Open main menu

Wikipedia β

This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

Contents

Antoine Griezmann
Antoine Griezmann

How to nominate an itemEdit

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated) in UTC.
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process. Remember, we use UTC dates.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

HeadersEdit

  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as (Ready) when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked (Ready), you should remove the mark in the header.

Voicing an opinion on an itemEdit

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
  • Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • The blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...Edit

  • ... add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  • ... oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive.
  • ... accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  • ... comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  • ... oppose a WP:ITN/R item here because you disagree with current WP:ITN/R criteria (these can be discussed at the relevant Talk Page)


SuggestionsEdit

July 16Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 16
Armed conflicts and attacks
Demonstrations across Iraq, leave dozens killed and cause mass unrest. (Iraqi News), The Jerusalem Post, Wall Street Journal

July 15Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 15
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

RD: Ray EmeryEdit

Article: Ray Emery (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Sporting News
Nominator: Teemu08 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Featured Article Teemu08 (talk) 19:26, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment It may have been listed as a featured article about ten years ago, but it doesn't appear to be featured quality at present. Ray_Emery#Personal_life is a mess. Also, the article isn't updated to reflect his death other than a death date put at the top. How did he die so young? The article doesn't say. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:29, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Yea, this should definitely be FAR-bound, but everything is at least cited. Death info has been added, not that there are very many details. Teemu08 (talk) 19:36, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
      • Not everything. I added some {{cn}} tags. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - article may not be FA quality, but good enough for RD. -Zanhe (talk) 01:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Complete coverage and referencing of subject. SpencerT•C 01:18, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. No cn's currently in article although it has been worked on since his death. There is a group citation for his stats which may potentially be a problem. Capitalistroadster (talk) 02:27, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

WimbledonEdit

Article: 2018 Wimbledon Championships (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In tennis, the 2018 Wimbledon Championships conclude with Angelique Kerber winning the women's singles and Novak Djokovic winning the men's singles.
Nominator: Power~enwiki (talk • give credit)

Nominated event is listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.

Nominator's comments: This is on ITNR. The article 2018 Wimbledon Championships has more prose, but I used the same articles as last year's nom. power~enwiki (π, ν) 15:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Both proposed articles are stubs with all prose in the lead followed by table cruft. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Conditional strong support - subject to some expansion to the target articles - though this was slightly before the World Cup finals, true? Juxlos (talk) 17:11, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Yes, it ended before the World Cup final. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose currently both articles are completely sub-standard regarding prose. I think this happened last year as well. Black Kite (talk) 17:28, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment as nom I fully agree that the prose isn't good enough yet. I'll try to improve it around 0200GMT if they're still in this state. There may be an option for different articles in bold, as well. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:32, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) 2018 FIFA World CupEdit

Articles: 2018 FIFA World Cup (talk, history) and 2018 FIFA World Cup Final (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In association football, the FIFA World Cup concludes with France defeating Croatia in the final.
Nominator: Davey2116 (talk • give credit)

Both articles need updating

One or both nominated events are listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.

