Wikipedia

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/June 2024

< Wikipedia:In the news‎ | Candidates

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

June 16

edit
June 16, 2024 (2024-06-16) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

  • Seven people are injured and one other person is injured while running away in a shooting at a pop-up party in Methuen, Massachusetts, United States. (AP)

Politics and elections

Sports

(Posted) RD: Jodie Devos

edit
Article: Jodie Devos (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Observer
Credits:

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

Promising Belgian coloratura soprano who performed internationally based in France, and made award-winning recordings. Died at age 35. - I wish I knew more French and had more time. Roles and awards need more refs (or to be cut). More reviews and more lead would be nice. I'll be out tomorrow which is the last day, so hope for help. 4meter4, you found sources where I didn't. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support -- looks well cited. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 03:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The string of bullet-points are mostly unsourced and some of the info there is also mentioned in the prose. Perhaps they can be merged to avoid the appearance of a block of unreferenced materials? --PFHLai (talk) 11:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I said that it's in progress, and the bulleted items would be something to look for. I'm a bit disappointed that nothing happened all day. I'm back home, and will try. It's not polite towards company, but I feel that she'd deserve to be mentioned. Please keep watching. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    PFHLai, I left only referenced facts now, and will try to reference the others also. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Posted. Thanks for the new footnotes. --PFHLai (talk) 21:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thank you. Sorry for the confusion about 4meter4 who had helped me before with finding references for other articles such as Cecelia Hall, and therefore I wrote what was meant as a ping to possibly help again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Barbara Gladstone

edit
Article: Barbara Gladstone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Observer
Credits:

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

American art dealer and film producer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait article is alright but that big cn tag in the Film production needs to be resolved. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The section on Film production needs sourcing. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 16:15, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

77th Tony Awards

edit
Article: 77th Tony Awards (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the Tony Awards, Stereophonic takes home the most wins including Best Play, while The Outsiders wins Best Musical. (Post)
Credits:

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

Occurred last night, article is getting updated -- table of winners, performers, lead and infobox all have updates. Might need to add more prose though and/or a picture? ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 17:01, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality I don't see a ref for the winners, and I would like more prose on the ceremony (there's a bit of prose list for 'other awards' and two lines of response right now). Obviously take this as support once updated, no need to ping. Kingsif (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose like the other award shows, there is almost no prose. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose virtually no prose. LiamKorda 17:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 US Open (golf)

edit
 
Article: 2024 U.S. Open (golf) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In golf, Bryson DeChambeau wins the U.S. Open. (Post)
News source(s): ESPN BBC
Credits:

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

The tournament article seems OK but I will let others be the judge. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 14:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose There is some prose but I think article needs a bit expansion. There is less prose than the previous editions' pages. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not enough prose and summary. LiamKorda 17:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 24 Hours of Le Mans

edit
 
Article: 2024 24 Hours of Le Mans (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In motorsport, Antonio Fuoco, Miguel Molina and Nicklas Nielsen win the 24 Hours of Le Mans (winning car Ferrari 499P pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In motorsport, the Ferrari AF Corse crew of Antonio Fuoco, Miguel Molina and Nicklas Nielsen win the 24 Hours of Le Mans (winning car Ferrari 499P pictured).
News source(s): Autosport
Credits:

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

Article needs some work. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:52, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose article needs a load more prose rather than just tables. Like a long race summary, and also some qualifying summary too. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is just tables and tables with just few sentences in between. There is no race summary or prose about the Qualifying results results. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is no way near ready to be posted. LiamKorda 17:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Joseph2302, PrinceofPunjab and LiamKorda. Way too much work. SpacedFarmer (talk) 20:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment still has some uncited lines but it isn't impossible for it to meet standards in time. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 15

edit
June 15, 2024 (2024-06-15) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Law and crime

(Posted) RD: Mike Brumley (infielder)

edit
Article: Mike Brumley (infielder) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

American professional baseball utility player.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:17, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment shouldn't the disambiguation be on year of birth rather than baseball primary position? Strange disambiguation choice. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:03, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The conventions at WP:NCBASE state to use position before year of birth, which is the last resort. Natg 19 (talk) 17:24, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article look alright to me. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article is long enough and well-cited enough for posting. Bremps... 01:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you Please take a look ?Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jadallah Azzuz at-Talhi

edit
Article: Jadallah Azzuz at-Talhi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Alwasat Libya, Ean Libya, Twitter post from official account of Abdul Hamid Dbeibeh (PM of Libya)
Credits:

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

Two time PM of Libya under Gaddafi. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 06:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Two-time Secretary-General of the General People's Committee, technically. At first, I thought it looked too stubby, but then I saw Hughes, Dusek and Abu Maraheel's short stories. He was 85. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's a stub at 1401 characters. Only two sentences cover his first 40 years of life. Dusek has 2,114, Hughes has 4,077, and Abu Maraheel, a GA, has 7,802. The comps to Hughes and Abu Maraheel are odd. Dusek has 50% more prose than at-Talhi. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I could tell this was the shortest one, but they all looked shorter than medium to me. As my copyedit alone removed over 700 characters, I don't think such a gap between this and Dusek's is that big. I'll defer to you, though, and cancel my vote. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article would have been enough for a MP but for a head of a government, article is no way near ready. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Paul Pressler (politician)

edit
Article: Paul Pressler (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP News
Credits:

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

He died on the 7th but his death was announced on the 15th. Article almost ready in terms of citations, however, I've found a couple spots where they're lacking (some information can be deleted and re-added once a citation is found). Disclaimer: Nominating this article does not imply that I endorse or support all the things this person did. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support posting Assuming all citations back up the statements they are after, the article is of sufficient quality. Ick. Bremps... 03:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ready marking it ready as it is a good article unlike the person it is about. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Marking as attention needed as it has been marked ready for about a day and a half. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 18:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Admins willing to post ITN: , can someone look at this? Natg 19 (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: James Kent (chef)

edit
Article: James Kent (chef) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, People, ABC News
Credits:

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

American chef. 240F:7A:6253:1:5831:E5EA:10D7:5033 (talk) 00:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak support Long enough, but not by much. Too many subsections make the article appear sparser than it actually is. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually oppose until two of those short subsections are cited. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:03, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Muboshgu I have added citations. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        Okay, restoring my weak support as I don't like either the WP:CITEBOMB in the lead or the one at the end of "Awards and distinctions", nor that "Michelin star" is mentioned and not wikilinked and then Michelin Guide is linked in the following section. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article meets bare minimum requirement. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) English Whisky Guild

edit
Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 18:08, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: English Whisky Guild (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ English whisky Guild releases first annual report (Post)
News source(s): Herald Scotland, Northant Telegraph, Whisky Magazine
Nominator's comments: Topic was in the news 15/96/24 and previously on the 14/06/2024 on the 4/06/2024. ChefBear01 (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2024‎
@Abcmaxx: Thank you I have added a blurb that should clarify the story more precisely.ChefBear01 (talk) 17:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2024 Kasai River disaster

edit
Article: 2024 Kasai River disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A ship capsizes in the Kasai River in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, killing over 80 people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A ship capsizes in the Kwa River in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, killing at least 86 people.
News source(s): MSN

Over 80 people have died when an overloaded ship has sunk in Congo. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 13:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Needs some cleanup, and it should be a blurb, not ongoing. Regarding notability, we posted Sinking of the Zico but did not post 2024 Bangui river disaster, so I'm not sure. Sadly, those tragic incidents seem all too commonplace... Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:20, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree and entire understand what you mean. It's hard to say. But close to 90 people dead IMHO is notable even if it happens in a "third-world country". But I a also not 100% sure what the best approach here. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 14:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't really have in mind the "third-world country" aspect of it, but it's true that where it happened shouldn't matter for notability, especially since we just posted 2024 Mangaf building fire. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly even now the Bangui article is well below par for quality and length for posting. That was why it wasn't posted, so we shouldn't judge it that way. This article still needs more content before it meets the quality aspects we expect. — Masem (t) 15:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, in this case I would support on notability, provided the article is expanded enough. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Kwara boat disaster was also posted. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:20, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would support the story for notability, but the article is too short and in need of cleanup to meet quality and updated content standards. To quote the updated content standards, the traditional cut-off for what is enough has been around three complete, referenced and well-formed paragraphs~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 15:49, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have expended the stub a bit and aded info about 21 children. Would the size suffice in your opinion? Thanks! With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 16:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support now, it seems rather suitable in scale to me? Start-class rather than a stub.2601:445:600:4C80:E1A5:FB7C:658C:937F (talk) 21:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality it is a blurbworthy story but article is a bit short for the main page. PrinceofPunjabTALK 07:58, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: UEFA Euro 2024

edit
Clear consensus against posting as ongoing. The winner will be posted as a blurb if the article is in shape then. --Tone 09:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: UEFA Euro 2024 (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport
Credits:
Yesterday marked the first match, the main international football championship in Europe, so it should be added to ongoing now. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 12:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I do not believe we have posted the Euros to Ongoing before (I checked 2016 and 2021 and they were both proposed but rejected). If I remember correctly the only sporting events that are posted to Ongoing are the Olympics and the (football) World Cup. Black Kite (talk) 12:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree here... Olympics and World Cup have wide international exposure as one of the reasons for these in ongoing. While this event is multinational, I don't think we should use ongoing for it. — Masem (t) 12:51, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, major soccer event. BilboBeggins (talk) 13:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No need for ongoing, we don't usually add that for sporting events and would be a slippery slope. We'll post the final result when it occurs and that's fine.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:33, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We can post the World Cup, but not the continental-level competitions, and doing this only for Europe would be more systemic bias. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per precedent. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:38, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose World level tournament for Ongoing. Result only for Continental. -- KTC (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I tend to agree with the argument that this is only a continental tournament, but arguing that there’s a precedent not to post this or that it’d create systemic bias doesn’t hold. All that was broken when we posted the 2014 Commonwealth Games to ongoing.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We'll post once the tournament is concluded. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose post results when done Ion.want.uu (talk) 23:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Kevin Campbell

edit
Article: Kevin Campbell (footballer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

English footballer, played for Arsenal and Everton (amongst others). Article needs a bit of referencing. I think this is good enough now. Black Kite (talk) 10:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Matija Sarkic

edit
Article: Matija Sarkic (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Montenegran footballer. Article is reasonably well sourced but needs tidying up. Black Kite (talk) 08:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 14

edit
June 14, 2024 (2024-06-14) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

  • At least six people are killed and more than 1,000 tourists are stranded in heavy rains and landslides across the state of Sikkim, India. (Reuters)

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Sreedharan Champad

edit
Article: Sreedharan Champad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Mathrubhumi (India)
Credits:

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

Indian malayalam language author and historian. Ktin (talk) 17:31, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support article looks okay to me. PrinceofPunjabTALK 08:10, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support posting Quality of the article is fine for main page. Bremps... 14:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: George Nethercutt

edit
Article: George Nethercutt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KremThe Spokesman-Review.
Credits:

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

American lawyer, author, and politician, very notable for defeating U.S. House Speaker Tom Foley in 1994.Needs a bit more work.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose an orange tag and various cn tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 08:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Guy Warren (artist)

edit
Article: Guy Warren (artist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SMH
Credits:

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

Needs a bit more work. Natg 19 (talk) 21:30, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait two cn tags but otherwise okay. PrinceofPunjabTALK 08:14, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2024 South African presidential election

edit
Consensus will likely not develop to post. (non-admin closure) --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 05:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2024 South African presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In South Africa, ANC leader Cyril Ramaphosa is re-elected as president, forming a government of national unity with the Democratic Alliance, the main opposition party. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In South Africa, ANC leader Cyril Ramaphosa is re-elected as president via a coalition with the Democratic Alliance, the main opposition party.
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw55w4z3gqeo
Credits:
One of the most historic days in South African history! For the first time since the end of apartheid, the ANC no longer controls the government, and has coalitioned with the DA opposition. This is pretty huge for the country, as this is almost the equivalent of Republicans and Democrats forming a coalition government. Lots of media coverage as well. Might be good to create a separate article on the new government that has formed. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:19, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, finally, south africa can be free from ANC Tyranny! Lukt64 (talk) 17:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:POV, but yeah it's a big moment for SA. ANC are still in power though, just have to share it on a largely equal basis with their main rival. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:36, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the historic election results is already posted recently this is just a update. Shadow4dark (talk) 17:56, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Altblurb 1 suggested Rephrasing to replace the buzzword "government of national unity". — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Better word would be 'coalition' as the ANC and DA are jointly ruling the country now PrecariousWorlds (talk) 20:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed "with the support of" to "via a coalition with". — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 21:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - we already posted the election. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:42, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We posted the 2023 re-election of Pedro Sánchez to ITN, however. Which you also opposed, I know. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:08, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    that was an exceptional case, as Sánchez managed to be re-elected prime minister after a controversial pact for a controversial amnesty law for those persecuted during the 2017 constitutional crisis, this being the main issue. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above. The election was already posted. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The target article is a woeful stub. Schwede66 03:58, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose election was already posted. Scu ba (talk) 13:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

June 13

edit
June 13, 2024 (2024-06-13) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

  • The general secretary of the miners' confederation in Mali announces that at least 22 miners have died in Kalana, Mali, following the collapse of a mine tunnel five days ago. (Reuters)

Health and environment

  • A heatwave forces Greek authorities to close the Acropolis for visits during the afternoon. (AP)

International relations

Law and crime

RD: Angela Bofill

edit
Article: Angela Bofill (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Billboard Deadline
Credits:

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

American singer-songwriter.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Several paragraphs need sources, as does the Discography section. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article quality could be better. The discography, awards, personal life and other media appearances sections fall short in terms of citations. Bremps... 19:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Laurence Gluck

edit
Article: Laurence Gluck (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Commercial Observer
Credits:

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

American real estate investor and landlord.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:31, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please take a look ?Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Posted to RD. Adequate depth of coverage and referencing. SpencerT•C 20:44, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Mangaf fire

edit
Article: 2024 Mangaf building fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 50 people have died after a fire broke out in a residential building in Kuwait City's suburb of Mangaf. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CNN, Reuters, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, France 24
Credits:

Ainty Painty (talk) 06:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support The death toll is on par with other natural and anthropogenic disasters that we typically post. Also since many of the victims were Indian, the fire has more international significance. Scaramouche33 (talk) 08:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the page has been moved. The new title "Kuwait Mangaf" strikes me as analogous to "Germany Bavaria" or "Canada Quebec". Though I guess that's a discussion for another page. Unknown Temptation (talk) 14:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's now 2024 Kuwait Mangaf building fire. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to 2024 Mangaf building fire. Natg 19 (talk) 21:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support High death toll with significant coverage and a rare occurrence in the area. Prodrummer619 (talk) 17:23, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support High death toll and article appears to be in good shape. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted after I tweaked and updated the blurb. Schwede66 05:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 12

edit
June 12, 2024 (2024-06-12) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: William H. Donaldson

edit
Article: William H. Donaldson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:

