the article: Packer advocated that LDS historians should refrain from discussing history that does not promote faith. In a 1981 speech to educators in the LDS Church Educational System, he cautioned, "There is a temptation for the writer or teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.") but no recognition outside the church beyond being interviewed for a PBS documentary. If there's more that justifies his recognition as an influential figure it should be in the article. μηδείς (talk) 17:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    This doesn't seem like a meaningful oppose. Putting the guy on RD isn't an endorsement of who he was or what he said, simply an acknowledgement that a notable person (who was clearly significant enough to merit coverage in a wide range of reliable sources, not just Mormon or Utah outlets) has died and we happen to have a biographical article for him that is in decent enough shape to post. I think those qualifications are met. -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's a straw man. Point to where he was influential or recognized outside the church. He has one building in Utah named for him. The most notable thing about him seems to be that quote, which I did not add to the article or go looking for. If he's somehow important outside the LDS higher bureaucracy, let's hear it. μηδείς (talk) 19:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Setting aside the notion that him being a longtime leading figure in one of the largest and fastest-growing churches in North America doesn't qualify him as notable -- his comments on homosexuality and feminism certainly got some play in the media: [22] [23] -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Jacobo Zabludovsky

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 16:50, 10 July 2015 (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: Jacobo Zabludovsky (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Wall Street Journal, Haaretz, Latin Times, Reuters
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: The leading TV news anchor in Mexico for almost three decades, viewed as a staunch supporter of the former long-running PRI government. --Tocino, 09:45 July 2015 (UTC)
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] Phil Walsh killed

[edit]
Although there was some support, this isn't going to end up being posted (RD or blurb). No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 11:13, 6 July 2015 (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: Phil Walsh (Australian footballer) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Adelaide Crows coach Phil Walsh is killed in a domestic incident involving his son. (Post)
News source(s): (ABC News Australia), every other Australian news source
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: I am unsure about bringing this here, but I think it is worth discussion. I think it is safe to say that Australian Rules football is the biggest sport in Australia. To have the head coach of one of the elite professional teams allegedly murdered is certainly a newsworthy event within Australia, but its impact probably does not extend far outside of the country. Then again, many items that appear in ITN are domestic events. Based on his career as a player and coach, he would not qualify under the recent deaths criteria. So my feeling is that it has to be either a blurb or nothing. The article's references are not up to scratch at the moment but can be easily fixed. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, weak oppose RD: I definitely don't see how this event, no matter how tragic, meets notability criteria for ITN. And Walsh could qualify for RD as a coach of a well-known pro sports team, but I don't think he meets muster in terms of accomplishments. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:23, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Walsh was the current coach of the 7th-ranked team in the most popular football code in Australia. If the 7th-ranked coach in the NFL was murdered, it would be an automatic inclusion in ITN. WWGB (talk) 04:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, that's entirely true, it would be on here in hours. However, that doesn't make it right, and I don't see how hits belongs on ITN. Fgf10 (talk) 07:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree; I would not support such a hypothetical situation. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nor would I, which is why we should debate this case on its merits and not set up strawmen. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If you take away the unusual means of death, he likely would not qualify for an RD, so I can't see how what may be killed in domestic dispute would merit a blurb. --MASEM (t) 06:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose breaking news in Australia, but no long term or international notability for ITN. --ELEKHHT 06:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD - He would have been a wonderful coach if not for his death. Sure, his career didn't attract international attention or wasn't long-term. However, I learned that being notable in mainly Australia shouldn't prevent him from being mentioned in RD. As for the blurb, let some sleazy journalist sensationalise the murder case, especially in Wikinews (no offense). Not in Wikipedia's ITN though. A mere mention of his name is enough, so let's not make his obituary a spectacular one. George Ho (talk) 06:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, oppose. Maybe he should have gained more attention while he was alive. George Ho (talk) 06:46, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. As said already, he likely wouldn't qualify for RD based on his career. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb/weak oppose RD Definitely does not rise to ITN blurb level. There is an argument that he might meet RD standards under criteria #2 but I think it's a stretch. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. I can't claim enough familiarity with the subject to judge how it fits the RD criteria but I suspect it is a bit of a stretch. No such problem with the wider assessment criteria for a blurb which allows us to consider the circumstances of the death too. As such I support this because I believe there will be a significant level of interest in the story - it may be subject to a heavy regional bias but the anticipated interest justifies posting. 3142 (talk) 15:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Minor additional - I this does go up (which I admit looks unlikely) I would modify the blurb to avoid implicating the son. Sure, the news media is doing so but I don't think a necessarily brief blurb can address that in the appropriate context. 3142 (talk) 15:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not due to the item being local to Australia (the same people who complain above the American items are always posted routinely oppose items simply because they are American) but on the Pistorious precedent. If we didn't post his much higher profile arrest on murder charges, I can't see how this warrants greater coverage. μηδείς (talk) 15:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose He played for a few years, coached for one, with what appears to be an unimpressive career, so he doesn't meet RD criteria. I see a few news sources on the killing, but I don't see how this meets our criteria. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD per Medeis' bad faith oppose. Also, because of his apples and oranges comparison, given someone being arrested is not the same as someone being murdered. Even then Trial of Oscar Pistorius was posted at verdict. Resolute 17:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So, if you weren't sniffing my butt, resolute, you wouldn't have bothered to wipe your own? There's nothing bad faith about my oppose, although your vote reeks of it. We'd never have posted this as RD, we don't post crimes before trials, we didn't post Pistorius when the murder was in the news. The judgment here is very easy if put in perspective. μηδείς (talk) 19:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral not a significant person in the history of the game, death is shocking, sure, but really not blurb or even RD par. Mind you, we did post a college-level basketball coach who didn't die in such circumstances and who had won very little, so perhaps this aligns with that level of notability?The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (and I'm from that city). I'm sure mid-level professional sportpeople die from time to time and I've never seen it in ITN, unless they die playing the sport (like Phillip Hughes) or are so famous that their death would be ITN anyway. For instance, wasn't there a gun death of an active NFL player comparatively recently? I might be thinking of Jovan Belcher, who died during the 2012-2013 NFL season, and there's nothing on his Talk page about being on ITN. Adpete (talk) 03:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - i am not familiar with the sport but the sportsman seems notable enough for inclusion.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:17, 5 July 2015 (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.

