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.

Stephen Hawking at NASA's StarChild Learning Center in the 1980s
Stephen Hawking

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.


  • 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pulled from the main page are generally marked with [Posted] or [Pulled] in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.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 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)


March 18Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 18
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections

Russian presidential election, 2018Edit

Article: Russian presidential election, 2018 (talk, history)
Blurb: No blurb specified
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Sherenk1 (talk • give credit)
Updater: YantarCoast (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: SpanishSnake (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Added now to assess article quality so as to make it ready to post as soon as election results are announced. Blurb can be specified at that time. Sherenk1 (talk) 11:38, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

March 17Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 17
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections

Xi Jinping reappointed president without term limitsEdit

Article: Xi Jinping (talk, history)
Blurb: Xi Jinping (pictured) is re-elected as the President of the People's Republic of China with no term limits by the National People’s Congress.
Alternative blurb: Xi Jinping (pictured) is re-elected as the President of the People's Republic of China.
News source(s): AFP, Reuters, Al Jazeera
Nominator: Starship.paint (talk • give credit)

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Nominator's comments: Should qualify under WP:ITN/R as an indirect election for head of state. starship.paint ~ KO 03:30, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Previous, related nomination on the removal of term limits on March 11. Current nomination is on the reelection of President on March 17, and has a different target article
  • Name: Chinese presidential term limits removed
  • Date: March 11
  • Alternative blurb: ​The National People's Congress removes term limits for the President of the People's Republic of China (incumbent Xi Jinping pictured)
  • Alternative blurb II: ​The National People's Congress removes term limits for the President of the People's Republic of China, with Xi Jinping as the incumbent president.
  • Alternative blurb III: ​At the 2018 National People's Congress, the Chinese legislature removes term limits for the President of the People's Republic of China (incumbent Xi Jinping pictured)
  • Sources: BBC,CNN, Reuters

Nominator's comments: Significant change in way of governing in one of the most significant countries now. More from The New York Times on why this is a big deal. Feel free to add more blurbs and suggest alternative target articles as the current one is not detailed starship.paint ~ KO 09:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Conditional support Widely covered and highly notable, might very well not have more Chinese presidential succession for a while. Article needs significant extensions though. Also blurb feels a bit long. Juxlos (talk) 11:02, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Change to Support focusing on the presidency instead of the meeting per below. Juxlos (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose on quality - article tells us nothing more than the blurb and is almost as long. The reason your struggling with the blurb is we can't say what RS are saying per WP:crystalball. The part we can say doesn't feel all that newsworthy. GCG (talk) 11:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The PRC is free to use its legal processes to change its laws about how long the President serves whenever it wishes. This will have little effect. 331dot (talk) 12:16, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
I would add that this legislature is essentially a rubber stamp body anyway. If Xi didn't want it, they wouldn't do it. 331dot (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
With the exception of Mao Zedong, the term limit seems to be obeyed in general. While the body may not exactly be a proper democratic one this still implies a major event in Chinese politics. If Trump even formally proposes doing this it will be all over the news in a heartbeat. Juxlos (talk) 12:54, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
FYI the US President has no formal role in crafting US Constitutional amendments. He can't push one through Congress (2/3 vote needed) or through the states (3/4 of the states). He can propose whatever he wants but it's unlikely it would happen. I believe he has joked about doing something similar to this Chinese action. 331dot (talk) 19:14, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Notability wise, support. I'm seeing this development in multiple news sources. This was also in the news a few weeks ago when it was effectively passed by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, but in terms of the encyclopedia, the official change to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China is what we want to mark. When evaluating this, we can't use the same criteria as that we would evaluating a development in a Western democracy. In China power happens through closed-door meetings and not by elections, and this is one of the most significant occasions. I've suggested a shorter alt-blurb. Article will need some work. --LukeSurl t c 14:24, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose on article quality. It's a stub and will require significant expansion before we can seriously consider posting to the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:42, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on notability as above; I was thinking about nominating this when the news first broke but knew that the response would be 'wait until it actually happens'. The article should be expanded. Davey2116 (talk) 17:06, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • President of the People's Republic of China might be a good target, as the news is really about this post rather than the meeting. --LukeSurl t c 19:17, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Agree. Stormy clouds (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
There was an uncited section, now fixed. Juxlos (talk) 10:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, still opposed. The new target has only a brief mention and offers no more information than what is in the blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support in principle, oppose on update. A historically significant change to one of the world's most powerful offices. However unless I'm missing something President of the People's Republic of China has just two sentences on the change, that say nothing more about it than the blurb does. I think we need a full paragraph of cited update somewhere before posting. Modest Genius talk 11:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • The difficulty of using President of the People's Republic of China as the target is that it's not really the place for an extensive commentary on recent events, especially when these events now mean there's an absence of a particular aspect of the position. --LukeSurl t c 12:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough, but that's currently the bold link in the blurb. If there's a better location for an update, that's fine. We do need one somewhere. Modest Genius talk 13:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support in principle. If allowing presidency for life in the most populous country and second-largest economy in the world, which directly impacts 1.4 billion people and has large potential to affect international relations, does not merit a blurb, then I'm really wondering what the political news should be concerned with to get included.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I think there is a lot of support in principle because this is a huge power grab for Xi. However, he is only the third leader of China since the President role became synonymous with the supreme leader, and he is just now entering his second term. The narrative that he is becoming Mao-like or ruling for life is highly speculative. GCG (talk) 13:37, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Nominal or not, it’s still the head of state position, the same way we care about the Queen of the United Kingdom. Juxlos (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Reluctant oppose as it's a significant story that is getting coverage, but neither proposed target has been sufficiently updated - the 2018 Congress article is still a stub and there has been a mere two line update to the new target that tells us little more than the blurb.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Ireland win Six NationsEdit

Article: 2018 Six Nations Championship (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In rugby union, Ireland win a Grand Slam in the Six Nations Championship. (captain Rory Best pictured)
News source(s): RTÉ BBC
Nominator: Stormy clouds (talk • give credit)

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Nominator's comments: Article needs some referencing, but is in an alright state. Item is ITN/R, and derives additional notability as it is only Ireland's third Grand Slam (and happens to fall on St. Patrick's Day). Stormy clouds (talk) 16:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Is just winning the Grand Slam on ITNR? They won the Six Nations a week ago.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
This nom is for the Six Nations as a whole. We wait until the tournament is concluded. Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:58, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose until improved. Compare 2016 [2] where the item was nominated in a state similar to the current one but was not posted until there was prose on the actual games themselves. (For some reason, this seems not to have been posted - or even nominated - at all in 2017.) There are also a number of uncited statements. Black Kite (talk) 12:17, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

March 16Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 16
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology

[Posted] RD: Adrian LamoEdit

Article: Adrian Lamo (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC News
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (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 well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Nice article. No issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Indeed nice article. Ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 23:11, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Added support. Ready to go. –Ammarpad (talk) 00:19, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - per above supports. Jusdafax (talk) 03:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support good to go, do we need to wait any longer? Anyone out there? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:45, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support everything is well sourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:09, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. Black Kite (talk) 11:29, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Louise SlaughterEdit

Article: Louise Slaughter (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): USA Today
Nominator: It's Wiki Time (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.