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

Former SEC chair. Ktin (talk) 01:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost ready but the Yale School of Management claim is uncited, and doesn't seem to be corroborated by the school's article. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 06:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I went through and cited the SOM info as best as I could. It seems like a lot of it is derived from a speech, so I worry about credibility. Also from a cursory look, there is a ton of info out there that needs to be added to this bio/article. Does not even mention his work as Under Secretary of State for International Security Affairs in the body prose. Wish I had the time. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 23:16, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mike Downey (columnist)

edit
Article: Mike Downey (columnist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Los Angeles Times
Credits:

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

American newspaper columnist needs expansion.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:24, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support article looks alright to me. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Majed Abu Maraheel

edit
Article: Majed Abu Maraheel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Felesteen
Credits:

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

First Palestinian Olympian and flag-bearer. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Neil Goldschmidt

edit
Article: Neil Goldschmidt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Oregon Live
Credits:

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

(Posted) RD: Robert Hughes (basketball)

edit
Article: Robert Hughes (basketball) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS News
Credits:

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

American high school basketball coach.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Howard Fineman

edit
Article: Howard Fineman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:

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

American journalist and television commentator.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:34, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support-ish looks ok, but some of the sources rely on information likely provided by the individual to organizations (introductions to speakers) and do not represent independent sourcing. However, I will still support. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:47, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose I agree with Classicwiki and I feel that the article should have a better balance of independent and primary sources. A good amount of the article's sources are from articles/sources that are likely from info he provided himself. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. NEeds better sourcing.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed, posted RD) RD/blurb: Jerry West

edit
No consensus to blurb.—Bagumba (talk) 17:33, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 
Article: Jerry West (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American basketball player Jerry West (pictured) dies at the age of 86 (Post)
News source(s): CBS Sports
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Basketball Hall of Famer, dubbed "The Logo." Most notable for his time as a player and executive for the Los Angeles Lakers KENGRIFFEY24FAN (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Article is a GA and I just resolved the last CN tag. pbp 14:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still one CN tag in the "early life" section. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 14:20, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Plus I'm pretty sure his statistic sections need citations as well. rawmustard (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Corvette ZR1: Looks like an IP removed my source. I readded it, and the page has been protected.
@Rawmustard: The statistics are supported by the "external links" section, which links to statistical sites such as Basketball-Reference pbp 14:54, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know that whenever an actor/other film personnel is nominated, typically the filmography needs to have inline citations prior to the article being posted to front page, so I would presume the same would have to apply to a sportsperson's statistics. rawmustard (talk) 17:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rawmustard: I've added citations to the bottom of the table pbp 19:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support PBP fixed the citation issues, and the article looks good. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 15:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb transformative figure in basketball history. It is rumored that the NBA logo was modeled after him. Natg 19 (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb. A rumor about him inspiring a logo isn't Mandela/Thatcher level of blurbworthy. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:32, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Blurb - Forget about the logo story. He still has many achievements as both player and executive and was one of the greatest of his time. I think that's worthy enough of a blurb. Prodrummer619 (talk) 18:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, leaning support blurb. The rare subject who was top tier both as a player and as an executive in their sport, and therefore transformative of the sport. BD2412 T 18:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurb. West is borderline notable for me, even as someone who probably isn't even top 5 on notability ever within their sport. To me though, I can't stop thinking about how we didn't post Bill Russell. IMO, Bill Russell's impact was greater, maybe nit within basketball solely, but with his civil rights impact factored in. So if we are to believe Russell wasn't transformative enough, then West isn't either, I'd say. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quite a shame that Russell did not get blurbed. I thought for sure that he did. Who is the most recent sportsman to get blurbed? Maradona? or was it Jim Brown? (OJ did, but for non sports reasons.) Natg 19 (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Natg 19 The last one was Franz Beckenbauer in January this year. Given that he, Pele and Maradona (also blurbed) were generally regarded as the three greatest players of their generation, those were no-brainers really. The only living footballers that I can think of who might deserve a blurb are Messi, C.Ronaldo, Zidane and possibly the original Ronaldo, and hopefully we won't be meeting any of those here any time soon. Black Kite (talk) 09:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If O.J.’s excluded, I believe Kelvin Kiptum was the most recent athlete to be blurbed. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 09:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, I forgot him. Although him dying at 25 in non-usual circumstances also helped. Black Kite (talk) 09:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doubt this is getting blurbed, as the soccer (football) players you listed above who were blurbed also have a claim to be the GOATs at their position. But Jerry was one of the greatest of his generation (1960s), along with Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and Oscar Robertson. Natg 19 (talk) 17:09, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we should ever deathblurb people whose death as an event isn't notable (e.g. a serving head of government whose death causes a change in leadership, or a notable murder, etc). By that metric, almost no sportspeople qualify. I do not think this is a failure of the system, RD line exists for a reason. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, part of my reasoning for Russell was his civil rights impact. The same reason I think Jim Brown was worthy. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with orbitalbuzzsaw, ideally, deaths should be blurbed if the death has a tangible impact, "famous person dies" is otherwise what RD is for. I won't oppose the exceptional blurbing of someone of the Thatcher/Mandela standard, as their death will likely have some level of impact (a good rule of thumb is whether the person has an article for their death, like death of Nelson Mandela). It really should be about impact, not about popularity and/or unusualness of the death. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Russell should’ve been blurbed, but the failure to blurb Russell shouldn’t affect West. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that sentiment, but in the sense of there being no hard and fast distinction for deaths where the death itself wasn't the main story, I personally think a bar should be set, and when x is less notable than y with both persons within the same field, and y didn't get posted, then justifying posting for x's death is hard for me. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:52, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
West may be less notable than Russell as a player, but his accomplishments as a player & GM may make West more notable than Russell. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Article is in good quality. Supporting blurb because West is highly influential in his field and not to mention he's the NBA logo too! Article definitely reflects his influential status/impact he had. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, weak support RD there's some unsourced lines. And, really, it is getting out of hand to propose blurbs lightly. Opposing for DarkSide. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:04, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb not a serving political head, manner of death not notable This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, support RD per Darkside830 ‍Relativity ⚡️ 22:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb The article is of sufficient quality for RD, but there isn't anything particularly noteworthy about the death in itself. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:05, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb This is the type of person for whom Recent Deaths was created. We should not be blurbing the death of every basketballer (or every sportsperson generally) just because they were better than average. Chrisclear (talk) 09:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb He was elected to the Basketball HOF on 3 separate occasions, is the only person to be enshrined as a player & a contributor (the latter is for his accomplishments as a GM) & his silhouette is the basis for the NBA’s logo. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Not of Thatcher or Mandela stature, and it's really time to stop proposing blurbs for all and sundry, just because they were successful sportsmen or whatever.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:18, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Perfect for RD, but not exactly world-changing. Yakikaki (talk) 12:38, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, weak oppose RD, while his achievements are noteworthy within basketball, he's completely unknown for people who isn't into basketball. 31.44.224.73 (talk) 12:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD. There don't seem to be quality concerns, so no need to wait on the RD. Discussion can continue on possible blurbing, although I'd imagine consensus isn't in favour of that as yet. (disclaimer: I'm involved on that score as I already opined on the question above). Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 13:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - the idea that it needs to be Mandela or Thatcher (seriously, why is Margaret Thatcher cited here lol) is not one that has any basis in the guidelines or our past history. West was transformational in his sport, no less so than Shane Warne for example. nableezy - 18:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Mandela-Thatcher standard is very much based in our history. The effect was effectively effected in December of 2012, while they were only mostly dead in a roughly contemporary fashion. Sure, there've been other timely pairs since that could've taken the title, but the people have spoken and the stickiness has stuck (OMD). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thatcher and Mandela both died in 2013, so you might have gotten your timeline mixed up a little bit here. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:12, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I said it was while they were only mostly dead; see the last (now shown first) entry regarding hospital whataboutism in Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/December 2012. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My bad, looks like I misread, sorry! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, some people are fond of repeating the same thing, based on some misguided belief that Margaret Thatcher, giggle, is in the same league as Nelson Mandela in basically any way, and then they try to impose that as the standard for any blurb of a death. If Nelson Mandela is the standard we should never blurb another person's death unless they die in unusually noteworthy circumstances. nableezy - 23:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Nelson Mandela is no more the standard alone than both are combined. As you say, this is just something people say. In practice, the only deaths we should blurb are the deaths we do blurb. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Idk why I’m engaging with this, but we blurb plenty of non heads of state, and I literally laugh out loud when people blurt out Thatcher here. But Shane Warne would be the closest example here, and guess what, blurbed. Please stop with the Thatcher Mandela nonsense, because a. The two of them aren’t in the same league anyway, and b. That has nothing to do with if a person should be or has been blurbed. nableezy - 02:58, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The reason we use them as examples is that both had a significant impact on their country's politics clearly demonstrating how they were great figures and top of their field (it also helped both had significant state funerals that lasted multiple days). It's why we're looking we're looking for the same here, and this article lacks a significant demonstration of why he had a lasting impact or legacy (I'm ignoring the NBA logo issue here). He's got some but not anywhere close to what we'd see with other sport legends like Pele or Jim Brown Masem (t) 03:19, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The difference between West and Wayne vs. Mandela and Thatcher is that most people in the world have some semblance of knowledge of who either Thatcher or Mandela were due to their international impact. You'd be hard-pressed to find someone who knows either West or Warne unless they're already interested in that specific sport. 31.44.224.73 (talk) 13:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Shane Warne's death was blurbed, in case you missed that part. nableezy - 13:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb: No doubt he's an important part of the history of the NBA, but for such a young sport/league, I think it's tough to argue that a guy who's not a consensus top 3 of the most important NBA people should be blurbed.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 19:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb His death is non-remarkable. HiLo48 (talk) 02:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blurb per above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:12, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

June 11

edit
June 11, 2024 (2024-06-11) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Éric Tappy

edit
Article: Éric Tappy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): RTS (in French, among others)
Credits:

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

Legendary Swiss tenor, Orfeo, Tamino, Pelleas. There wasn't much of an article, sadly. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support article seems to be in good shape. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 08:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support no major issues. Well written and sourced— Iadmc♫talk  13:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just post This is about to slide off without being posted with only Support votes. Bremps... 14:04, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like its in good order, well cited and no CN tags. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 14:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Article looks fine. No major issues. Netherzone (talk) 14:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I support this nomination, but I would like to see the word "created" clarified. Was he creating tenor parts as in composing, i.e. contributing new notes, tunes, whatever? Or was he singing the part in its public premiere, thus creating (at least for a while) an authoritative way of performing that role, like Alfred Deller in the first film of Auberon in Britten's Midsummer Night's Dream? This is just a question, and does not affect my support. Storye book (talk) 16:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nominator Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the support. I need sleep. If no admin is available please move him to 14 June when his death became known. --

RD: Marina Tarkovskaya

edit
Article: Marina Tarkovskaya (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El Pais
Credits:

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

Russian writer and critic. The younger sister of Andrei Tarkovsky. Thriley (talk) 22:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Tony Lo Bianco

edit
Article: Tony Lo Bianco (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fox News
Credits:

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

American actor.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment unfortunately the tables are mostly unsourced (and I am unlikely to tackle). Prose looks decent though. Not ready yet. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Filmography unsourced and there's a section of the career part that's unsourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:23, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Orest Lenczyk

edit
Article: Orest Lenczyk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Eurosport/TVN24 (in Polish)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Nationally famous Polish football manager. Needs a few more citations. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(RD posted) RD/blurb: Françoise Hardy

edit
 
Article: Françoise Hardy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  French singer-songwriter and actress Françoise Hardy (pictured) dies at the age of 80 (Post)
News source(s): Le Monde , The Guardian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Article is updated and well sourced. Seeing how the article definitely reflects her legacy, impact on French culture and also impact on the modern-day music industry, not sure if it warrants a blurb? Regardless, article (IMO) is good for RD. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support RD, oppose blurb The article is of more than sufficient quality for RD, but the manner of death was not notable, and thus a blurb is not warranted. In my opinion, death blurbs should only be in place when the death itself is a notable event. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD 💔 what a loss ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, as the legacy section states : Hardy was celebrated as a "French national treasure" and one of the greatest figures in French music of all time., I think that it's enough to deserve a blurb. Alexcalamaro (talk) 04:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Seconded. I support blurb based on this. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:54, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Loads of people are labelled "national treasures", that doesn't mean we blurb them. There's too much of the "this person is famous, let's blurb them" going on these days. Is Hardy a major figure of the Thatcher / Mandela stature? No. So we don't blurb her, it's that simple. If people want to lower the bar across the board or impose a different standard such as "major contributor" then that should be agreed at WT:ITN first.  — Amakuru (talk) 06:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Article good for RD though? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it looks fine on that score. The only issue I can see is length. At 12,000 words, it's halfway between "probably should be trimmed" and "almost certainly should be trimmed", per WP:TOOLONG guidelines, but I won't object to ITN on that basis. Support RD.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, we have posted Tina Turner and Tony Bennet as blurbs before, based in the "major contributors" or "transformative in their field" rationale. Hardy may belong to the same league. Alexcalamaro (talk) 02:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per Amakuru. Was she famous in France? Yes. Was she important enough for her death to be blurbed as a standalone news item? No. *Support RD on quality. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:17, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD looks well sourced (minus the lede). --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb not a serving head of state or government, manner of death not notable This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting RD, consensus against blurb. The article looks great. --Tone 07:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Hunter Biden

edit
Consensus to post is unlikely to develop.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

 
Article: Hunter Biden (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Hunter Biden, son of U.S. President Joe Biden, is convicted in a federal court in Delaware on three felony counts of possession of a firearm while under the influence of narcotics. (Post)
News source(s): NBC News
Credits:

Article updated
Mia Mahey (talk) 18:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Update on H. Biden's article is sufficient and event should be historic enough to warrant a blurb. Bremps... 18:27, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unlike the Trump conviction, this is insignificant. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as much as some politicians are trying to make this into a big deal, this is no different than any other low level crime. Yes, it’s a felony. No, it’s not a relevant felony, and it doesn’t become so just because he’s the President’s son. If Joe himself were convicted of this maybe it’d be newsworthy but probably not. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - he's a private citizen convicted of something inconsequential in the national or international grand scheme of things and bears no real meaning other than providing obvious partisan talking points. If he was convicted over something related to his father's presidency, that might be another matter. RPH (talk) 18:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Hunter Biden is only a public figure because his father is a public figure; absent increased involvement from his father (for example, a presidential pardon) then this doesn't warrant posting. BilledMammal (talk) 18:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose irrelevant for ITN. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Local trivia. Black Kite (talk) 19:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per RPH. DarkSide830 (talk) 19:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The events of his life have little real world impact. Compare it to the recent Indian election, where hundreds of millions of people voted in a democratic election to form a new government. You can't compare the scale of the two events. Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:33, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Khushboo (Pakistani actress)

edit
Article: Khushboo (Pakistani actress) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The News
Credits:

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

Ainty Painty (talk) 03:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Six sentences of prose at the moment. Needs citations. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 03:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait There's more info in the two headlines I read than in the current article, and who knows what might grow from those entire articles? For now, though, yeah. Way too stubby. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:49, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's no mention of her death outside of the infobox yet. Too much of a stub. Estreyeria (talk) 14:15, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Her death is unreferenced. Schwede66 22:53, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 10

edit
June 10, 2024 (2024-06-10) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Brad Dusek

edit
Article: Brad Dusek (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted blurb) RD/blurb: Saulos Chilima

edit
 
Article: Saulos Chilima (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Malawi Vice President Saulos Chilima (pictured) and 9 others are killed in a plane crash (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A plane crash in Malawi causes the death of Vice President Saulos Chilima (pictured) and nine others.
News source(s): The Times of IndiaCNN
Credits:

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

Malawi Vice President died in Air Crash.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, blurb? Андрій ЯЧ (talk) 11:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The plane crash event is noteworthy enough to be a blurb. 10 casualties including VP of a country. Didgogns (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb Article is of sufficient quality and event is major enough. Bremps... 18:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
added altblurb. Sheila1988 (talk) 19:17, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb However, shouldn't the target article be the plane crash itself? Also worth noting, former first lady was also among the casualties. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:23, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the target article should be the plane crash. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:23, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 22:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull Blurb, leave RD Current precedent seems to be that deaths generally shouldn't be blurbed unless they're ITN/R. As Saulos Chilima was not a Head of Government, (or even a Head of State) this means it's not ITN/R. And as for overall notability, Chilima wasn't exactly a "transformative" figure, or at least there's nothing to indicate that in the article. I feel that this was posted far too hastily, given that it spent less than 12 hours since nomination. Nottheking (talk) 11:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Technically the blurb is centering around the plane crash itself not just his death. The crash itself is notable enough as it killed a sitting VP, a former first lady and eight others. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:18, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: James Lawson (activist)

edit
Article: James Lawson (activist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tennessee Lookout,Los Angeles Sentinel
Credits:

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

American activist and university professor.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Steele Hall

edit
Article: Steele Hall (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Credits:

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

Premier of South Australia and Australian Senator.