Nominator's comments: The ongoing item should be removed when this is posted. Davey2116 (talk) 03:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment we just call it the Final, not the "final match". The Rambling Man (talk) 06:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment since this is likely the next blurb getting up, please prepare some picture to update the Thailand cave, since it will be replaced. This should have happened yesterday already but I instead removed another item that took place on the same day, in order to keep an image. --Tone 08:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: it's also the finals of Wimbledon today, so the NSU story will probably go as well if the Wimbledon article is in decent shape. Black Kite (talk) 09:06, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • It's likely that a freely-licensed photo of the winning team or a scene from the match will be uploaded within a few hours of the final, thanks to the OTRS from Soccer.RU. Until one is ready, the winning team's captain should be featured. SounderBruce 14:23, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Or possibly the scorer of a winning goal, if available. We have free images of most of the players, but some are not great (i.e. Lloris, the French captain). Black Kite (talk) 14:27, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • On second thought, the Man of the Match should be featured. Griezmann seems to be an early contender, having been involved in all three goals so far. SounderBruce 16:23, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Griezmann photo for entry. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:22, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Griezmann as photo until free image of the winning team surfaces. He is the official MOTM. Nice4What (talk) 17:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong support. Perhaps we could add the final score, 4-2?Zigzig20s (talk) 16:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong support - nothing left to say Juxlos (talk) 16:57, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • support - Definitely for ITN.BabbaQ (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per above. --AmaryllisGardener talk 17:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong Support - Speedy add Nice4What (talk) 17:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Quality appears sufficient pretty quickly. The main article can use some more sourcing here and there but nothing worth holding this up for. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Note I've added the image of Luca Modric (which was taken at the current tournament) to the Commons protection queue, as he won Best Player of the Tournament. This would seem to be a good stopgap until we get a free image of France actually winning the trophy. Black Kite (talk) 17:42, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
    • This entry is about the winning team, not the best player of the tournament. I think it would be misleading/confusing to have Modric's picture since Croatia lost. Nice4What (talk) 17:48, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
      • No, the entry is about the whole tournament. Also, we're only talking about a temporary image until we get a good free one (in which case, it'd be nice to show Modric if only for a few hours). If Griezmann is MOTM then use him instead. Black Kite (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
        • OK, he is. Adding image until we have something better. Black Kite (talk) 18:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
          • Wow... Also, as stated above, let's keep the Griezmann photo until the group image is released. Nice4What (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Suggestion - How about adding the score to the blurb? Thanks. Jusdafax (talk) 18:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Support - Add 4-2 score, notable since it is one of the most amount of scores in a final. Nice4What (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
      • Done. Black Kite (talk) 18:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
        • Removed the result. We never post results. Strangely enough, 4-2 is the most common result in WC finals ;) --Tone 18:34, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
        • @Tone:, you removed the 4-2 score without participating in discussion. From the Washington Post on its notability:
"The six goals were as many as the previous four finals combined. They were the most in a final since England beat Germany, 4-2, in extra time in 1966 and the most in regulation since Brazil’s 5-2 triumph over Sweden in 1958." ( Source )
The match also notably didn't go into overtime as most finals do. Nice4What (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
All true. However, this is still super-arbitrary. If we insisted on breaking the rule of not including the result in the blurb, the explanation would have to be provided there as well - for which we have no room. My humble opinion ;) --Tone 18:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Where can this rule about excluding results be found at? And it's not "super-arbitrary", it is notable a 4-2 number is recognizable by even a non-fan of the sport to be a great score. Nice4What (talk) 18:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
The blurb could easily be changed to "In association football, the FIFA World Cup concludes with France defeating Croatia 4-2 in the highest-scoring final since 1966." Many sources are reporting on this. Nice4What (talk) 18:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
When have we ever posted a score in a blurb about a sports championship? Why should we start now? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:44, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
May be the case where the result (not the score) is a world record. We did this for marathons and 100m a couple of times. Also, "since 1966" is again totally arbitrary. First time since 2002 that it ended in regular time? --Tone 18:47, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Perhaps, but there's no record here. These are bits of trivia that are not significant enough to belong in one of our blurbs. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:51, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
I don't think the score of the biggest sporting event in the world, only held every 4 years, was trivia. I didn't think it was a major issue at all, to be honest. But, if that's "how we do things", then ... whatever. Black Kite (talk) 19:06, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
No, we never post scores. Plus, if we ever did, we'd use the manual of style with en-dashes and not hyphens. *shudder* The Rambling Man (talk) 19:21, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
This no-score rule scores big on the counter-intuitive scale. Oh well, it's only ITN. Sca (talk) 20:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Including a linked mention of VAR would be far more relevant, especially as it directly led to one of the goals. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:22, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - We have never included the score for any sporting event on ITN. Let's not start now just because it's the World Cup.--WaltCip (talk) 22:40, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
No, let's wait 'til it's Word War III, when we can say we won 3-2 over them. Sca (talk) 23:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
    • As @Black Kite: mentioned before, the World Cup is the biggest sporting event in the world that's only held every 4 years. If there were a sporting event to have the score posted, it would be this one. I still believe that the 4–2 score should be attatched. Nice4What (talk) 23:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment The score was posted in 2014, was still there when combined with Klauses record hotdogs, and later removed by Tone, re-added by Jayron32, re-removed by Fox, was not included when the hotdogs were removed. It looks like that's how it stayed: "The FIFA World Cup concludes with Germany (captain Philipp Lahm pictured) defeating Argentina in the final.". Personally, I don't care how popular soccer is, the scores look tacky in the blurb and unless we're going to do it for every sport, we're best off doing it for none. I was thinking to close this, but I commented instead. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:26, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Arguably, a 1-0 score in the World Cup final is significantly, implying a very difficult match. A score of 4-2 is not as impressive as a metric. I would argue that if any other finals event ended with a very unusual score or some significant record. --Masem (t) 00:44, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
      • The thing is, there will always be some factoid that seems significant in a "world cup". Most goals scored in total WC appearances, most shots on goal, most goals scored as penalty kicks from blatant dives in the first half, most head butts to the chest, whatever. There will never be a world cup where someone doesn't find some factoid and prop up as "extra important because OMG soccer". Like Tone pointed out, 4-2 is actually the most common result. Instead of pretending soccer is special and having this argument every four years, lets just be happy that it sat in ongoing for six weeks and now it's posted in a blurb within minutes. Isn't that good enough? --LaserLegs (talk) 00:51, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes, the score is the least significant "factoid" about a game. Right? Gimmie a BF break. Sca (talk) 01:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

