Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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

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

A blurb is a one sentence summary of the news story. An alternate suggestion for the blurb is called an altblurb, and any more suggestions get labelled alt1, alt2, etc. A blurb needs at least one target article, highlighted in bold; reviewers check the quality of that article and whether it is updated, and whether reliable sources demonstrate the significance of the event. Other articles can also be linked. The Ongoing line is for regularly updated articles which cover events that remain in the news over a longer period of time. RD stands for the "recent deaths" line, and can include any living thing whose death was recently announced. In some cases, recent deaths may need additional explanation as provided by a blurb; this is decided by consensus.

William Ruto in 2014
William Ruto

How to nominate an item[edit]

In order to suggest a candidate:

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

Purge this page to update the cache

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

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


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

Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do not...[edit]

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

Please be encouraged to...[edit]

  1. pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. Maybe the previous reviewer has missed a problem, or an identified problem has now been fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes may also help administrators identify items that are ready for promotion to the ITN template on MainPage.
  3. point out problematic areas in the nominated article and, if appropriate, suggest how to fix them. If you know exactly what to do, by all means, go ahead and fix it as you see fit.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


August 19[edit]

August 18[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

RD: Norah Vincent[edit]

Article: Norah Vincent (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT (paywalled)

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: Writer. She died on July 6, but as far as I can tell, her death was not reported anywhere until this NYT obit today. Some of the article is fine but the section about her second book (Voluntary Madness) needs work. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 20:39, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Hanae Mori[edit]

Article: Hanae Mori (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times

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: Death published today Thriley (talk) 13:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose article is orange-tagged. A lot of work is required. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

August 17[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

Nadir crater[edit]

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

Article: Nadir crater (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​Scientists announce the discovery of eight kilometer-wide undersea Nadir crater in the Atlantic Ocean. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, BBC, Science Advances

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Believed to be of impact nature, but in any case the discovery of such large Earth features looks significant. Peer-reviewed article is out. Brandmeistertalk 09:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – I would like to see the article expanded a bit more first, but this looks very promising. Would be a really interesting article to blurb! ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. The peer-reviewed paper describes it as a candidate impact crater, because the evidence is very incomplete. In addition, the date is highly uncertain - it's quite likely this isn't related to Chicxulub at all. At present this is just a proposal with some circumstantial hints, which IMO makes it unsuitable for ITN. (Theses issues should also be described in our article.) Modest Genius talk 10:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. This is just a claim by a group of scientists published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal awaiting verification/refutation by other scientists in the field. That's how science works. That the media publish a modified version in a clickbait-oriented manner is completely irrelevant.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:27, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The "newsworthy" part of this is the possible connection to the dinosaur mass extinction event, but that's not yet proven, only that these feature exists in the ocean. --Masem (t) 12:36, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - Granted, scientific discoveries rarely take the form of gigantic breakthroughs. Instead, they are gradual, halting steps as a hypothesis is posited, repeatedly tested, and then eventually subsumed into standing scientific consensus. This is not good as far as ITN is concerned when we want to give attention to these minority topics, but the lack of a definitive moment-of-truth prevents us from publicizing stories such as these. Perhaps ITN and science news are just incompatible.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 13:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's even more galling, I think, when you consider the fact that every single item currently on the ITN template right now currently involves death, or an attempt to cause death. --🌈WaltCip-(talk) 13:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This item would be about death and disaster too. Looking at the BBC News currently, the main alternative I'm seeing is Girls just wanna have fun.... But note that the Japanese government is following this "party on, dudes!" trend too... Andrew🐉(talk) 14:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Last month we posted science blurbs including the first JWST images, Chinese paddlefish extinction, and the Fields medal (OK that's maths, but pretty close to science). ITN does feature scientific stories from time to time - big breakthroughs do happen, albeit not as often as disasters and elections. Modest Genius talk 15:29, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Notable scientific discovery This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 13:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius and Masem. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose There have been many claimed impact craters that lack definitive evidence that have turned out not to be true, which I have spent a lot of time cleaning up. In this case, there is no definitive confirmation that this is indeed an impact crater. This is merely a first step in confirming/disproving whether this structure is an impact crater. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:03, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The article is sourced a single peer reviewed, but nevertheless primary, research paper from the group that made the discovery. There is a CNN reference in the article, and some other news organisations have picked up the story, no doubt originating from a press release to promote the groups new Science Advances paper. Nice paper, but needs wider coverage beyond the authors of this original study and associated stories released to the press. Polyamorph (talk) 20:46, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[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) Defteros v. LLC[edit]

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

Article: Defteros v. LLC (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​The High Court of Australia rules that  is not a publisher and therefore cannot be liable for defamatory material. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​The High Court of Australia finds that  is not the publisher of its search results and therefore is not liable for defamatory material therein.
News source(s): ABC, Axios

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This is worldwide news, ruled by an Australian court but potential implications everywhere given is used everywhere. I have only just started the article now, so bare bones at the moment but plenty of more sources available to add to article; any help very welcome! Abcmaxx (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose, as the targeted article does not qualify based on length and even then, the way jurisprudence works throughout the world typically means this case wouldn't factor into the case law of different nations. rawmustard (talk) 16:43, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • My understanding is that other common-law countries will occasionally cite decisions from other jurisdictions, but that it's not controlling precedent, and it's very uncommon. Here in the US, it's even very uncommon for state courts to cite precedents from other states. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose not a landmark ruling and effectively other areas of the world already have this like Section 230 for the US. --Masem (t) 16:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Clarification/Altblurb/Oppose While is not a publisher in this case about its search results, it very well could be a publisher in other cases, particularly any about its publications. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:05, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. This maintains the status quo, and is consistent with other legal jurisdictions. Plus the article is a stub. Modest Genius talk 10:16, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Interesting but provincial This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose and close per all above. Not all news is likely to get the attention in Candidates, btw. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:03, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[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.

August 16[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections

RD: Matti Lehtinen[edit]

Article: Matti Lehtinen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): HS

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: Centenarian Finnish operatic baritone and voice teacher of international fame. Article was deleted once by BBB23 who perhaps knows more. Some bits are not yet referenced, but I need to go for the day. The Finnish-speaking updaters were already of great help! The English ref is a (bad) translation of the Finnish, which may help. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Mark Girouard[edit]

Article: Mark Girouard (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph

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.

 Thriley (talk) 22:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • The wikibio currently has only 311 words of prose. Anything more to write about him? Also, please be reminded that the Bibliography section needs to be fully sourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 01:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Bibliography remains unsourced. --Vacant0 (talk) 09:42, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Wolfgang Petersen[edit]

Article: Wolfgang Petersen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian

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

Nominator's comments: German film-maker, best known as the director of Das Boot and Air Force One. Source given is about news of his death; died from pancreatic cancer on 12 August 2022 but only announced publicly on 16 August 2022. Article only requires a few more citations before posting. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Not Ready Referencing is quite poor and will require some work before this can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:37, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done Grimes2 (talk) 11:01, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Steve Grimmett[edit]

Article: Steve Grimmett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian

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: Frontman of metal band Grim Reaper. Source given is about news of his death. Article requires big clean-up, nominating to draw attention to it. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:17, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Apparently, the "big clean-up" mentioned in the nominator's comments above has not happened yet. Please expand and add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 02:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Darius Campbell Danesh[edit]

Article: Darius Campbell Danesh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
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.