NB: I created this article (20 years ago). Hall is perhaps most famous for changing electoral laws to remove the gerrymander that had kept his party in government for decades, thus all but ensuring his defeat at the next election. There can't be too many examples of politicians willing to do such a thing. --Roisterer (talk) 09:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Roisterer, could you address the CN tags in the article please? --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 09:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Several uncited paragraphs. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

European Parliament election

edit
 
Article: 2024 European Parliament election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The European People's Party Group wins the most seats in the European Parliament election (outcome pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The European People's Party Group (main candidate Ursula von der Leyen pictured) obtains the most seats in the European Parliament election.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

I see lots of news reports about this so what exactly are we waiting for? It might help to make a start. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait A little premature perhaps as the article doesn't even have the seat breakdown yet nor have they finished announcing. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Last time it seems that ITN posted two days after the polls closed, on the Tuesday. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality. Article is in bad shape with many empty sections and very little content on the results, reactions and implications. There's long way to go before this gets posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait/Oppose on quality. Too many empty sections. Wait until the article is expanded and provisional election results/seat breakdowns are available. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 08:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait and Improve - We should post this, but we need an acceptable article. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Might be good to mention the surge in support of right-wing parties in the European Parliament, which has been a massive talking point in this election PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I concur, this seems to be the main thing the news is reporting. Curbon7 (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Ursula von der Leyen did not run in this election, and the leader of the EPP is currently the German politician Manfred Weber. --2.248.103.101 (talk) 13:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure of all the details but the BBC live report indicates that she's in the driving seat, e.g.

    European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen says she will approach social democratic and liberal parties that she has worked with in the past to form a majority in the European Parliament.

    The nominated article lists seven alliances and four of them are shown to have leaders who were not running as MEPs. If there's a better way of explaining the result, I expect there will be alt blurbs suggested. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment von der Leyen is the main candidate, but not the leader of the EPP group. It should as such not say "led by" in the text. I would instead replace it with "The European People's Party Group (main candidate Ursula von der Leyen pictured) wins the most seats in the European Parliament election." I will also say that I would be cautious with writing anything which could imply that UvdL is guarenteed to continue as Commission President. So I would prefer using the term "win" if it is possible. Gust Justice (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To understand this, I read Ursula von der Leyen in pole position.... This indicates that her getting a second term as President is decided by national leaders and then endorsed by the parliament. So, that seems to be a separate process, just as election of the US President is separate from the election of Congress. Right? I'm therefore not convinced that we ought to personalise this by showing a particular politician but it's good to have an image of some sort. I'll adjust the nomination... Andrew🐉(talk) 19:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This indicates that her getting a second term as President is decided by national leaders and then endorsed by the parliament. Leaders of the 27 member states (on June 27) and majority of MEPs (secret ballot voting; tentative July 18) [2]. So imo, delay this ITN to July 18.— hako9 (talk) 21:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, the blurb which was posted in 2019 was as follows:

In the European Parliament election, the centre-right and centre-left lose seats. Liberals, the far-right, greens and regionalists make the largest gains.

The Presidential process was not included. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article is about the elections to the European Parliament. Because of the unusual institutional setup of the EU, the election of the Commission President is a separate, later election (as noted above), and in any case the Commission isn't exactly equivalent to a government in function and form. I would therefore strongly suggest a blurb focusing only on the parliamentary elections and the outcome in terms of party groups, and leave VDL out of this for now. There is however no reason to delay the article until she is reelected (or not) as that election is another affair, strictly speaking. Yakikaki (talk) 07:23, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready. There are five orange-tagged sections and no prose at all about the results. The empty sections could simply be removed or merged into others, but there also needs to be at least a full referenced paragraph describing the outcome, reactions etc. Modest Genius talk 11:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    FWIW, I do think the blurb should avoid mentioning von der Leyen, because the Commission and the Parliament are two separate bodies. Modest Genius talk 11:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not that it's not ready, but the article is in such a terrible shape that all of the questions in the foregoing discussion should've not been raised because the article is supposed to provide the answers.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:09, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but wait on the basis of WP:ITNELECTIONS, but wait until the full results come out, and there are still two orange tagged sections. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 21:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment and wait The notion that European People's Party Group is the "winner" is quite misleading. We should wait until there is a clearer picture of the fractions within the Parliament, and that may take some weeks... --212.247.95.190 (talk) 20:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternate Blluurrbbb #002 The strong results of the National Rally in the 2024 European Parliament election led Emmanuel Macron to dissolve the lower house of the French parliament, the leaders of the The Republicans to fire their president Éric Ciotti in a unanimous decision overturned in court two days later, the left-wing parties to unite in a New Popular Front, and the leader of Reconquête to fire vice president Marion Maréchal for "treachery". (§)— Preceding unsigned comment added by SashiRolls (talk • contribs)
  • Support with new altblurb the election is very clearly major enough to warrant an inclusion in the news, however, the blurb and altblurb provided aren't factually correct, von der Leyen can't be the main candidate, she didn't run. Scu ba (talk) 13:24, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 9

edit
June 9, 2024 (2024-06-09) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

(Posted) RD: Lynn Conway

edit
Article: Lynn Conway (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Los Angeles Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American computer scientist, and transgender activist Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support seems well sourced. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 02:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Article looks fine. I would even hover the idea of a blurb for her impact on computer technology, but I don't think the quality of the article is appropriate for it yet. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. Estreyeria (talk) 13:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted – Schwede66 22:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Edward C. Stone

edit
Article: Edward C. Stone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Time
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American space scientist. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unfortunately there is a ton of unreferenced material in the article. The {{cn}} and {{unreferenced section}} tags will need to be dealt with before this could be posted in RD. Modest Genius talk 11:48, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eight {cn} tags remaining in the prose, with half of the string of bullet-points following the prose unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Decision needed) 2024 Bulgarian parliamentary election

edit
Article: 2024 Bulgarian parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ GERB wins a plurality of seats in the Bulgarian parliamentary election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ GERB–SDS wins the most seats in the Bulgarian parliamentary election, but it does not obtain a majority in the National Assembly.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Reuters
Credits:

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

Part 2 of Europe's "Super Sunday" elections, and Bulgaria's 6th general election in 3 years. Curbon7 (talk) 21:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Aftermath section needs to be expanded and prose needed for results section. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 03:36, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It looks like it has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Almost ready It needs a longer lead (one that explains the outcome). We don't post the word "plurality" on the main page as it's too obscure. Lastly, it was GERB–SDS that won the plurality and an updated hook should show that. Schwede66 03:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Schwede66: I added some sentences to the lead & an altblurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article is good enough to be posted. Scu ba (talk) 13:21, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Simon Cowell (conservationist)

edit
Article: Simon Cowell (conservationist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: British conservationist. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 20:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate There's a much more famous Simon Cowell and so running this in the usual RD way is unacceptably confusing and misleading. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an argument for opposing. You can create a discussion on the talk page to change the "usual RD way" if that is an issue for you. Natg 19 (talk) 21:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrew Davidson is that a real policy argument for opposing a RD? --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 21:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue has come up before but I don’t recall exactly how disambiguation was done. The point is that we need to make it clear which Simon Cowell we’re talking about. It’s a significant BLP issue. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there have been rare instances where the name with disambiguator is in the RD line, i.e. Simon Cowell (conservationist). But this is usually up to the posting admin to decide. Natg 19 (talk) 23:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Searching, I find a previous case was Sudan in 2018 in which a disambiguation was added. More recently, a rough consensus to disambiguate in such cases was agreed in this discussion. And this was then done for a Bob Brown. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. He was notable; he's dead; article looks ok. I suspect his talents far exceeded those of his more famous namesake. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Martinevans, but as to Andrew's concerns, I do think the (conservationist) disambiguator should be included in the listing. The Kip (contribs) 23:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I tried to address the CN tags in the article. I am a little iffy on the alumni verification. Room for improvement, but looks ok. I think going with the current parenthetical, (conservationist) or (wildlife conservationist), would be enough of a disambiguator. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 01:09, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted (with disambiguator). Black Kite (talk) 07:30, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like Stephen altered this back to the "regular" format (Simon Cowell), but then switched it to its current form (Simon M. Cowell). This seems to be a workable compromise to me. Natg 19 (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Decision needed) 2024 Belgian federal election

edit
 
Article: 2024 Belgian federal election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the Belgian federal election, the incumbent coalition government, led by prime minister Alexander De Croo, lose their parliamentary majority. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the Belgian federal election, the New Flemish Alliance remains the largest party in parliament, but the governing coalition (prime minister Alexander De Croo pictured) loses its majority.
News source(s): The Guardian, AP News, Politico
Credits:

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

Part 1 of Europe's "Super Sunday" elections. Curbon7 (talk) 06:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Technical Support Should be "its" parliamentary majority, as a coalition, but close enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's an ENGVAR issue that shouldn't interfere with posting. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No stalling intended, it's ready when it's ready, just seems the sort of potential ERRORS issue best checked preemptively. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Article is currently lacking in prose and analysis. Will support when it improves. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle once the article is ready. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: this is almost sufficient, but there's an orange-tagged section and I'd like to see a bit more referenced prose in the 'results' and 'aftermath' sections. Modest Genius talk 11:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I added some prose to the aftermath section YD407OTZ (talk) 17:38, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. The article now meets our minimum requirements, so I support posting. I've added an altblurb and a potential image. Modest Genius talk 10:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Article is ready to go Sharrdx (talk) 19:04, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Almost ready I'd like to see some prose in the section "Opinion polls". Schwede66 00:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Schwede66: I added prose to the "Opinion polls" section, but the article may need more citations. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:58, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Including for the part that you added, Blaylockjam10. Schwede66 01:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That’s true. I based that on the lead of the Opinion polling for the 2024 Belgian elections article, but I’m going to do some alterations based on what’s in the body of that article. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 01:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only one CN tag left, regarding that polling sentence YD407OTZ (talk) 02:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've had a closer look. To understand what's going on, I had a look at the composition of the Vivaldi coalition. Adding up the seats of the seven parties that make up the coalition, I come to 76 seats, i.e. 2 more than the remaining parties. That isn't spelled out in the article or in any of the result tables; please tell me if I've missed that. Either way, if I've got that right, then both hooks above are factually wrong. What am I missing? Schwede66 03:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, however multiple parties (Open VLD - which supplied the PM -, Groen, PS) in the Vivaldi coalition have announced they don't want to be part of the new government due to the bad results for their party. I'm not defending the blurbs as they're written right now, but it's a little bit more complicated than just adding seats. YD407OTZ (talk) 05:38, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article has an Aftermath section, and there is an entire new article about the formation of the government fixing earlier arguments that the article wasn't ready to be included. Scu ba (talk) 13:22, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) French Open

edit
 
Article: 2024 French Open (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In tennis, Iga Świątek wins the Women's Singles and Carlos Alcaraz wins the Men's Singles at the French Open. (Post)
News source(s): Women's singles, Men's Singles
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: This year's article has prose which various previous grand slam nominations lacked. PrinceofPunjabTALK 17:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support finally a grand slam event article that actually have prose. LiamKorda 03:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: although the singles articles are mostly tables, the target article is good shape. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support Once the lede is properly written, the article is good to go. Unnamelessness (talk) 11:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality - the bottom four sections of the results - Boys' singles, Girls' singles, Boys' doubles and Girls' doubles - are lacking prose at the moment. I'm also not convinced we need that "Champions" section at the bottom; that is nonstandard, uncited and seems to be almost just a glorified gallery.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Amakuru Please look into the article once again. I've tried address both of your concerns. PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. For the first time I can remember, a nominated tennis article has proper prose summaries of the tournament, not just tables. This looks good to me, thanks for the much better article this time around. I think this is ready to post. Modest Genius talk 11:10, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There were no further comments in 24 hours, so I'm marking this as ready to post. Modest Genius talk 11:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This article has prose summaries w/enough details & it has sufficient references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 23:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Siri Kannangara

edit
Article: Siri Kannangara (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Sunday Times, Daily FT
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Inducted to the Football Australia Hall of Fame in 2002. He was also conferred with a Member (AM) in the General Division of the Order of Australia during 2013 Queen's Birthday Honours (Australia). Abishe (talk) 17:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: I think the article has tone issues right now. It is slightly WP:FLOWERY. Could do with improvements to the layout as well. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 07:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Classicwiki Any improvements now? -- PFHLai (talk) 12:19, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PFHLai yes a bit. I do not understand the line "as the latter offered him the job of senior registrar." Would be nice to have birthdate and death information in prose. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 22:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Classicwiki My apologies. I hope I have rectified the phrase correctly. Can you double check on that. --Abishe (talk) 08:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Striking my opposition and moving to weak support, but would be good to have other editor's opinions. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 17:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This has a lot of details & enough references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Michael Mosley