July 14Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 14
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Science and technology
  • In data collected by NASA's Juno spacecraft, an INAF team discovers suggestions of a new volcano close to the south pole of Jupiter's moon Io. (Tribune)

Sports

(Posted) RD: Theo-Ben GurirabEdit

Article: Theo-Ben Gurirab (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Namibian
Nominator: EternalNomad (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article is updated and well-sourced. EternalNomad (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Support article is fully sourced. -Zanhe (talk) 23:52, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - referenced fully. good 2 go.BabbaQ (talk) 14:03, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. SpencerT•C 01:19, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

July 13Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 13
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents
  • An explosion at a chemical plant near Cairo, Egypt, injures 12 people. (BBC)
  • An explosion at a chemical plant in Sichuan, China, kills 19 people and injures 12 others. (BBC)

Politics and elections

(Posted) Bombings in PakistanEdit

Article: 13 July 2018 Pakistan bombings (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In Pakistan, at least 136 people are killed and more than 335 others are injured in multiple bombings in Mastung and Bannu.
News source(s): Geo News, The Express Tribune, The News International
Nominator: Amirk94391 (talk • give credit)
Updater: Jibran1998 (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Amirk94391 (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Huge nums of deaths. Bigger attack than Peshawar's one which was also posted. Amirk94391 (talk) 16:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - There is no official minimum deaths rule on ITN, but logic follows that if we post the disaster in the same area with fewer deaths, we post the subsequent larger one also.--WaltCip (talk) 17:28, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support in principle – But article looks quite thin. Sca (talk) 20:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
    • @Sca: the article is now updated and it'll be expanded even more.Amirk94391 (talk) 03:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Looks good – thanks. Sca (talk) 13:45, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support with the expectation of expansion. It is adequate (though only barely) for now. The attacks are horrific even by the bloody standard of that part of the world and are certainly ITN worthy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on notability. Massive death toll. Lepricavark (talk) 21:51, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article is not very informative in its present state but the event is notable due to the huge number of casualties. Hrodvarsson (talk) 22:46, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support It is one of third recent attacks on a Political party before General Elections of Pakistan, 2018 and death toll is massive. Nauriya, Let's talk - 06:07, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - As per comments above. Sherenk1 (talk) 04:34, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment article needs aligning (lead with infobox figures), the blurb here needs fixing for dab link, the dab links in the article and the raw URLs need to be addressed, but otherwise it seems ok. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Fixed everything else but we still have a discrepancy. The lead and infobox say 4 people died in Bannu, the section on the attack says 5. Are we counting the perpetrator.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:15, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: and @Coffeeandcrumbs: fixed all issues.Amirk94391 (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Notable bombing, article postable. Suggest moving forward. Jusdafax (talk) 07:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Very notable bombing. Ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 08:27, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posting. --Tone 09:29, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

