Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

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.

Satellite composite animation of the Hunga Tonga eruption
Hunga Tonga eruption

How to nominate an itemEdit

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated).
    • 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.

HeadersEdit

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pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.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

Voicing an opinion on an itemEdit

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

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 because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive.
  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.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

ArchivesEdit

January 19Edit

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections


RD: Gaspard UllielEdit

Article: Gaspard Ulliel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: French actor who was killed in a skiing accident. The article has been updated but the career section could be better sourced. Calidum 16:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


Ukrainian CrisisEdit

Article: 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph & etc.
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: I've been on the fence as to whether or not this should be on the main page for a while. But I think things have reached a point where it needs to be at least discussed. Ad Orientem (talk) 14:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support. This has been escalating for quite a bit, at this point I think it's worthy. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 15:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support ongoing situation with lots of coverage. And the article has been updated for events in the 24 hours. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support no singular event that stated this but let's of little fires that clearly indicate far higher tensions than we expect.--Masem (t) 15:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support ongoing - lots of RS coverage, notable, tensions rising between Russia, Ukraine, and NATO. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 15:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support - definitely for Ongoing. Will likely be in the headlines for a long time.BabbaQ (talk) 15:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Strong Support Tensions are high, and there is a real possibility of Russia invading Ukraine. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 16:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support - Yep. I think we're there. I've been in the same boat as the nominator. --WaltCip-(talk) 17:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment - Though I will say, in addition to my above !vote, that the article feels unreadable. It's just a day-by-day timeline of events as they have progressed and doesn't really give an overall picture of what has precipitated the crisis and why it is persisting. I'm aware this is due to it being a developing story, but we really need to find a way to separate the meat and potatoes from the ice cream. --WaltCip-(talk) 17:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

January 18Edit

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment


RD: Narayan DebnathEdit

Article: Narayan Debnath (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian cartoonist. Article requires some attention before going to homepage / RD. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: André Leon TalleyEdit

Article: André Leon Talley (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Needs a few citations (particularly filmography) and overall could stand to be fleshed out but meets minimum length/breadth already. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

(Ready) RD: Lusia HarrisEdit

Article: Lusia Harris (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Article is a Good Article --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support article is a GA, and everything is sourced (apart from one unsourced sentence which I removed). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per Joseph2302. The article is in good shape, everything is cited. RD ready. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 13:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose article contains no information about her death, except an update to the date. I would expect well-referenced text in the body of the article explaining what is known about her death. Simply updating the date of death is not sufficient. If anyone thinks to fix this, then consider this opposition obviated. --Jayron32 13:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC) Support I added a bit to it as well based on the source material. --Jayron32 13:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support @Jayron32: Sourced sentence on death added.—Bagumba (talk) 13:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

(Close) New Indonesian capitalEdit

Consensus not to post at the moment. --Tone 13:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