edit
Article: Michael Mosley (broadcaster) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC, BBC, ITV, NYT, NZ Herald
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Date found dead. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 08:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait for confirmation. Most sources I'm seeing are saying it's "believed to be" him so shouldn't post prematurely as a BLP issue.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, but the mayor has said it was likely him.
    Seeing that they're saying cause of death is likely heat and dehydration.
    178.19.184.210 (talk) 178.19.184.210 (talk) 09:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • A mayor is not a coroner and the key word is likely. Nothing will happen if we wait a few hours for a formal identification and declaration. Think how you would feel if the world's online encyclopedia confirmed your loved one dead before you had been to inspect the body Unknown Temptation (talk) 10:45, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb Identification seems likely to be a formality now. It's worthy of a blurb because his mysterious disappearance has been front-page news lately and the readership has been correspondingly high – greater than William Anders, for example. And it's international news; for example: "British TV Doctor Michael Mosley Found Dead in Greece" in the New York Times. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb If he is all that great of a British journalist, his article is nowhere close to a standard that would be appropriate for a blurb. I see some facets that might lead to that impression but nowhere close to demonstrating him as a great figure in British TV news presenting. We also, again, do not use page views to judge ITN appropriateness. --Masem (t) 12:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb While he's well known in the UK, he's not particularly known globally. 31.44.224.73 (talk) 12:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:ITNDONT, "Please do not... Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country". Andrew🐉(talk) 07:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand what you're getting at, but isn't that aimed at "Irrelevant for me/I don't like country X, so therefore I oppose." opposes? I'm not trying game, but what I'm getting at is that I don't think his death is particularly meaningful to the vast majority of people outside the UK to warrant a blurb, compared to that of major world leader or similarly internationally well known person. 31.44.224.73 (talk) 11:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See How the presenter transformed people's lives, "It is not an exaggeration to say Dr Michael Mosley transformed people’s lives. ... Tributes are now pouring in..." Andrew🐉(talk) 07:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Not a transformative figure, which is the general criteria for a death blurb to be posted. And Television section needs more sources before being posted to RD. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't support a blurb either, but surely in this case the criteria would be "death is the story" rather than him being "transformative." Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In that case, the death isn't a major news story either. Unusual, yes, front-page story, probably not. And not every unusual RD has to be a blurb. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The story was on the front page of most UK papers today. And that's after days of similar coverage. And all that's before the body was found so there will be even more tomorrow. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And today, following discovery of the body, the news is on the front page of every UK newspaper except the FT. The coverage is mostly the main photo story or takes the entire front page. While on Wikipedia, it was the top read article for the day, getting half a million views while William Anders got just 40K. The RD picks that ITN is actually running got comparatively few views; they are obviously not prominent in the news and readers aren't interested in a dry list of unknown names. Useless.
We can expect yet more coverage tomorrow as the news is still breaking. The latest is that they've found CCTV of him falling down... Andrew🐉(talk) 07:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ITN, and especially RD, isn't just about how many views the articles are getting. Especially since we're not picking RDs based on fame or anything, but based on article quality. And, for some people outside of the UK, Michael Mosley can be just as much of an unknown name as any of them. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Andrew keeps pushing this argument, and it's nonsense. The number of views an article receives should have no impact whatsoever on whether we post it to ITN. I think perhaps we should update ITNCDONT to reflect this, because it's getting tiresome. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GenevieveDEon: Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is that way. BangJan1999 13:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:ITNRDBLURB, the posting of RD blurbs is determined on a "a sui generis basis" which seems to mean that anything goes and so editors may support or oppose for their own reasons. Chaotic Enby's reason for not posting was that "the death isn't a major news story either. Unusual, yes, front-page story, probably not". Evidence is therefore needed to show that this claim is false. The story is, in fact, all over the front pages and the evidence is that it's dwarfing the recent accidental death of William Anders for whom a blurb has also been suggested. See evidence-based practice. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD oppose blurb Article looks good and was a notable figure in the uk Sharrdx (talk) 13:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb his disappearance was in the news for a few days, while he probably died of natural causes. This isn't a Lord Lucan or a Madeleine McCann. I don't know a lot about dieting, but I highly doubt that Mosley's work was as noted in the field as Dr Atkins, for example. Unknown Temptation (talk) 14:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Good for RD but this isn't big enough for a blurb. Johndavies837 (talk) 14:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Most of the Television section is unreferenced. - SchroCat (talk) 20:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD oppose blurb: when citations are added to aforementioned problem sections. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 08:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb Looks fine as an RD but I agree with above, not transformative enough beyond the UK to justify a blurb. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • An unfortunate accident for sure, but no more significant than an individual of his fame dying in a car accident. The section is good, but it's not enough for a blurb at his level. I think a lack of responses to the death described in the article is part of the issue. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb - While the story of his disappearance has been a nine days' wonder, the actual circumstances are not such as to merit a blurb here. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb Extensively covered in British news for the last few days. Death very unlikely to be foul play, probably not notable enough for blurb. Angusgtw (talk) 11:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb: Very extensive media coverage. No issues with article quality (although now stuck with an inappropriate image).Martinevans123 (talk) 11:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: post-mortem has established that he died on 5 June. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The Television section is heavily missing references, some items are cited, most are not. The rest is fine and once fixed, a consensus seems to be for RD. --Tone 13:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD per coverage, oppose blurb per WP:CRETINISM. ——Serial Number 54129 16:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Cretans are people too, you know. Please give them a break. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Television section still needs some more cites.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There is clear consensus against a blurb so I am removing that option to avoid any more unneeded pile-on. Instead, reviewers should focus on if the article meets the RD criteria. Curbon7 (talk) 21:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, quality is fine. Modest Genius talk 11:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Fine", except for the television section, which is still woefully short of citations. - SchroCat (talk) 05:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @SchroCat, @Joseph2302, @Tone, @Amakuru, I have tried to source the television section. I am marking it as ready (at least for RD), feel free to remove if you think more needs to be done.
(Given the number of times I have done this, I wonder WP:FILMOGRAPHY/MOS:FILMOGRAPHY guidance language should be updated to highly recommend references.) --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 06:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 8

edit
June 8, 2024 (2024-06-08) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

(Posted) RD: Chet Walker

edit
Article: Chet Walker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

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

N.B.A. Player and Movie Producer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article looks good with the additional references. Ready to post. Natg 19 (talk) 16:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ramoji Rao

edit
Article: Ramoji Rao (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Economic Times
Credits:

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

Need Work .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Article needs ref work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as the lists are mostly unreferenced. Schwede66 22:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A stubby wikibio with only 230 words of prose, followed by a large table and a long string of bullet-points that lack sources. Please expand this wikibio and add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 12:22, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 7

edit
June 7, 2024 (2024-06-07) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: David Boaz

edit
Article: David Boaz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

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

— Preceding unsigned comment added by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • contribs) 05:54, 12 June 2024 {UTC) (UTC)

Oppose for now It’s almost good enough, but a few more references are needed in the last paragraph of the “Career” section. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:22, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaylockjam10: Fixed the sourcing issues. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Warren Winiarski

edit
Article: Warren Winiarski (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Warren Winiarski, whose Napa wine triumphed over France, dies at 95
Credits:

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

As the then owner of Stag's Leap Wine Cellars, in 1976, his wineries 1973 vintage Cabernet Sauvignon was entered into the Judgement of Paris (wine), where it won, and made it famous and Napa Valley wines as well. He also seems to be a well known Preservationist. TheCorriynial (talk) 18:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(RD posted) RD/blurb: William Anders

edit
 
Article: William Anders (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  William Anders, who took the Earthrise photograph (pictured) in 1968 dies in a plane crash aged 90 (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Apollo 8 astronaut William Anders, who took the Earthrise photo (pictured), dies in a plane crash aged 90
Alternative blurb II: ​ No blurb needed. The photo is more famous than the photographer. Simply display Earthrise photo at top of ITN section, and under Recent Deaths, since William Anders is already posted, just add in parentheses (Earthrise photographer): William Anders (Earthrise photographer).
News source(s): Fox, AP, CNN
Credits:

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

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:37, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support RD when ready, oppose blurb. Natg 19 (talk) 23:44, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there anything you think is wrong with the article? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:46, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Overall, looks fine, but did not do a full review. Natg 19 (talk) 23:59, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, Neutral blurb. Wait for official confirmation. B3251(talk) 23:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What counts as official? I've been waiting all week for confirmation. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At the time, the only publication that reported on the incident was a television station which used his aircraft to make the connection. Now that it's been confirmed by family and more widespread publication, it's good now. B3251(talk) 03:25, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alternate Blurb (which mentions Apollo 8), Anders was one of the first three humans to fly to and orbit the Moon, he participated in the Apollo 8 Genesis reading and, iconically, took the Earthrise photograph. Extremely worthy of having a lead blurb with Earthrise as an image. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:44, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb One of the most notable astronauts, on the first mission which flew to the Moon, and he also took an iconic photo of Earth. The way he died is also unusual. Johndavies837 (talk) 01:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Altblurb added. Johndavies837 (talk) 01:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb Article is in great shape, as I'd expect for a GA-tier article. He had a very significant and transformative career; as Randy mentioned, the Earthrise photograph itself had a lasting impact. (the fact that it's a Featured Picture is a testament to that)) On top of that, the death is unusual; it was for that reason that we blurbed the death of Kobe Bryant back in 2020. I echo that we should also use Earthrise as the photo. Nottheking (talk) 01:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb While the Earthrise photo is indeed extremely well-known, the person behind it is far from a household name, and doesn't fit the high standards of a death blurb. Although, if it is possible, it would be great to have Earthrise as our image even if he is only in RD. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)\[reply]
    • Will say only once more, again, one of the first three humans to fly to and orbit the Moon. If he is not blurb worthy then nobody is, and Wikipedia should stop publishing blurbs. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Stop posting death blurbs, you say? I'm down. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not an "all or nothing", and many people (even in the field of astronautics) are more well-known than him. Yes, that one accomplishment is impressive, but he was not the only one on this mission, and they aren't as well-remembered as, say, Neil or Buzz. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    With the latest update, support "altblurb2". Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:10, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, neutral on blurb The article is rated Good, so it should be sufficient for posting. rawmustard (talk) 01:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural support RD; strong oppose blurb - not a serving head of state/government This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You act like we can only blurb the deaths of incumbent heads of government or state, when this is fact not so. I distinctly remember we recently posted OJ Simpson's Death as well as that of Peter Higgs, in spite of neither man having been an incumbent anything at the time of their death.
    I think we certainly shouldn't have posted either of those, as neither death (as an event) had a notable impact This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 05:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The key thing to recognize here is that we routinely blurb deaths (and other events) that aren't ITN/R; that's why this has a yellow box, rather than green. An incumbent head of government dying inherently means a change of head of government, thus it's ITN/R and green. Deaths can very much be elevated to blurbing, for any reason of the deceased being "transformative" in their field, as well as the death itself being unusual/newsworthy. The former has a strong argument (if still debatable) but as for the latter, the rule does seem to be that anyone with a Wikipedia article dying in an aircraft accident (such as Ted Stevens or Kobe Bryant) is almost always blurbed, even when they're well beyond being in the spotlight. Nottheking (talk) 03:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The point (and the problem with those postings) is that neither of those ought to have been blurbed. The death should be notable as an event in and of itself, which random plane crashes are not This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 05:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure how you can possibly say Kobe Bryant shouldn't have been posted. A NBA superstar who recently retired unexpectedly dying in a helicopter crash is a massive story and the way he died was undeniably a big part of why the death was so big. Death blurbs aren't just limited to heads of state or government. Jbvann05 17:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altburb The articles are highly important for and changed the world history. ArionStar (talk) 02:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support An extremely influential person whose article is a GA and his manner of death is also noteworthy. I prefer Alt blurb. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I can support a blurb, but focusing on the Earthrise photo when he's far more recognized for a distinguished military/astronaut career overall, is inappropriate. Focus on him and the sudden death. --Masem (t) 04:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, weak oppose blurb While it is a notable person who died, the death is not notable in and of itself. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 06:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - RIP to one of humanity's greatest heroes. He died as he lived. But yeah, the first human to fly to the Moon (along with Lovell and Borman) is definitely notable enough for a blurb. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 07:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb per Chaotic Enby. I think the only astronaut we should blurb his passing is Buzz Aldrin. The others don't reach the level of notability we should demand and ITN is for. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb A notable and tragic ending for one of the few living men (only 6 left now) to have been to the Moon. The articles themselves look good. CDE34RFV (talk) 10:13, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb per Chaotic Enby. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 14:49, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Notable individual that surprisingly did not die from natural causes Scaramouche33 (talk) 17:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb per Chaotic Enby. This is what RD is for. Not every event connected to space flight needs to be in the blurb. Nigej (talk) 20:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Not every every event connected to spaceflight...". Anders is one of the three people to first leave Earth's orbit, Earth's gravitational influence, to be captured by another astronomical bodies gravitational field, to arrive at the Moon, and to personally see the far side of the Moon. Yes, just an average spaceflight event (!???). Randy Kryn (talk) 22:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The event was important, as were other Apollo program milestones, and would itself have obviously been blurb-worthy, but it doesn't make every person on board worthy of a death blurb's extremely high notability bar. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Chaotic Enby, there were three persons on board, the first to go the Moon (a human race civilizational milestone of extraordinary proportion). How do all three not pass what you call an extremely high notability bar? Randy Kryn (talk) 23:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The mission is clearly very notable but that doesn't necessarily mean that all the people on it are so important. There's a big difference. Nigej (talk) 08:29, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a bit of a catch-22 argument there. Because under those grounds, it's used to just dismiss all people from being important. William Anders was the one that gave us the photo & quotes that brought the mission into the public memory. Nottheking (talk) 20:32, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not really. Notability is not inherited and being one of a notable group doesn't of itself make anyone notable. The members of the group may or may not be notable enough. Nigej (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb per Chaotic Enby, they put it quite well. Ornithoptera (talk) 22:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose Blurb Per chaotic enby. Sharrdx (talk) 01:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Article's in good shape, one of the few people to leave low Earth orbit and his death is quite uncommon especially given his age. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:09, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb per Chaotic Enby. The Kip (contribs) 07:45, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb Very notable for taking that photo, article is also a GA. Quite an unusual death too, having not died of natural causes. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 08:51, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb Per Ollieisanerd. 31.44.224.73 (talk) 12:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb This is what RD is for. Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Ðg[reply]
  • Oppose blurb OMD -- Kicking222 (talk) 20:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Photo RD This isn't a classic case of OMD, given the plane crash. But as the death toll is one man of an advanced age, (relatively) far from civilization, any presumed aftermath shan't exactly be a long, hard nor winding trip for the FAA, FEMA or SJCC, either. OMPC, if you will, and the story seems to check out, sourcewise. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. One of many Apollo astronauts, did great work but not a Thatcher or Mandela figure in his own right. Quite something to go all the way to the moon, make it to 90 and then to sadly die in a plane crash...  — Amakuru (talk) 23:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, support alternate blurb per Ollieisanerd. I feel as though most people know of Apollo 8 as at least a moon mission. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 05:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, weak oppose blurb - By no means a household name, but I do understand the arguments about the photograph. We should post something, though. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consensus for RD, I don't see a consensus for a blurb. Posting RD. --Tone 13:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My heart says blurb, but that's filtered thru the fact that he is one of the few famous people I've ever met in person, and he was very cool to a young awkward teenage doofus 45-50 years ago. If ITN was set up more like I think it should be, I'd say blurb. But it is run a different way, and the way it's currently run, a blurb is probably not going to happen. Reasonable call, Tone. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb2 - The photograph is more famous than the photographer. Therefore no blurb is necessary. Just display the photo Earthrise (ie., replace photo of Narendra Modi). - Trauma Novitiate (talk) 00:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Rose-Marie (singer)

edit
Article: Rose-Marie (singer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