 It's Wiki Time (talk) 16:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

  • She's one of my personal favorites, and I may devote some time to getting the article up to speed, but my main point here is that the article is not yet up to speed. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:11, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
    • Support and ready Did the first comment make me too WP:INVOLVED to post this? It's ready now. Great job to everyone for improving this BLP. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:00, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose unreferenced material, tables aren't in chronological order, etc etc, lots of work to do here. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
What's wrong with the tables? They don't look as nice as the ones at Susan Collins, but reverse-chronological is pretty normal. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:16, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Whether it's "pretty normal" or not, it's not acceptable. Show me an encyclopedia that lists events in reverse order. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:33, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
I've had that same argument on election pages in tables that list polling, and have often found myself in the minority in hating reverse chronology. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it's just unacceptable, so until that's fixed, and all the unreferenced issues, this is a definitive no. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
I could be wrong about this, but isn't there some coding wizardry you can add to a sortable table so it defaults to showing a certain way round? Black Kite (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
There sure is, but the default should be chronological. That needs re-work. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Fixed it - now in chronological order. One of the very few things that Visual Editor is useful for. Black Kite (talk) 19:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Reverse chronology is the standard on many of these pages. Is that being a no-no codified anywhere in MOS? If so, would be nice to fix up some of the tables like Opinion polling in the Canadian federal election, 2015, Opinion polling on the Donald Trump administration, Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election, Opinion polling for the Russian presidential election, 2018. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#Order_of_events would be the place to include it for biographies. I don't think there's an MOS sub-page relevant for the "Opinion polling" pages, which have problems beyond their ordering. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:58, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Again, how many encyclopedias are publishing reverse-order information? None is the answer. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:14, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
If it's so obvious, it should be easy to find consensus to state that in the site policies. The section of MOS:BIO currently says Within a single section, events should almost always be in chronological order. Exceptions to this rule may be apply to lists of works, such as publications or other media productions, where the most recent may be listed first, as well as for distinctions such as orders, decorations, and medals. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:24, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Again, how many encyclopedias are publishing reverse-order information? None is the answer. I've already challenged this absurd MOS exception. Time we all started acting like we're building a real encyclopedia, not a tabloid. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:29, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Too many gaps in referencing. The whole thing with the tables is not a deal breaker with me, but yea, they look weird. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:45, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • The article is down to one {{citation needed}}, which I've started a discussion about on the talk page. The article probably needs two more copy-editing passes before being "good". power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:06, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
    • Support I've resolved the last CN tag, and am happy with the article quality now. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support not seeing any more issues with this. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 23:13, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - ready for posting. Good work.BabbaQ (talk) 02:21, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Article has been improved greatly. –Ammarpad (talk) 04:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. Black Kite (talk) 11:29, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

March 15Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 15
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections

Marielle FrancoEdit

Article: Marielle Franco (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The Member of the Rio de Janeiro City Council Marielle Franco and the driver Anderson Pedro Gomes are assassinated in a drive-by shooting in Rio de Janeiro's city center.
Alternative blurb: Brazilian politician and outspoken police critic Marielle Franco is killed along with her driver in a drive-by shooting in Rio de Janeiro.
News source(s): BBC, CNN, Vice News, MintPress News and virtually all major news outlets.
Nominator: RedUser (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: The assassination happened on 15 March, UTC time. RedUser (talk) 02:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Highly relevant news. (talk) 06:21, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support alt blurb per the fact it's dominating Brazilian news and led to tens of thousands of protesters taking to the streets. Banedon (talk) 06:58, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Carlton GaryEdit

Article: Carlton Gary (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Chicago Tribune
Nominator: Dumelow (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: American serial killer executed by lethal injection. Not the most pleasant of topics perhaps but the article is in pretty good shape - Dumelow (talk) 23:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak support there are two permanently dead refs in there which needs to be addressed before this is posted, otherwise it's in good order. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:54, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I have replaced the dead links- Dumelow (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • support - ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 11:02, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article looks fine. –Ammarpad (talk) 11:26, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. Black Kite (talk) 11:29, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Slovakian Prime Minister resignsEdit

Articles: Robert Fico (talk, history) and Peter Pellegrini (talk, history)
Blurb: Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico announces his resignation over the murder of a journalist and designates Peter Pellegrini to form a new government.
News source(s): New York Times, BBC, The Guardian, SCMP, Aktuality (local source)
Nominator: Juxlos (talk • give credit)
Updater: BaconBoss Gabo (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Fuebaey (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Interestingly, a day after his Slovenian counterpart. Peter Pellegrini is now PM-designate, but his article is a bit on the short side. Fico's article is long and well-referenced, though. Juxlos (talk) 22:29, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose for now. Fico's article has not been adequately updated to discuss the circumstances of the fall of his government. This is even more important than normal given the rather sensational blurb. Pellegrini's article is only a half step over a stub and will require significant expansion before it can be linked on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on principle, oppose on quality ITNR transition of a world leader, but as noted above, we really need more about why Fico's resigning. --Masem (t) 00:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Masem Ad Orientem it seems like someone got around to updating the article, with a subsection on resignation. Juxlos (talk) 00:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Fico's article looks better. The other one is still in need of drastic improvement though. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on the merits due to the reason for the resignation (though this is not ITNR as this is head of government not head of state). 331dot (talk) 17:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per Masem. Banedon (talk) 21:01, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose looks like a big publicity issue, perhaps we can publish the new leader per ITNR, but this is titivating and nothing more. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on circumstances of resignation, but wait till new government is formed. This is Paul (talk) 23:24, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait until Government is formed, then run a modified hook like Peter Pellegrini becomes Prime Minister of Slovakia after Robert Fico resigns the post. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

RD: Tom BensonEdit

Article: Tom Benson (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator: Lepricavark (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: Influential sports owner and businessman dies at the age of 90. Lepricavark (talk) 21:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose too much unreferenced material. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support -needs come cleaning and more references. Should be posted after adding new references Awestruck1 (talk) 22:38,15 March 2018
  • Oppose The 'Saints relocation controversy" section is way too long and is rightly tagged for WP:UNDUE. That needs to be resolved.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:06, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