July 12Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 12
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Science and technology

RD: Roger PerryEdit

Article: Roger Perry (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Variety
Nominator: TompaDompa (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Referencing needs to be improved. TompaDompa (talk) 13:12, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose inadequately referenced still, and IMDB isn't an RS as far as I know. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:55, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

July 11Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 11
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents
International relations

Law and crime

Sports

RD: Tom NeilEdit

Article: Tom Neil (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: The Rambling Man (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Second World War flying ace The Rambling Man (talk) 05:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose - far too much unreferenced text. Mjroots (talk) 08:50, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - just enough references but just barely to include it. Article in good overall shapeBabbaQ (talk) 09:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Three out of four paras in the Military career section are unreferenced. Mjroots (talk) 13:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I think BabbaQ is looking at a different article. 159.53.110.140 (talk) 11:19, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment it's not ideal by any means but I'll hopefully get a chance later to fix it all up. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:36, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
History buffs may wonder how his 14 kills rank among WWII RAF aces. Sca (talk) 20:39, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) ShangchenEdit

Article: Shangchen (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Scientists discover the oldest evidence of hominins outside Africa in Shangchen, China, dating to 2.1 million years ago.
Alternative blurb: ​Scientists discover stone tools dating to 2.1 million years ago in Shangchen, China, the oldest evidence of hominins outside Africa.
News source(s): Nautre, Science, BBC, NYT
Nominator and updater: Zanhe (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Major discovery published in Nature. Reported everywhere. Zanhe (talk) 01:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Article in good shape. Of particular note is a quote from the BBC entry on this: We are now moving beyond a Eurocentric view of human evolution in Eurasia: the Asian record for human evolution is proving to be as complex and fascinating as in Europe and Africa -- Prof. Robin Dennell. CaradhrasAiguo (talk) 06:00, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Interesting, article in good shape.BabbaQ (talk) 09:31, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article is good, and the story is very notable. Davey2116 (talk) 22:24, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, marking ready. Added an Alt clarifying exactly what was discovered (stone tools). SpencerT•C 22:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, expected, but still a notable discovery Openlydialectic (talk) 23:09, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Terry ToddEdit

Stale. Stephen 01:46, 13 July 2018 (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: Terry Todd (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): My Statesman
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article has been updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Note Wikipedia took notice of his death on this day, despite his death being announced on the 9th. Perhaps, if needed, this nom. should be moved to the 9th to avoid it going stale or briefly being placed last on ITN.--TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:55, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Revision history shows that Wikipedia took notice on the 8th, same as the reliable sources. This belongs on the 7th, so it is unfortunately stale. ghost 11:43, 12 July 2018 (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.