July 2

[edit]
July 2, 2015 (2015-07-02) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
Health and medicine

[Closed] RD: Charlie Sanders

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 06:58, 7 July 2015 (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: Charlie Sanders (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Detroit Free Press, ESPN
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: Pro Football Hall of Famer, member of the 1970s All-Decades Team. Article needs work – Muboshgu (talk) 01:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Very small article, third-round draft pic, good to middling career but nowhere near the top. μηδείς (talk) 02:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD conditional on article improvement. Sourcing is a little weak. That said a Hall of Fame football player satisfies the guidelines in ITND. On a side note there seems to be a misconception among some editors that one must be at the pinnacle of a given field to qualify for RD. That is not true. The guidelines reads... "2. The deceased was widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field." A Hall of Fame athlete certainly meets that criteria. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Along the lines of Medeis. If this was an important player, our article does not reflect that beyond calling out the Hall of Fame. --MASEM (t) 02:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support on the merits but oppose on quality. The honors in his sidebar would seem to suggest he his important to football, if not the most important, but the article is not in shape for posting. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I'm shocked that one of the top 250 American football players of all time has such a woefully brief article. But it meets the minimum required for RD. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Thirty-seven touchdowns in nine years... That's a decent amount, even if not a lot, id est four touchdowns per average year. The sport is not internationally well-known, but his record was good, making his name worth mentioning. Also, he became a sports commentator and was given a Hall of Fame. --George Ho (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Super Bowl is the second most watched annual sporting event worldwide- hardly "not well known". 331dot (talk) 09:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, change to oppose. He could have done more to be mentioned in the front page. George Ho (talk) 19:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support: NFL Hall of Famer, probably meets notability criteria. Article is acceptable. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This seems ready with a rough consensus in favor of posting, so I'm marking it as such. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tied for 217th Sanders is tied for 217th in career touchdown receptions. (A glance at the top twenty receivers shows somewhere between 8 and almost 20 a year; 4&1/9ths TD receptions per season is nowhere near notable.) I have no idea what 331dot's mention of the Super Bowl is for, since he never played in one. We need more of a consensus and one based on facts to post this. μηδείς (talk) 02:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. He had an above-average career, played in the Pro Bowl for 7 of the 10 seasons he was a player, and made it into the Hall of Fame. He retired with (according to the HOF's website) numbers that put him at or near the top of the game back in 1977. He worked with the Detroit Lions off and on after that, sometimes as a commentator, sometimes in the office. My issues with the article are the length of it - it's a short, stubby article, and the fact that it completely summarizes his career and life - instead of actually giving details, the way (IMO) an article here really should. I am also very ambivalent about his notability, since he did retire nearly 40 years ago, but hasn't had the influence and notability of say, Dick Butkus or John Madden. Challenger l (talk) 14:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose I'm fairly sure we wouldn't post the cricketer with the 217th highest number of runs in Test cricket, or the footballer with the 217th most career goals. This doesn't exactly scream "widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field." Black Kite (talk) 19:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the arguments in favour are weak, the article is weak, the individual is parochially significant but nothing more. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 6 July 2015 (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.