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

Article: Nusantara (city) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​The Parliament of Indonesia approves a bill to change the country's capital from Jakarta to Nusantara. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Indonesia designates a section of Kalimantan as Nusantara, its future capital.
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: The bill to relocate the capital was reportedly passed by eight parliamentary fractions and only one fraction rejecting it. Update is needed (perhaps the country's infobox field should be changed when transition is completed). Brandmeistertalk 15:16, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support on the merits, a sovereign state changing its capital is rare and significant. 331dot (talk) 15:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose at the moment, the capital is still Jakarta, and it will remain for a while. The news at the moment is that the future capital got its name, which is not the "ITN-level" story yet. It will take years before they move it. --Tone 15:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait. This plan has been advancing for several years now. Today they announced the name of the new city, but it still has to be built before the capital actually moves. That's currently expected to be 2024, which would be a better point for us to post this story. According to our article, the parliamentary bill was approved in September last year, so the blurb is also not news. Modest Genius talk 15:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait until they actually move capital, which sounds like it'll be in years time (as it's not built yet). Before then, it's WP:SPECULATION. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
This is another example of where the announcement gets far more attention than the actual event. Furthermore, Jakarta is overcrowded and sinking, the capital is not staying there. 331dot (talk) 15:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Disagree strongly that this event will get more attention than an actual move. Maybe the move will be spread out, such that there is less of pinpoint moment, but that's not the same thing. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Also the bill for a new capital was approved in September 2021, it's only the name which was announced today, so far as I can see. And I would think this is similar to when Barbados became a republic (which we posted on the day it happened, not the day it was announced). A notable rare event, but today doesn't seem like the right time to post it (either last September or when it becomes the capital would be way more appropriate times). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
According to CNN, the new city won't be finished until 2045. So no, we're not waiting. If we don't post it now, we're not posting it. Mlb96 (talk) 17:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Per Tone, Modest, Joseph. A non-event at this pt. – Sca (talk) 16:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Agree with Joseph2302. We should post this once they actually build it and complete the ceremony of transferring the capital. Until then it's just a declaration of intent really, which on top of everything isn't new. I've been hearing about this intention for like a decade or so . --5.44.170.26 (talk) 17:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support This is a unique, interesting news story from a non-Anglosphere, non-European, non-Commonwealth country which doesn't involve an election, sports, or large amounts of death and destruction. ITN needs more of these kinds of stories, not fewer. The completion of the city won't be a discrete event with news coverage, and even if it is, it will be decades in the future. So if we're going to post this, it has to be now. Mlb96 (talk) 19:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose because the blurb is inaccurate. We can either blurb the naming of the future capital city, or we can wait until the new city becomes the capital in 2024. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose I think moving the capital will concluded in 2045 and starting in 2024 maybe, so why not posted two years later? Additionally, it is non-European story, but not significant impact for me. 180.254.169.24 (talk) 19:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't see in the ITN guidelines where it says events must be personally significant to us to be posted. 331dot (talk) 20:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Weak support It's interesting enough, not a disaster or death, and helps reduce systemic bias to post. Lots of the content in the article is background from 2019, so not directly related to this announcement. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose for now. The bill has not even been numbered yet, the construction has not been started and the actual capital is still de facto at Jakarta. Nyanardsan (talk) 23:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Alt News enough, timelier than Poitier, sexier than disaster. Waiting for constructon to end is tricky. Even London is still developing. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose per Nyanardsan. we shouldn't even have an article on this before any legal product is published. There's currently none now. There could be significant changes behind the scene, or something else happening.
For those who support this in order to counter bias, I'm all for countering bias (I've spent hours creating RD articles for Indonesian figures from scratch). But since we apparently have only a single chance of posting a blurb on this topic, wasting it for the de jure approval seems a bit silly.--Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 23:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait, as per IP 108, until 2045. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Also comment, if this is approved, I suggest to use article Law on State Capitol instead of the "city" article (which doesnt exist yet), primarily because the event was about the law about the new city which was passed in plenary session yesterday, not the new city itself. Nyanardsan (talk) 23:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Even if it's far down the line, think it makes more sense to post when the change occurs. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now per WP:CRYSTAL. Giving that the bill was only approved by the parliament and the new capital will not commence its operation until 2024, so why not posted two years later? Additionally, the moving to the new capital only begins in 2024 and lasts until 2045. 114.125.252.202 (talk) 09:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Presidents and politicians often make plans and promises which don't actually work out. This particular idea is not new – here's much the same story from over two years ago. We should wait until this is more concrete. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Microsoft acquires Activision-BlizzardEdit