[Closed] Miami bridge collapseEdit

SNOW Close, tragic but consensus is almost entirely against posting this event. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 23:07, 15 March 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: Florida International University pedestrian bridge collapse (talk, history)
Blurb: ​A new pedestrian bridge in Miami, Florida collapses days after being installed, killing at least six people.
News source(s): Miami Herald, BBC, ABC Australia, New York Times
Nominator: SounderBruce (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Article needs expansion, but the news story is receiving international coverage. Highly unusual, given that it's a new bridge and using a modern method of construction. SounderBruce 20:13, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Just a small bridge. No long-term impact.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
"...killing at least six people." That's a long-term impact.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • A new bridge, using a relatively new construction method, will likely have a long-term impact. SounderBruce 20:20, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • If it is a new construction method, glitches or problems are to be expected. It doesn't mean this accident will be the death of this method. I don't think we even know if the accident was related to the construction method. 331dot (talk) 20:25, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose trivial accident, if this had occurred anywhere else on planet Earth it would be universally greeted with "meh", so ... "meh". The Rambling Man (talk) 20:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose certainly a tragedy, and brand new bridges are not expected to fail, but the death toll is too low for ITN. Lepricavark (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak support – making international news; new construction method lends to greater notability than an old decaying bridge collapsing. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - unquestionably sad, but I don't feel that a sufficient number of people have died for this to merit posting. If it happened elsewhere, it would likely not even have an article - we must avoid bias, even if it means letting nominations like this fall to the wayside. Stormy clouds (talk) 20:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose at this time. Tragic, but not generally significant enough based on what we know now. 331dot (talk) 20:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose although undoubtedly a tragic event, it is ultimately a minor accident at best, the bridge was also not fully completed according to the article provided. SamaranEmerald (talk) 20:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. –Actually strong oppose, if it means anything. Relatively minor incident at unfinished bridge. If it were not in the US, it may not even get article talk less of going to main page. –Ammarpad (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Pile on Oppose At the risk of sounding callous; things break and people die. We just can't post every fatal accident that garners some short term, even if sensational, news coverage. Although there is no written rule, in my experience accidents with low death tolls usually don't make it onto ITN. Our motto is not "if it bleeds it leads." It has to bleed a lot. Prayers for those affected... Kyrie eleison. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Number of fatalities isn’t currently large, but nature of the incident and fact that it was a new structure sways it for me.yorkshiresky (talk) 22:51, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per all above opposers, arbitrary at best, bridges especially new ones tend to have problems within days after they open, take the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge for example, it had problems almost immediately after it opened, and as a result it collapsed several months later. Kirliator (talk) 23:01, 15 March 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.

March 14Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 14
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections

[Closed] Toys R UsEdit

This dead horse is getting cold. Brandmeistertalk 15:17, 15 March 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: Toys “R” Us (talk, history)
Blurb: Toys “R” Us says they are closing in the US and UK.
Nominator: (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Big news. (talk) 00:49, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose: No sources given. Also, this is just a company about to be liquidated. This is not CompanyPedia. 2601:2C0:4700:4A9A:E1AA:FC3B:E64E:EACB (talk) 00:57, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose It is big news here in the States. But companies go broke all the time and we are not talking a mega bankruptcy here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:34, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Just a side effect really of the biggening of the online shopping industry especially by mega-retailers like Amazon. More businesses will be sure to follow suit. WaltCip (talk) 01:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I personally find this to be sad news, but it certainly does not rise to ITN level. Lepricavark (talk) 02:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'd consider a support if/when they actually closed. A few years ago HMV claimed it was closing, and never did. Aiken D 07:05, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose just another company whose business model didn't move with the times. Already fish and chip paper. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose routine business action. As I understand it(at least in the US) they are not totally going out of business yet, just closing a bunch of stores. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose This does not interest the majority of people, even within the US. Natureium (talk) 13:58, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose No international significance, not the kind of thing we usually post on ITN and no reason why this is exceptionally different. AusLondonder (talk) 14:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
@AusLondonder: I agree that this does not merit posting, but "international significance" has never been required for any ITN posting; if it were, very little would be posted. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 15 March 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.

Slovenian Prime Minister resignsEdit

Article: Miro Cerar (talk, history)
Blurb: Slovenian Prime Minister Miro Cerar resigns after the supreme court of Slovenia annuls the results of a government referendum.
News source(s): AP
Nominator: Banedon (talk • give credit)
Updater: Juxlos (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: From the source, Slovenia has also had "a wave of strikes and protests by public sector workers", including a strike by teachers that shut down schools on Wednesday. Banedon (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Article looks to be in decent shape though I might suggest waiting until we have a successor announced as we usually post the outgoing and incoming at the same time. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Wait per Masem below. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait articles are fine but we should post it when his successor is sworn in – NixinovaT | E ⟩ 00:14, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Conditional wait not entirely sure. If it’ll take a few months for his successor to be decided then post but if it’s within a week or so then might as well wait. Juxlos (talk) 00:20, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • also he’s still formally prime minister if I’m reading this correctly
  • Wait Per Reuters, he will hold the post until the new gov't forms. --Masem (t) 00:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Masem. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Conditional Oppose Sad to say, but the last time I heard about Slovenia was with regards to Melania. This news item may be too myopic?Zigzig20s (talk) 07:58, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait for the election (which is ITNR) to post something about this. There doesn't seem to be a big scandal here, he resigned after the Supreme Court annulled the results of a referendum he had championed and ordered a new vote. 331dot (talk) 14:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
I agree. Inatan (talk) 18:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
You think whether or not there is a big scandal is relevant to whether or not this should be posted on ITN? Banedon (talk) 21:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • It is better to wait until the election here. He resigned a couple of months before the regular election would take place, and the resignation is being interpreted as a strategical move in view of tensions in the coalition and some other cases, such as the referendum being overturned. Cerar will remain acting PM until the election so there is no major change expected. --Tone 20:27, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Man and I was hoping we can have “Slovakian prime minister resigns” and “Slovenian prime minister resigns” next to each other on ITN. Juxlos (talk) 23:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] UK Expels 23 Russian DiplomatsEdit