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

Northern Irish singer and television personality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zevabelle40 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 7 June 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Oppose selected discography section do not have any sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A stubby wikibio with only 201 words of prose. Anything more to write about this singer? --PFHLai (talk) 11:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as still a stub. Schwede66 21:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Nicholas Ball (actor)

edit
Article: Nicholas Ball (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The National
Credits:

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

English actor known for EastEnders and Hazell. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 09:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Article is stub in terms of thorough details/info about his early life, career, etc. Filmography section is unsourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:00, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is a stub and filmography is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:02, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A stubby wikibio with only 184 words of prose. Anything else to write about this actor's career? Filmography is unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as still a stub. Schwede66 21:57, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 6

edit
June 6, 2024 (2024-06-06) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

RD: T. D. Allman

edit
Article: T. D. Allman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

Obit published 6 June. Thriley (talk) 14:01, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait there is one cn tag and there are works that are unsourced, otherwise article is alright. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article has several cn tags. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Six {cn} tags remaining in the prose. Multiple bullet-points in the lists after the prose are also unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 11:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still nowhere near good enough. Schwede66 21:47, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Sooners four-peat

edit
Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 06:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2024 NCAA Division I softball tournament (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Oklahoma Sooners win the 2024 Women's College World Series with the first-ever four-peat. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Oklahoma Sooners win the 2024 Women's College World Series for the fourth consecutive season in a row.
News source(s): ESPN, NY Times, USA Today, KFOR
Credits:

The first ever four-peat in college softball history. Even the NY Times called it "historic". The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:32, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I can support this (women's sports fights systemic bias) but (1) it needs a lot of prose describing what happened and why a four-peat is historic and (2) a lot of images to add interest to all the tables. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Please keep slang/jargon such as "four-peat" out of ITN. I think I can guess what it means, but I shouldn't have to guess. HiLo48 (talk) 05:17, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HiLo48: to note, the “four-peat” is used by all RS and is why it is notable. Google “four-peat” or “4-peat” and you see dozens of RS news articles, including those listed here. So I disagree that it should not be used in ITN, since RS uses it way more than not. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 05:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also to note, “four-peat” is an actual term in the merriam-webster dictionary. So, it is not “slang” or “jargon”. Just because you don’t know what it means, doesn’t mean the rest of the world doesn’t. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 05:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrew Davidson: So what? NY Times and ESPN lied? If I misread the sources, please explain what the Sooners won according to NY Times and ESPN. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 06:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The NCAA tournament calls itself the "World Series", probably named after MLB World Series, but is just an American collegiate tournament rather than an international professional one. Curbon7 (talk) 06:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "College team wins national tournament in minor sport for 4th time". Not exactly world news. Its not in WP:ITN/R and uses slang in its proposed form. (What on earth is a "four-peat"? Certainly not a term we use here in the UK). The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 06:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The C of E: Alt-blurb without “slang” added. Please strike the part of your oppose for that. Also, clearly you can’t read what was posted just above yours on how “four-peat” is a dictionary term and not slang. Lol… The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 06:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote that in response to your "Just because you don’t know what it means, doesn’t mean the rest of the world doesn’t" quote. Just to prove the rest of the world doesn't, for its not in the Oxford English Dictionary. Must be some US-specific term. Anyway, the !oppose still stands for it not being on ITN/R. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 06:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For your reference, it isn’t just an US thing. Manchester City's Premier League four-peat on ESPN. I still disagree that just because it isn’t on ITN/R, doesn’t mean it can’t be listed. ITN/R is a guideline for things guaranteed to be listed. For a first-time in history event, one would think it should be listed, despite not being on ITN/R. But, I shall respect your opinion. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 06:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not ITNR, not ITN-worthy, not globally relevant. _-_Alsor (talk) 06:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Congratulations to the Sooners but this is not really a major global notable event.  — Amakuru (talk) 06:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Sergei Novikov (mathematician)

edit
Article: Sergei Novikov (mathematician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Semenov, Kirill Vladimirovich (6 June 2024). "Скончался Сергей Петрович Новиков". Moscow State University (in Russian). Retrieved 6 June 2024.
Credits:

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

The first Fields Medal recipient from the Soviet Union and a Wolf Prize recipient. — MarkH21talk 00:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support article looks alright to me. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Starship successful flight test

edit
Consensus will not develop to post. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:57, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: SpaceX Starship integrated flight test 4 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ SpaceX conducts a successful flight of Starship, with a landing for the Booster and Ship (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ SpaceX Starship successfully launches, culminating in a re-entry and ocean landing for both the Booster and Ship.
News source(s): New York Times, The Guardian
Credits:
Come ON! This is one of the most insane and incredible spaceflights in human history. Completely successful orbital launch followed by a successful atmospheric re-entry and hard landing for BOTH the Booster and Ship. The most powerful rocket in history. We have to post this PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Is this even a question? Couple very small failures, but still hugely successful, and they both landed for the first time. This was the most anticipated spaceflight event of the decade. qw3rty 14:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I highly recommend everyone go and watch the replay of this, one of the most amazing things I've ever seen. Ship the size of the Statue of Liberty plummeting through the atmosphere, green and blue plasma flying all over the feed, the craft literally melting away live but still manoeuvring for landing. Just insane. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    'most anticipated spaceflight event of the decade' no it isn't, not even close. That's Artemis 3, which will land humans on the Moon. Modest Genius talk 17:15, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a massive step towards that mission too PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:59, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not every SpaceX launch deserves a blurb. Even Boeing Starliner's very first crewed flight is being heavily debated below, so a test flight into orbit for a prototype Starship isn't really blurb-worthy. (Edit 14:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC): Not even into orbit as per below) Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks like Starliner is coming to a consensus [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 22:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This was the first actually successful flight of Starship. Very important milestone in spaceflight. Note that this was not an orbital flight though. Agile Jello (talk) 14:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Chaotic Enby. Not even into orbit. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Being on an orbital trajectory is a rather arbitrary requirement, especially as by all metrics Starship made it to space, just not at an orbital velocity (which wasn't the goal of the flight). PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The main test objectives of this flight were to simulate a booster landing in the Gulf of Mexico, and for the Starship to survive reentry and soft-land in the Indian Ocean. Both of which were accomplished.
    This is not just a major milestone in SpaceX development, but a significant milestone in human spaceflight history as the largest ever rocket's first successful flight. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 00:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Other nominations regarding Starship were opposed due to a failure to complete the entire test or meet some arbitrary requirement. Of course, now opposes are citing some other random arbitrary requirement to meet ITN. By all measures, this was a historic moment which may very well mark the beginning of human effort to establish an extra-terrestrial settlement. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Every test flight is a step towards human effort to establish an extra-terrestrial settlement, this one is only one more small incremental improvement, and I don't see why it is any more historic than any other. It's not about a random arbitrary requirement, it's about the fact that we don't blurb test flights achieving slightly more than the previous test flight. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    First fully successful test flight of the first fully reusable and most powerful rocket in history, as well as the largest vehicle to ever make a controlled landing, as well as being all over the news. We've posted a lot less. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's easy to describe every test flight as a "first" in something as they each do incrementally better than the previous one, but until there's an actual payload, or maybe even manned mission, not every Starship first should be ITN-relevant. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So the first commercial satellite launch of Starship would be notable for ITN in your view? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Possibly. I don't believe in posting every Starship "first", but if there's one to pick, it's either that or the first manned flight. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough, though I personally believe this is notable enough to be posted PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not just a major milestone in SpaceX development, but a significant milestone in human spaceflight history as the largest ever rocket's first successful flight. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 00:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Plus the first successful flight and landing of a fully reusable rocket, which is a game-changer. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:37, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Another incremental test flight, still not to orbit and still without a payload. 'Successful hard landing' is a euphemism for 'intentionally destroyed on impact'. I'm getting pretty fed up of every test being nominated. If Starship actually achieves something useful then I'll reconsider; gradually getting closer to a usable state isn't blurb-worthy. Modest Genius talk 17:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Where did "hard landing" come from? The article claims soft landings for both the ship and the booster, and the CBS News source it links to appears to confirm that (although for the ship it simply quotes Musk's claim on that). 167.24.104.189 (talk) 17:42, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    'Hard landing' is in the nomination above. The article calls it a 'virtual landing' i.e. not a real landing. Modest Genius talk 17:47, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From the article: "B11 successfully splashed down in the Gulf of Mexico, in what SpaceX has confirmed was a soft landing" and "S29 splashed down softly in the Indian Ocean." If that's wrong, it should probably be corrected, but the sources given seem to confirm it. 167.24.104.189 (talk) 17:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Both the Booster and Ship appeared to land intact based on the telemetry (though the ship had taken damage on the flaps), I don't think we've gotten confirmation yet as to their status now. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:54, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Mention of "hard landing" in nomination appears to be in error? Both vehicles performed soft touchdowns successfully [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 22:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:ITNCDONT point 4 [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 22:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I did read the article - at the time of my comment it said nothing about the landings, only plans for the landings. We can argue semantics if you like, but being destroyed when they enter the ocean does not constitute a soft landing to me, even if they slowed down first. There's no evidence either craft was in the intended location either - the upper stage almost certainly wasn't, given its fins were completely shredded during re-entry. Anyway, none of this makes this more than a test flight, so it isn't suitable for ITN. Modest Genius talk 10:27, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is an uninformed analysis. Starship was orbiting the earth at 26.000 km/h and slowed down to 50km/h performing a vertical soft landing. The same happened for the booster. The entire stack is the largest and most powerful rocket ever built. This is a monumental achievement and an historic first in human spaceflight technology. Nothing similar has ever been attempted in history. We just had in the news the Boeing Starliner launch which is a routine ISS crew mission (performed by an extremely delayed but totally ordinary launch platform) and not this? {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 13:39, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Starship was orbiting the earth It was not, this was a suborbital flight
    Nothing similar has ever been attempted in history I remember SpaceX attempting this three times already, and claiming each time that it was the first "true" success
    We just had in the news the Boeing Starliner launch which is a routine ISS crew mission And, more importantly, is Boeing Starliner's first manned flight, rather than its fourth test flight Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The news here is that both the booster and the launch vehicle of the most powerful rocket ever achieved orbital re-entry and performed the first vertical soft water landings in history. Calling that flight "sub orbital" is farcical. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 13:53, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So jarring that the Starliner launch is the first item and this is not even mentioned... unfortunately the topic at this point is absurdly polarised and the results are simply comical. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 13:57, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But it was not an orbital flight. They weren't on an orbital trajectory at any point. That's literally the definition of suborbital. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:51, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. I also get the feeling that this is an incremental improvement, which is exactly what Starship's development approach really is. This is the fourth integrated flight test in less than a year, and there's going to be a fifth one by the end of this month. I really don't see why this one warrants inclusion. When it achieves something beyond the current limits of spaceflight development, then that would be the right news to post.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:35, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If IFT-5 is another flight like this, even if the full system is recovered, I would be against posting, but this is the first fully successful flight, and previous tests were shut down due to not all objectives of the mission being met.
    The booster catch, if performed successfully on IFT-5, would definitely fit ITN imo PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per PrecariousWorlds and Kcmastrpc. Alexcalamaro (talk) 17:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose another week, another SpaceX launch. Starship is launching test flights so often now that it is hard to keep track (expected to have 4 more this year). So what that this one did not explode. When Starship has its first crewed launch, then we can post. Natg 19 (talk) 18:04, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Surely it's not necessary to have every space flight included here. Got to be something really out of the ordinary. Nigej (talk) 18:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not just an ordinary space flight; it is the first fully successful flight test of the largest spacecraft currently operational. Surely the complete success of IFT-4 deserves a brief mention in current events, as opposed to the incremental successes of the last two Starship flights. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 21:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. I'll consider supporting if/when they do a crewed launch, but this is just another incremental test. The Kip (contribs) 19:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While we'd posted IFT-1, it quickly came in retrospect to have been viewed as a mistake, and neither IFT-2 or IFT-3 were posted. This is merely an incremental test flight that doesn't mark any big turning point. The only difference being claimed is that the vehicles mostly remained intact/capable up to the point they were expected to blow up; it still had a number of "partial failures," so it doesn't even cross the bar as a 100% success, even before acknowledging that an internal test isn't exactly particularly newsworthy. ITN is not a ticker for SpaceX activities; it's a venue for news, not press releases. Nottheking (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What? All test objectives were accomplished? [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 21:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, no they were not all accomplished. You can read the list we have on them here. Those yellow items indicate objects only partly completed. "All objectives completed" would mean that list would consist only of green items, with zero yellow, red, or grayed-out.
    The actual qualified statement is that, for the first time, Starship wasn't precluded from even attempting its final objectives. It's notable that it still had engine failures, and most critically, while it was mostly in one-piece on reentry, it did still suffer a heat-shield breach, that resulted in one of its maneuvering flaps burning partly through. (a decent amount of material was observed to have broken free of S28 during reentry & descent) Given that the focal objective repeatedly talked about was to avoid any burning up during reentry, this constitutes only a partial success. Nottheking (talk) 22:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The main test objectives of this flight were to simulate a booster landing in the Gulf of Mexico, and for the Starship to survive reentry and soft-land in the Indian Ocean. Both of which were accomplished.
    Not sure what you mean by partial success, even major news networks are hailing the flight as the first successful Starship flight. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Would also like to point out that those are huge first accomplishments in the history of spaceflight... those are monumental steps forward in the history of spaceflight. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 13:32, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I believe that this fully successful flight test of the largest spacecraft constructed deserves a brief mention. This story has been covered by multiple major American and international news networks and hailed as a completely successful test flight, including CNN, BBC, CBS, NSBC, etc.
Besides, the opposers seem to be riding on a shaky precedent set by the last three Starship launches that failed. This one is a complete success, very different from the previous IFT-2 and IFT-3. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 21:42, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While I do agree that IFT-4 was amazing, the exact notability of the mission isn't really that much (especially compared to IFT-1). Frankly, I don't think we should be nominating Starship launches until a major milestone is achieved (such as first full reuse, first ship-to-ship prop transfer, or even first HLS demo mission). Stoplookin9 Hey there! Send me a message! 21:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Successful flight test and big milestone in spaceflight towards fully-reusable rockets. 2607:FEA8:E31F:D2C6:932B:262A:AD:4D20 (talk) 21:54, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, incremental improvement over the previous flight but it looks like NASA and the media consider this to be a Big F***ing Deal owing to the controlled landing of both vehicles, especially the controlled reentry and landing of the upper stage being the largest spacecraft ever re-entered (semi?)-successfully [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 22:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be pretty curious having 3 notable spaceflight-related blurbs on the front page although this shouldn't be a factor in consensus finding [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 22:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've not seen much from NASA. I've seen a lot of SpaceX asserting it's a "full success," even though it's still heavily qualified. Expect it to drop out of the news cycle once it's no longer the day of, just like with IFT-2 and IFT-3. Nottheking (talk) 22:36, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Expect it to drop out of the news cycle once it's no longer the day of, just like with IFT-2 and IFT-3" isn't this the same as 50% of the items we post? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 07:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Modest Genius and Stoplooking9 Sharrdx (talk) 12:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support having the Boeing Starliner launch in the news section and not this launch which is the first successful complete launch of the most powerful (and advanced) rocket ever built is crazy. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 13:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because Boeing Starliner is the actual first manned mission, while this is just another, slightly more successful test launch. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:39, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comparing the two is farcical. Starliner is a totally routine and ordinary mission. The only notable aspect of that mission is that the first launch was so delayed. Starship is the world's most powerful rocket. Nothing similar to Starship was ever attempted in the history of human spaceflight and this test resulted in many "firsts" and many records and a huge step forward in human spaceflight technology. In the words of NASA Administrator Bill Nelson: “Congratulations SpaceX on Starship’s successful test flight this morning! We are another step closer to returning humanity to the Moon through Artemis—then looking onward to Mars.” {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 13:48, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing similar to Starship was ever attempted in the history of human spaceflight - this is not evident. You're bludgeoning this thread with peacock terms and SpaceX boosterism, accompanied by crystal-ball claims about the Moon and Mars - but the evidence just doesn't support it. It's a decent test, don't get me wrong - but it just doesn't deserve the exaggerated hype you're heaping on it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
this is not evident I understand that. Hence this absurd discussion exists. Unfortunately, to anyone with basic knowledge of spaceflight technology this is abundantly clear. See for example: SpaceX Starship launches on nail-biting 4th test flight of world's most powerful rocket https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-flight-4-test-launch-success
What you call "boosterism" and "peacock terms" are actually reality. This is:
  • the biggest rocket ever launched
  • the most powerful rocket ever launched
  • the first successful re-entry of a booster of this class
  • the first successful vertical soft landing of a booster of this class
  • the first successful orbital re-entry of a space vehicle of this class
  • the first successful vertical soft landing of a booster of this class
And many other firsts (more technical). This is a monumental achievement in the history of spaceflight. But sure, let's talk about Boeing Starliner. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 14:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't understand why in unbiased and good faith you are actively against posting this blurb about Starship. IFT-1 and IFT-4 are subjectively notable to the same degree. HamiltonthesixXmusic (talk) 14:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Modest Genius. Not every single test needs to be posted. Seems like a recurring theme that "ooh-la-la! cool spaceship launched!" is taken into consideration here. Kline • talk • contribs 17:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Israel–Maldives relations