Article: Activision Blizzard (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Microsoft announces it is acquiring Activision Blizzard for 68.7 billion Dollars (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Monumental deal in gaming. it does raise some antitrust questions but with Biden in charge it's pretty obvious this deals not getting blocked --5.44.170.26 (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose just like we've oppose many companies mergers/renames in the past. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Also, strong oppose on quality as there is only a small amount of content in the target article about the merger, and most of that is unsourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • The supporting refs are also used in the second para of the section but on phone, this is not easy to move. --Masem (t) 14:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Also, the "legal disputes" section violates WP:CSECTION: Sections within an article dedicated to negative criticisms are normally also discouraged. And "is expected to do something in 2023" sounds a lot like WP:SPECULATION. Maybe people should try thinking about article quality rather than just mindlessly shouting support..... Joseph2302 (talk) 15:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    Of course I'm concerned about quality. Rather than ascribing "mindlessness" to voters, which by the way is a near-violation of WP:NPA, why not let the process play out. This news literally just broke this morning. WaltCip-(talk) 15:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support If we oppose this, we might as well never post mergers, period, and create an ITN/NR where we automatically blacklist certain items. This completely changes the video gaming and technological landscape not just in the West but internationally.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Also, as a side note, I don't think Biden being in office as opposed to Trump would favor the companies in this instance. Trump's opposition to certain mergers and acquisitions was based on personal ideological quibbles with folks like Ted Turner and Jeff Bezos rather than any grounded antitrust precedence.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
To add this now would make MS the third largest video game related company following Yencent and Sony. And given the VG market is estimated around $200B a year, this is a huge amount of money to achieve this --Masem (t) 14:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support. This is a big deal for both business and gaming. A common objection to these postings is that this is just an announcement, but this is when it gets the attention, not when the deal is finalized. Any antitrust issues that derail it likely would also merit posting. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Topic is in the news, target article is updated and well referenced. No real issues. --Jayron32 14:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Not well referenced, over half the section on this merger is unsourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per WaltCip. "We opposed mergers in the past" is not in itself a valid rationale unless you can point out opposition to a merger of comparable scale. Regards SoWhy 14:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • We've had many mergers proposed, and none posted. Including Facebook/Meta incorporating WhatsApp, Instagram etc... Which are comparable. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Haven't we passed M&A concerning bananas and an Irish company I forgot about? Howard the Duck (talk) 14:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Not to my knowledge, but maybe we did. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment To add to this discussion, I do believe the intention of the ITN/R is to post stories that are IN THE NEWS. And this story is certainly in the news worldwide, see the main pages of a variety of media/newspaper organization like: CNN, Le Monde (in French), Vesti (in Russian), O Globo (in Portuguese), et cetera 5.44.170.26 (talk) 15:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    Well it's also not even on the front page of BBC News in the UK, so they don't consider it one of the biggest 20 stories at the moment. Just having articles doesn't make it groundbreaking... Joseph2302 (talk) 15:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    For me, it's showing as the 8th story on the BBC News home page. Remember they re-order material based on IP geolocation (I'm in the UK). Modest Genius talk 15:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose There's no logic to these. DuPont/Dow was posted (that was around $130bn) but Kraft/Heinz wasn't (despite being >$100bn). The one that's most relevant, probably, is Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/October_2016#AT&T_buying_Time_Warner which was an $80bn takeover in the same sort of area as this one - that ended as no consensus to post. Black Kite (talk) 15:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    I agree that there is lack of logic to (not) posting mergers and acquisitions at times. I feel we ought to post them more often, because arbitrarily denying certain acquisitions creates dilemmas such as these. "Business" used to be considered a minority topic at ITN, when we still tracked that sort of thing. WaltCip-(talk) 15:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Biggest deal in history of gaming. Now that gaming is the largest entertainment industry, I think it's hard to justify not posting about it. Melmann 15:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Weak support. The Guardian is reporting this is the "biggest deal in tech history" in terms of cash involved, although it's only about 2% more than the previous record. Certainly a big transaction which further consolidates the industry and sets up Microsoft as as big a games producer as Sony is, complementing their competition on hardware. But I doubt it makes much difference to end users, as games are all made by individual studios that are subsidiaries of the giants anyway, hence the weak support. Article content appears OK, there are now three referenced paragraphs on the deal. Modest Genius talk 15:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
I think thd metric to consider for m&a is not just size but impact on market. Eg while Facebook acquiring Instagram or Whatsapp may have involved more money, that fundamental shift (at the time) social media or IT industries. There is almost universal agreement this acquisition is a fundamental shift in the vg industry, though, from RSes. --Masem (t) 15:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
For what it's worth, Facebook's acquisition of Instagram in 2012 was only $1 billion, but it definitely had a major impact in that industry. Microsoft is valuing Activision Blizzard at about 70 Instagrams (remember well when that was a thing).rawmustard (talk) 16:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
We don't post ITN articles because of what one company thinks another company is worth. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per WP:NERDBIAS, aka the Carrie Fisher rule. This would not have been the largest deal in any of the last nine calendar years. We don't post a lot of mergers, and it's not hard to see why this relatively small one is gaining momentum here. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    >"This would not have been the largest deal" citation needed, name a larger acquisition in the past year or so 5.44.170.26 (talk) 16:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    also whether you like this nerd stuff or not, it's on the main pages of wall street journal, and really any business daily worldwide. And indeed as I've linked above on the main pages of most mainstream news websites in general. So your point is really mute, especially since I highly doubt Fisher was on the main page of WSJ or Le Monde the day she died 5.44.170.26 (talk) 16:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    Here's your citation. I didn't say I don't like nerd stuff, rather I implied the crowd that spends all day editing WP is nerdier than the public at large. We do not, cannot, and never will post every story that appears on the MP of the WSJ. We must exercise discretion. We have actively declined larger, more impactful mergers in the past. Posting one now because it appeals to our personal interest is clear bias. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    Biased though it may be, ITN operates on consensus and participation. I don't think that our failure to post certain stories should be used to deny those other stories that readers would be interested in. Also, if it's discretion from the standpoint of appealing to readership that you are concerned about, we ought to have something to put on the ticker that isn't just deaths and disasters, for a change. I think that's a valid use of discretion. WaltCip-(talk) 17:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    Agree with you 100%. But even if you are casting aside bad precedence, we should be cautious about doing so when it serves WP:ILIKEIT. See the United States' disparate handling of the crack & opioid epidemics. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • WaitMicrosoft announced its intent to acquire Activision Blizzard (my emphasis). No need for breathless Main Page promotion. – Sca (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Both companies' boards have approved the plans. It is now mainly how much worldwide govts will scrutinize the deal. As noted in past merger itncs the time to post is when the news is announced, not at when it completes. --Masem (t) 17:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose I fully expect to get overruled here (and wouldn't be that torn up about it), but I just can't support a merger without some concrete policy on what does and what doesn't merit posting. Personally, reasons like "Microsoft is spending a lot of money on this merger" or even more nebulous statements like "this will have a big impact on gaming" (especially with no indicator of why) don't stand as sufficient reasons to post. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support because a) business news is under-represented on ITN. I'd say that extremely large takeovers merit posting on ITN, and at nearly $69 billion this qualifies as "extremely large". b) The quality of the target article is fine for an article of that size. I'll do a quick pass in ten minutes and try to fix the one tag that I see. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support for being a major business story that is certainly in the news. Kafoxe (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support It is in the news and a big business deal. It may not be the biggest, but it is big enough. If we only posted the biggest story in each field when the last story's scale was overtaken, ITN would be incredibly dry. No earthquakes if they are lower in magnitude and death toll than previous ones? Etc. Just because bigger business deals have not been posted, doesn't mean there were not good arguments for them to be posted. Has consensus changed. Kingsif (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose, means nothing to anyone except gaming fans, who are a minority among gamers, who are a minority among Wikipedia readers. No actual indication of impact on anything at all except the flow of money. Abductive (reasoning) 03:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
    • It's estimated 3 billion people in the world play video games [2] - about 40% of the world population - so calling this minority or niche is misleading. --Masem (t) 04:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
      • But how many billion mostly only really care about the Asian brands? InedibleHulk (talk) 04:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
        • 40% is a minority, and people who care about the provenance of their games are a tiny, tiny minority. Abductive (reasoning) 11:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
          40% is a damn large minority when you consider that 44% of the world's population are association football fans[3], and even fewer are cricket and basketball fans. It's not all far-fetched to compare video games to sports in terms of popularity. WaltCip-(talk) 13:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Mostly Support I am not a gamer but I recognize that this is major news, especially since this was headline news in many business publications. This is involving the third largest video game company purchasing the fifth largest, with each one generating billions of dollars in revenue annually. Not to mention that Disney's purchase of 21st Century Fox was slightly larger than this acquisition, and it got featured on ITN. The only real reservation that I have is that it might be more appropriate to post it when the acquisition does go through. Mount Patagonia (talk) 04:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support, should probably mention that its the biggest aquisition in Gaming (and Entertainment?) history, by a long shot. jonas (talk) 04:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Er… it is not the biggest entertainment acquisition, by a long shot (see: Disney) - but it is the biggest acquisition of anything by Microsoft, and as the second-biggest technology company in the world (behind Apple), it is that which is significant. Kingsif (talk) 05:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment I see that Disney-Fox was posted, no reason to hold this back based on those grounds. But we should wait for it to actually go through than jump-in here. Gotitbro (talk) 07:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Gotitbro The announcement of a business deal always gets more attention than when the deal is actually completed. When that happens, the argument is typically that the deal is no longer sufficiently in the news. If the transaction is derailed for some reason, that would likely merit posting. 331dot (talk) 08:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
I see, either way I think this should be posted. I was basing my comment on the WSJ report that has been included herein which says that the deal hasn't been finalized as of yet. Gotitbro (talk) 10:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
@Gotitbro At what point of the transaction was Disney-Fox posted? Canadianerk (talk) 09:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Here, back in July 2018. Gotitbro (talk) 10:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment I think this has a sufficient support to post. The article is decently updated. Please check the blurb, I am not sure how to format the sum involved but most likely not the way it is written now. --Tone 08:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support (This makes Support 11, to 5 Opposed, for reference) On Disney-Fox precedent. ITN posted the Disney-Fox deal twice, at announcement and at shareholder approval. Hence, I believe precedent indicates there's no need to wait. As currently written, I have no concern about the arguments re: quality, or impact. Sourcing looks fine, and the potential impacts are already implied and/or stated in Prose within the section of the article. Canadianerk (talk) 12:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I'm posting now, without the sum, which is probably not the key thing here (the acquisition is). Feel free to add the sum. --Tone 12:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support A large number of Wikipedia readers go to articles about this game company and its games. Some of their games have sold tens of millions of copies. This is something significant that many readers will want to read about. Dream Focus 12:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose and pull per above. Run of the mill story, not the sort of thing we post on ITN.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
    Can we not pull a story just hours after it goes up? I know the consensus is a narrow one, but it really makes ITN on the Main Page look downright manic when we get into this habit of posting and pulling stories due to vagaries in consensus. WaltCip-(talk) 13:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support per the two Disney-Fox ITN blurbs; RSes are catching on, I believe that this is sufficient. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 13:19, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Post-posting oppose. Just an announcement, the deal has not yet closed. Sandstein 13:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support There is a sufficient update and it's a big story now (as opposed to when the acquisition is formally closed).Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Post-posting oppose nothing definitive. Just an announcement. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Post-posting oppose The deal is not final as said above, and I don't think this is that notable overall even as a gamer. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 15:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Francisco GentoEdit