 2A00:23C7:2B86:9801:391E:E97D:7240:73C4 (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support Article seems good to post XxLuckyCxX (talk) 16:59, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support, - Have added some additional sources Mark E (talk) 08:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

August 15[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Pete Carril[edit]

Article: Pete Carril (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; The Washington Post; Princeton University

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.

 Bloom6132 (talk) 05:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Closed) FIFA sanctions Indian FA[edit]

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

Article: All India Football Federation (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: FIFA suspends the AIFF, stripping India of its international football hosting rights (Post)
News source(s): Deutsche Welle

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Article needs updating but otherwise it's well written. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Update doesn't currently meet WP:ITNCRIT. It's impact seems minimal, only affecting a U-!7 event.—Bagumba (talk) 09:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've updated the AIFF article now. Well they cannot qualify the Asian Championships or the World Cup, fairly significant for the most/2nd most populous nation in the world's most widely played and watched sport. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:19, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment It's a one-line update on a start-class article. I would like to see the situation explained better on Wikipedia before blurbing. Not sure about the impact but this does seem quite major. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose temporary bans for government interference in sports boards are quite common and are usually lifted once the board is cleared out/reset, so this is fairly transient. Also, India are hopeless at football/soccer and have no chance of qualifying for the World Cup so this basically won't affect any high level tournaments Bumbubookworm (talk) 11:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose due to lack of significance. Even if it was important enough to post, there's only two relevant sentences in the article, giving no more information than is in the blurb. Modest Genius talk 11:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per above. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:42, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support major news, the worlds most populous country suspended from hosting events for the worlds most popular sport, and two months before a major event. Obvious notability. Needs one more sentence update and maybe some reactions and it's good to go. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per above and SNOW close. The event is of minimal significance and the target article has not been updated well enough. EditMaker Me (talk) 12:23, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per everyone else! Polyamorph (talk) 12:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[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: Frederick Buechner[edit]

Article: Frederick Buechner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT

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: Prodigious author, Pulitzer and National Book Award finalist, O. Henry Award winner. I haven't edited/updated the article, but is comprehensive and seems well-sourced. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 01:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Nicholas Evans[edit]

Article: Nicholas Evans (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Bookseller

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: Best known as the author of The Horse Whisperer. Died on 9 August 2022 following a heart attack at the age of 72, but death announced publicly on 15 August 2022. Article needs expansion and further citations before posting. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:40, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Lenny Johnrose[edit]

Article: Lenny Johnrose (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport

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: Ex-Bury & Burnley football midfielder died aged 52, five years after motor neurone disease diagnosis. Source given is about news of his death. Article needs expansion and further citations before posting. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) 2022 Kenyan general election[edit]

Proposed image
Article: 2022 Kenyan general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: William Ruto (pictured) is elected President of Kenya. (Post)
Alternative blurb: William Ruto (pictured) is elected President of Kenya, defeating Raila Odinga
Alternative blurb II: Kenya's incumbent Deputy President, William Ruto (pictured) declared president-elect in spite of chaotic scenes and dismissal by the loosing party led by Raila Odinga and some members of the electoral committee.
Alternative blurb III: William Ruto (pictured) is announced to be elected as President of Kenya, which is challenged by opposition candidate Raila Odinga.
News source(s): BBC, Sky News, Reuters, AP, France 24, AlJazeera, DW, CNN, The Independent

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

Nominator's comments: Dramatic election once again, in one of Africa’s most vibrant democracies BastianMAT (talk) 15:32, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support - Major news EvergreenFir (talk) 15:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - firstly, the individual should not be a bolded link, the news item is the election only, as per all other elections worldwide (e.g. the last US election, in which Joe Biden was not bolded). Secondly, there needs to be a prose update in the linked article detailing what happened, as we would expect for any election or event of this nature. 2017_Kenyan_general_election#President at least has a few sentences explaining how things unfolded and who won. Thirdly, and this probably isn't an issue at this stage as reliable sources are reporting that Ruto is president-elect, but there's some controversy going on around this. Four of the electoral commissioners have disowned the result that their own chairman has announced, and it is very likely that the result will go to the Supreme Court in the next week or two, to air whatever issues those commissioners plus the losers of the election may have to say. I'm not sure what would happen if we report this as news now, then have to announce something different further down the line if there's a re-run for example... (as there was in 2017). Food for thought anyway.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:55, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Needs update. I agree with Amakuru that the bold link should be to the election, not Ruto. The content already in the election article is good and adequately referenced, but it doesn't have any prose on the results. Needs some textual description, reaction, aftermath etc. - especially if the opponents have said they intend to appeal. Modest Genius talk 17:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    24 hours later, no prose on the results has been added to the article. Modest Genius talk 16:12, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Support original blurb (not the alts). There's now several paragraphs of reaction, explaining the messy announcement and intention to appeal. I'm not sure that section is entirely neutral, but the overall article is good enough to post. Modest Genius talk 12:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak oppose for now per Modest Genius. Lack of prose in the "Preliminary results" section (which preliminary seems not to be anymore) and a section on reactions/aftermath is missing. That they are challenged before the Supreme Court is a consequence of the elections, which by themselves are INTR. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:20, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose I just listened to a report on BBC Radio and the result didn't sound reliable – a week to count the votes; violence at the announcement and election officials disowning the result. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The results have been reported by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission. The reliability of this commission and of the results of the elections must be assumed, no matter how much there are opponents who reject them or may "smell bad" the counts. Saying what you say, it would exclude from being ITNR the elections in many countries, especially in Africa, and we've already said on several occasions that it's not up to us to make this judgment. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:41, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, but in this case four members of the actual IEBC you cite have disowned the reported result. Although for as yet unspecified reasons. It's not just the opposition candidates. However, the crucial point is that reliable sources are calling the result a Ruto win, so for that purpose we can regard the result as final for now, pending any further supreme court decision which might be made in the future.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:21, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Exactly. In the same way as was done with the American presidential elections: when reliable sources announced the results, these were already taken for firm. It would be ITNR-worthy (IMO) in the event that the Supreme Court invalidates the results and a general election has to be held again in Kenya. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – Follow the RS reports. – Sca (talk) 19:41, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The BBC is the reliable source I'm reading and it says, "Four of the seven members of the electoral commission refused to endorse the result, saying it was "opaque". ... Kenya's history of disputed elections in the past have led to violence or the whole process election being cancelled. ... The Kenyan Supreme Court annulled the last election ...". As we are an encyclopedia, not a newspaper, there's no rush and so it would be prudent to wait a while and see how this works out. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The BBC also says Ruto won. It’s not up to us to judge whether the election was free and fair, only to post the results. The Kip (talk) 23:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Am I missing something? I don't see any text about the result or the split in the electoral commission.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:50, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support ... in principle, pending article development. Official results appear to have been accepted. – Sca (talk) 12:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – Odinga to challenge the official tally. Expected. Doesn't change results for now. Article, though longish (3,300 words), seems acceptable. – Sca (talk) 13:12, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support – I've done a bit of tidy up. The article is good enough; solid referencing. The original blurb is good to go. Schwede66 23:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted. Sandstein 14:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Post-posting comment the article already meets the conditions to be published. But not with the altblurb but with the original one, since it's the model we always use for the presidential elections. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:02, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Denise Dowse[edit]