July 2015 Sinai clashes

[edit]
Article: July 2015 Sinai clashes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 17 Egyptian army soldiers and 100 ISIL militants are killed during clashes at the Sinai peninsula. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters Ahram
Credits:

Nominator's comments: This is more militarily tragic, which not yet involves civilians. George Ho (talk) 21:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Care to elaborate some of those "geo-political implications"? HaEr48 (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Islamists attempting to destabilize the military/secularist government of the most powerful country in the Arab world. If they succeed it could undermine the governments of many of the other moderate Arab states in the region and threaten the oldest peace treaty between an Arab state and Israel. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If they managed to topple Egypt's rulers, sure. But it seems to me the clashes are local and have very slim chance to destabilize Egypt nationally. If, say, the opposition staged a huge protest or civil disobedience like 2011, that would have the destabilizing effect you mention. But this is entirely different and more isolated. HaEr48 (talk) 16:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Howard Stern to leave America's Got Talent

[edit]
Snow close. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 2 July 2015 (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
Articles: Howard Stern (talk · history · tag) and America's Got Talent (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following the tenth season, Howard Stern (pictured) plans to resign as judge from America's Got Talent. (Post)
News source(s): Daily News
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Large coverage. Gary noine (talk) 19:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Does he have performing dogs? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:28, 2 July 2015 (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.

Deepwater Horizon oil spill settlement

[edit]
Article: Deepwater Horizon oil spill (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ BP agrees to pay a $18.7 billion fine to the United States Justice Department and several U.S. states regarding the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian Reuters, Deutsche Welle, New York Times
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The Guardian describes this as the "largest environmental fine in US history," while Reuters says it is "the largest corporate settlement in U.S. history." Thus this seems significant. However, the update to the article on the spill is minimal (one sentence), and so should be expanded. Everymorning talk 17:39, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Technically should be closure on this matter, and major settlement costs. I'm not sure how much expansion there can be on the settlement unless there are additional terms beyond the funds. --MASEM (t) 17:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and concur with Masem's thoughts. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose target article has a maintenance tag slap-bang at the top, plus given its girth, I'm finding it difficult to see the update that must have been applied to cover this? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The update is presently (when I last looked) one last sentence at the end of the Lawsuit section. It should be reflected in the lede. On that maintenance tag, it is basically asking for a re-writing of the lede to summarize better which is far from a severe problem (compare to the greek debt crisis that had a huge lead section). It can be fixed but its far from sourcing issues. --MASEM (t) 18:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Update inadequate, understood. I would expect to see this story summarised or at least covered in the lead, after all that's where our readers land when they click on the link from the ITN section of the main page, and if it's so significant, it should be therefore be covered in the lead. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've slightly tweaked the blurb to clarify this isn't a kind of settlement when one pays just to avoid legal prosecution. Brandmeistertalk 19:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose BP gave the Obama Administration $20 billion at the time of the spill, for the feds to dispense as they saw fit. This is anticlimactic and getting almost no coverage. μηδείς (talk) 00:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • That was them realizing what deep shit they were in so they gave a large amount of the money for the purpose of public relations. The scientists researched the long term effects and the oil lawyers spent 5 years haggling the amount they spilled down to 3.1 million so now they finally figured out the final amount. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support High international significance and broad global media coverage. --ELEKHHT 07:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - assuming the huge target article is fixable or a postable target is identified. Jusdafax 10:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - per jusdafax--BabbaQ (talk) 12:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment as it's been marked for attention, I cast a quick glance, there seems to be two sentences, one in the lead and one buried in the main body, each contradicting one another for the terms of the fine. This simply isn't adequate. Please demonstrate (using diffs where appropriate on an article of such a size) where the appropriate updates have been made before re-marking this for attention. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Val Doonican