Article: Francisco Gento (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Spanish football legend, one of the greatest of all time. BastianMAT (talk) 11:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose A single sentence on his international career? Needs some real expansion. --Jayron32 14:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    • Support Looks good now. --Jayron32 16:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    • I've expanded the international details 2A00:23C5:E187:5F00:B922:CE73:626B:C28F (talk) 15:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
      • @Jayron32: Article seems to be in good shape now with the section expanded and most of it backed up by sources. Considering how big of a legend Gento was in football, getting it out on the page should be suitable now. BastianMAT (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment I've added some cn tags, but generally the wikibio is in good condition. Honours sections should have more sources and I think the Legacy section is not very objective. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

January 17Edit

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Karim OuelletEdit

Article: Karim Ouellet (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; Montreal Gazette; Le Devoir (in French)
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 17:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Comment – A bit thin at 280 words. – Sca (talk) 12:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Birju MaharajEdit

Article: Birju Maharaj (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian dancer. Article requires some work. Edits done. Article is a reasonable C-class biography. Good for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 04:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Wait Current version has him dead at 83 and 84. After that's settled, maybe. It's quite stubby. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • @InedibleHulk: Thanks for checking. Edits done. Please have a look. Ktin (talk) 05:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I see you've gone against the source, and with the original birthday math. A road less traveled, but at least it's not internally inconsistent anymore. Weak Support! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) Afghanistan earthquakeEdit

Article: 2022 Badghis earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​A 5.3 magnitude earthquake in Qadis, Afghanistan kills at least 28 people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​28 people are killed by a 5.3. earthquake in Qadis, Afghanistan.
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated

 ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 21:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support – 26 deaths and the extent of destruction is easily notable even if the magnitude is smaller than 6.0 Mw. Haven't had an earthquake ITN since that Oct 5.9 in Pakistan which also resulted in a similar extent of damage and casualties. --Dora the Axe-plorer (explore the morgue) 21:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Afghanistan has earthquakes like some places have rain. Not saying this death and destruction is insignificant. But by Afghan, earthquake and Afghan earthquake standards, it lacks oomph. It was also two earthquakes. Hard to know if the stronger was deadlier. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    I had the same reasoning when opposing this earthquake some time ago.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
    I remember. Read it a day or so too late to help, felt kinda bad for having "better" things to do, sorry for your loss. Don't delay, act today, eh? InedibleHulk (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment – A bit thin. Doesn't appear to have been very widely covered. – Sca (talk) 13:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support article is slightly short but covers the essentials and is well-cited. NorthernFalcon (talk) 02:53, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
    It treats a pair of earthquakes as a single earthquake, before and after acknowledging the weaker one happened. Is that fundamentally encyclopedic? I think not. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Article is well referenced and sufficient. Topic is being covered by news sources. --Jayron32 12:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 13:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Rasheed NazEdit

Article: Rasheed Naz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Khaleej Times, DAWN, Geo TV
Credits:

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

 Ainty Painty (talk) 11:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose – Stub – 190 words of text. – Sca (talk) 13:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Not Ready per Sca. Additionally, the non text sections are completely unreferenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

(Closed) Fuel truck explosion in Abu DhabiEdit

No consensus to post. --Tone 14:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