Article: Denise Dowse (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN

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.
  • Oppose Article needs ref work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The Filmography section is still unsourced. Too many sentences in the (short) Career section have no footnotes. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 21:36, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

August 14[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

2022 Yerevan explosion[edit]

Article: 2022 Yerevan explosion (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​Six people are killed, 60 others injured and 18 more are missing or trapped under rubble in an explosion at a fireworks storage area of a mall in Yerevan, Armenia. (Post)
News source(s): (Al Jazeera)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Major world news. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose on notability and because the article itself is no more than a stub. Also, the proposed blurb has no link to the target article. EditMaker Me (talk) 07:38, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fixed blurb. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose on quality If someone is able to translate the Armenian equivalent article to help expand the article then that would be helpful XxLuckyCxX (talk) 18:40, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pueblos Unidos cartel is broken up[edit]

Article: Mexican drug war (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​The Pueblos Unidos cartel is disbanded after 164 armed members are sucessfully ambushed by police in Michoacán, Mexico. (Post)
News source(s): Poland The Times, 24 News Recorder, Yahoo! Noticias, Grupo Marmor

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Major event where 146 gang members are arrested, with 142 assault rifles, 42 pistols, and a 28 vehicle convoy captured in one move, disbanding whole (albeit smaller) cartel. Could not find the article to this cartel but likely has another name? Article needs updating too. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:37, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose Seems to be a local group, formed in 2021 to defend avocado farms from drug cartels, tangential at best. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per InedibleHulk. A local group, doesn't mark a before and after in the war against carteles, with no relevant leaders, no long history of its activity and not even a Wikipedia article of its own. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:51, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'll defer to you on relevancy of leaders. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:04, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It seems that they're more relevant than I thought, but they don't have their own article in Wikipedia either. I had in mind characters such as Vicente Carrillo Fuentes, Miguel Caro Quintero... _-_Alsor (talk) 22:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait The group has not disbanded; it has retaliated. The situation seems complex and confused: "A Pueblos Unidos leader arrived at the scene to negotiate with the authorities and after making agreements, the retained officers were let go. Neither the authorities nor Pueblos Unidos would share details of the negotiations. ..." And coverage seems limited and patchy. Searching for sources, I'm liking this related story about a giant hole. I've been watching Narcos lately and these incidents and plot twists would make more great TV... Andrew🐉(talk) 23:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That is one of the better corporate vampire sinkhole stories I've read this year, so thanks. But make no mistake, those Pueblos Unidos are from long ago and far away. Non-canonical, as the TV kids say, just a good name for any united people without a more distinctive brand. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose – I'm not finding any coverage on Pueblos Unidos anywhere on Wikipedia. They are not even mentioned in the Mexican drug war article (which also seems a bit of a broad article for such a blurb). Wikipedia readers are poorly served if we blurbed this. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:09, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose There is no article on this. Polyamorph (talk) 08:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment If it's solely the lack of article for Pueblos Unidos then I can create it as there does look to be plenty of WP:RS on them. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose – Encyclopedic target article totals 1,400 words and doesn't focus on a news development. Doesn't seem appropriate for ITN. – Sca (talk) 13:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. No article, murky details, minimal coverage in mainstream media (which are covering other events in the Mexican drug war e.g. [1]), no reason to see this as a significant development. Modest Genius talk 16:16, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose good faith nomination per most of the above, in particular Modest Genius. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:04, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) Giza church fire[edit]

Article: Giza church fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​At least 41 people are killed and 45 others injured after a Coptic church complex including a nursery catches fire in Giza, Egypt. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​A fire at a Coptic church in Giza, Egypt kills 41 people, including several children.
News source(s): (BBC News), AP, Reuters, France24, AlJazeera

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Breaking news so obviously article is only one line long at the moment. Abcmaxx (talk) 15:26, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support in principle. However, the article needs major expansion before this gets posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle. This clearly needs work to be able to be posted, but I profoundly disagree with Polyamorph claiming that this dister lacks significance. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support once expanded, which Ill get to work on. nableezy - 15:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Think there enough here at this point, will keep working on it though. nableezy - 16:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle, article needs more information, although the unfortunate number of losses is significant.. Alex-h (talk) 16:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality article is too short. Support it once improved. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:37, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Just so I know what people are looking for here, how long of an article do you think is necessary to post? nableezy - 16:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    More than 400 words. A Start class article. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Done, currently at 441 words of readable prose. nableezy - 17:24, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Is still a stub article. Perhaps with a section titled "Background" that talks about the Coptic community in Giza, the history of that church, what they were celebrating (or if it was an ordinary Sunday mass), if there is any similar precedent.... _-_Alsor (talk) 17:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thats just based on the assessment on the talk page though. Id say this is start class at least at this point. Ill see what I can find for background without resorting to synth though, but id expect it to take some time for that type of analysis tying together past events to happen here. nableezy - 17:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And done, this would now meet the DYK requirements for length (524 words, 3258 characters of readable prose) to post as well. nableezy - 18:01, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - the title of the article is very generic; arguably it should be merged into the parent article of the subject church, which also should be updated. The blurb needs to link the article as well, currently it does not meet posting requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 17:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed on the title, added altblurb to address those issues. nableezy - 18:01, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Major disaster with significant loss of life. Article quality is now acceptable for ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support The article now meets the minimum requirements for ITNR and is a notable disaster. No longer a stub article. Good job Naableezy. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support on the basis of the quality of the article I created and the significant amount of deaths. Fixer88 (talk) 19:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait - there is uncertainty over the identity and location of the subject church. - Indefensible (talk) 19:07, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dont think that matters tbh, but I *think* I have the correct location now, but either way until its verified can just keep that out. We have a name and neighborhood, dont need exact coordinates. nableezy - 19:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no need to rush, this is an encyclopedia and not a news site. - Indefensible (talk) 19:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Im not rushing, but the article does not have a wikilink to a church or coordinates, not having that isnt all that important. The confusion you speak of is now just on the talk page, and it shouldnt matter for our purposes here now. nableezy - 19:16, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Freya[edit]

Article: Freya (walrus) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NRK

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.