edit
No consensus to post. Stephen 06:23, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Israel–Maldives relations (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Maldives bans Israeli passport holders from entering the country, following the war in Gaza. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera CNN Times of Israel The President's Office Sky News
Credits:

MAL MALDIVE (talk) 13:15, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Minor development in the war, and the Maldives already didn't have diplomatic relations with Israel. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose footnote to the ongoing conflict. Masem (t) 13:47, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. The Kip (contribs) 16:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Minor diplomatic move that won't make any difference to the war. Modest Genius talk 17:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose good attempt but oppose per Modest Genius Ion.want.uu (talk) 05:57, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Rosa (sea otter)

edit
Article: Rosa (sea otter) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Monterey Bay Aquarium
Credits:

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

Sea otter at the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Jbvann05 01:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Well sourced, decent depth of coverage (for an otter you know). Looks good to me. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually just missed the lack of a source for her death date in the infobox. That's been rectified. It should probably be mentioned in the article proper as well. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Sufficiently sourced and generally of decent article quality. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 10:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready Still many primary YouTube sources, and several [citation needed] tags in the last two sections of the article. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:01, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    All the cn tags have been removed now. Jbvann05 20:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready but I support it when it is. The "care" section has some fluff that needs removed too. EvergreenFir (talk) 15:47, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RIP, article is in a good shape. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 5

edit
June 5, 2024 (2024-06-05) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) Starliner, for real this time

edit
Article: Boeing Crewed Flight Test (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Boeing Starliner spacecraft conducts its maiden crewed flight, launching two astronauts to the International Space Station. (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Article needs updating

Just about to enter orbit (only took 14 years). Article needs updating. qw3rty 15:11, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The most interesting aspect of the CNN report was that this mission is going to fix the ISS's urine recycler which is broken and so they are having to cross their legs up there. But our article says nothing about this and it's not clear that it counts as the sort of "going boldly" that we aspire to. Compared to the Chinese mission, this seems too lower deck to make the grade. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:51, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Good for Boeing I guess. This just reads as commercial news to me. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability Isn't this ITN/R? I believe we posted SpaceX launches in the past. This is a major milestone for the commercial crewed space program, as there is now a competitor to SpaceX. Article itself looks like may need more details. Natg 19 (talk) 18:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks like ITN/R had launch of crewed orbital spaceflights before, but it was removed. Natg 19 (talk) 18:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Maiden crewed flight of a new spacecraft. Only the sixth in US history. Agile Jello (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Per the list of crewed spacecraft, it's 9th in the US and 13th overall. Unlucky for some... Andrew🐉(talk) 09:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose One giant leap for Boeing's involvement in the urine recycling game, only the sixth small step in corporate American space support history. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:51, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - Until the mission concludes, but Hallelujah! It's a latter day miracle! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:54, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support. We rightly removed routine ISS crew rotations and new rocket types from ITNR, so this needs to be judged on its own merits. We posted a blurb about the first SpaceX crewed launch to the space station (Crew Dragon Demo-2), so it seems fair to also post Boeing reaching the same milestone. But that should be the only time we feature this spacecraft going to the ISS. The article is underwhelming but in good enough shape to post. I can see a case for waiting until it docks with the ISS though. Modest Genius talk 19:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Dragon Demo was posted in May 2020 because it was a different time with different rules on presumed importance and resistance was futile. Same reason we kept a massive box of constant COVID nearby (more or less). Nowadays, we're free! InedibleHulk (talk) 20:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: they're having difficulty docking CNN. Modest Genius talk 17:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Successfully docked, as of 17:41 UTC. Natg 19 (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK. Then we should post as soon as reliable sources have reported that fact and the article has been updated. Modest Genius talk 17:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The article is in decent shape and the notability and newsworthiness is high. Jusdafax (talk) 23:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support notable as first for spacecraft, future crewed launches of spacecraft however shouldn't be posted. Happily888 (talk) 04:04, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support as Boeing's first crewed launch, but future launches shouldn't be posted even if they do incrementally better. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support notable due to being maiden flight of a spacecraft carrying crew, has happened on the order of 20 or so times in human history [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 18:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: NASA reports that the spacecraft has docked to the ISS so we may want to consider whether to include that in the blurb or not [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 18:15, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support per Chaotic Enby. The Kip (contribs) 18:59, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This marks the first crewed orbital spaceflight operated by a new entity, which brings the world's total to 5. (after the USSR/Russia, USA, China, and SpaceX) To be honest this is the level of something that should have its own ITN/R criteria, but space ITN/R has been... Slashed down very heavily over the years. This has been covered extensively in the news across its entire campaign to reach launch across the prior month, and is most certainly a major event that changes the landscape of human spaceflight. This is a major historical milestone for the subject.
Worth noting that this is ITN-worthy specifically for being the first such flight by Boeing; routine crewed flights (they're on contract to provide NASA with six more) aren't inherently newsworthy, the same as applies with routine Crew Dragon or Soyuz launches; we get a few of each for each year. However, the first by an entity is newsworthy, and (while this isn't the proper venue) is something that is a glaring absence from the ITN/R criteria. After all, as it stands India's upcoming first crewed Gaganyaan flight (on track for next year) would, in fact, not be ITN/R, as bewildering as that sounds. So that's a clear indicator that right now, there's a huge gap for spaceflights in ITN that aren't ITN/R. Nottheking (talk) 19:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now that they have successfully docked. --Carnildo (talk) 19:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for notability and reliable sourcing -- Rauisuchian (talk) 23:46, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 03:46, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull per Andrew Davidson (talk · contribs).wound theology◈ 19:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: having this up while not mentioning Starship's launch on the same day looks ridiculous. The contrast in coverage is jarring especially since many have obviously compared the two launches (since the two companies are competitors) [4]. At this point we should probably remove this as well. It looks like a paid ad for Boeing. Either mention the two (even together) or remove both. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 19:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a false equivalency. It's entirely logically consistent to think Boeing's launch is ITNworthy, while thinking SpaceX's latest isn't. Whether one (or both) actually are ITNworthy are two separate questions, but it does not look ridiculous to draw the line between them. As we've apparently done. Floquenbeam (talk) 19:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Aye. As I repeated summarily while closing the other Starbird, it was only a test. This Starcraft is "for real". A test can still be posted if consensus develops, of course. Likewise, "the real thing" can just as easily fail. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The difference in significance of the two launches is so vast that highlighting one versus the other is comical. One is a "for real" routine ISS crew flight (albeit with a new vehicle). The other is the first successful test of the most powerful rocket in history and the achievement of many firsts in rocketry history (full reusability, vertical landing etc.). I understand if we don't want to report all tests. But then we shouldn't highlight the Starliner ISS crew flight as it is pretty much irrelevant. {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  talk 12:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Nobody seems more into making this a Starliner vs Starship feud than you have, in both nominations. I find it funny, but not "ha-ha funny", and agree each is irrelevant to the other. You're probably right about all those rocket science superlatives, but you can't expect a fan of something else to get as excited about it. Nobody can, whatever their niche. Anyway, I appreciate the effort and am sure you've raised a good deal of rocketry awareness in just trying to get this across to us. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gtoffoletto I would second this. Additionally that discussion was closed and archived too soon, in a rush, preventing further opinions and discussions. It was closed after only approximately 24 hours, mostly from people who seem to be unaware of it. Ergzay (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: John Blackman

edit
Article: John Blackman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

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

Australian TV and radio personality HiLo48 (talk) 00:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose a large number of cn atgs and multiple orange tags and needs more sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:23, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Asmatullah

edit
Article: Asmatullah (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BOL News
Credits:

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

Ainty Painty (talk) 04:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 4

edit
June 4, 2024 (2024-06-04) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

(Posted) 2024 Indian general election

edit
 
Article: 2024 Indian general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In India, the Bharatiya Janata Party led by Narendra Modi loses its parliamentary majority in the Lok Sabha elections, but it still has a path to form a government with its allies in the National Democratic Alliance. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the Indian general election, the Bharatiya Janata Party (leader Narendra Modi pictured) wins the most seats but loses its majority in the lower house of parliament
Alternative blurb II: ​ In the Indian general election, Prime Minister Narendra Modi (pictured) is reelected for a third term with support from coalition parties, after his ruling Bharatiya Janata Party fails to secure a majority on its own.
Alternative blurb III: ​ After the Indian general election, the Bharatiya Janata Party loses 63 Lok Sabha seats and its majority while the opposition Indian National Congress wins 47.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ In the Indian general election, the National Democratic Alliance led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi is re-elected with a reduced majority.
News source(s): CNN, BBC, The Hindu
Credits:

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

I couldn't figure out how to phrase the blurb in a brief way (I think the fact that the BJP lost its own majority but still has a path to form a government via alliance is significant), someone else will have to do it. Tube·of·Light 17:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not ready. Although final results were scheduled for today, it seems counting still hasn't been concluded. We can't post this until the final results are in, and the article has been updated with them. The article also needs to have at least a full paragraph of referenced prose describing the outcome, which is currently missing. I've added an altblurb. Modest Genius talk 18:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Some summary results have now started to appear, but the detailed results table is still incomplete. Modest Genius talk 12:21, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The results table is still incomplete. Is this a problem with updating the article, or is counting still going on? Modest Genius talk 17:26, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Counting ended two days ago, I have no idea what is going on with that article (and I also don't have the time to complete that on my own). Tube·of·Light 03:49, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait if the whole idea is about a possibly alliance wait Ion.want.uu (talk) 18:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb pending final results This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb #1 or #2, but agree that the election article is not ready for the feature. The article needs its result table to be filled in, which is not possible until the count is complete. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 21:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support AltBlurb 2 Suggested Alt Blurb 2 for clarity, the first Altblurb loses the significance that is referenced ITN about Modi needing coalition support to get re-elected. Article needs work though Schwinnspeed (talk) 21:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral on Alt3 I added it because this parliamentary majority business seems like a numbers game, first and foremost, but don't like the way the article looks. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is very much so a numbers game, and you're right to point out the INC gains. But Alt3 feels like we're missing the forest for the trees. The significance here is Modi was reelected, but had to rely on coalition support, because the BJP lost its majority and 63 seats (this is along the lines of every major news headline) I fear the dynamics and implications of the Lok Sabha numbers game will be lost on the majority of people looking at the main page. Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I figured since the other three options already made Modi the star, shifting to party politics was the "alt" thing to do. And I did say it lost its majority, which more than implies it's now running a minority government. A lot of things will always be lost on a lot of people from a blurb alone, I think, just naturally. A decent one is barely longer than a headline, if that. But yeah, I don't care if Alt3's chosen or not. Just "putting it out there". InedibleHulk (talk) 05:07, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the Prime Minister is sworn in This may happen as soon as this week as per the news reports. ITN candidate
    The results of the election are WP:ITNR, not the swearing-in. Tube·of·Light 11:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment on alt4 I have written the alt to mention NDA and to make the blurb concise. This could also be used later on when newer ITNs are published. DogeChungus (talk) 14:34, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt2 as the most neutral, as it explains how Modi is still reelected but needs a coalition as the BJP doesn't have a majority by itself anymore. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:38, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt1: confirming the prime ministership is a formality but it hasn't occurred yet, whereas the parliamentary majority has been confirmed. Also support posting now rather than at the swearing in. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:45, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT1 per above. The Kip (contribs) 21:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt2 as Modi's alliance has formally elected him. Like others have said, we do not need to wait for the new term to actually begin (scheduled sometime Sunday night). rawmustard (talk) 10:39, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt2 - by far the clearest and most balanced expression of what's happened in this unquestionably headline-worthy event. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt2 most accurate headline and article is in a good shape. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Alt4 It's the most formal & Least Disrespectful. Maheep Singh24 (talk) 05:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no guideline saying we have to respect politicians, neutrality and respecting politicians' feelings are not the same. The fact that the BJP lost its majority and will need a coalition is important enough to be explicitly mentioned in my opinion. Tube·of·Light 17:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb2: Suitable to post this today because of the oath taking ceremony of the prime minister.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:40E2:200D:C4D0:BC96:A24F:CCED:2CBA (talk)
  • Support Alt blurb 4: Should've been posted earlier, but today's the swearing-in so nvm. Alt 4 reads the most appealing for the simplicity wrt international audience's pov. — hako9 (talk) 01:39, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt blurb 4 Should be posted today, as today is the swearing-in ceremony. Alt 4 is most suitable for above stated reasons. Leoneix (talk) 16:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt4 It's the most formal & Just go quick it's taking too much time PM has already taken over.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maheep Singh24 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Alt4. Govt has already been formed. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Admins willing to post ITN: I think this nomination is really to be posted. Lightoil (talk) 05:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Alt4 – Schwede66 09:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: William Russell