(Posted) NSU trial ends in Munich after 5 yearsEdit

Article: National Socialist Underground trial (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In Munich, the National Socialist Underground trial ends after more than five years with the conviction sentencing of the main defendant Beate Zschäpe to life in prison.
News source(s): SZ.de BBC, AP, Guardian, CNN
Nominator and updater: SoWhy (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: First major neo-nazi related trial in recent history with worldwide coverage over five years. See also National Socialist Underground and National Socialist Underground murders for more details. Regards SoWhy 09:00, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Beate Zschäpe has an article. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:07, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Added and updated. Thanks! Regards SoWhy 10:11, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – A landmark, controversial and long-running, high-profile case. Zschäpe, who mostly refused to testify, claimed not to have been a member of the NSU. (Blurb corrected to Eng. usage with "sentencing to" rather than "conviction to.")Sca (talk) 13:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support The article meets ITN criteria and the news is getting media coverage worldwide.Amirk94391 (talk) 14:21, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Certainly headline news here in Germany but it does not rise to the level of ITN in my opinion. There is some controversy surrounding the role of the Verfassungsschutz, which is the main source of the interest in the case i believe, but that has little to do with the conviction. As a side note, there will be an appeal from what i have seen so this may not be over. 31.150.101.31 (talk) 14:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Appeal or not, the sentencing is significant – particularly given the context of ongoing ethnic tensions involving, among others, neo-Nazis and right-wingers. Quite widespread coverage on mainline English-language sites and in other languages as well. Sca (talk) 14:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Why does it not rise to the level of ITN in your opinion if it has been in the news worldwide (e.g. Italy, France, Israel), something I'm pretty certain I can say from experience is not how German trials are usually reported on? The fact that an appeal was announced does not change the ITN part: Either it is unsuccessful (likely), then we won't hear from it this way again or it is successful, in which case ITN-worthiness can exist again. As a side note, the appeal was always clearly coming. Regards SoWhy 14:46, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
It certainly was reported on more than other court cases. But this case also gets that media and political attention because of the role of the Verfassungsschutz, like destroying data, perhaps ignoring crimes and so. We just don't know and probably won't find out. That is what really interested many people, from personal experience anyway. The convictions itself are an end to criminal proceedings, more or less anyway, but unresolved questions remain. And i just don't see this domestic court case important enough to be posted. Were other cases of similar nature posted by the way? If so, then i could very well be swayed. And i just noted that there will be an appeal, not that i was opposing because of it. 31.150.101.31 (talk) 15:06, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Well, i guess if so many people do find this important enough, then so be it. I just set the bar too high it seems. I have struck my oppose anyway. 31.150.101.31 (talk) 16:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment most of the refs are German, which take longer to check, and should be checked because of the risk of a BLP vio in these articles. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:43, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm concerned about these "inter alia" list of charges - either list the charges in their entirety or don't list any. "Cherry picking" the "wost / most important" is deceptive. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose The main source of the "list of charges" in the lead is a PDF [1] which doesn't have (that I can make out) a publication name or author -- which likely fails WP:RS, that's not even consider if that wordpress site has the authority to reproduce it. Deutshelobby.com "German Lobby - Yes to the German empire"? Ok, that link fails WP:RS. I don't have time to check the rest of this, but at the very least, this can't go up where the charges against the accused are attributed to the "German Lobby". --LaserLegs (talk) 16:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes, there is no way a far right blog can be a reliable source for anything. That has to be sorted. 31.150.101.31 (talk) 16:52, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I have looked for replacements. Links are on the talk, but i rather not break anything so if someone could do the change in the article that issue should be sorted. 31.150.101.31 (talk) 17:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I replaced the ref with newspaper articles and the official press release detailing the charges. I don't think "inter alia" is problematic, at least not for the lede. Regards SoWhy 07:41, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Very significant news. The articles look good, though as LaserLegs points out, the German sources should be checked. Davey2116 (talk) 15:48, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I'm seeing many unique articles (i.e. non-wire) from diverse international sources, which is an important consideration for significance. ghost 16:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Important and noted decision. 7&6=thirteen () 16:15, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - story has clear significance, support upon removal of dubious German-language sources. Stormy clouds (talk) 10:23, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Which dubious sources? Looking through the reference list they all look like reputable newspapers and the like bar one to a tabloid, which only supports a very minor fact about the proceedings. 85.16.166.77 (talk) 12:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
It's not just having WP:RS but confirming that the source supports the content -- I've seen far too often a "well sourced" article where the refs don't back the claims. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:40, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
They probably meant the PDF mentioned above by LaserLegs which was since removed as a ref. Regards SoWhy 12:14, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I was indeed referring to issues raised by LaserLegs. If addressed to the satisfaction of other editors, consider my !vote a full support. Stormy clouds (talk) 17:40, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
⇒ Looks like consensus. Marked ready. Sca (talk) 13:25, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
"Although a Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry into the NSU is said to confirm that German authorities were not involved and did not cover up the NSU killings" is a deadlink ref, and "doubts remained" has no citiation. And seriously, the only mention of a "cover up" is in that lead, not in the rest of the trial article or in the NSU main article. The whole thing needs a copyedit and a ref check. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:49, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@LaserLegs: None of that is relevant to the trial article, so I removed the whole paragraph. Regards SoWhy 14:41, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Not ready. More fact tags, more dead links. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@LaserLegs:   Done. Regards SoWhy 18:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
More dead links -- you should try to see if you can find new sources for content instead of removing it, that bit about complaints to the court about process that I tagged previously had value, it'd be nice if it could be kept. Since you're a native speaker, it'd be faster for you to check these than I. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I removed it because I couldn't verify it. It's not in the de-wiki version about the trial either. As for dead links, they can easily be replaced, although per WP:DEADLINK that should not matter. I replaced them anyway. Stupid German law requires public broadcasting corporations to remove content after a certain amount of time. According to W3C's validator, all other links should work. Regards SoWhy 18:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── It seems quite counter-productive to obstruct posting of a timely and widely reported item which has drawn a clear consensus on account of a few dead links. Sca (talk) 20:00, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:BLP? Nevermind, I guess I was wasting my time actually checking refs. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:30, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I guess ref checking is "counter-productive" and "obstruction", and it certainly feels like a waste of my time now, but the statement "Schulze ... also provided useful information for the process and has acted as a very important witness." (is ESL for one thing) and is not supported by the source which only mentions his juvenile sentence and his "showing remorse in court". I've not checked the whole article, but almost every statement I looked at had some issue with WP:RS or WP:V yet here it is, marked "ready" again ... --LaserLegs (talk) 22:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
And the BBC ref doesn't state Gerlach was "convicted for aiding a terror organization" it says "Holger Gerlach received three years for giving his birth certificate and other ID to Uwe Mundlos". Oh well. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I went through every source in the lead and 'proceedings' section and everything is in the sources, bar one minor detail i noted on the talk, and i would certainly say the sources are reliable. Which sources don't support the article as written other than the one you noted? Which sources have issues with reliability or verifiability? If you could point them out, i could perhaps improve it. 85.16.166.77 (talk) 23:11, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I put a link supporting Gerlach being convicted for aiding a terror organization on the talk. If anyone could make the change, that should be solved as well. 85.16.166.77 (talk) 23:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. I've removed that odd sentence that needed a citation at the end of the article that was pointed out by LaserLegs. Black Kite (talk) 22:32, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) Onging: 2018 Japan floodsEdit