Article: Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The United Kingdom formally accuses Russia of the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal by a nerve agent and expels 23 diplomats.
Alternative blurb: ​In response to the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal by a nerve agent, the United Kingdom expels 23 Russian diplomats.
News source(s): NYT and virtually all major news outlets.
Nominator: Ad Orientem (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: The original blurb just fell off ITN as the situation is rapidly escalating into a serious international incident/crisis. Russia is threatening unspecified retaliation. I think recent developments justify reposting. If this drags out we might want to consider ongoing. The article is in good shape. Ad Orientem (talk) 14:28, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Wait I'm tempted to say this may be better for ongoing, as each element of the tensions rising here is not going to be ITN itself (we can't post every incremental update), but it is a major breakdown in relationships between the UK and Russia. --Masem (t) 14:31, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Okay, now we have something here. Support.--WaltCip (talk) 14:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
My intial reaction after seeing BBC's "to expel" headline was also 'wait,' but evidently they've been given official notice – they just have a week before they have to say "До свидания." – Sca (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support A major escalation. I think the expelling of diplomats is blurb-worthy and I would prefer this to merely adding it on Ongoing.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Ongoing the death blurb just expired off, pop this down into ongoing (now we have a free slot) and let it die off naturally. -- (talk) 15:33, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support next logical stage but a real degradation in relationships between the two countries. Good job the rest of Europe sits between the UK and Russia...... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Also, good thing we're in a formal union with those countries so they can back us up. Oh, wait..... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – A big step all right (and May also revoked an invitation to Lavrov). – Sca (talk) 16:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I fin it unusual that this wasnt mentioned already, even before the expulsion of the diplomats. Dahn (talk) 17:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
It was. However it just got bumped off the ITN bar with the posting of Stephen Hawking's death. That blurb only addressed the attempted murder, not the most recent and rather dramatic developments. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support International news with a major case of excrement hitting fan that has not been seen since the Cold War. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Post to ongoing - You don't need a crystal ball to know that this whole thing is going to be in the news for at least a couple of weeks. - Floydian τ ¢ 18:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait Russian Ambassador Alexander Vladimirovich Yakovenko is not expelled yet. If he is, then this would mean something huge. For now, I’d hold off. Juxlos (talk) 18:41, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. It seems to still be developing, and currently receiving a large amount of media attention. Natureium (talk) 19:06, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose until the diplomats actually leave (i.e one week from now). This is what we've been doing by precedent. Banedon (talk) 20:33, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
What precedent is that? I don't recall the last time we discussed posting the expulsion of diplomats. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
No, but we had lots of nominations not posted because it "hasn't happened yet", e.g. your Kim-Trump meeting nomination. Banedon (talk) 20:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Well, this has happened. The named diplomats have to leave the country. I'm not sure what happens to them if they don't but I'm guessing it involves arrest. So you actually support this but oppose it for consistency? 331dot (talk) 20:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, this is for consistency. It's not that the diplomats don't leave the country, but rather that the UK can change its mind. Again, this is using previous arguments for not posting XYZ per WP:Crystal and all that. Banedon (talk) 20:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. 331dot (talk) 20:55, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Major escalation in this dispute. 331dot (talk) 20:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Major international kerfuffle involving the use of a nerve agent in Europe with long term consequences. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Is "formally" necessary in the blurb? zzz (talk) 21:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Still favor posting, but would add this note of caution: Looks like the Russians are getting ready to play (surprise!) tit-for-tat. If they do, that could be added. Sca (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Routine. You periodically expel spies to disrupt their network-building efforts. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Expelling diplomats is not common. The mass expulsion of more than 20 is w/o recent precedent. You would have to go back to the dark days of the cold war to find something like this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:48, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: I would have posted this, but I'm not seeing language in the article to match the blurb. Perhaps something along the lines of "After Russia refuses to cooperate with the investigation of the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal, the UK expels 23 Russian diplomats as undeclared intelligence officers." This matches the language of news sources, c.f. [3]. Accusing Russia of Murder does not appear in reliable sources as such. This seems to have the support as an article worth the main page, but the blurb needs to be nailed down better. --Jayron32 23:28, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
“Their response has demonstrated complete disdain for the gravity of these events,” May told MPs. She said: “There is no alternative conclusion other than the Russian state was responsible for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal and his daughter.” [4] -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:37, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
If you can make that language more explicit in the article, I will post this. --Jayron32 23:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Added alt blurb as a back-up. Brandmeistertalk 23:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Posted The altblurb. I am more comfortable with that language. In specific, the changes to the article do not reflect the sources still. I'd rather the Wikipedia article directly quote May than paraphrase. For material this sensitive, it's important we speak in the voice of our sources, and not in Wikipedia's voice. "Formally accuse" is not language that appears in the sources. --Jayron32 23:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
I too like the altblurb, but wonder if the phrase "by a nerve agent" will be readily understood. Would "by a nerve-acting poison" be better, perhaps? Sca (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Alternatively, would "with a nerve agent" be better? Sca (talk) 00:09, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. I don't know if we want to amend the blurb or not but Russia has announced it is expelling 23 UK diplomats (and some other actions) in retaliation. 331dot (talk) 09:45, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Jim BowenEdit

Article: Jim Bowen (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC News
Nominator and updater: Ritchie333 (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Lugnuts (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.

 Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Parking this here for now. I suspect people will oppose, because the article is not in a good shape. However, we got Ken Dodd improved to be posted, so I think we might be able to do it again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Subject to improvements, etc. And a speedboat for anyone who brings it up to scratch. But only if you live in Tamworth. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 13:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support subject to improvement S a g a C i t y (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Pending those last couple of citations being added. Miyagawa (talk) 14:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support referencing has now been improved. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Great job by Ritchie in bringing the article up to scratch. Now sufficiently referenced.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:43, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Super, smashing, great Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted blurb] Stephen HawkingEdit

Enough of the pile on. That's plenty of PPS. If anyone want to discuss whether we should wait a minimum amount of time before posting, then you're welcome to WT:ITN. -- KTC (talk) 12:50, 14 March 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: Stephen Hawking (talk, history)
Blurb: ​British physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking dies at the age of 76.
News source(s): The Guardian
Nominator: SounderBruce (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Article is in good quality, but does need a bit of spotchecking. SounderBruce 03:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb Absolute no-brainer. EternalNomad (talk) 03:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb One of the most famous people, let alone scientists, in the world. And a tragic loss for mankind. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 03:53, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb No need to argue this; absolutely yesNixinovaT | E ⟩ 03:55, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb with tears. Davey2116 (talk) 03:55, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb No doubt. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb Not even a question. What a loss. GrossesWasser (talk) 03:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb per MAINEiac4434 and Davey2116. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 03:58, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong support blurb One of the most influential and iconic scientists of this era. I couldn't believe the news when I just saw it on Facebook. Every morning (there's a halo...) 04:02, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Blurb This is definitely a no-brainer for a blurb (in addition to the !votes above), the article is strong shape. --Masem (t) 04:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support Just piling on. Passes the Bowie/Mandela/Prince standard. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:07, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I'd also support adding a photograph of Hawking. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 04:15, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    • Agree. The infobox image (File:Stephen Hawking.StarChild.jpg) is appropriate and nicely framed at thumbnail size. SounderBruce 04:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
      • There is some necessary cascading protection for main page images that I am not 100% sure how to do, but this is clearly a move to make. --Masem (t) 04:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support without a doubt. Lepricavark (talk) 04:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I think the image should be posted too. Our admins watching this should help. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:07, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Post-posting very strong support: very strong support, yes, I also feel the image should be posted as well. --Titodutta (talk) 06:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Post-posting very strong support. Of course. Double sharp (talk) 07:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support blurb - A true icon of our era. Kurtis (talk) 07:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Beyond the event horizon support - What more can one say? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:15, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • PPSS unequivocally blurb-worthy. RIP. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:58, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Much like WP:RFA, it's not often that the entirety of ITN can come to an unequivocal 100% agreement on something, but I think here there is a clear unanimous consensus. We've got our blurb and our image; we can probably just close the discussion at this point and leave it at that.--WaltCip (talk) 10:51, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment "In rare cases, the death of major transformative world leaders in their field may merit a blurb.". This was one of those "rare cases". Good post. -- (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • This should be noted as an example for the guidelines. Juxlos (talk) 11:46, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Post Post Support - As per everyone else. It’s almost impossible to find a media that doesn’t show this as a headline or at least first page news. Juxlos (talk) 11:46, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Post-posting support. But it seems this was 17 minutes from nomination to posting. Is this a record for ITN? And for ITN article quality assessment? And for articles where the nominator writes 'Article is in good quality, but does need a bit of spotchecking.', where nobody else commented on article quality except the poster, and where the infobox was not (and still is not) even flagged as updated? Was such haste necessary or advisable? Or does it set a worrying precedent? I understand, perhaps mistakenly, that it was concerns about haste like this after the death of a revered figure that lead the Catholic Church to invent the post of Devil's Advocate, so might ITN benefit from something similar? (Please don't bother answering any of these questions here, as I'm only asking them to provoke thinking on the matter, and this is probably the wrong place to discuss them further, and anyway I'm not really interested in discussing them myself as this comment is hopefully just a one-off breach of my decision to try to stay away from ITN). Tlhslobus (talk) 11:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
The article is a former FA; even thought it was delisted in 2014, I know people have kept a close eye on it so I wouldn't have believed it any worse than B-class at any time - I suspect other people knew / felt the same and hence insta-supported. PS: I await Donald Trump's reaction to Hawking's death with interest. Just sayin'. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
It's a shame though that an article about such an important person is not a FA or at least a GA.... Regards SoWhy 12:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
The Donald has just tweeted that he is bigly saddened to learn that Wikipedia has posted the death of a character who once appeared in The Simpsons, but unsurprized as he always knew Wikipedia was Fake News. Tlhslobus (talk) 11:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Figures.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Almost. That's a parody account. Although it says something that in this day and age one can easily believe that the US President could have said something like this. Regards SoWhy 12:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
The fastest posting to ITN was Hilary Putnam's RD, back in March 2016. That took only 11 minutes. In that particular case, the article was featured, and the new RD criteria were in place, so it did not take long for a consensus to develop.--WaltCip (talk) 12:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Post Posting Support The very definition of a blurb-worthy death. Front pages everywhere, transformative.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:24, 14 March 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.