edit
Article: William Russell (English actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Comment Actor best known as Ian Chesterton in the first couple seasons of Doctor Who, and later came back 57 years after leaving for a cameo that later led to a World Record. But he also appeared in many other tv shows of the era. TheCorriynial (talk) 19:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I watched him back in the day. But the name is quite common and so it won't work well at RD. Tsk. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe it might be worth doing like what's been done with ongoing with maybe putting William Russell (Ian Chesterton) or English Actor instead of (Ian Chesterton). TheCorriynial (talk) 20:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't remember him at all, but the parenthetical in his title strongly suggests he's not the William Russell, so no blurb (regardless of whether he was 99). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:05, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the important thing is to keep the readers in the dark, right? Looking at RD currently, we have a serial killer, a hooker, Obama's mother-in-law, a mercenary colonel and some basketball players. But who's who? You can't tell any of that from just a list of names. It's useless. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is business as usual, you've seen it. For those who want light and timeliness, the important thing is Deaths in 2024. Here, we have space restraints and a quality bar holding things back. "Wiiliam Russell" fits, but an extra "(English actor)", "(Ian Chesterton)" or "(Sir Lancelot)" does not. Barwise, even the William Russell can't shine through multiple unsourced paragraphs. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose His filmography section is entirely unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Support. Article looks in decent enough shape, a very long acting career, most notably as a character from the very beginning of a certain long-running TV show. Challenger l (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2024 (UTC) Withdrawn. Challenger l (talk) 00:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: "There's more than one William Russell" doesn't seem a valid reason for not including him. There are plenty of occasions when I've looked at the box and gone "Who's dead?!" only to click on the link and find it's someone else with the same name that I've never heard of. As noted in the box above, the policy is that anyone prominent enough to have an article on Wikipedia is notable enough to be included. The only issue should be the quality of the article. Skteosk (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I really don't understand why we wouldn't. He's got a decent article, and that's that. We usually don't include disambiguation brackets in the RD text of people's names - we just pipelink to the correct article, and I don't think that needs to be any different here. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:58, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Multiple footnote-free paragraphs. Filmography is unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 10:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Janisa Johnson

edit
Article: Janisa Johnson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): GMA News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American volleyball player. Died 25 May but announced publicly on 4 June. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose two orange tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Lanka floods

edit
Article: 2024 Sri Lanka floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 16 people have died and more than 12,000 houses have been destroyed by floods in Sri Lanka. (Post)
News source(s): France 24, BBC, AP, EFE, Independent, ABC
Credits:

Ainty Painty (talk) 02:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality as the article's extremely short. Wait on notability - it certainly looks like it might meet the scale for a blurb, but it's a developing story. The Kip (contribs) 03:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — Weather events with more deaths and injuries have not been posted. Single country notability. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 06:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is not blurbworthy. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Prince Ahmad Shah Khan

edit
Article: Ahmad Shah Khan, Crown Prince of Afghanistan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Persian
Credits:

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

Titular head of the Barakzai dynasty and son of the last king of Afghanistan Mohammad Zahir Shah. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 20:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article is a stub and has orange tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:17, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 3

edit
June 3, 2024 (2024-06-03) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Jürgen Moltmann

edit
Article: Jürgen Moltmann (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

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

One of the leading Christian theologians.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support All sections seem to be well-sourced.Filmman3000 (talk) 04:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: added myself to updaters --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • About 6 {cn} remaining in the prose. Quite a few unsourced bullet-points in Bibliography section after the prose. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 22:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I added Jen to updaters. I woke up to 3 cn and referenced those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He wrote - see: German National Library - more than 350 books. There's a bibliography of English titles in the external links. What can we use? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted – Schwede66 10:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Brother Marquis

edit
Article: Brother Marquis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today
Credits:

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

American Rapper Filmman3000 (talk) 23:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support All sections seem to be well-sourced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Lead is a bit too long, but article looks good overall. Three cn tags shouldn't keep the article from getting posted. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. At first, I was really saddened, mistakenly thinking Biz Markie had died, but then I realized this is a different rapper, but then I discovered Biz Markie died three years ago. Hyperbolick (talk) 10:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose accolades section needs sources. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Five {cn} tags remaining. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PFHLai, @TDKR Chicago 101 and @PrinceofPunjab I have sourced the accolade section as well as other citations missing. Hope you find it satisfactory. Thank you. Filmman3000 (talk) 19:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This article has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Brigitte Bierlein

edit
Article: Brigitte Bierlein (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News
Credits:

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

Former Austrian chancellor Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose There's five cn tags. Otherwise, article looks ready once they're resolved. Support One cn tag shouldn't keep the article from getting posted IMO. I think her chancellor section is expanded to the best it can given her short tenure. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is work to be done: the cn tags need to be fixed and the content relating to her, albeit short, tenure as Chancellor should be expanded. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article is indeed ready to be posted. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Colin Gibb

edit
Article: Colin Gibb (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Black Lace band singer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose two orange tags. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:10, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2

edit
June 2, 2024 (2024-06-02) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: Jeannette Charles

edit
Article: Jeannette Charles (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph
Credits:

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

Likely well sourced. 240F:7A:6253:1:61BB:8258:CB1:D733 (talk) 05:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article has an orange tag as filmography is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:10, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dick Sears (politician)

edit
Article: Dick Sears (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): VT Digger
Credits:

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

Thriley (talk) 12:48, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article is a stub, needs expansion. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Article is too short and only two sources given, both of which are obituaries. Needs significant expansion on his career in the the Vermont Senate as well as expansion and sourcing on his early life and career. Jmanlucas (talk) 21:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Janis Paige

edit
Article: Janis Paige (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

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

American actress. 240F:7A:6253:1:BE:C460:CCA2:CE59 (talk) 05:34, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose some cn tags and one orange tag. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Four {cn} tags remaining in the prose. Much tabulated materials under the Television section is unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 22:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Larry Allen

edit
Article: Larry Allen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo sports
Credits:

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

American Football player.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Article is woefully lacking in citations - nearly the entire playing career section is unsourced. The Kip (contribs) 18:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is EXTREMELY under sourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Carl Cain

edit
Article: Carl Cain (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KCRG
Credits:

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

Article updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Levy (Israeli politician)

edit
Article: David Levy (Israeli politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

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

Israeli Politician.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Mexico election

edit
 
Articles: 2024 Mexican general election (talk · history · tag) and Claudia Sheinbaum (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Claudia Sheinbaum is elected as president of Mexico. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Claudia Sheinbaum is elected as the first female president of Mexico.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Claudia Sheinbaum is elected as the first female and Jewish president of Mexico.
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

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

Important election. Media outlets in Mexico are already projecting that Sheinbaum won, but votes are still being counted. Davey2116 (talk) 03:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Sheinbaum article is in no fit state to be a bolded article. Three orange tags and five citation needed tags will have to be addressed first. Schwede66 04:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Wait until it's been officially projected that she has been elected. Support Also worth mentioning in the blurb that she'll be Mexico's first female president. It appears the election has been called for Sheinbaum per NYT. The general election article looks good in terms of sourcing. Not sure if Sheinbaum's article needs to be a target article as well. I recall nominating Guillermo Lasso's election but the 2021 Ecuadorian general election was suggested as the targeted article. Not sure if things changed then. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for notability but wait until the election results are fully in. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 11:15, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support but wait until all the votes have been counted. I also support featuring her picture in the "In the news" box, replacing Trump's. 2601:280:5C01:B7E0:9C1D:96E3:DEC9:8217 (talk) 13:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support and wait per others. - Sebbog13 (talk) 14:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternative blurb, it's a significant election and her being the first female president is notable. Lunsel (talk) 15:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Altblurb, high profile country election and it's notable shes the first woman in office in Mexico. Sharrdx (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 
For example
  • Wait Absolutely nothing official yet (silence from the INE is odd and the others haven't conceded). Use the time to find a better photo and fix the orange tags (no {{cn}}s left). Moscow Mule (talk) 05:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the 2024 Mexican general election for notability. Sheinbaum's article needs to be reworked to be bolded. This is the first time a puppet president has been elected since Emilio Portes Gil, and Mexico is descending into a condition of democratic decay, with Sheinbaum herself promising to overhaul the election and legal systems. Her gender is not relevant enough to be described in the blurb beyond the standard reports. She is also the first person of Jewish origin to be elected, the first atheist, and the first person to indirectly earn a Nobel Prize, although these achievements are not highlighted. (CC) Tbhotch™ 05:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Reminder that Wikipedia is not a forum, nor a soapbox. The Kip (contribs) 18:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No opinion as to the article quality, but all the major Anglophone news organizations like AP, Reuters, and NYTimes have called the election for Sheinbaum.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 07:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is it worth also adding mention of the SHH alliance getting a supermajority if it occurs? A political alliance becoming powerful enough to unilaterally amend a national consitution must surely be big news if it happens. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 08:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Very significant Arbeiten8 (talk) 10:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Results and reaction sections would benefit from some expansion, they are really short. --Tone 13:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Notability is significant enough that the election at least needs to be here, and the content is filling in. We can potentially wait to bold Sheinbaum until more is filled in re: her platform and campaign. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 16:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Now it's cleaned up a bit more -- both articles expanded, Sheinbaum's tags taken care of, over 95% reporting and official sources announcing her the winner of the quick count -- so it feels appropriate to tag both articles quality-wise. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 21:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Very notable and significant election, and the first female Mexican president. As others have said due to the problems with the Sheinbaum article I would wait to bold it for now. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 18:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Identity Politics, please (we're universal). Some things about people are just clear by their names and photos. The important thing is another election was won. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The reason we mention her being female is because she is the first in Mexico's history. Same way we would use a first male head of state. Sharrdx (talk) 00:01, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I get how "firsts" work, I just think they're overplayed. And no, it doesn't work for (most kinds of) men. The last "real" state to get its first male leader was South Sudan, and we didn't summarize, picture, link, embolden or mention the man (just the system). InedibleHulk (talk) 01:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I reckon it's most significant that she is an engineer and climate scientist. Politically, she seems very much the protegé of the incumbent Obrador. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    South Sudan's first male leader was its first (independent) leader period. And that is the case for most if not all of the world. If after decades if not centuries of female leaders, a male took office, we would mention his status as the first male to hold the office just the same. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, in theory, I hear you. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as election article is good to go. I'd wait to bold Sheinbaum however, as there's multiple orange tags. The Kip (contribs) 18:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Sheinbaum's article does not need to be bolded, as long as it is bolded a good article like the one on the elections. Let's wait for 100% of the vote count, but the election article is practically ready to go. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt3; received less attention then her being a her, but still received significant attention and worth mentioning. BilledMammal (talk) 01:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Does it still count if she tells you she was raised by atheists, as an atheist, and "never belonged to the Jewish community"? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:38, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes; it’s an ethnicity. It’s like saying "first Hispanic president". BilledMammal (talk) 09:37, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I suppose that's technically true, and there's also a political element. But I don't think I'm the only one who infers the religious and cultural parts first when reading "Jewish president". If she's not politically Jewish and some point must be made about something decided before her parents were born, I suggest adding "ethnically" before "Jewish"; I still won't support it, but it'd make more sense. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From The New York Times, she has downplayed her ties to Judaism, her origins have not gone entirely unnoticed, revealing currents of xenophobia and antisemitism persisting beneath the surface in Mexican politics.[5] —Bagumba (talk) 09:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Four citation needed tags. 2024 Mexican general election § Results needs at least some analysis and perspective of the results. (The non-presidential results are still outstanding, though I suppose that part is not being blurbed.)—Bagumba (talk) 05:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Since resolved.—Bagumba (talk) 09:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work The lead says that there were hundreds of seats being contested for the Chamber of Deputies and Senate. There's a confusing issue about re-election which I don't quite follow. And no results for these elections are reported. Nada. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:50, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Re-election": confusing and wrong; gone now. "Legislature": still true. Moscow Mule (talk) 07:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The 2022 blurb on Giorgia Meloni becoming Italy's PM didn't mention that she was also the first woman.—Bagumba (talk) 09:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Cleaned up Sheinbaum's last few tags. Preference for alt or alt3. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 16:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looking good on my end. Ornithoptera (talk) 20:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support main blurb. Oppose alt blurbs; don't add personal bio bits. Support removing superfluous "as"; keep it simple: Claudia Sheinbaum is elected president of Mexico. —  AjaxSmack  21:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not that there's "anything wrong with" President of the United Mexican States, of course, but yes, Support Seven Words. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt Blurb Being the first female is what makes it notable, and is in line with how WP:RS are referencing this event. However if we didn't call this out previously for the Italian election result as @Bagumba noted above, then the same should apply here. Schwinnspeed (talk) 21:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough on the second point, matter of perspective, but every general election is automatically notable on this site and every notable election article is presumed fit to post in bold letters by these local pagemasters (unless the people choose otherwise). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree and have revised my vote after taking a closer look at some of the previous comments. I recognize all general elections are notable per WP:ITNELECTIONS and her being a female should not be the basis for posting. I still maintain that Mexico voting in their first female president is pretty significant, but I will reserve the subjectivity for elsewhere. Cheers to the ITNocracy. Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Cheers. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb - ITN/R. Also important to note the election of the first female Mexican president as such.--estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. The legislative results don't appear to be in yet, and I've expanded the sections on that a bit. Otherwise I think all. Issues were dealt with. I've Stuck with a simple blurb (ALT0) without editorialising about first woman or first Jewish person or anything, as is standard practice for elections.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I still think "as the" overcomplicates things, but yeah, better some wordiness than a hot-button issue. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:00, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Burnside

edit
Article: John Burnside (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