No consensus to move to ongoing. Stephen 01:44, 13 July 2018 (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: 2018 Japan floods (talk, history)
Blurb: No blurb specified
News source(s): [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]
Nominator: Nixinova (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Almost 200 dead; big event. Will be bumped off soon.  Nixinova  T  C  08:01, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait until the blurb rolls off the MP, then reassess. The most recent updates are from 9 July so it may not be suitable for ongoing then. --Tone 08:35, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose All natural disasters leave a period of clean-up and "Day 2 stories," but the flooding itself is over. "The rain has relented but the country is still struggling to deal with the extensive damage left in its wake."(BBC[8]) ghost 12:51, 12 July 2018 (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.

July 10Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 10
Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Clive KingEdit

Article: Clive King (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44823636 https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jul/13/stig-of-the-dump-author-clive-king-dies-aged-94
Nominator: Aiken drum (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: English author Aiken D 15:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose a couple of unreferenced sentences/paragraphs, and the bibliography could use ISBNs and/or references. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

RD: Haroon BilourEdit

Article: Haroon Bilour (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator: Wumbolo (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: killed in the 2018 Peshawar suicide bombing which was posted on ITN (see right below), but has been pulled since. Source: The New York Times wumbolo ^^^ 12:11, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose take away the stuff about his father, his funeral etc, and you're left with a sub-stub about his life. Also needs work on references. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:57, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Decent enough for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 14:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) Peshawar bombingEdit

Article: 2018 Peshawar suicide bombing (talk, history)
Blurb: ​A suicide bombing in Peshawar, Pakistan left 20 people dead and wounded 63 others.
News source(s): Geo News, The Express Tribune
Nominator and updater: Amirk94391 (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Significant number of deaths in a notable city. The blast is getting media coverage and the article is also of good quality. Amirk94391 (talk) 08:35, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Support, CNN, NYT and The Guardian also gave coverage but we are seeing the usual WP:GEOBIAS at the ITN. The modus operandi here is to ignore it till it gets stale. 39.57.157.188 (talk) 05:25, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - terrorist attack with relatively high death toll. Victims include an important politician according to NYT. Article looks decent. -Zanhe (talk) 06:49, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support --UkrainianCossack (talk) 06:53, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 01:38, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • How about a RD for Haroon Bilour who was killed in the attack? wumbolo ^^^ 10:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
    Feel free to propose it as an RD nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Tin Ka PingEdit