March 13Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 13
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology

[Ready] 2018 UK higher education strikeEdit

Article: 2018 UK higher education strike (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The UK higher education strike over changes to pensions continues into its fourth week with potential further disruption set for April to June at over 60 universities after the University and College Union (UCU) overwhelmingly rejects revised offer from employers' representatives.
Alternative blurb: ​Talks to end the 2018 UK higher education strike collapse resulting in up to 16 university campuses being occupied by student solidarity groups in escalating dispute.
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, Independent, Times Higher Education, The Times, Xinhuanet, Irish News, Cyprus Mail, The PIE News, The Straits Times
Nominator and updater: Stinglehammer (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Times describes dispute as "the worst industrial action at universities in modern times". Stinglehammer (talk) 12:16, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose blurb - coverage is almost exclusively by British papers. Neutral for ongoing. Juxlos (talk) 12:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Added a few links to sites outside of UK inc. Singapore, China, Cyprus, Ireland etc.Stinglehammer (talk) 15:32, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, seems it as in the news in these countries 2-3 weeks ago... 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 18:59, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Can you login, please? Hard to argue with an address. Article did not exist 2-3 weeks ago. It exists now. Strike escalated on Tuesday this week when long hoped-for resolution, after 6 days of talks at the Acas conciliation service, resulted in an 'overwhelming' rejection by university staff. This rejection of the Acas agreement hardened the two positions, exposed deep divisions between the two sides and escalated the strike so that it is now set to continue for another 14 days; doubling the strike and doubling down on its effects as the new strike days will take place in the important April to June exam period. The elongating & escalating of the strike happened this week with resolution seemingly a long way off. That's why nomination was put in.Stinglehammer (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Not everyone has and wants an account. Unneccessary opening statement. Propose you retract. As for your argument. Not sure I am convinced, as you offer an interpretation using dramatic words. I checked the Guardian. If an important turning point, I would expect a British newspaper to offer extensive coverage. Nothing off that, even taking into account that the Russia news dominates headlines. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Sorry,I will retract of course. Wrongly assumed after your first Oppose comment I was discussing with a random IP address that hadn't read the nominated article or the thread discussion. Which after discussing the nomination for so long got my back up. Apologies again. Will moderate my comments in future. As to the substance of your point, it depends what you mean by extensive coverage. There has been sustained coverage from Guardian, Times, BBC, Times Higher Education, Independent etc. over the last 3 weeks which includes coverage of the rejection this week. Given BBC, Times & Guardian etc. have covered in number of articles over the period and ITN has not covered at all, I propose there is case for inclusion now strike is entering an escalated 2nd phase.Stinglehammer (talk) 21:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Union strikes are not the type of thing that makes good ITN stories. --Masem (t) 13:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Isn't this dealing with "the appropriateness of topics in general rather than the specific story"? This strike affects university staff at all UK universities established before 1992. 64 of them. Not a one-day strike either. Looking at a period of twenty-eight days of sustained striking now that talks have broken down. Strikes can be extremely newsworthy: (timeline of strikes). Stinglehammer (talk) 09:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Not to make it too trite, but I'd call this a "first world problem". Yes, a good number of people (profs, students, supporting staff) are affected, but we're talking about being inconvenienced over labor issues. It's the same reason we don't post when winter storms shut down airports and cause extreme disruption to traffic in the US - its not a significant long-term issue. Add that this is stale news - the strike has been going on for some time, and this is an arbitrary point to announce it. --Masem (t) 13:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
The dispute is about the future of UK higher education and how it is funded so it does indeed have longterm significance. The strike has resulted in a stalemate between the two sides grinding an important sector to a halt, a sector with international significance. Why are we equating this prolonged sector-wide strike with a one-off weather/transport issue? Not the same. The plane crash reported on ITN is a one-off event for that matter so why are we covering that? Hardly stale news either when after protracted talks the agreement has just been rejected in the last two days and a further 14 strike days are to go ahead now as a result, effectively doubling the strike and doubling down on its effects. Not arbitrary if you take that as your ITN blurb.Stinglehammer (talk) 17:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - UK education system grinding to a halt as classes cancelled at 60+ of UK's oldest universities for an extended period from February up to (potentially) the June exam period is entirely worthy of ITN. Thousands of university staff and students all affected in the stalemate. Stinglehammer (talk) 14:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
A bunch of students can't go to class. It may be mildly disruptive, but it's not especially significant or lasting in any way.--WaltCip (talk) 14:24, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
"bunch" is way too blithe. 126,000 students have asked for their fees to be returned so far and that's before exams have been affected and standoff is now an entrenched one with goodwill of staff now permanently eroded. That will be a longlasting effect of the dispute for years to come and difficult to recover. Strike is also seen as emblematic of wider discussion on the future of higher education. e.g. BBC article - "The more you talk to people, the more they understand what the big issues actually are. Yes it's about pensions but, fundamentally, its about defending higher education against further cuts and marketisation." Ergo, the scale and nature of the dispute is historically notable for ITN.Stinglehammer (talk) 14:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb Nomination is stale. This has been going on since February. Neutral for ongoing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, ongoing since February. Has it featured in ITN in this time though? News from yesterday is that after 6 days of talks, an agreement has been rejected yesterday resulting in further entrenchment (and 'bad blood') in addition to the prolonging of the strike with a further 14 strike days now looking likely to take place in the important April to June exam period unless a mutually agreeable way forward can be struck. Stinglehammer (talk) 15:12, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. The blurb is too convoluted; if posted, it should be simplified. 331dot (talk) 15:18, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  Done Added shorter alternative blurb above. Stinglehammer (talk) 15:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Good article, in the news not just in the UK (it was on Democracy Now!) and we are not USApedia anyway.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:21, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
We should be careful not to end up as UKpedia too. Banedon (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
"Please do not 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." - Passing of Ken Dodd and Jim Bowen is very UK-centric for instance. Compare with universities which are international by their very nature.Stinglehammer (talk) 09:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Irrelevant. We would post the passing of Ken Dodd and Jim Bowen regardless of their nationality under the current ITNRD criteria.--WaltCip (talk) 12:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Point I was making this idea of "only relating to a single country" is not one ITN is supposed to go in for per the guidance page. Beyond that, the point is the UK Higher education sector has international relevance. The Bowen/Dodd point was just a throwaway followup as you can't get more 'UKpedia' than Ken Dodd and Jim Bowen.Stinglehammer (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose local news, plus it's just a strike per WaltClip. Compare e.g. the London underground, how often does it go on strike? Banedon (talk) 20:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