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

Scottish award-winning writer Drchriswilliams (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mostly Support The ending kind of trails off into scattered short sentences, each beginning (all somewhat chanting) "Burnside", but I've never seen that stop something before and can be dealt with in its own good time, probably; he was 69. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Orange-tagged sections for sourcing.—Bagumba (talk) 05:43, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have now finished going through those two sections of awards and publications and have checked them and individually referenced them, so have now removed those tags. Drchriswilliams (talk) 08:57, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Rob Burrow

edit
Article: Rob Burrow (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2024 Icelandic presidential election

edit
No consensus to post. Stephen 00:13, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2024 Icelandic presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Halla Tómasdóttir (pictured) is elected president of Iceland. (Post)
News source(s): RUV
Credits:
BastianMAT (talk)
  • Oppose on quality. ITN/R is given, so I support this in principle, but Halla's article is still pretty much a stub, and the election article still lacks both context and aftermath. Once it all is ready, I'm more than happy to support it. CDE34RFV (talk) 09:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • We might as well close this now. Even though we at least posted Guðni winning in 2016, there's no progress in both Halla's article as well as the election article itself. And since we've got the results from more significant elections in Mexico and India, coupled with the European Parliament this weekend, the election in Iceland really seems like a sideshow, further exacerbated by the fact that this rather insignificant election has taken place over half a week ago. CDE34RFV (talk) 17:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Halla's article is extremely short and election article needs more prose. PrinceofPunjabTALK 16:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality per PrinceofPunjab. One target's a stub and the other is almost bare of prose. The Kip (contribs) 20:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- this is not ITNR, no? Not head of the executive. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 07:57, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- since it's not ITNR and the President of Iceland has no actual power, I oppose posting this. --RockstoneSend me a message! 09:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Battle of El Fasher

edit
Article: Battle of El Fasher (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Clashes in Al-Fashir kill over 100 people and injure more than a hundred, while a hospital is subsequently bombed by the Sudanese Armed Forces in Kutum as a result of the battle. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Clashes in Al-Fashir, Sudan, kill over 100 people and injure more than a hundred, while a hospital is subsequently bombed by the Sudanese Armed Forces in Kutum as a result of the battle.
News source(s): (Sudan Tribune) (Dabanga Sudan) (Sudan Tribune) (Channel 4) (BBC)
Credits:

Article updated

(talk) 02:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Added altblurb mentioning the country. Most readers wouldn't know what country this was relevant to if the original blurb were used. Tube·of·Light 05:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Event is notable and has enough info and sources. NuestroBrasil (talk) 20:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, already covered by ongoing Sudanese civil war and its timeline. Alexcalamaro (talk) 06:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as it seems quite a notable moment in the ongoing civil war as a whole. I'll note, though, that the article I've just cited should be added to the blurb for further clarity, if we do publish it... Oltrepier (talk) 14:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support we posted massacres in Israel before (i think at least) so why not Sudan? Ion.want.uu (talk) 15:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're probably thinking of the October 7 one, which came right before the war (so not yet "covered by ongoing"). InedibleHulk (talk) 16:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They probably think that one. Also not to forget that we also nominated and posted the Geneina massacre. Vamos Palmeiras (talk) 16:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If I recall, the deaths in that one were based on more than the say-so of a radio caller, as the Kutum Hospital airstrike (currently) is. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    True. The Geneina massacre was caused by the Battle of Geneina itself and killed between 10 to 20,000 people. Not to forget that the blurb about El Fasher and the full nomination is talking about the ongoing offensive on the city and how it is affecting thousands of people. Furtherly, I think if this nomination does in fact get posted that we should expand the Kutum Hospital airstrike article. But for now let's keep it the way it currently is. Vamos Palmeiras (talk) 16:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The part about the recent offensive talks about how it killed eleven people and wounded 42. I'm not seeing enough updated detail on these thousands of others (or anything at all about 2024 in the lead). Of course, there remain thousands who have been and are affected in myriad ways this whole time (including in El Fasher), but that much remains conveyed by the Ongoing item, I think. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Battle is covered by ongoing, and the sourcing for the hospital airstrike is shaky anyways. The article is also in no shape to post. The Kip (contribs) 19:53, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Chang'e 6 landing

edit
 
Article: Chang'e 6 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The CNSA Chang'e 6 sample return mission touches down on the far side of the Moon. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CNN, Guardian, Reuters, News, Xinhua
Credits:

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

Article mentions landing but needs work. Prior nomination of Chang'e 6 to ITN consensus was to wait until landing. [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 00:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on notability but article needs some work. Mission profile section is a bit small and needs to be expanded. PrinceofPunjabTALK 01:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability Obviously, the article needs some work which would help explain this event a bit more. Overall a great event to display on 'In the news'. Vamos Palmeiras (talk) 02:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I was wondering how they knew that the landing was successful and the article explains that the Queqiao-2 relay satellite has been pre-positioned to maintain comms. So, the article is quite informative and and useful. As it's ITN/R, we don't need notability votes. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support though would like to see more expansion of the article to match what we usually see on NASA or ESA missions. There was general consensus when the launch was nominated to wait until it reached the moon (and potentially on a successful return); that's this point. --Masem (t) 14:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. The Kip (contribs) 19:54, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 02:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose for now The “Overview” section doesn’t have enough references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 02:38, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kudos to Stephen for noticing that the mission has moved on and that, with sampling completed, the ascender stage has already taken off. The effect was that we only reported the landing for just five minutes but now we're up-to-date.
    There's an interesting detail that the sample hole was left in the shape of the character zhong (中) and so China has engraved its initial on the surface of the Moon. As this pictogram is based on a flagpole, this is literally symbolic. We should see if there's a free picture of this or other shots from the surface. Here's a video to start...
    Andrew🐉(talk) 06:44, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 1

edit
June 1, 2024 (2024-06-01) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Philippe Leroy

edit
Article: Philippe Leroy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rai News (Italian)
Credits:

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

French actor. May require additional references for this go through. – robertsky (talk) 04:35, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Artur Chilingarov

edit
Article: Artur Chilingarov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV Reuters
Credits:

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

Russian polar scientist and member of parliament.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose awards section is unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 02:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) UEFA Champions League

edit
 
Articles: 2024 UEFA Champions League final (talk · history · tag) and 2024 UEFA Women's Champions League final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, Real Madrid win the 2024 UEFA Champions League for the 15th time after defeating Borussia Dortmund in the final (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In association football, Real Madrid win the UEFA Champions League, defeating Borussia Dortmund in the final.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In association football, Real Madrid defeat Borussia Dortmund in the UEFA Champions League final (man of the match Dani Carvajal pictured).
Alternative blurb III: ​ In association football, Barcelona win the women's Champions League (player of the match Aitana Bonmatí pictured) and Real Madrid win the men's Champions League.
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

Heatrave (talk) 20:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – Added an ALT blurb based on 2023's blurb. SounderBruce 21:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb but I think Madrid extending their record is worth mentioning as well Jbvann05 21:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments 1. This is ITN/R, 2. Would it be possible to propose a combined altblurb that also mentions that women's Champions League? That final was on 25 May so still within the ITN window (Barcelona beat Lyon). Kingsif (talk) 21:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once match summary is added Article just needs a match summary and post-match section to be added. I'd support the Women's CL final joining this if a summary were added there as well. S.A. Julio (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb I think it would look better for altblurb 3 if Carvajal was featured instead (more recent event + more famous), but altblurb 3 is good too Sharrdx (talk) 00:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt3 when ready women's' final looks ready but there is a rather short small summary on Men's final. When a longer summary is added, I will support it. PrinceofPunjabTALK 01:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 
Aitana Bonmatí
  • Support alt3 (Updated nom re. ITN/R) – there's now a match summary at the Women's final article. There's also this image of Bonmatí there that can be used - probably start by posting one of Carvajal, but it's typical to rotate images after a while and it's a great photo, so can add the Bonmatí one to MP protection. Kingsif (talk) 00:50, 2 June 2024 (UTC) – Marked as ready with the update to the men's final article. Kingsif (talk) 15:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support though I think we need to point out a minor technicality that may need to be discussed later. The UWCL isn't listed on WP:ITN/R so we may need to discuss that for future years in case they stop coinciding to do a dual nom. That being said, I support this nom but I do think ALT3 has a bit too much WP:OLINK and I also think we should only use the official names. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - article is not MOS:ACCESS compliant at the moment, as it has tables within a table. I'm not sure why this happens every single year...  — Amakuru (talk) 17:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's no longer an issue on either final article. S.A. Julio (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. This is how sport articles should look like. Women's final is not ITNR but the article is good and a combined blurb is a good way to have both posted. --Tone 10:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment there is a grammatical error. The links should be "wins" instead of "win" Jiaminglimjm (talk) 14:38, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Colonel Dyck

edit
Article: Lionel Dyck (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): iHarare.com
Credits:

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

Rhodesian and Zimbabwean Army soldier and mercenary group leader. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support article looks alright to me. PrinceofPunjabTALK 02:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting as Colonel Dyck which has a nice ring to it. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support using the common name. Aside from it being good enough for these past 34 months of his life, rank is among the things we can't take with us. There's an unfilled burial place field in the infobox, but I've never seen that stop anything before. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted – Schwede66 20:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not bitter, but this nicknaming business may set a new Slippery Slope Standard. Could be a lot of weird ones slipping through (especially with musicians, criminals and wrestlers) and a lot of extra arguments about which nicknames are the weird ones. Hopefully I'm wrong! InedibleHulk (talk) 22:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The precidence has already been set @InedibleHulk: as Kamala ran under his wrestling name and we ran Barry Chuckle under his stage name. I think as long as the nicknames are cited and they are used to commonly name someone, then I see no reason why we can't. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 08:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Those are common names, stage names and ring names, not nicknames. The article titles follow suit. What happened here would have been akin to posting Kamala as The Ugandan Giant. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A-ha. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Boeing Starliner

edit
Launch has been scrubbed for now, please re-nominate once the astronauts are in space (non-admin closure) [osunpokeh/talk/contributions] 00:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Boeing Starliner (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Boeing Starliner launches on June 1st, 2024. (Post)
News source(s): CNBC Washington Post CBC CNN
Credits:
Nominator's comments: New to this process— may be short, but if someone could expand this, that would be great. 48JCLTALK 16:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome here and thanks! I'm thinking a blurb that mentions it being a spacecraft used to resupply the ISS could be more informative maybe? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given the delay, wait and see if it's launched tomorrow. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whelp, launch got delayed again. Natg 19 (talk) 16:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wtf is happening at Boeing. How can it get this bad? This is like the 11th delay or something, it was originally scheduled for launch in 2017. What is going on PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. Since the launch was sadly delayed, on procedural grounds I think this has to be closed at this time. No opposition to it being renominated at a later date when it eventually does get off the ground. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The C of E added alt version 48JCLTALK 16:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, according to news reports it looks like they are going to try again in 24 hours or so. So on that basis I would say wait until we know more. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks. 48JCLTALK 17:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait and I suggest closing this for now. Starliner has been repeatedly delayed. Let's wait until it actually launches. Johndavies837 (talk) 18:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Sorry for the early ITN, the reason was because I was watching it live and the timer said 4 minutes until launch so I thought it would be appropriate for ITN. 48JCLTALK 19:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, welcome to ITN! Johndavies837 (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Tomorrow's launch attempt has been canceled as well. No launch until at least June 5 so there's no point in keeping this open. (Source) Johndavies837 (talk) 21:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) 2024 South African general election

edit
Article: 2024 South African general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The African National Congress (ANC) loses their 30-year majority in South Africa's parliamentary election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The African National Congress (ANC) loses their majority for the first time since the end of apartheid in South Africa's parliamentary election.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The African National Congress (ANC) wins South Africa's parliamentary election but lose their 30 year majority that they had held since the end of apartheid.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In South Africa's parliamentary election, the African National Congress (ANC) wins a plurality of the vote, but fails to achieve an outright majority for the first time since the end of apartheid.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ In South Africa's parliamentary election, the African National Congress wins the most seats, but loses its overall majority.
News source(s): (AP) (BBC)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: In addition in highlighting the ANC losing its majority, the uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK), led by former president Jacob Zuma, has also seen a rise in the polls. CastleFort1 (talk) 11:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support when ready: Although we're still waiting for the official results to get published, and the article needs to be updated with new information, I think there's no doubt about the ANC's loss of parliamentary majority being by far the biggest takeaway from this election, as well as a turning point in the modern history of South Africa. Oltrepier (talk) 11:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - Until official results and the composition of the National Assembly is finalised. However, last general election, did we wait to post when the president is actually elected by parliament or did we post the NA results? I would be in favour of posting both as this is the most significant election in South Africa since 1994, and basically the only election where one party hasn't been dominant since 1948. This is a big moment in South African history. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment we need to phrase this the way we always phrase election results, to avoid seeming partisan. The blurbs above, which phrase it as The ANC loses... are not accurate - the ANC still won the election, only that they're short of a majority.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I concur with this. After the number of seats are released, I will make a second alternate blurb to reflect it. It'll say that the ANC won the most in South Africa's election, but it will mention them losing their majority for the first time since the end of apartheid. CastleFort1 (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We could also write that the ANC won the plurality of votes but failed to get a majority. That could make it less ambiguous for readers. Scaramouche33 (talk) 15:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle BUT wait until the result is officially announced. I think the proposed wording is accurate but I do agree with the above that it should be something like ALT2 that I've just added as a possibility. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT2 once results are released, but it should be edited for grammar to "The African National Congress (ANC) wins South Africa's parliamentary election but loses its 30 year majority that it has held since the end of apartheid." PtolemyXV (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality. A significant amount of unsourced statements and indeed a whole paragraph ("Preliminary candidate lists"). Black Kite (talk) 18:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt1, oppose Alt2 Alt1 best captures the significance of this electoral event for me. In principle I strongly oppose saying that a party that gets a plurality of seats "won an election" in ITN for parliamentary elections because it implies to anyone unfamiliar that that party will end up in power even if it isn't actually the case (e.g. Spain and Poland, where the plurality party failed to get into or lost power), although in this case it's moot because the ANC is expected to stay in power albeit while being forced to ally with another party. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on importance, but wait until results are announced and information in the article is improved. I have proposed Alt3, which addresses the fact ANC wins a plurality, but not a majority. I used outright to indicate/clarify there is still room for them form a ruling coalition, and I see it being used in various sources. NPR, AlJazeera, Bloomberg via YahooNews. --Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 19:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt3 but there are some paragraphs ends without any footnotes. PrinceofPunjabTALK 02:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt2 now that the results are fully in I feel that this is the best description of the situation. Scu ba (talk) 17:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality still a lot of unsourced statements.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT2, oppose on quality per above. The Kip (contribs) 19:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • AAIOUIUA An acronym is only useful if used afterward. If we're posting this, post it without the "(ANC)" (or use it afterward). Please and thank you. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when ready: It should definitely get posted once all parts of the article are finished and have sources. Also, I Support Alt3. Opm581 (talk) 10:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support. The article seems to be in good shape, the only issues I spotted were a) some provinces have separate results tables while others don't; and b) the results map in the infobox needs updating. It would be simpler to just remove those until they're ready. If that's done, I support. At the risk of proliferating the blurb choice, I've adjusted alt3 to produce alt4, which I think is more neutral and uses less jargon. Modest Genius talk 13:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Issue b) has been fixed. Modest Genius talk 17:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Everything looks good to me, the regional elections could be spun off into a "2024 South African regional elections" article or something adjacent to that since they take up quite a bit of space but regardless it's quite thorough. Ornithoptera (talk) 20:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article is good now as it is a historic election result. Shadow4dark (talk) 07:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now that it's in better shape; I like Alts 2, 3, and 4 for clarity, but Alt2 could use a copy edit for verb agreement: "The ANC wins [the election] but loses [their majority]" (instead of "wins but lose")~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 20:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: marking ready as it seems there is consensus to post. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 22:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 23:04, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Coveney, Michael (4 June 2024). "William Russell obituary". The Guardian. Retrieved 4 June 2024.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/June_2024&oldid=1230658608"