Article: Tin Ka Ping (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): SCMP, The Standard
Nominator and updater: Zanhe (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: One of the most famous Hong Kong philanthropists, funded hundreds of schools, dozens of hospitals, and thousands of libraries. Zanhe (talk) 06:46, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) Kavanaugh nominationEdit

SNOW CLOSE Good faith nom, but there is no chance that this will be posted. ITN does not post domestic political news including changes in cabinet positions or the judiciary. Consensus on this is long established and very strong. Additionally as noted by power~enwiki, this is only a nomination. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:16, 10 July 2018 (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.

Articles: Brett Kavanaugh (talk, history) and Supreme Court of the United States (talk, history)
Blurb: President Donald Trump has nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill justice Anthony Kennedy's seat in the Supreme Court of the United States.
News source(s): BBCNew York TimesNBC
Nominator: HenryMP02 (talk • give credit)
Nominator's comments: Important United States news. Henry TALK 04:04, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I supported posting about Kennedy's retirement, and I might support the final confirmation vote, but this isn't the right time to post this. I expect a bunch of other oppose votes to sink this quickly. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:10, 10 July 2018 (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.

(Posted) RD: Lord CarringtonEdit

Article: Peter Carington, 6th Baron Carrington (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Times (paywall)
Nominator: Yorkshiresky (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former UK Defence and Foreign Secretary. yorkshiresky (talk) 11:34, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Comments @Yorkshiresky: The article is very well sourced however the "In popular culture" doesn't have one source and should probably be removed if no citations can be found. Govvy (talk) 13:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Maybe it's been edited since you posted, but the "In popular culture" section seems to consist almost entirely of people who have played him in films, plus Rowan Atkinson in a celebrated Not the Nine O'Clock News sketch. The section could be better written by condensing into a single paragraph, but in terms of sources, surely those works source themselves? Jheald (talk) 14:49, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • The article is in a good shape, as noted above. I suggest commenting out the popular culture section. In the intro, there is "As Secretary General of NATO, he helped prevent a war between Greece and Turkey in 1987". This is not mentioned later in the text, though it would be appropriate to add something more. --Tone 13:57, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support "In popular culture" section now all sourced and copy edited. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Suppport but remove the title of nobility. We don't post those in the RD ticker except for kings or queens, and even then.--WaltCip (talk) 18:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posting. --Tone 18:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. Every article I have ever read about him uses the spelling Carrington. Using the form with a single 'r' - however it may be justified - renders the name incomprehensible to the overwhelming majority of readers. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:12, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • The first line of the article has an "explanation" from Debrett's that I personally find almost impossible to understand. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree. "Lord Carrington" is a renowned figure; "Peter Carington" is a cipher. But WP:RULES say we can't use titles of nobility. To what extent are we dancing on the head of a pin by insisting on the one-R spelling? Downing St's statement speaks of the "death of Peter Carrington", and the Lords gives his full name as "Peter Alexander Rupert Carrington". Not sure what the answer is, but as it stands it's very odd. Moscow Mule (talk) 21:39, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Comments There is a decree of peerage and an "in lieu" of, if you scroll down to the Ancestry tree and have a look you will see 2nd Baron then skips to the 4th Baron. The "in lieu" is a substitute in name due to something happening in the family, why, what happened to the 3rd Baron I don't know, seems to revolve around this issue. Govvy (talk) 22:27, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Baron Carrington Only in death does duty end (talk) 08:32, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Can someone point me to this rule we're deferring to? WP:OBE does not seem to preclude the use of titles. ghost 16:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I don't think there's a rule per se, but our precedence on ITN has always been to omit the title of nobility.--WaltCip (talk) 11:35, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
If there is no explicit rule, might I respectfully submit that it be changed to "Lord Carrington", the name by which he is (by far) most commonly known, at least for his remaining days here in the front-page limelight? (Comparisons are odious, but Piratita Morgan's not a baptismal name, either). -- Moscow Mule (talk) 15:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I support this, but suggest you take it to Errors to actually request the change. I would further like to respectfully submit that discussion of name parsing for RDs should be permitted in noms. CAT:WNC does not have the brevity requirements that RDs do. I suspect (but do not know) that the convention Walt refers to was in the interest of brevity. We would not post as titled (Peter Carington, 6th Baron Carrington) because of length, not because the title is superfluous. ghost 15:59, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Right, that was my actual concern, that it would take up too much real estate on the RD ticker as compared to other entries who aren't of nobility.--WaltCip (talk) 16:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Note that we also have this Peter Carrington, who seems to be very much still alive. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Query posted on errors. -- Moscow Mule (talk) 17:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