    Bizarre idea to compare it to some other completely unrelated entity, you might as well compare it to the French or the NRA. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Agree, this is a total false equivalence. Not the same at all. Half of all UK universities and some of the oldest in the world (inc. Hawking's alma maters Oxford and Cambridge) have ground to a halt in a stalemate with its staff which looks set to continue into pivotal exam period and have repercussions for sector for years to come in terms of the 'bad blood' that has been engendered. By same token, the Italian elections could be considered 'local' news... but it has international significance. UK higher education has international significance likewise in its students, staff, teaching & learning, research & development etc. Stinglehammer (talk) 22:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
If we accept that UK higher education has international significance because of international students and staff, then most things have "international significance" since in the globalized world we live in someone is bound to be international. That Hawking's alma maters are involved is irrelevant - Hawking is also only one person. To argue that Oxford and Cambridge are independently notable is another thing, but that's still a stretch; there are plenty of other notable universities (e.g. Harvard, MIT, Tsinghua, UTokyo ...) that are not on strike. Banedon (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Again this is a false equivalence. There are plenty of places where there are no elections, where there are no plane crashes, where there are no sector-wide education strikes. But where there are this is news. I mentioned Hawking because he is included on ITN and he is one man, as you say, albeit a giant in his field. He has thousands of colleagues who are similarly respected internationally, working at extremely notable institutions like Oxford, Cambridge and over 60 others where they have ceased to work and look like they will continue to be on strike for a prolonged period. This is crippling for the sector; an important sector in the UK and abroad. Therefore this is news.Stinglehammer (talk) 23:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I think this story is very relevant, and highlights the depth of problems in UK Higher Education. Jason.nlw (talk) 10:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This story is highly relevant to a valuable UK industry, as well as relevant to current UK politics and to plans for the restructuring of UK higher education. The story is also relevant globally, and of particular interest to the US, where historic K-12 teacher strikes have been ongoing. Karengregory (talk) 11:56, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This is clearly important news. It's obviously of greater interest to those in the UK, but I think we all need to be informed if such a large scale strike is happening in any country in the world. NavinoEvans (talk) 13:02, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Large-scale strike affecting multiple universities. The Times's note on its significance is enough to make me support. talk to !dave 13:35, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support The fact that a million students across more than 60 universities are directly effected by the strike and the rarity of action on this scale demonstrates quite clearly that this is a significant story. It is the biggest strike in the history of UK higher education. The top 20 universities internationally includes Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College London, University College London all of which are impacted by the strike which should soothe any fears over whether this is of international importance. Richard Nevell (talk) 17:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I will look to the support rationales in this ITN nom the next time we're talking about whether or not to post an ITN about NCAA basketball.--WaltCip (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I should be delighted to take part in that conversation. Please do leave a message on my talk page when it becomes relevant. Richard Nevell (talk) 17:58, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • The two subjects are not comparable, so to attempt to chill the discussion over this nomination is completely misleading. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose unclear why this should be posted now, and not when the strike began. It's not like anything important has happened in relation to this strike in the last few days. The blurb says it all, "continues into its fourth week with potential further disruption set for April to June". 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 18:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
I suggest you read the article's section on the Acas agreement onwards which makes it clear that there are indeed important recent developments. The talks are important because it effects whether there will be further strikes.Richard Nevell (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Sure did that. Also read the section that came after the Acas section? Looks like this "important" agreement was rejected just a few hours later. Must have been an important development, indeed. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:55D4:F543:6342:97DA (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Indeed, in fact it sounds rather a lot like news to me. Richard Nevell (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Talks went on for 6 days. Acas agreement was rejected overwhelmingly by university staff across the UK when it was put to them by representatives the next day. Time for decision is not relevant - the rejection of the agreement is all. Shows the depth of feeling and that the employers' position did not go anywhere far enough. Thus deepening the divisions between the two sides and causing deadlock for entire sector until situation is resolved.Stinglehammer (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This is an important and escalating story. As strikes enter their fourth week between 14 and 16 university campuses have been occupied by student solidarity groups, supporting staff and protesting marketising of education. This story speaks to a wider narrative around the UK HE sector and to student-led protest (national walkout day in the US yesterday for example). I think the summary needs to be updated to reflect the increasing direct action from student groups. Ammienoot (talk) 19:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Neutral for Ongoing, which seems a more appropriate place as it has been, well, ongoing since February. There doesn't seem to be a pressing reason to post this as a blurb right now.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support for ongoing, clearly no real clear blurb here, but this is an ongoing issue, and now there's talk over students suing for recovery of their fees, this is a really big deal right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:45, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Alt blurb - Talks to end the 2018 UK higher education strike collapse resulting in up to 16 university campuses being occupied by student solidarity groups in escalating dispute.Stinglehammer (talk) 22:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Alt blurb. Significant story with bigger implications for pensions regulation and students' rights. Zeromonk (talk) 09:28, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Significant and large scale strike affecting multiple UK universities, with additional student occupations of University property having been announced over the last few days, including the University of Glasgow yesterday. Lirazelf (talk) 09:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment On a historic note, this would be the third UK story in a row at ITN. Brandmeistertalk 10:12, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Duly noted. And obviously you'd normally want a wider spread of world news featured but passing of Stephen Hawking, the poisoning and the historic nature of the UK higher education strike are all huge stories with wide implications. Stinglehammer (talk) 11:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Well, a lot of people in the UK speak English, so why not. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:44, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Just giving this thread a bump as the article has been significantly expanded and a new image gallery added. Think it looks good. Stinglehammer (talk) 10:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