 Count Iblis (talk) 13:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose Only 239 words, too stubby. --Masem (t) 13:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem. Barely any content and only four references total.Polyamorph (talk) 13:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Polyamorph, if references are an issue, I can easily find and addd more, I'm just conscious of WP:OVERCITE. (Also, I must disagree with the "stubby" assessment, rater predicts Start class anyway) HenryTemplo (talk) 15:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      We expect articles posted to main page to be >500 words. While not a "stub", it still is too stubby for front page. Masem (t) 15:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      I suppose it depends on one's definition of what a stub is, which can be subjective. Regardless, I (or anyone else) can still work on and expand the article to make it more suitable for here. Have a great day! HenryTemplo (talk) 15:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      Start is only one up from stub. The lack of references reflects the lack of content. Polyamorph (talk) 15:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      The article is still in a work in progress, besides, rather that WP:CITEBOMB the article, I'd rather WP:MINE the sources I already have and expand the content of the article (although perhaps it was too soon for the ITN nomination?). If you want to find references, try googling "Freya walrus", it's pretty well covered, don't worry! Feel free to help expand the article if you want, and have a great day :) HenryTemplo (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      As I said, it's not so much about the lack of references than the lack of content.Polyamorph (talk) 16:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment, I'm not sure if the death of animals is a right topic for ITN. Alex-h (talk) 15:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    If the animal is notable enough to have its own wikiarticle, it's fine. Racehorses and popular zoo animals have gone on RD before. --PFHLai (talk) 16:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Alex-h: Articles about animals are occasionally posted on ITN. As the nominating template says, "any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post". Sunshineisles2 (talk) 18:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support, for me, if a article is long enough for DYK (which this article is), it's long enough for ITN. HenryTemplo (talk) 16:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. Per policy, we should not debate whether an animal (or person) is "appropriate" to appear, as per explanation included in every single nomination. We need only discuss whether the article quality suffices. And since I've just approved this for DYK, I think it's per definition now no longer a stub (was also expanded a bit recently, now at 400 words), and could appear. --LordPeterII (talk) 17:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    ITN requires a higher word count (500), as with RDs we are generally expecting that the article already exists, and the death confirmation is being added. Masem (t) 17:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    When does it get posted to DYK? Having it on both columns would be redundant. - Indefensible (talk) 18:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Indefensible: Unlikely anytime soon, it's not in any queue yet, only just approved.
    @Masem: I see. I'm not as active here, and don't know the specifics. To be fair, the animal has been in the news and named since October 2021, but we didn't have an article until now (probably because, well, Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS). It's now at 467 words, only a little short, so I still stand by my vote. --LordPeterII (talk) 18:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support on present quality. BD2412 T 17:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The problem is that it's not really a biography, is it? It's a news story about a walrus. Whilst it probably passes GNG, given the very low bar there (although, frankly, WP:NOTNEWS), it should really be "2022 Norwegian walrus incident" or something like that. Let's face it, if it had been an important story, the article would have existed before (checks notes) six hours ago. Black Kite (talk) 17:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Black Kite: As you can read in my reply above, I've very slyly turned the "not news" argument against you ;) Although I get what you mean: It's not the usual nomination, and I can understand why you'd vote oppose. I see it differently (we currently only have two named wild walruses, this one and Wally), but yeah I trust consensus will determine what's best. --LordPeterII (talk) 18:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: At least on the technical side, we are now at 526 words. --LordPeterII (talk) 20:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
... due to recent expansion, we are now at 662 words. And to those skeptical in regards to article creation, there really are several sources dating to 2021, we just did not have an article up until now. Which totally makes sense if you think about it, it only became WP:NOTNEWS due to the continued press coverage months later. --LordPeterII (talk) 21:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support "Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post". Andrew🐉(talk) 20:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keep in mind that there was no WP article until today about the walrus, thus the above issues related to length and notability are 100% fair game to consider. Most of that has been resolved since but we still will raise questions of notability of an article created on the same day as the death if it is short and/or lacking sourcing. Masem (t) 22:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That's what WP:AFD is for. If you or anyone else doubts the notability, that's how to go about asserting the concern. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    If we tagged it for AFD that would 1) be pointy (given that there were editors sayign they were working on expanding it) and 2) disqualify the article for ITN posting while the AFD tag sat there. The reason to make sure that there's enough content for a freshly created article that is then put to be on RD is to make sure that it meets our quality expectations (500 words min, using reasonable sourcing) If for some reason that a new article couldn't get to those levels, then yes, an AFD would be required. It's just the claim "oh, there's a standalone, we must post" is not how we operate, we're still evaluating the quality of the standalone for posting. That's not an automatic blind thing that Andrew is suggesting. --Masem (t) 22:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am fully aware of all this. Yet an article with sufficient coverage existed, sufficient notability was asserted, no-one had AFD'ed it. So that's just time to move on. By the time Andrew made his vote, all the boxes were checked. There was literally nothing else to be concerned about. Feels like there's some wonkery afoot here, "a freshly created article" caveat. Nein danke. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support article is reasonable enough, covers the death of a notable animal, nothing much more to debate here unless someone wants to take the article to WP:AFD of course, otherwise, hurry up and post. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Vinayak Mete[edit]

Article: Vinayak Mete (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Indian Express

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 needs more information to be added as well as citations for some of the information it currently contains. Hopefully this nomination leads to the fixing of these issues. EditMaker Me (talk) 12:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose barely more than a stub. Both sections are entirely unsourced. Polyamorph (talk) 13:55, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • A Recent Death nomination with zero footnotes in the Death section?Some REFs are in place now. --PFHLai (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2022 (UTC) Please expand this stub and add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 14:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • At 153 words, this wikibio is too stubby to qualify. Anything more to write about him? --PFHLai (talk) 01:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ongoing: 2022 European heat waves[edit]

Article: 2022 European heat waves (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post, The Guardian, World Health Organization