July 9Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 July 9
Disasters and accidents
International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports
  • Former NFL cornerback Brandon Browner is arrested after allegedly breaking into a home of an ex-girlfriend who has a restraining order against him. (UPI)

(Posted) RD: Hans Günter WinklerEdit

Article: Hans Günter Winkler (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Associated Press and others
Nominator: Gerda Arendt (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article had no ref this morning, but now has several. We don't know exactly if he died 8 June or 9 June, because it happened over night. The German Hall of Fame has 8 June. I am not a sports person, checking of equestrian terms wanted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Please look again. You requested a citation for the Olympics in 1956 split, Melbourne/Stockholm. I added one, but think it is common knowledge and has nothing to do with his bio. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:25, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Support Issues have been addressed. Good work indeed. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:36, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Support Ready to post.BabbaQ (talk) 19:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Good to go; bereit zum posten. Sca (talk) 20:30, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - article is well referenced. -Zanhe (talk) 00:02, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 00:33, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

RD: Tab HunterEdit

Article: Tab Hunter (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): People
Nominator: Strikerforce (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article has a few CN tags that need cleared. StrikerforceTalk 14:40, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Article has sections with no sources. Ref work does need to be made. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:43, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose More work needed on sourcing especially on the filmography. Capitalistroadster (talk) 02:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose last time I looked, IMDB wasn't considered a reliable source. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose A lot of contents present needs verification and the article also has some non-rs such as IMDB. Amirk94391 (talk) 14:15, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) Eritrea–Ethiopia warEdit

Articles: Eritrea–Ethiopia relations (talk, history) and 2018 Eritrea–Ethiopia summit (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The leaders of Ethiopia and Eritrea have signed a declaration saying that the "state of war has come to an end"
Alternative blurb: ​The leaders of Ethiopia and Eritrea (pictured) sign an agreement declaring an end to the "state of war" between their two countries and re-establishing diplomatic relations.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Sherenk1 (talk • give credit)
Updater: FallingGravity (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Varavour (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Positive news. Article is not updated. Sherenk1 (talk) 11:23, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Eritrean–Ethiopian War may also be a good article to link to. Too early to say anything about this, as the articles have not been updated fully yet. I think the blurb needs some work too. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:49, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • The peace itself is significant enough to post, but the process is long and winding. It's difficult to decipher (from any potential single target article) why this is particular moment is the time to post, and not (for example) back on June 5th when Ethiopia decided to pull out of the disputed territories. ghost 14:16, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • I think the fact this was the first meeting between the leaders of these countries in 20 years, and signature of the declaration, makes this the right time to post. Ethopia has seemingly been doing steps ahead of time as GCG points out above, but this is a formal declaration that they have ended the conflict. I can't readily tell if there is some action their respective legislators need to do to cement that. --Masem (t) 14:30, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • support notability and timing not sure about blurb or article though EdwardLane (talk) 16:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support in principle Seems to be a significant international development. I saw the photo of the two leaders hugging over the weekend. We just need updates in articles and a bolded link in the blurb. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:49, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. It was formal and significant, and considering how gradual the transfer of Badme and other disputed territories to Eritrean control will likely be, this event seems like a good news-flagship for the process. I have added a link to the relevant article to the blurb. Inatan (talk) 17:52, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Support Interesting and article seems ready.BabbaQ (talk) 19:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • ALT2: Ethiopian and Eritrean leaders (pictured) agree to end the "state of war" between their two countries.
My two cents --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:47, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

ReferencesEdit

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

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