2018 Sukma attackEdit

Article: 2018 Sukma attack (talk, history)
Blurb: ​An IED blast kills at least nine CRPF personnel and injures six others in Sukma district, Chhattisgarh, India.
News source(s): Washington Post, Herald Sun Hindustan Times
Nominator: (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The Draft needs a Review before it could go to ITN on Main page. Its a stub atm but will expand it later. (talk) 09:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose as of now due to quality (as mentioned by nominator). Weak Support on notability. Juxlos (talk) 10:46, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  Done, the article can now hopefully be judged above stub-level. (talk) 09:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh well, revert then. On an unrelated topic, how do I strikethrough? Juxlos (talk) 14:05, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. Could the name of the police force be spelled out in the blurb? It was not immediately obvious to me what "CRPF" means. 331dot (talk) 20:44, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose As I write this it’s still a three line stub. Not convinced about significance either. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

[Closed] Trump sacks TillersonEdit

Good faith nom but consensus is clearly opposed to posting. In general changes in political offices below the level of national head of state or government are rarely posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:06, 13 March 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.

Nominator's comments: I'm aware that this will get oppose !votes for being U.S.-centric, but the article update has been thorough and it's even the top story on BBC (beating out the fallout from the Russian poisoning). Davey2116 (talk) 14:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Trump's cabinet has been a revolving door since his inauguration to the point of being almost as typical as sunrise and sunset. Rex Tillerson's sacking is neither unexpected nor overly significant.--WaltCip (talk) 14:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
And its placement on BBC, I think, is immaterial. I'm still of the belief that the Russian poisoning is a non-story.--WaltCip (talk) 14:57, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Maybe revise and check your logic - this does not make you look like an intelligent person. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:188B:D30F:20F4:98AF (talk) 17:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Dismissal of a leader's adviser under conditions like this is not ITN type material. --Masem (t) 14:56, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Neutral on inclusion, but if used, the verb "sack" in the sense of "fire" or "terminate" (an employee) is less common in the US than the UK so we might want to rephrase. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose John Magufuli sacks George Mkuchika, would it get posted? I think not. The BBC isn't above regional bias either. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 15:04, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't think this should be posted either, but I think we both realize that US politics have a far greater global impact than Tanzanian politics. Lepricavark (talk) 18:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
That is true. How about Putin sacking Dmitry Medvedev? That would have a slightly higher chance of being posted, but still not much. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 18:58, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose as a simple personnel change, and it is true this wouldn't be considered for most other countries. I have added a blurb with US terminology (fired) 331dot (talk) 15:19, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support making headlines, decent article. We can talk about "other countries" when "other countries" currency is used as a global trade standard, when "other countries" have military bases in 180 countries and fleets of ballistic missile submarines, when "other countries" engage in nuclear brinkmanship with North Korea. The sudden departure of SecState is a big deal. The false equivalences are comical. -- (talk) 15:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Systemic bias is not comical and something we should take seriously. This is not the pro-USA Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
This also was not sudden and was long expected. 331dot (talk) 15:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Once again, you don't fight "systemic bias" by suppressing stories from countries you consider to be over represented. It was long speculated, not so long expected, and it's not common for a sec state to go mid-term. -- (talk) 17:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
IP editor, have you tried Conservapedia? You might be more at home there. Here at Wikipedia, though, we don't post stuff like this. And if we post every tiniest thing about a certain country, then you do counter the bias by "suppressing" stories- there are too many countries in the world to do that for, ITN would be flooded. You may even consider starting a wiki at Wikia, where all United States-related news is posted. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 17:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The snottiness is unwarranted. The IP has a valid point about comical false equivalences, even if I disagree with his support for posting this. Lepricavark (talk) 18:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for the snottiness. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 19:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose ministers get sacked all the time, no reason in particular why this is special. Unless something huge follows, but that’s WP:CRYSTAL. Juxlos (talk) 16:22, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment As a result of the dismissal CIA director Mike Pompeo was nominated as new Secretary of State and in turn Gina Haspel was nominated as new CIA director. This would be the first female director of the agency, and her nomination is also controversial due to her involvement in a torture site and the 2005 CIA interrogation tapes destruction. I would recommend to change the blurb, but it may be too soon to nominate this.--Jamez42 (talk) 16:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support So this which makes global headlines doesn’t get posted but the election in Tuvalu does? (talk) 16:29, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
General elections of all sovereign States are on the recurring events list. Routine dismissals of officials who serve at the pleasure of the President are not. If you feel elections should not be, please propose their removal. 331dot (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The last sec-state dismissed mid term I think was Haig back in the 80s, I didn't look to see how frequent before that. Not exactly "routine". -- (talk) 17:15, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose, local politics. If we posted every time a cabinet-level official was replaced in every large country ITN would be a continual stream of them. We stick to heads of state, and sometimes heads of government. Modest Genius talk 16:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support more important and more impact than most of the stuff we post on the mainpage. What the IP above rightly said, the false equivalences are comical indeed. Either this is an encyclopedia and we evaluate events based on their importance and impact. Or we are not, and we just keep shoehorning the usual fare of disasters, elections and sport events into the mainpage. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:188B:D30F:20F4:98AF (talk) 17:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not unexpected, and while we can figure what this means for things like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (R.I.P.), we'll post that when it happens. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    • Also, "sacking" is not terminology we use in the U.S. unless we're talking about football. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose yet another Trumpism, local politics, not important, not the last of these kinds of things. Suggest this is closed with extreme prejudice. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:28, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    Then why did you not close it just yourself as SNOW. Would have been more constructive than posting a worthless oppose that does not provide a single valid reason? 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:188B:D30F:20F4:98AF (talk) 17:33, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    Go away "IP", or log in, or do something constructive. I offered a perfectly apt oppose, "local politics", of no interest to anyone outside the Trump administration and, curiously, a handful of IP editors here. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
    Not going away, but maybe you can. National, not local politics, and please note the instruction above "Do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country". Utterly worthless oppose, as I said. 2A02:A451:8B2D:1:188B:D30F:20F4:98AF (talk) 19:05, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Trump appoints Pompeo as Secretary of State. There can't be two at the same time. If anything, Haspel's appointment as the first female director of the CIA may be notable.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Utter local US politics and Trumpic drama. Ministers/secretaries are appointed and sacked all the time around the world. Their appointment is explicitly at the whim and pleasure of the master they serve, who can hire and fire at any time and such events are generally not ITN worthy at all. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:51, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose typical political drama. Political figures below the top come and go all the time around the world. ZettaComposer (talk) 18:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. As many sources point out, this signals the start of a far more confrontational foreign policy. Count Iblis (talk) 19:03, 13 March 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.

[Removed] 2018 anti-Muslim riots in Sri LankaEdit

Article: 2018 anti-Muslim riots in Sri Lanka (talk, history)
Ongoing item removal
Nominator: Ammarpad (talk)

Nominator's comments: According to the article and external news sources this is no longer "ongoing." Tension has been defused and normalcy returned. –Ammarpad (talk) 07:55, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Given that this was posted more recently than 2/5 of active blurbs and within minutes of a third, could we move this to blurb? GCG (talk) 12:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Probably should have always been a blurb ... however per WP:USGOVERNMENTSHUTDOWN we now pull blurbs for events that have concluded, so .... neutral. -- (talk) 12:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Remove per (talk) 13:43, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Remove, but re-post as blurb per GCG and Davey2116 (talk) 13:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support removal from ongoing / Oppose blurb One of the reasons this was posted in ongoing in the first place is that it was too stale for for ITN. The riots and their coverage began quite a ways back. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:54, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • If this were "converted" into a blurb, it would be dated from the start of the event, which would be older than the oldest item. --LukeSurl t c 16:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: I've not looked into the current rate of updates, but if this has stopped being ongoing it should be removed entirely, not upgraded to a blurb. The original discussion very specifically formed consensus on an ongoing posting, not a blurb. Besides, moving to a blurb would create a bad precedent for circumventing the original consensus that way. Modest Genius talk 16:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Remove - this was too stale for a blurb when originally posted. Now that it is entirely complete and over, a blurb listing is even more redundant. Time to remove it, I feel. Stormy clouds (talk) 21:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Removed from ongoing Stephen 22:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

March 12Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 12
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
  • Austin package explosions
    • Police in Austin, Texas announce that three package bombs in recent days that have killed two people and injured one more appear to be connected. The packages were left off at three separate locations and were not placed there by any delivery service, police say. (CNN)
Politics and elections

RD: Nikolai GlushkovEdit

Article: Nikolai Glushkov (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Guardian
Nominator: Count Iblis (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.