Nominator's comments: This is an important current topic linked to the 2022 Oder environmental disaster, 2022 European drought, Climate change in Europe and 2022 European and Mediterranean wildfires and includes the 2022 United Kingdom heat waveMunci (talk) 10:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support: The heatwave is ongoing and has caused droughts, huge wildfires and environmental damage. greyzxq talk 11:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose: Many sections of the article haven't been updated for weeks. Miggie H (talk) 11:33, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – It would take a herculean effort to cobble together a good article about the high levels of heat this summer around the world.
    Sca (talk) 12:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS: ID sources per usual format, please. – Sca (talk)
This is my first time suggesting something for ITN so I am not sure what you mean. I did try and follow the instructions. Munci (talk) 17:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See other nom's re sources. -- Sca (talk) 22:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose There are multiple heat waves besides the ones in Europe happening in the world. Does not make sense to isolate one at this time. --Masem (t) 13:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support The drought should also be mentioned. It's the worst drought in about 500 years. It's now rivaling the 1540 European drought "Everything began in northern Italy, with a winter that felt like a July. Not a single drop fell from October 1539 to early April 1540. Then the drought advanced north."[5] July brought such an "ember-like heat that churches made prayers while the Rhine, Elbe and Seine could be crossed on a dry foot. Where there was still water, the warm broth acquired a green colour," dead fish floated belly-up." Count Iblis (talk) 13:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That’s how they usually float. – Sca (talk) 14:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem. Climate change is a reality that affects the entire planet and wanting to focus only on one region is reckless. The European summer (especially in the Mediterranean) is like this: record heat waves, droughts and forest fires. Nothing new under the sun. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support It is a quite major collection of events, impacting quite a lot of Europe, and as per Count Iblis, it is the biggest drought in almost 500 years. GamerOfStrategy (talk) 17:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Driving force behind a significant amount of notable news items. The Kip (talk) 19:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Ongoing is for ongoing events. This article is a collection of events, most finished, several not begun. Even if we did treat list articles as event articles, for whatever reason, it seems Eurocentric to single out the European branch of 2022 heat waves till December 31. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose we could put 2022 heat waves instead. Munci (talk) 10:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That article has the same basic problem, as a hodgepodge of concluded events. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • On closer examination, this article also sucks. Of the five "August heat wave" sections, only Ireland's mentions a heatwave (maxed at 31, only water-related deaths, but still). The others are single high temperatures or slightly broader predictions. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Firstly, I do not see an issue with simply putting up specific notable heat waves for nomination. I think just having had one rise to the level of individual nomination is not enough to consider this for ongoing - if a second posted heat wave occurs, the perhaps we should consider this for ongoing. Beyond that, the organization of the article is poor. The article stratifies by country, but even under each country specific waves are not specified, and it is not specified in many cases the wave in question associated with the statements provided in the article. Just seems like a lot of information thrown together randomly - information that may be useful, but not as much so without context. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment from proposer Equivalent articles are ongoing on the French and German versions of Wikipedia. Munci (talk) 10:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – Possibly relevant: "Global heating has caused ‘shocking’ changes in forests across the Americas." – Sca (talk) 12:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Two different continents, three studies from the 2010s and no mention of heat waves, but yeah, possibly. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment As per Count Iblis I think the drought is more notable, and also ongoing. I mean, heatwaves we have had some in recent years, but c'mon, from that article's lede: The European Commission has warned that it will be Europe's worst drought in 500 years (!) – that's something, if indeed no rain is to come soon. We in Europe are not California, that's really new to us. --LordPeterII (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That could indeed be an alternative. Munci (talk) 08:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That line misrepresented the source, changed now, still seems relatively ongoing. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:42, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. Unlike the July ones, these aren't record-breaking.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Current practice of posting items for major events (e.g. Oder) makes the most sense at this time; article organization could use improvement. SpencerT•C 01:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose As before, I keep seeing reports about heat waves and fires in [northern Africa. Presumably the same heat waves. If approved, this needs to be less Eurocentric. Nfitz (talk) 07:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Rakesh Jhunjhunwala[edit]

Article: Rakesh Jhunjhunwala (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV, BBC, CNN

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

Nominator's comments: Indian business executive. Article requires some work before it can be ready for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 04:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support: Very very prominent figure in Indian stock market and Economy. Supporting inclusion in the RD. --Titodutta (talk) 04:25, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support High profile billionaire, possibly already generated lots of publicity after his company Akasa Air commenced operations a few days ago. NytharT.C 06:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Maintenance tag will have to be dealt with first. Schwede66 15:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: Needs copyediting (" first big profit", "Rakesh felt some uneasiness in his health, due to which he was rushed to Breach Candy Hospital", etc.); CN tags to be dealt with; a little more clarity throughout (he was investigated for insider trading but paid SEBI - an abbreviation not defined in the article - money; was that a settlement without admission of guilt?); use of currency symbols should be standardized throughout. Career section needs further details about what specifically he invested in: stocks, real estate? SpencerT•C 16:30, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing removal: 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine[edit]

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

Article: 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)
Nominator's comments: There hasn't anything major happening for months since this was first posted in February. Unless something major happens, it should be removed. Interstellarity (talk) 00:09, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The invasion is over and I haven't heard about it yet? _-_Alsor (talk) 00:48, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Just because nothing of note has occured recently doesn't mean it's over. Russia's still there. MyriadSims (talk) 01:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose As above XxLuckyCxX (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong Oppose The invasion is still happening. It is still in the news. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 03:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose absolutely still happening --Masem (t) 03:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose as long as Russian invasion forces are still in Ukraine this remains ongoing. Polyamorph (talk) 03:48, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per everyone else. The invasion is still very much a major thing in the news. Kurtis (talk) 03:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Russian troops are still in Ukraine and sizable parts of the country are occupied. Are you serious? The Kip (talk) 04:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[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.

August 13[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime


  • Romanian swimmer David Popovici breaks the 13-year-old world record for the 100m freestyle with a time of 46.86. (SwimSwam)

(Posted) RD: Steve Worster[edit]

Article: Steve Worster (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN

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.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 16:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Maung Paw Tun[edit]

Article: Maung Paw Tun (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Voice of Myanmar, Global News Light of Myanmar

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.

 Htanaungg (talk) 08:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • This stubby wikibio currently has only 265 words of prose. Anything more to write about this person? --PFHLai (talk) 11:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @PFHLai: I have a bit expanded; it's now 328 words. Thank you. Htanaungg (talk) 03:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Excellent! Thank you for the expansion, @Htanaungg. Start class now. -- PFHLai (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – RS coverage? – Sca (talk) 12:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support recipient of the National Lifetime Award for Literary Achievement is notable and highly respected writer in Myanmar. Taung Tan (talk) 04:02, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: Htanaungg This article is really close; would you be able to add 1-3 sentences about what his "renowned works" were about? (Are they fiction/nonfiction, short stories, themes? etc.) SpencerT•C 01:49, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Spencer: Thank you for your comment. I have added some. Htanaungg (talk) 10:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 16:21, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

August 12[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Anshu Jain[edit]

Article: Anshu Jain (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Money Control (India)

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

Nominator's comments: Banker / Business executive. I will work on the article shortly. RIP. Did not require any major edits. Good to go in current state imo. RIP. Ktin (talk) 13:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) 2022 Oder environmental disaster[edit]

Article: 2022 Oder environmental disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​A mass die-off of fish, beavers and other wildlife occurs in the Oder river in Poland, likely due to mercury poisoning, causing a health and environmental crisis in large parts of the country. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​A mass die-off of wildlife in the Oder river causes a health and environmental crisis in large parts of Poland.
News source(s): Sky News, Reuters, ABC, Yahoo!, Planeta, Onet, TVN24, DW (English)

Nominator's comments: A whole ecosystem has been wiped out along half the country and likely affect Germany too. They found several tons of dead wildlife in the river which stretches 840km. Protests among the local population already. Needs article. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Comment Do you have a main article for this event? I don't think we can post it if there isn't a base article for it & I don't think the section in the Oder article is long enough to warrant a post XxLuckyCxX (talk) 21:41, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@XxLuckyCxX: I couldn't find one, was hoping this nomination would help. If there isn't one then I can create 2022 Oder environmental disaster. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see some updating at Oder#Contamination_in_2022. Let's call this article the nominated article for now. --PFHLai (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Update Created separate article, as the section was only 2 sentences long, and this could easily be a standalone article. Nowhere near perfect or even ready to post, but it's a start; any help very welcome! Abcmaxx (talk) 22:42, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle Article def. needs work like OP stated but looks fine currently XxLuckyCxX (talk) 23:06, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle - This is a developing story, with contradictory information from different sides of the border, but it looks pretty significant. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle - Some sources are suggesting this may be the permanent destruction of the river's ecosystem, which would make this event notable. With improvements to the article, especially regarding sources, I support the addition of this item to the current events section, in principle. StrongPencil (talk) 01:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle - As this is causing a major environmental and health disaster in Poland, and seems to be triggering a major political crisis, this is more than significant enough to be posted. However, the article needs some more cleanupno pun intended before it can be posted. Mount Patagonia (talk) 03:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment. If we go ahead with this posting, I would recommend going with ALTBLURB (ALT1) instead of the original blurb. Do not want to posit a "likely" cause unless it is definitively stated. Ktin (talk) 03:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per above, and agree with Kitin that ALTBLURB is preferrable. EditMaker Me (talk) 05:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support for reasons already pointed out. Ayyydoc (talk) 05:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Update Length now should be much better, lots of sources. Apologies for the bare references, I tried to add a lot of information in a very short space of time. Concur that the cause is unknown still it seems, at the time of nomination I thought mercury poisoning was pretty much the consensus at the time. Abcmaxx (talk) 05:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle. This is an excellent story of high encyclopedic value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:06, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support I think the article looks good and will be expanded over time. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support,This is a major disaster which will effect people's life. Alex-h (talk) 12:02, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Germany is also affected by the disaster (should be mentioned in blurb). Grimes2 (talk) 12:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support ... in principle, pending article development. Widely covered for several weeks in Germany, which shares the Oder (called Odra in Polish) with Poland. – Sca (talk) 12:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support and more: this is just one part of the current ecolgoical crises, including heatwaves in Europe for example, which should have a major place along with the invasion of the Ukraine by Putin and Covid-19. Munci (talk) 18:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment This article really isn’t ready for the front page yet. Far too slim and vague. Thriley (talk) 19:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted The article is short, but I think it's just long enough and detailed enough to post. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Consensus seems clear that the article was not ready for posting. I see two editors that are okay with the article and at least seven that aren't. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose little more than a stub Polyamorph (talk) 13:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Pretty thin – about 460 words of text, some of which is reax. -- Sca (talk) 22:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - This article is in rather poor shape. For example, I just removed the line, "According to anglers, it is unlikely they would ever be able to fish again in the water." Fishermen are not ecologists, and furthermore, the source does not even say that. Recommend pulling. Schierbecker (talk) 02:59, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose – This particular ecological event seems to be over, and forecast rain may wash away the 'stale' results. – Sca (talk) 13:24, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Note – The blurb needs to be updated as this is no longer contained within Poland but has moved downstream to also affect Germany. There is a discussion at Errors regarding an alternative blurb; please contribute there if that's of interest. Schwede66 22:14, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) 2022 Cetinje shooting[edit]

Article: 2022 Cetinje shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A mass shooting after a family conflict in Cetinje, Montenegro, leaves 11 people dead and 6 others injured. (Post)
News source(s): WP, NDTV, The Guardian

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Very rare mass shooting in a small European country; reported worldwide. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Weak oppose Yes, few mass shootings happen there, but this is a result of a domestic dispute and not a terrorism or similar operation. --Masem (t) 21:37, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I may be wrong, but I think this may be the country's worst shooting ever (granted independent not that long, and small population, but still) Abcmaxx (talk) 21:42, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also its not the motive that's the notable part, it is the rarity, location and scale of the tragedy surely. I am unconvinced this would be more notable if 11 people died because the perpetrator was a terrorist.Abcmaxx (talk) 22:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support this is possibly the worst mass shooting in Montenegro ever, and given we routinely post mass shootings from other parts of the world where they are a daily occurrence, it seems relevant to give this as some kind of global context. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's routine when the death toll reaches a certain threshold relative to other mass shootings in the same country, or in cases where there is something particularly noteworthy about the details surrounding what happened (e.g. elementary school children were the victims). We don't post every single mass shooting in the US, even ones with a moderately high death toll, because of how common they are—but we do still post many of them. Same goes for Iraq back when it was being suicide-bombed on the regular. Kurtis (talk) 04:30, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I dont think thats true, and I think the yawning fellow up above must actually be asleep to have blacked out his constant repetitive opposes to any mass shooting in the United States, opposes that have largely carried the day. We rarely post mass shootings in the US, and the claim that we do routinely is bs. nableezy - 20:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support The worst mass shooting in the area ever (not only in country’s history) is something that merits inclusion. I really don’t understand the hangers-on to the notion that domestic incidents are inferior to terrorist attacks. We should be more pragmatic and look at the consequences in first place.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:37, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - widely covered in major sources around the world, seems like an obvious reason to support. nableezy - 22:48, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Mass shootings in Montenegro are not usual. Being the worst ever in this country/area makes it ITNR-worthy without any doubt. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:50, 12 August 2022 (UTC)pReply[reply]
  • Support and endorse Kiril Simeonovski's criticism of the apparent hierarchy being applied by other users. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:10, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Well, we generally post mass shootings which have left 11 people dead in the US. Seems reasonable to post this one. Although oddly, it's not showing up on the BBC's front page, or Reuters. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 00:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted. My first time doing an ITN update; please let me know if I've done anything wrong. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 08:41, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • post-posting comment: i am not sure if "after a family conflict" is an appropriate description for the shooting. earlier reports, including the one from the guardian referenced in the nomination, mention a "family dispute", but later reports, such as this reuters source, appear to have been avoiding that description. the reuters source reports that a police director stated that the family killed was "staying at the house of the shooter as tenants", and the description of the victims in the bolded article in the blurb seems to confirm this. dying (talk) 10:09, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    DW,quoting Montenegrin public broadcaster RTCG, also refers to a family dispute. -- Sca (talk) 12:27, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    i agree that previous reports mentioned a "family dispute", as i stated above. however, my point is that the story appears to have changed.
    • compare this earlier rtcg report ("Saznajemo da je tragediji prethodio porodični sukob") with this more recent one ("Policija nema saznanja, niti je prijavljivano, da su postojali raniji konflkti [sic], niti napad u posljednjem periodu Borilovića na porodicu podstanara").
    • alternatively, compare this version of a report from the new york times ("the attack ... came after a family dispute") with an updated version of the same article ("The gunman first targeted the mother and her two children, who were tenants staying on his property").
    • the english dw article you linked has clearly not been updated ("the violence started while the attacker was arguing with his family members"), while the german dw article casts doubt on the earlier description of the dispute ("Warum er sie erschossen hat, ist bislang völlig unklar. Medien berichteten von einem 'Familienstreit'.").
    as the article has been updated, the itn blurb appears to no longer be supported by the article. stating that a dispute is a "family dispute" suggests that the dispute is within one family (as otherwise, perhaps all disputes are family disputes), and the updated article makes it clear that the shooter borilović was not a member of the family martinović. dying (talk) 20:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Post-posting support The article remains up to date. --Vacant0 (talk) 13:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

According to above comments, it seems that "family dispute" may be misleading. That should be removed from the blurb. Remember BLP. In general blurbs often are lengthier than they need to be. Omit needless words. -- (talk) 04:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Post-posting comment – Definitely dubious in terms of significance. – Sca (talk) 12:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Reworded "after a family conflict" removed per above comments. Article no longer identifies gunmen as being a family member.—Bagumba (talk) 15:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) Salman Rushdie stabbing[edit]

Article: Stabbing of Salman Rushdie (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Booker Prize-winning author Sir Salman Rushdie, sentenced to death for blasphemy by an Iranian fatwa in 1989, is stabbed in the neck in Chautauqua, New York. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Salman Rushdie, author of the 1988 imaginary tale The Satanic Verses, widely decried by Islamicists, is stabbed in the neck in Chautauqua, N.Y. (U.S.A.)
News source(s): New York Times (paywalled), AP, BBC, Reuters, AlJazeera

Article updated

Nominator's comments: To me this is one of the most important news items of the decade,comparable to the 1989 Iranian fatwa sentencing him to death for blasphemy. (Redacted) Tlhslobus (talk) 20:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support as nom.Tlhslobus (talk) 20:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That isn't necessary; your support is already assumed. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, though in my case it shouldn't be assumed, if only because I once nominated an item without being sure whether I was in favour of posting, as distinct from being in favour of having a discussion on whether it should be posted (which logically is all that a nomination really implies). Tlhslobus (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment There is a stub article, Stabbing of Salman Rushdie, but that currently gives less information than Salman_Rushdie#Chautauqua_attack_(2022). -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose assuming he survives the operations post-attack (which it sounds like he will). If he dies from it, a blurb may be appropriate as that's 100% an unusual death, but as an attack that he survives, it's a minor footnote. --Masem (t) 20:24, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose It's not even one of the most important stories of the week, let alone the decade (unless he dies, of course). Oh, and your nom statement is offensive to Muslims, even if the "woke" part of it makes it laughable. Black Kite (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    A prize-winning novelist who has had a foreign government calling for his death for years, is stabbed repeatedly and is now on a ventilator, has a damaged liver and may lose an eye. Not all those details were known when you wrote the above but still, "not even one of the important stories of the week" seems way off to me. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose (unless of course the poor fellow dies). While it's certainly dramatic, this isn't going to be more than a brief footnote even in his own biography. And yes, the nomination is ludicrously partisan and filled with religious animus. We can and should do better, whatever our feelings on the subjects of our nominations and !votes. ETA: It seems his injuries are much more serious than I had thought. Still opposing posting it if he survives, but my thoughts are with him and his family. Tlhslobus, please consider retracting your needlessly inflammatory postscript to your nomination. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Tentative Support - depending on how serious the wounding is; but after several hours of surgery, it looks bad. Not sure the logic that this assassination attempt would be a footnote, for a such a traumatic attack on a very prominent author; this goes well beyond book-burnings. Nfitz (talk) 21:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The injuries are indeed very serious, and life altering - no longer tentative. Nfitz (talk) 03:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Amended slightly given there is an article on this specific event Abcmaxx (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per Nfitz XxLuckyCxX (talk) 21:42, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak support: would we post (hypothetically) an assassination attempt of Trump, Bin Laden (yes I know he is deceased), Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Cristiano Ronaldo, a current head of state, the current Pope, the previous Pope? I think we might do (God forbid) in all those cases. Rushdie is a worldwide figure and had a sizable part of the global population trying to kill him for a long time, that in itself is unprecedented. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Every single person you noted is more significant. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:34, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This isnt even the most important story in NY today (like not a single NY paper/TV station outside of upstate NY itself is leading with this afaict). But Im a woke moslem (who somehow doesnt think Salman Rushdie should die so I guess Im pretty terrible at being both) so discount this plz. If he dies definitely merits a blurb even if he died naturally in his sleep, which one hopes he will do many many years from now. nableezy - 22:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It definitely is in the UK though, throughout all the media.Abcmaxx (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Id forgotten we were on Her Majesty's sovereign property at ITN, silly me. nableezy - 22:45, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support blurb if Rushdie dies. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:17, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait – Widely covered; developing. – Sca (talk) 22:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Agree this meets significance for a blurb if he dies. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:34, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose for now per GCG and above. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Are people really not going to comment on the needlessly inflammatory rhetoric the nominator used? If someone submitted a nomination with most of their submission comment focusing on the strawmen of supposedly "many" Jewish, black, or even atheistic users opposing or supporting one action and how it's emblematic of everything wrong with society, people would rightfully condemn it as biased or WP:SOAP. But for some reason, most people are just shrugging their shoulders here and ignoring this. This should be considered unacceptable discourse, even if the nomination itself is sound. 2600:8802:2718:6700:F556:1D60:9C0C:DAFF (talk) 00:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • An Islamicist is a scholar of Islam. See Islamicist. You mean Islamists, though even that I dont think is accurate for widely decried. Maybe Islamic fundamentalists? nableezy - 01:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose If he dies (G** forbid) I would switch to a support. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support I don't see what the issue here is with posting this. The event is clearly in mainstream news and significant in that a controversy running for well over thirty-years now has come to a head with extremists actually succeeding in finally attacking the author. Either the author's or the controversy's article can be linked, both of which appear to be fleshed out (unless the stub improves). Gotitbro (talk) 03:10, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. A perfectly healthy man just walked onto a stage and is now on a ventilator and unable to speak. His liver is damaged and he is set to lose at least one eye. That perfectly healthy man also happens to be a public figure with sustained international recognition/notoriety/controversy/whatever you want to call it, spanning, at this stage, many decades. Now, according to the above, it depends on "if he dies"? Where are the criteria that state a person has to be killed? Would the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II be passed over if it happened today because he survived? (Probably not, because it's the Pope.) But why death? Talk:2011 Tucson shooting shows that the attempted assassination of a representative of Arizona's 8th congressional district was posted...
It's an unprecedented attack, on a scale usually reserved for politicians. It's not as if someone just walked up and kicked him... Three continents (and three countries with significant populations, where the English language is widely spoken) are linked to the individual concerned: India (population 1,407,563,842), U.S. (population 331,893,745) and UK (population 67,326,569). Even his knighthood has its own article. It wouldn't/couldn't set any precedent to post the average "local diarist/national bestseller has argument/gets beaten up" story. This is not the sort of event that happens every day. To get away from the US v UK dispute, it's headline news in Australia, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, France... and Iran, naturally.
To conclude, this tweet by Kylie Moore-Gilbert that I noticed on the website of a newspaper sums up the scale of the event: "More than 30 years and a $3million bounty later, Khomeini's poisonous fatwa has finally caught up with Salman Rushdie." (I am not familiar with her but I found it hard to disagree with that line). --Gaois (talk) 04:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Suggesting a more neutral wording that links to the history (if the attack article is not expanded). He didn't lose an eye or sustain damage to his liver from being "stabbed in the neck" as is stated above: "stabbed multiple times" is the current phrasing from the opening sentence of the attack article. --Gaois (talk) 05:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Friendly reminder Don't forget that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a news portal. So something that has significant international journalistic coverage doesn’t mean that it’s directly ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 05:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The novel obviously is of considerable scholarly interest (elevating a little known apocryphal event) to the mainstream, the controversy around it further generated significant debate on cultural issues and art in both the Muslim and Western worlds which has ultimately manifested in violence on the author. This is a clear case of an encyclopedic event. Gotitbro (talk) 15:33, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support, reasoning and wording per Gaois - the location is less important than the reason behind it. I have no words for the distinction "If he dies ...". I put his name on my talk, quoting a DYK from April 2020, "about free imagination in battle with thought control" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support highly notable. An attempted assassination of a public figure who was the subject of the biggest literary controversy in the last 50 years, and front-page news around the world. AryKun (talk) 07:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. This isn't a simple attack, given his history and the general threat to his life. His agent says he will lose an eye and the nerves in his arm were severed. [2] 331dot (talk) 07:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. It’s a relevant event. He’s a worldwide known figure. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:28, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. The latest chapter in a decadeslong saga of great relevance to the arts, a topic area ITN often neglects. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 08:33, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Relevant event getting worldwide coverage and it is definitely a rare event. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support This event has a political dimension, because of the Fatwa. Grimes2 (talk) 10:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong support Notable political/culture wars event Bumbubookworm (talk) 10:53, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted - Used a more compact blurb as both of the ones here have issues in terms of accuracy and wording. Edits/suggestions to WP:ERRORS. - Fuzheado | Talk 11:18, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (ec) Support Serious attack getting widespread coverage. I don't see why an assassination attempt has to be successful to be posted. Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:20, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support widely covered event with long term significance.Polyamorph (talk) 11:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Post-posting comment from a former opposer - Good call. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Post-posting commentArticle (460 words) seems rather thin. 'Reactions' section fails to include reactions in Iran, where the fatwa originated, and where praise for the attack was expressed. [3] [4] [5]Sca (talk) 12:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Good job it's not the bolded article then :) Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    But it's the most relevant article about the attack. -- Sca (talk) 13:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    And the bolded article barely mentions it. Because of the sudden change in the tides on this nom, there was barely any discussion of quality. This was a failure of our process. GreatCaesarsGhost 16:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment It seems mildly awkward to add "in the United States". I'd suggest removing that, our readers are certain to know what country New York is in. --RockstoneSend me a message! 14:10, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I've removed the location from the blurb, as it is not really relevant to the importance of the event, and the blurb is quite long. Sandstein 15:03, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      WHAT??? The location may not be relevant to Mr. Rushdie's long standoff with the Iranian Islamic fundamentalists, but it certainly is relevant to this news event. Remember the five Ws? And let me remind you that this main page fixture is called In the News (aka In den Nachrichten).
      -- Sca (talk) 18:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Yeah, @Sandstein:, I agree with Sca here... I don't think removing the location the stabbing happened is a good solution. It is relevant. Especially since stabbings in the US are uncommon. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 20:41, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • We Want Where! InedibleHulk (talk) 20:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – The current blurb's ending "in the United States" seems OK. We don't really need "in Chautauqua, N.Y., U.S.A." – such clunky specificity isn't really relevant. As long as we give some indication of WHERE, das genügt. Und schönen Tag Abend noch.Sca (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Change bolding to Stabbing of Salman Rushdie. Article is now more developed, and reflects the main reason for the blurb.—Bagumba (talk) 01:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Changed by Schwede66Bagumba (talk) 09:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think the appositive "author of The Satanic Verses" in this blurb is inappropriate. If it is intended to identify Rushdie's literary career, it makes it sound as if TSV is his primary literary contribution, which is not true; he has written many novels and it minimizes his career to reduce him to a book he wrote over 30 years ago and does not even consider his most significant work. If it is intended to identify the cause of the attack, this too is inappropriate as we don't have any definitive information about the motive yet. Moreover there is sinister subtext that his writing the book somehow caused the attack, which is the apogee of victim-blaming--the responsibility for perpetrating such acts of senseless violence begins entirely with the extremists and their ideology, an author cannot predict or be held responsible if some people decide to use violence just because they don't like a work of fiction. (talk) 18:16, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yeah I agree. Many ITN blurbs are overly wordy, as it is. Omit needless words. -- (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    All reports and commentary surrounding the attack focus on the book, mentioning it is neither inapt nor taking up space especially when the controversy is considered in this context. Gotitbro (talk) 10:41, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment His honorific 'Sir' title is missing from the blurb. ♦ jaguar 20:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    WP:ERRORS is the place for this kind of issue, but I don't think WP:HONORIFICS backs you up. You decide. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 20:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment – In Monday coverage, Iran says it was Mr. Rushdie's own fault. [6] [7] [8]Sca (talk) 12:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Anne Heche[edit]

Article: Anne Heche (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Rolling Stone

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: Just confirmed --Vacant0 (talk) 17:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Compulsory article needs updating and minor clean-up comment, but it has had some work over the last week so shouldn't take long. Kingsif (talk) 18:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    We're still adding sources. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:10, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support: Article looks good and more work is being done to it. Very sad news. Very talented actress. Rest in peace. --SitcomyFan (talk) 18:34, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It appears that this nomination is premature. UK sources reported her death because there, brain death = legal death. But that's not the case in the US. It seems that she's still being kept alive for organ donation. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Reports are saying brain death = death in California so she meets the medicolegal definition of dead. That said, I say we wait until either a death certificate is produced, a medical examiner/coroner reports her death, or she's taken off "life support". EvergreenFir (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Muboshgu: Am I reading the reports wrong? Her friends and family have confirmed death, the Guardian (very careful with their sources as a newspaper) followed up with California law (not British), and said life support was removed. Is it perhaps people who have done their own OR at the talk page and are asserting that they don't think brain death should be considered dead who have made you reconsider this? Kingsif (talk) 19:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Honestly, I'm confused. The Guardian saysOn Friday afternoon TMZ had reported Heche was “brain dead”, which under California law is the definition of death. It was announced earlier in the day Heche would be taken off of life support. I see no indication that she has been taken off of life support. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, so, brain dead, body alive. Does that meet ITN RD requirements or do we wait for her to be taken off of life support? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ – Muboshgu (talk) 19:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I mean, the family seem to be saying dead, California would agree, but it can't hurt to wait. I'd contribute at the talk page if it wasn't ridiculous at this point, kudos to EvergreenFir for trying to control all those, er, discussions. FWIW, I also imagine the time difference may be confusing the Guardian writer based on that "earlier in the day" part. Guess you have time to source her awards anyway. Kingsif (talk) 19:24, 12 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Edit - think I found one though I'm outside US so can only access the cached version. Perhaps you can check it? It seems her name is listed as a nominee.
Direct link -
Cached link - SitcomyFan (talk) 19:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, that website can be seen at . She appeared as a "performer", not nominee (credits section). I don't know if it is a valid source. Alexcalamaro (talk) 20:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think all the nominees are listed as performers. SitcomyFan (talk) 23:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Surprised it wasn't up there. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 22:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The article is good enough. There's a few awards that are uncited. I can't find sources for them. But, ITN postings don't have to be "perfect". This isn't a GA review. WP:ITN says in partArticles should be well referenced; one or two "citation needed" tags may not hold up an article, but any contentious statements must have a source, and having entire sections without any sources is unacceptable. I don't think anyone is going to say a "Blockbuster Award" is contentious. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:46, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted. BTW, I have removed two mentions of "posthumous release" from the Filmography tables, as the sources are dated before her death. Please restore that when newer RS is available. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 00:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


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

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