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

Article: 2022 Abu Dhabi attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​A fuel truck explosion near Abu Dhabi airport kills three people, and Houthi forces claim responsibility for the attack. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​A fuel truck explosion near Abu Dhabi airport kills three people
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating
 wleightond 14:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose not mentioned in article listed. Events that aren't notable enough for their own article won't be notable enough for ITN. And don't currently see lots of news coverage about it. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Still oppose on quality, as the article is basically a stub. It has 4 sentences on the attack, 4 sentences on actual aftermath, and is then just bloated with reactions. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose due to absence of article, neutral on significance the most significant thing here is that the UAE hasn't seen any terror attacks in years as it's a relatively peaceful country. Heck, I can't recall any terror attacks at this scale that happened there in the last 15 years. Tube·of·Light 15:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Update: according to Gulf News, there was a minor fire at Abu Dhabi Intl Airport that could have been caused by this attack. Tube·of·Light 15:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Update:Oppose due to article length Article has very little information as it is. Tube·of·Light 03:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. We generally do not post events that don't have their own article. Unsure if this even justifies an article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose without standalone article. 331dot (talk) 21:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment Now has standalone article. Ionmars10 (talk) 02:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support - Only if background is added. Looks well-referenced. Notable since first attack of foreign entity on UAE soil. Sherenk1 (talk) 04:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Apart from 'Reactions,' text is a 150-word stub. – Sca (talk) 14:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment Added altblurb, but I don't think that it will help much. NW1223(Howl at me/My hunts) 20:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Three deaths is tragic for those affected, but this is a minor footnote in the Yemeni Civil War (2014–present). It's unusual for the Houthis to attack across the border into the UAE, but it seems unlikely to make much difference to the outcome of the war, or anything else really. Also the blurbs make this sound like an accident, while the article makes it clear it was a deliberate attack. Modest Genius talk 12:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose, Not a turning point in the scope of the war, Alex-h (talk) 14:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not significant in the war. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 14:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 16Edit

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Sports


(Posted) RD: Ibrahim Boubacar KeïtaEdit

Article: Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Ousted president of Mali. Article is orange-tagged and needs some work. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 12:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Every paragraph looks sourced now, orange tag gone. Brandmeistertalk 21:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Much improved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 16:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Shinji MizushimaEdit

Article: Shinji Mizushima (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Nikkan Sports (Japanese)
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: Japanese manga artist, known for baseball manga Abu-san and Dokaben. According to the Nikkan Sports, in 2019 and 2020 he was one of candidates for Japanese Baseball Hall of Fame balloting (but not elected). He died on January 10, but his death announced on January 17 (JST). --133.232.197.102 (talk) 03:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Charles McGee (Tuskegee Airman)Edit

Article: Charles McGee (Tuskegee Airman) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Military Times, NBC4 Washington, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin (via Twitter), AP, BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Purposely leaving the pipe in the header so you see he was one of the last Tuskegee Airmen. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support The article is rated B-class and looks fine. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support No major issues. [Memory eternal.] -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Article looks to be in good shape. AviationFreak💬 04:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support. BD2412 T 04:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support, Randy Kryn (talk) 05:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I would suggest that the title of the article is not consistent with how disambiguation should be made. It's POV-ish in that the more concise title is just "(pilot)". --Masem (t) 05:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
    Seems to have been moved to current title in 2020 per Talk:Charles_McGee_(Tuskegee_Airman)#Title_of_article.—Bagumba (talk) 07:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support I think that "Charles McGee (Tuskegee Airman)" is okay because that is part of the notability. Peaceray (talk) 06:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 07:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Post-posting salute Well done, history-maker. -TenorTwelve (talk) 04:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Paul MynersEdit

Article: Paul Myners, Baron Myners (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

 ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Not Quite Ready Article is not in dreadful shape. But there are a handful of cites needed before we can post this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

January 15Edit

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Sports


(Posted) RD: Jean-Claude LordEdit

Article: Jean-Claude Lord (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; Montreal Gazette; La Presse (in French)
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 07:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Article is solid and well referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 16:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ed CheffEdit

Article: Ed Cheff (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Spokesman-Review
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Short, but should be complete – Muboshgu (talk) 00:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Short but adequate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. Bare but meets minimum standards. SpencerT•C 16:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Marlon BundoEdit