[edit]
Article: Val Doonican (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
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: Described by the BBC as Ireland's "Bing Crosby". Long career, although article does need a bit of sourcing. Mjroots (talk) 12:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose: From the chart positions, looks pretty darn close to a one-hit wonder. No apparent international impact beyond his native British Isles. No awards or significant honors to speak of. Him having his own variety show on British television is probably the biggest thing he's got going for him in the notability department, but the show doesn't even have its own Wikipedia article and there's almost nothing in his biography here about it. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:46, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support: By all accounts a very genuine and warm individual. Did enjoy chart success and even one series on USA TV. Was a UK TV "Doon-icon" for over 20 years. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support: Article is in OK nick. As for the bloke himself, he seems to have been very popular in the 1960s (he knocked the Beatles off number 1). Maybe more should be written on his 20 years presenting on the telly. '''tAD''' (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support - The article has a big old maintenance tag, but I'm aware that much work has been done today; if it meets sourcing requirements then a RD post is probably worthy. Pedro :  Chat 
It now has 12 different sources and they all seem to be reliable. Only one paragraph remains without any refs. "Big old maintenance tags" would be much more useful if accompanied by a Talk Page summary of where attention was needed? One might even suggest that as a policy, lol. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When I say "big" that's subjective. When I say "old" I really mean old [25] Pedro :  Chat  20:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've only been alive two score years plus nought but Doonican was proper household name for most of my life. Like many nominations, this therefore stumbles into "well-known" territory, which is oft cited in many other RDs we see passing through. I guess my score is based on the fact that when I saw it noted on the BBC homepage I was "saddened". The article is reasonable and nobody gets bumped from RD if we post Val, so, like the above, I'm in weak support of this nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aww. Tell us another one, Rambler. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
well ... ---Sluzzelin talk 19:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Listen, the love you get is equal to the love you give. The end is nigh. Simple. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's only me pursuing somethin' I'm not sure of... Martinevans123 (talk) 21:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC) [reply]

July 1

[edit]

[Closed] Ace Limited acquiring Chubb

[edit]
Non-admin snowclose. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:58, 4 July 2015 (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.

Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Other than big sum, I'm not sure whether these two companies are trendy. Both sell insurances which is not the same as producing foods or electronics, for example. Brandmeistertalk 21:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Chubb Corp article was only three paragraphs before today, and has only two refs before 2015 - even with updates, it's not a strongly public/consumer facing company, meaning it's not as much of interest to average readers than consumer facing companies.-- Aronzak (talk) 00:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is yet another consolidation which will end up with middle management getting shafted. The effect on the public will be nil. μηδείς (talk) 00:24, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archivebottom

[Closed] US/Cuban embassies

[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archive bottom

[Posted & closed] RD: Nicholas Winton

[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Are you joking? The man is universally recognized as one of the great humanitarians of the last century. We post blurbs for the death of top notch film stars like Robin Williams but Nicholas Winton doesn't qualify? Remind me again, how many lives did Williams save? -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Williams influenced a far larger number. Nergaal (talk) 21:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping There is no guideline limiting ITN to heads of state. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Williams sudden death by suicide (the death was "interesting" per ITN standards) is why he had a blurb, not solely because he was a famous comedian. --23:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
There is no requirement to be a head of state for a blurb - the man is an inspiration as a humanitarian, someone who went against the policies of the government of his day. -- Aronzak (talk) 01:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull wth? I didn't think we would somebody who got famous for doing something 70 yrs ago, but did not do something else since that got him recognition. Schindler maybe would have deserved it, but not somebody titled [insert country]'s Schindler. That is why we have RD, for notable cases that might not necessarily reached popular culture. Nergaal (talk) 21:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the article itself is not very clear about his exact role, what did he do to he help save the 600+ children. Nergaal (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
He used his Jewish contacts in London to secure homes that would be willing to house 669 children, and , to put it bluntly, he bribed officials and fabricated travel documents to get the kids out of Czechoslovakia as quickly as possible - right before the outbreak of war. -- Aronzak (talk) 01:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"doing something" - he worked to save the lives of 669 children - not just "something".-- Aronzak (talk) 01:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After thinking about it, I have to agree - I hadn't realized it was already posted until most of the way through my own thoughts on it. A tremendous contributor to our world's history, I'd say. Challenger l (talk) 05:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive bottom

  1. ^ Template:Cite web
  2. ^ Template:Cite journal
  3. ^ Template:Cite web
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/July_2015&oldid=1138438129"