 Count Iblis (talk) 18:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose on article quality. Huge CN for claims surrounding his death which are a serious BLP FAIL. That needs to be fixed PDQ or I am going to remove it. Beyond that some of the sources are Russian and we need to have a close look by someone familiar with Russia and the current state of affairs there to determine their reliability. No, I do not regard Russian sources as presumptively reliable. Too much is going on over there. And lastly the article really needs a lot of copy editing for better reading. I am having a hard time figuring out the plot to the backstory which sounds simultaneously bizarre and slightly incomprehensible. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I removed the BLP vio. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:35, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Which has subsequently been fixed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:50, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

RD: Craig MackEdit

Article: Craig Mack (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): CNN Rolling Stone
Nominator: Davey2116 (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: A 1990s rapper dies at age 46. Davey2116 (talk) 13:48, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Poor sourcing and some word choices would be formalized. Main issue is sourcing. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Unsourced statements and parts of the article are not written in an encyclopedic tone. Quality is not there yet.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Oskar GröningEdit

Article: Oskar Gröning (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Spiegel, BBC
Nominator: Masem (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: He reportedly died on March 9, but Spiegel, the first source to report, is only reporting it today. Article seems to be in good shape. Masem (t) 02:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - I agree with Masems assessment. Ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 02:04, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Kyrie eleison. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 03:09, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] US Bangla Airlines Flight 211Edit

Article: US Bangla Airlines Flight 211 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​At least 49 people are killed after US Bangla Airlines Flight 211 crashed en route from Dhaka, Bangladesh to Kathmandu, Nepal.
News source(s): IE
Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Numbers are likely to grow looking at what happened to the aircraft. This should be mimimum for ITN notability. Lihaas (talk) 11:18, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - Due to number of fatalities. Sherenk1 (talk) 11:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Per above. Article is a bit short but it should expand in the next couple hours as info comes. Juxlos (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Question what, beyond an unfortunate death toll, makes this notable? What are the minimum deaths for notability? -- (talk) 12:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
    • There's no formal minimum, but commercial airline crashes with two-digit death tolls are almost automatically notable and postable. Brandmeistertalk 13:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - apparent high death toll, article in fairly good shape with no referencing issues. Mjroots (talk) 12:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - High number of deaths. Good shape article.BabbaQ (talk) 13:22, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Sad accident. Article looks short but adequate and is decently referenced. I did add a CN but it's not enough to hold up posting. I also updated the death toll in the blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support high death toll, article is sufficiently ready. Lepricavark (talk) 14:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted This does not appear controversial. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Ameenah Gurib announces her resignation as President of MauritiusEdit

Article: Ameenah Gurib (talk, history)
Blurb: Ameenah Gurib announces her resignation as President of Mauritius.
News source(s): Bloomberg

Nominator's comments: and other sources have reported this in the past few days. SecretName101 (talk) 10:53, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

  • comment change in head of state is ITNR so a new pone will get posted but I imagine she will be acting till then.Lihaas (talk) 11:09, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment The Presidency of Mauritius appears more ceremonial than of a true leadership position (the PM is the leading state official there), this might beg the question if this should be considered ITNR. --Masem (t) 13:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
The Prime Minister is head of government, not state. We should expect an "acting" President to take over, which would not be ITNR. The replacement being elected or assuming office would be. I still think we should be using the yellow-shaded from here for ITNR, but that idea was shot down. GCG (talk) 16:30, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
As a matter of practice we have generally posted changes in head of government as well as head of state assuming that the article is up to scratch. In any event this is ITNR. I have added a couple CN tags but the article is not in bad shape overall. Fix those and I would think this will be postable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support resignation of any major post, even if wields less power than other positions is signifigant, especially if there is a scandal, which there is. Should be postedUser:Awestruck1(talk) 20:22. 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support According to ITNR only the succession of head of state is ITNR; however I would still post now and update blurb when a successor is determined. Banedon (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose because this is not ITNR, we must consider the merits. As this a ceremonial position, and the reason is run-of-the-mill government graft, this is not noteworthy. @Banedon: given historic precedent, a successor may take weeks to assume office. GCG (talk) 11:47, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
If that happens, I would still rather post this and the successor assuming office. Banedon (talk) 20:30, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose plenty of unreferenced material in here, whether it's ITNR or not, it's not close to being posted in its current state. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

March 11Edit

Portal:Current events/2018 March 11
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections

[Posted] RD: Ken DoddEdit

Article: Ken Dodd (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: The Rambling Man (talk • give credit)
Updater: Ritchie333 (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Only in death (talk • give credit) and Ghmyrtle (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

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.

 The Rambling Man (talk) 05:49, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose The article is in a terrible shape unfortunately. Aiken D 07:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC) Enthusiastic support A huge improvement, well done. Aiken D 19:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose The quality feels very light m'lud ... unsourced sections, images dropped wantonly in the article without a thought for context, questionable layout and flow - in short, a total disaster area. :-( Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I see the issue template but look at the article without snap judgements: I really don't see the issue. Not every assertion is referenced but we do not have huge tracts of unreferenced text (especially when implied references are included - not every reference needs a ref tag) and the article is reasonably well developed. Remember we do not require FA standard here. 3142 (talk) 09:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
    I think we all know we don't need FA quality here, but since this is a BLP, referencing for pretty much every claim is required. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Given we are discussing a recent death BLP by definition does not apply. 3142 (talk) 09:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
@3142: As I understand it, BLP applies to recent deaths as well(for about a year I think). 331dot (talk) 09:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
We can all do without this bickering.--WaltCip (talk) 11:07, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Plese read WP:BLP before making false assertions. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
There is a difference between a false assertion and an honest mistake. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Don't start again 331dot, you're already close. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I've done a cull of the photos. There are now four (in appropriate placing) Infobox, one of his statue in the honours section, and two in the comedy section (one with his signature tickle sticks, the other from earlier in his career). The others were either unflattering or un-necessary (repeat of the statue, his house etc). If I have time later I will look at the sources. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Everything is now sourced - I've got citations where I can and anything left over wasn't a deal-breaker so I removed it. Combined with OID's reorganisation of the article, I think we've actually done it. Aiken drum - do you want to revisit your oppose? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:53, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article is much improved.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Excellent work to get it up to scratch. yorkshiresky (talk) 19:07, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Great work on improving the article! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:10, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Great work there - I was going to help when I got home from work, but it was already done. Black Kite (talk) 23:21, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Togo D. West Jr.Edit

Article: Togo D. West Jr. (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Washington Post
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

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: Updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - Indeed, ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 11:06, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Looks good to go. –Ammarpad (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:02, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Karl LehmannEdit

Article: Karl Lehmann (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Kardinal Karl Lehmann ist tot FAZ
Nominator: Iselilja (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

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: Not ready yet, but I'll work on it Iselilja (talk) 09:00, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Came to nominate him, pleased it's done. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:15, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I have now tried to improve the article and every paragraph should be referenced. I would appreciate some copyediting for language, and otherwise that people now start evaluating the article. It is still somewhat thin considered that this guy had a real career with real influence and I'll try to expand it somewhat more, but hope it can get posted within reasonable time. Iselilja (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:15, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


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 [] 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: