This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.
Nomination steps
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Voicing an opinion on an item
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.
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.
Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.
Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
New satellite imagery from Stratfor appears to reveal the destruction of four Russian attack helicopters and 20 lorries at the Tiyas military airbase after a reported attack which was conducted last week by the ISIL. (BBC)
Reports claim that an Egyptian forensic official says that body parts recovered from EgyptAir flight 804 indicate that the crash was caused by an explosion. (Daily Mail)
Google's offices in central Paris are raided by French finance officials as part of a tax fraud investigation. Google is accused of owing €1.6bn ($1.8bn; £1.3bn) in unpaid taxes. (BBC)
Motorist Wahib Sadek Ahmed is arrested after he is accused of wielding a knife at a motorist. He is subdued after four taser shots. The FBI investigates after Sadek claim to be affiliated with a terrorist organization. His car is found to contain the knife and three guns, including an AK-47, and a loaded 45-caliber pistol. (CBSDFW local)
The article may have received updates of May 22 and 23, mostly minor updates in prose. However, neither seems very impactful to the event marked as "ongoing". Of course, the event can be reinserted as just a blurb, but this is the removal proposal, i.e. delisting the event from Ongoing ticker. The ones in "Search and recovery efforts" discusses just an Egyptian submarine and a French boat scanning the possible crash area. The latest one in "Responses" is just a series of latest reactions that do very little effect to the event. The latest one in "Investigations" do not make the event meet the ITN ongoing standards, IMHO. George Ho (talk) 06:06, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sri Lanka's Disaster Management Centre reports 92 people are confirmed dead with 109 people still missing from landslides and floods resulting from Roanu. More than 500,000 have been driven from their homes. (EconomyNext)
Bangladesh reports at least 26 deaths caused by drowning or homes collapsing with 500,000 evacuated during the storm. Maheshkhali Island officials are monitoring a badly damaged 17-mile stretch of mud embankment in danger of collapsing, allowing seawater to flood the communities. (The Weather Channel)(The Navhind Times)
Health officials are concerned about the spread of the Zika virus in Haiti, which suffered the worst epidemic of cholera in recent history following the deadly 2010 Haiti earthquake. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports there are 2,214 suspected cases as of April 23. But new research indicates the virus has been present since 2014. The actual infection rate remains unknown since the poor, densely populated nation lacks routine data systems that can track and document disease outbreaks. (AP)
Judge Barry Williams finds Baltimore, Maryland, Police Officer Edward Nero not guilty of all charges. Nero was accused of second-degree intentional assault, two counts of misconduct in office, and reckless endangerment. Community leaders and elected officials appeal for calm. (CNN)
DemocraticGovernor of VirginiaTerry McAuliffe is being investigated by federal prosecutors over campaign contributions, including a foreign contribution from a Chinese businessman, and what they consider to be "suspicious personal finances", as part of a public integrity probe that has lasted for more than a year, according to officials. The United States Department of Justice would not confirm or deny the investigation. (The Washington Post)
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.
Question. Does the removal of term limits only apply to the current president, or to anyone who is president? The blurb suggests the former. 331dot (talk) 09:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why they would do that and change it to allow his son to run at 33 years old- but I digress and will say that I support posting as a notable change to their constitution. Given your reply I'm not actually sure the blurb needs to be changed. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Posted the article is barely above stub quality, but consensus is strong, so posted in the hope that we can get this expanded reasonably quickly. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[Posted] Binali Yıldırım appointed Turkish Prime Minister
Oppose for now. Needs some referencing improvement. Especially the following section: Education, Early political career, second paragraph of Member of Parliament, middle paragraph of Minister of Transport, Awards and Honors section. --Jayron3201:24, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Added references to the parts stated. Awards and Honours section is already sourced. The source at the end of the first paragraph lists the universities. Nub Cake (talk) 14:49, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. It doesn't have to be a result of an election. A blurb about the resignation of the Austrian Chancellor and the appointment of his successor is currently on the ITN. Nub Cake (talk) 14:13, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Nub Cake. "A blurb about the resignation of the Austrian Chancellor and the appointment of his successor is currently on the ITN". Can't put it any better. Banedon (talk) 14:25, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We don't post one item just because we have posted other items in the same category of events. Each item is weighed on its own merits. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I'd still say that unless someone explains clearly what the difference between Austrian Chancellors and Turkish Prime Ministers are such that the former merits posting and the latter doesn't, then if we oppose posting this because of anything other than article quality issues, it would be a sign of systemic bias. It's up to ITN whether we want to embrace bias or fight it, and I personally think we should have a discussion on that; I do on a personal level feel we should fight bias however, and so I'm supporting. Banedon (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The fact that it wasn't an election is irrelevant. Most countries don't directly elect senior government officials, not a reason not to post. Fgf10 (talk) 15:43, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I don't want to formally say that I oppose this but the effect of this seems minimal; the PM is chosen by the President and as such must agree with his policies(in fact, the previous PM was dismissed forresigned due to disagreeing with Erodgan). The new PM has even suggested his role should be abolished de jure because Erodgan is already in charge de facto. 331dot (talk) 15:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support The senior leadership of the CCP (PRC) is not 'elected' by the wider public, so "it was not an election" is a No-go argument. And until Turkey formally moves to a Presidential system, this is ITN recurring material. CaradhrasAiguo (talk) 16:10, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot: Regardless, it is a non-trivial consolidation of power in favor of Erdogan, and thru my lens it is clearly by no means an insignificant step in the path towards increased Authoritarianism, and possibly Totalitarianism in the Turksish 'Republic'. CaradhrasAiguo (talk) 16:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Though Yıldırım won't be much more than a figurehead, he has been a key minister for years, and both his positive achievements and dark sides are remarkable. Apart from that, current developments in Turkey are very intensely covered in int'l media, and CaradhrasAiguo is right in noting that this is another important step towards authoritanism. We should also reward the main author of this contentwise awesome article, though I'd like to see more English-language sources, or at least translations of some of the more important sources' titles. Technically it's a bit early, as Yıldırım has not yet been confirmed by parliament, but it is beyond any doubt that he will be confirmed at the parliament's next session. --PanchoS (talk) 16:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I cannot, actually, determine whether or not this nomination should be ITNR. The criteria states that "heads of state" are ITNR, election or not, but that "heads of government" are not ITNR, election or not. The definition of Turkey's government, as noted on Wikipedia, the CIA and Turkey's own government webpage, is "parliamentary republic". This means the PM, as head of parliament, should be the most powerful person in the country, and if ITNR should have any correlation with impact, then surely heads of government should be ITNR for republics. Now, the difference between "state" and "government" is something of a Western conceit that Turkey (among others) is doing away with, and there's good reason to say that de facto power in this particular "parliamentary republic" actually does lie with the head of state, contrary to their assertions otherwise. The strictest reading of the ITNR criteria leads me to say that ITNR should not apply here, and this particular case seems to support that. But the fact that, for many countries on Earth, ITNR would cover the change in a mere figurehead, but not the person in charge of the actual functioning of the state and government strikes me as absurd, and surely this would have been considered when laying down the ITNR criteria.128.214.53.18 (talk) 07:43, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Voters in Vietnam go to the polls to choose legislators for its Parliament. The only legal party in the country is the Communist Party, which has already chosen its members. (AP)(Time)
Voters in Tajikistan go to the polls for a referendum to make various amendments to the constitution which include, among other things, the elimination of term limits to allow PresidentEmomali Rahmon and only him to run again for office and lowering the presidential age limit from 35 to 30, which observers believe will position Rahmon's son Rustam Emomali for future succession. (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty)
Science
NASA projects that 2016 will have the warmest global temperature average on record. This year would be the third record-breaking year in a row. Per NOAA annals, April marked the 12th record warmest month in a row. (Scientific American)
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: Award-winning actor, should be notable enough even without trial run. Article needs more sourcing in Biography section though. EternalNomad (talk) 14:14, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tentative support, iconic actor. The article needs some more references, though. A couple of paragraphs are unreferenced (though there has been some improvement since the first time I checked). --Tone20:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Other than the "Illness and death section", has a grand total of two references, and discounting the section on his death and the list of films is so short as to be a substub. I don't expect everything to be an FA, but I do expect an article on a politician to have more than one sentence about their political positions and career. ‑ Iridescent20:32, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Noticed this tournament by chance. Has one line of prose. Needs some more prose (buildup, match summary, etc), if there are any ice hockey fans out there. Fuebaey (talk) 21:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
More just a matter that this is actually not that major of a tournament, unlike the olympics, World Cup of Hockey or the Stanley Cup playoffs, which are also ongoing. It's an annual tournament that is mostly seen as secondary, as many of the world's best are too busy with their club teams to participate. Tends to be treated more significantly in continental Europe than anywhere else. Oh, and its annual, unlike the quadrennial World Cups in other sports, and even hockey.oknazevad (talk) 16:56, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Article 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: An exit poll has Hofer leading by less than two percent - within a margin of error. Result should be finalised tomorrow. Fuebaey (talk) 16:43, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yea probably, nor surprised at chicanery (a la French election a decade or so ago (what fun I had debating with my [black) French teacher (incidentally best, most neutral teacher ive ever had...spelled out her position and actually discussed with me at UVA) ;))Lihaas (talk) 22:39, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
comment point being, we don't determine "narrow" arbitrarily, reader can. And also mentioned party for context.Lihaas (talk) 22:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not just a close election but one with many implications for Europe, and within the scope of a turbulent time of Austrian politics. Maybe a merged blurb with new president and chancellor? That would also help with not having this blurb as a sea of blue which it is at the moment... Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until official results are announced. Postal votes have yet to be counted. The official results are released on Monday so best to wait until then. See BBC article [1],
Added second alternative blurb in case Alexander Van der Bellen of the Greens is elected although I prefer the original blurb in case either candidate is elected. Capitalistroadster (talk) 06:19, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note about altblurb 2: Van der Bellen ran on an Independent ticket. So while it is true he is a Green party member, putting that in the blurb would imply that we won the election for that party, which would be incorrect. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:40, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose image – Int'l media was only interested in Van Der Bellen as Hofer's opponent. With a president promising to continue the low-profile role of his predecessors, the lately appointed Chancellor clearly is the central figure in Austrian politics. --PanchoS (talk) 15:22, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support image. The head of state is more interesting to an international audience, and more recent. The narrow victory after a day of great uncertainty clearly is a major news story. --Tataral (talk) 16:42, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Recency is an argument, but why would a figurehead head of state be "more interesting to an international audience" than a powerful head of government? I'm not prejudiced against Van der Bellen, but while Hofer would have changed the political system of the Republic, it is very likely that the international audience won't ever hear about Van der Bellen again. The defeat of Hofer is the big news here, not Van der Bellen's victory. That's why I also strongly prefer altblurb3. --PanchoS (talk) 17:01, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think altblurb3 gives undue weight to the guy who lost the election. If Hillary Clinton wins the US presidential election, she will continue the legacy of Obama and many previous presidents and not really make any dramatic changes, as opposed to the American version of Norbert Hofer, Donald Trump, who has said he will persecute Muslims, build a wall and so on, and clearly have a more dramatic (in a negative way) impact on his country. But if Clinton wins the election, the blurb should focus on her and not Trump. --Tataral (talk) 17:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Support Featured on 4 Megadeth LP's that have all gone platinum (one went double), and was nominated for a Grammy. Rust in Peace was released on September 24, 1990, and debuted at number 23 on the Billboard 200. Went Platinum after shipping one million copies. Countdown to Extinction debuted at number two on the Billboard 200 with first week sales of 128,000 copies. Went platinum after shipping one million copies.. Eventually went Double Platinum with two million copies. Was nominated for a Grammy. Youthanasia debuted and peaked at number 4 on the Billboard 200, with 143,000 units sold in its first week. Went platinum after shipping one million copies.Cryptic Writings debuted at number 10 on Billboard 200 chart, sold 75,000 copies in the first week, and was certified platinum in 1998 by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for shipping one million copies in the United States. JanderVK (talk) 20:33, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
None of what you typed is relevant while we're posting all recent deaths that are of sufficient quality (ie neutrality, sourcing). – Muboshgu (talk) 20:59, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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 I don't think this is written in an encyclopedic tone. While sourced, there is a lot of speculation in the article; including his place of birth, his interactions with other Islamic figures and his death. Phrases like 'alleged', 'apparently', and 'claimed' pepper the article. I will also note that the US government have yet to definitively confirm his death, only that they did target him in a drone strike and is "probably" dead. Fuebaey (talk) 15:31, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As long as the claims are being made by specifically identified reliable sources and not being made in Wikipedia's voice then there is no problem with those sorts of statements - indeed if the information is disputed by reliable sources or there is no definitive information available they are required. As for the death, last I saw it had been confirmed by the Taliban (and a false claim of death would not seem to be in their interests). Thryduulf (talk) 16:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment: Barring expansion that indicates major notability in the water polo field, I'm leaning oppose. "Oldest Olympic gold medalist" isn't as notable as "Oldest living human", and his medal was won as part of a team competition rather than an individual event as well. SpencerT♦C04:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We are currently trialling a new system for RD where everyone who has a Wikipedia biography is automatically notable enough, the only criteria we are judging on is the quality of the article (see WT:ITN for more info). Thryduulf (talk) 10:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on length of article. A stub cannot be posted on the main page. If this were expanded to a comprehensive biography, I could support it. --Jayron3204:38, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Oklahoma Legislature files a measure asking for Congress to impeach Barack Obama over his decision to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms corresponding to their gender identity. (KOCO)
A highly-reported execution of convicted murderer Kho Jabing occurs at 3.30pm on 20 May 2016 amidst local and international pleas to the government of Singapore to revoke the scheduled execution. (The Straits Times)
Iraqi security forces fire tear gas and water cannon on protesters attempting to storm the Green Zone in Baghdad, injuring at least 33. (Bloomberg)(WSJ)
The Iraqi government imposes a curfew in Baghdad. (Reuters)
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.
Try the Career section for starters. Most of it is unreferenced, relying in some cases on blue links which don't themselves have reliable sources for verification. Then there's the list of appearances, some of which don't have references or dubious articles to rely upon. Hope that helps you fix the issues instead of spending all your time editing chat pages! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:34, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely. For filmography, IMDB is not "unreliable", it's "disputed". But the info is verifiable, by watching the individual movies, etc. The same can't necessarily be said for "trivia" and the like. So it's reasonable to take a given actor's filmography from IMDB, except maybe in cases where it says "uncredited", which might be harder to verify. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 16:00, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
this is not productive
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
It's just not what Bugs does, in fact it's quite the opposite, providing false information without sourcing is his forte. Quite what he's doing here discussing article space issues is beyond me. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here's one of my referenced entries from earlier today.[6] It puts the IP troll's claim to the lie. He's based in Georgia, so he could claim ignorance as his excuse. There's no explaining you, though. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 20:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is that an article you referenced?! Try reading up about cricket, football and international flight and providing sources before more errors in future! Cheers for popping to the encyclopedia for a bit though! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Extremely notable person for Mr. Ed and extensive Disney work etc. Cavils about sourcing would apply equally to a vast number of article, but this is the guy who just died. By the time every article is done, we would have this at the centenary of his death, AFAICT. If it makes a difference, change entire filmography sections for every actor. Collect (talk) 00:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Strange to think that you consider suitably sourced and referenced articles to be a petty requirement. Still, at least we know where we stand regarding your opinions hereafter. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Very notable person, a much-loved actor for decades, as per Collect above. Once properly sourced, I think it should be good to go. Challenger l (talk) 06:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not relevant to RD (beyond having an article) during the current trial. The only thing that matters is the quality of the article. Thryduulf (talk) 21:58, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Weak oppose. "Paving the way for entry" is not the same thing as actual entry. There's still a few steps for them to complete before they actually enter. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per TRM; something that hasn't happened yet being a bit more likely to happen is not news. There's a long way to go yet; given the realistic possibilities of a President Trump or a post-Brexit UK government including either Farage or Sturgeon, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that NATO won't even exist by mid 2017. ‑ Iridescent20:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Given that NATO endured throughout the Cold War and outlived the entire Eastern Bloc, I doubt it will even flinch from Trump-like persons. Brandmeistertalk20:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Farage or Sturgeon are meaningless here. They are not going to be part of the UK government even if Brexit happens. Trump however may mean US withdraws from NATO, which could indeed mean collapse of NATO or least most of its influence. -- KTC (talk) 22:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: While the old chancellor's resignation was posted, the followup nomination got missed. Still not too late. PanchoS (talk) 18:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I clicked on the link in the blurb, saw a 29-year old foreign minister stare back at me and thought "those Austrians sure know how to pick their leaders." Unfortunately the actual article is barely a week old and still a stub. Fuebaey (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I thought it was another Trudeau moment, albeit a right-wing version. In terms of expansion, could add more on his political/business background. From reading the article, I don't understand how the head of a state company suddenly becomes head of government. Government ministers or people with political experience tend to get high profile posts. This seems unusual. Fuebaey (talk) 22:04, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Having expanded the article quite a bit and improved the reference situation, I'd feel quite comfortable now with this blurb getting promoted now. It's still not perfect though, and further improvements are highly welcome. But by and large, it should be on par with the German version now. --PanchoS (talk) 13:53, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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.
We are not judging RD nominations on basis of notability anymore; we are judging on whether it meets our quality and reference standards.--WaltCip (talk) 18:00, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support once the citations are added to awards sections (unfortunately I don't have time myself today but if I have time later I'll help). Agree that Safer is one of the top people in his field in any event - 60 minutes regular for years. TheBlinkster (talk) 18:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles updated One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: The legislative part of the Philippine general election, 2016. The winners for the executive (presidential and vice presidential elections) aren't to be officially proclaimed until early next month, at the earliest. –HTD15:19, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The large swaths of uncited texts are backgrounders (electoral system) written in summary style. I could just hide them for the meantime as that's a common practice here... –HTD16:03, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I wasn't event talking about that. The background stuff on the election system which is citable to other articles is of minor concern. I was concerned about the larges swaths of text, about living persons and about the particulars of this election, which are entirely uncited. If you got rid of all of the uncited text in these two articles, you'd be left with some tables and a few bare sentences and lists. --Jayron3216:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Currently, in the Philippine House of Representatives elections, 2016, the only section that has large swaths of text that involves people is the "Results" section, and every paragraph that I know of has at least one reference. As you've said, the "Electoral system" section doesn't need references, the "District changes" section has a citation for every new district created, the "Retiring and term limited incumbents" section is tucked away to another article, and I'm just waiting for the Commission on Elections to upload the party-list result so that could be done with.
In the Philippine Senate election, 2016, I've cited the large swaths of text involving politicians in the "Coalitions" section As for the "Term-limited and retiring incumbents", I'm waiting for the presidential and vice presidential election to have officially declared winners so I can cite who among them won and lost. –HTD16:35, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment added altblurb. I'd hide the big empty table until the results do come out - it doesn't give any information and just adds more page scrolls. Fuebaey (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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 for now. Article is almost entirely unreferenced. Length and depth are acceptable, but we can't post an article where the bulk has no refs. --Jayron3214:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
If Sca hadn't come to the talk page to bother, if not annoy or harass, administrators about the so-called tragic event, I wouldn't do this for him. (No offense, Sca, but that's how I see it.) To be honest, I didn't want to nominate it ever, but my ethics wouldn't be strong enough to prevent this from being posted per ITN rules. Therefore, quality becomes the main concern, which is not my strong interest for ITN... unless I have no choice. I know that Wikipedia is not censored, but I wonder why administrators like to put tragedies into the Ongoing section, like wildfires, airplane crashes, airport attacks, and attacks on a peaceful city. Nothing against administration discretion, but... never mind. As said before, personal feelings and ethics and morals are useless per ITN rules. Well, as I hate to admit,Anyway the article has events of May 16 and May 18 since the delisting. I don't know whether that is enough to relist the tragic wildfire, but maybe we should do the same with other American wildfires... right? George Ho (talk) 06:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC) Reluctantly modified post. George Ho (talk) 10:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
oppose as the article 2016 Fort McMurray Wildfire article is not getting significant updates. Nor is the event generating major news stories (they're mostly just local tickers). Also, George Ho I would suggest depersonalising the nomination and making it solely about this event. If you want to discuss anything more general then WT:ITN is the appropriate venue. Thryduulf (talk) 09:00, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
More importantly, why would you feel the need to personalise this in any case? Are you trying to make a point? Take it up with Sca or to a talk page if you must. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:21, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) The 'rule' is that disputes with other editors should not be taken to this page; this page is to discuss the merits of nominations, not settle disagreements or disputes. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I struck out the part about administrator discretion, but I want to leave in the first sentence (unless I feel pressured to strike it out) because I fear that the discussion started by Sca wasn't going anywhere. George Ho (talk) 10:05, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article has not been receiving regular, substantive updates over a time frame that would make ongoing a good idea. If there is a specific event regarding the wildfire that you'd like to see mentioned in a blurb, please feel free to nominate for that. --Jayron3210:47, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Facebook, met with a group of prominent U.S. conservatives, over allegations that the company censors conservative content. (Reuters)
More than 150 people are feared dead by two landslides triggered by more than three days of heavy rain in central Sri Lanka. (Reuters)(The New York Times)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Long the primary suspect in Timothy Wiltsey's 1991 murder, despite a lack of direct evidence, his mother Michelle Lodzinski was finally tried and convicted in a successful "cold case" prosecution that attracted widespread media attention. —Patrug (talk) 12:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
Support - Aircraft missing with 66 on board, not likely to be a positive outcome. Major aircrashes generally get posted. Mjroots (talk) 04:30, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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: Important historian, consultant to the US State Department, part of Thatcher's commission to evaluate if German reunification should be allowed. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support for a blurb – For anyone interested in 20th century German history, Fritz Stern is a must-read. In January 1990, he trenchantly observed (in the New York Times): "The moral sphere also needs a reciprocal recognition of crimes committed, and apologies offered and accepted." That process still is still going on. Sca (talk) 14:11, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article quality and length is not commensurate with his stated importance. If this were cleaned up (mostly referencing issues) this could be posted easily. --Jayron3215:17, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb regardless of quality - "retired professor dies aged 90" does not merit a blurb unless there is something more to it than that or there is exceptional public reaction. Oppose RD while there is only thin prose with missing citations. Thryduulf (talk) 21:52, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Amid growing concern about North Korea's ballistic missile capability, South Korea, Japan and the U.S. are to hold their first ever joint anti-missile exercise next month, according to South Korea's Ministry of National Defense. The three countries will practice "detecting and tracing a hypothetical North Korean missile," said a ministry official. (CNN)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: This kidnapping got a huge amount of news attention when it happened in 2014, and this girl represents the first one to be found and rescued since the kidnapping happened. According to above NBC News link, the rescue has been confirmed by the Nigerian military in addition to the BringBackOurGirls activist group (the latter of which might be criticized as unreliable). Everymorning(talk)14:52, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. If we post this finding of one of the girls, it would be hard to not post every instance of one of the girls being found. If this was the last missing girl, that might merit posting, or if a large operation rescued a significant number of them, but not just one. 331dot (talk) 21:08, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
[Closed] Ongoing: Iraqi civil war
Consensus against posting an article onto ongoing that isn't regularly updated. Feel free to reopen if another relevant target does appear. Fuebaey (talk) 09:49, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
On the May 17th current events template, the following news article is mentioned: "At least 44 people are killed and 90 injured in three bomb attacks in Baghdad, Iraq." The Iraqi civil war article piped in the article leads to a 2016 timeline with a running ticker of serious events going on in Iraq, mostly localized around the capital city. The death toll is mounting and continues to mount. We can turn a blind eye to this no longer. This is a hot war and it needs to be posted as an "ongoing event".--WaltCip (talk) 17:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of ongoing is to direct people to Wikipedia articles that cover ongoing events with timely information, where the events and updates to articles are coming too fast to have a reasonable blurb. I'd not be opposed to a blurb about this one event, but as yet you have provided no article receiving timely, frequent, and well-written updates for us to direct readers to regarding the ongoing war. As TRM notes, the two best targets don't seem to be receiving such ongoing updates. --Jayron3219:49, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents:
In the news toolbox
.jpg)
.jpg)
_on_finals_at_Ataturk_Airport.jpg)