Article: Marlon Bundo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 24.hu ANSA CNN Politico
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: former bunny of the united states. announcement made on this date, though exact date of death appears unclear. article appears to be in decent shape. dying (talk) 07:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support, article looks good and is fully cited. feminist (talk) 11:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Looks ready. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 16:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Article is good. Condolences to Wesley. Davey2116 (talk) 18:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support But I guess not a Thatcher or Mandela rabbit, so no bunny blurb. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • PP Comment It's rather sad when we have a much better article about a pet rabbit than a recently deceased former Prime Minister of Japan. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
    • Hear, hear... I dare not post a 300-word start-class wikibio next to it. --PFHLai (talk) 03:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
    • People who read the English Wikipedia would likely be more interested in Mike Pence's pet rabbit (a topic which has remained in the English-speaking public's consciousness) than a former Japanese prime minister who served a little more than two years around the end of the Cold War. For that matter, the jawiki article for Marlon Bundo (ja:マーロン・ブンド) looks nice as well, a sign of Bundo's international impact. feminist (talk) 12:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

(Closed) Colleyville synagogue hostage crisisEdit

Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 00:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

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

Article: Colleyville synagogue hostage crisis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​An armed individual takes four hostages in a synagogue in Colleyville, Texas. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, Star-Telegram
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Ongoing hostage situation – Muboshgu (talk) 01:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Comment - Let the event be over first. (PenangLion (talk) 01:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC))

  • Wait but leaning oppose. Unless this turns into something a lot bigger, these kinds of things don't normally rate ITN blurbs. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
    • Oppose Run of the mill hostage situation. No casualties, except the bad guy. Long term significance is likely nil. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait, borderline oppose - Adding on to Ad Orientem's point, only four people were taken hostage, and one has already been released IIRC. Given the small number, unless it escalates into a major firefight or Siddiqui does get released because of this, I don't see anything particularly blurb worthy about this. Mount Patagonia (talk) 01:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
    I don't believe we have a WP:MINIMUMHOSTAGES policy. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
    The point is that, assuming no further escalation occurs, there isn't much about this that makes it important enough to get it reported as a blurb on the frontpage. Mount Patagonia (talk) 02:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support. A threat like this has put the entire American Jewry on edge. | MK17b | (talk) 03:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose -- this event, while I'm sure traumatic for all involved, ended uneventfully (thankfully). It is unlikely that there will be sustained coverage on its aftermath. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 07:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per Rockstone and Ad Orientem._-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 09:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Per previous opposes. Crisis ended quietly. – Sca (talk) 13:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose - does not rise to the level of significance required. Can this be added to one of the current events pages? Do we even have “News in the United States”? Maybe Wikinews? Great work on the article. Thank you for it. Jehochman Talk 13:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait The new British angle makes me think it might get more newsworthy attention. It is at least intriguing. Kingsif (talk) 19:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, the international angle will mean that the media will cover it more widely & for longer. The media & general public will be interested in Malik Faisal Akram's history in the UK & US. How he went from growing up in Blackburn, Lancashire to becoming a hostage-taker 4,600 miles away in Colleyville, Texas. Jim Michael (talk) 20:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If it turns out Boris or the Queen were behind this, somebody ping me. Otherwise this was just a routine hostage situation with no wide ranging or long term significance. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
They'll be an investigation in regard to how a non-resident foreigner bought guns in the US. Other aspects of the investigation will be why Akram choose to target a synagogue, what connection he thought a synagogue in Texas had to Aafia Siddiqui & why he thought she should be released. Jim Michael (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose Surprising as it all is, looks like this is not some new wave of cross-border Islamic antisemitic terrorism, just the synagogue was open and close to the prison. So, standard as far as hostage incidents go, and consensus suggests those are not unusual enough to go in the box. Are they? Kingsif (talk) 21:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I was initially opposed to it being posted, but I'm now undecided. If he was a lone wolf & his only connection to Siddiqui is that he was a supporter of her, it isn't important enough. Jim Michael (talk) 21:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Noteworthy development this evening. - BREAKING: Two teenagers detained in south Manchester in relation to attack on Texas Synagogue | MK17b | (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Joe B. HallEdit

Article: Joe B. Hall (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo Sports
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Currently orange-tagged for citations; I'll be working on this shortly. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose Primarily sourcing issues, but might be a bit sparse too.—Bagumba (talk) 10:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Alexa McDonoughEdit

Article: Alexa McDonough (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Died 15th, announced on same day. —Hcoder3104 (talk) 15:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Wait: Promising article but multiple citations are still needed. Flibirigit (talk) 15:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support everything appears referenced now. NorthernFalcon (talk) 07:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support as per above. Ornithoptera (talk) 11:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support, article has no more maintenance tags and now meets citation requirements. Flibirigit (talk) 12:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Ready Much improved. Well done on referencing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support article in great condition. Good job. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 17:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) 2022 eruption of Hunga TongaEdit

Article: 2022 Hunga Tonga eruption and tsunami (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Tonga is hit by ashfall and a tsunami after the eruption of volcano Hunga Tonga (Post)
News source(s): The Sydney Morning Herald, BBC, Guardian, France 24, AP, LAT
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Blurp per Current Events. The Capitólio rockfall article wasn't in a better state when it was posted either, and this event has arguably more global significance, so I think it's only fair. Are GIFs acceptable for ITN items? jonas (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Ongoing I was posting a nomination too but Jonas got there first. The volcano has been erupting since 20 Dec so this is the latest in a series of events and there may be more to come. Ongoing may therefore be sensible as with the other recent volcanic eruptions which lasted for weeks. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support blurb and/or ongoing. The satellite image is especially interesting content. The target article seems sufficient. Jehochman Talk 13:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Do we have any information on deaths or financial impact? I agree the article is good, but what it is the significance? GreatCaesarsGhost 13:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    • No immediate deaths (the island is unhabited) but there are tsunami warnings out at the present. --Masem (t) 13:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    In the absence of reported mortality, Ongoing seems a logical choice for now. – Sca (talk) 14:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
PS: Somewhat underwhelming video here. - Sca (talk) 14:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
The article says communications are down. Jehochman Talk 14:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per Jehochman Nyanardsan (talk) 15:22, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Tsunami warning has been issued for the US West Coast. Looks like a powerful enough tsunami for it to be at least a major event, even in the (hopeful) case that casualties are limited or none. Juxlos (talk) 15:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Impact spans to U.S. and Canada. Article sufficiently sourced.—Bagumba (talk) 15:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support regardless of ultimate death count. Top news story currently, the entire Pacific Ocean is on red alert. Large amounts of damage is inevitable. Mlb96 (talk) 16:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    That's clearly speculation. Please see below. – Sca (talk) 16:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait! AP dispatch of 16:30 relates "no immediate reports of injuries" in Tonga and "no reported damage and only minor flooding" in Hawaii. Also, wave height at Monterey, Calif., put at only 8 inches (20 cm). Prudence dictates reserving judgment until this apparently weak tsunami's effects known. – Sca (talk) 16:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
PS: Our own article, under subhead Impact, says: "No information is yet available on the extent of damage and casualties from Tonga due to communication issues." ITN promotion of such a sketchy article would be premature. – Sca (talk) 17:54, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Just for posterity, full quotation from the AP article: "There were no immediate reports of injuries or on the extent of the damage because all internet connectivity with Tonga was lost at about 6:40 p.m. local time, said Doug Madory, director of internet analysis for the network intelligence firm Kentik." Prism55 (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait Volcanoes erupt all the time. If this one is substantially larger (it appears that we are giving in a VEI 5 without citation), or it causes death/destruction it could be posted. But I'm seeing nothing that specifically indicates this is significant. GreatCaesarsGhost 16:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment Though ITN is obsessed with WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, this is already unprecedented, even if (hopefully) the damage is minimal. She said the advisory was “fairly uncommon” because it was due to a volcanic eruption and not an underwater earthquake, and because it extended to the entire West Coast.[4].—Bagumba (talk) 17:05, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    So far, this (continuing?) geologic/marine event appears to lack general significance or major impact. Ergo, wait. – Sca (talk) 17:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment I moved the article and then saw it was in ITN/C. Will this break anything? Skarmory (talk • contribs) 17:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    • Taken care of. Mjroots (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
      • Okay, I don't really know the ropes around here but I will give a Weak support, as it is definitely making plenty of news right now. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 17:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support blurb - making headline news world wide. Mjroots (talk) 17:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
So is Novak Djokovic. – Sca (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait I support on importance - this probably should be ITNR, but isn't. The issue is that I haven't seen a metric for how large the eruption was, or an assessment of the impact on the ground in Tonga. Most of the article is about the tsunami (and the tsunami was barely an event at all). Presumably satellite internet in Tonga will be working in the morning and we will get some sense of the situation on the ground. Also there will presumably be a better sense of the size of the eruption. User:力 (powera, π, ν)
  • Support - How much news do we end up posting from Tonga? And should we not concern ourselves with diversity of topics? A butcher's bill need not be an indication of newsworthiness.--WaltCip-(talk) 19:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support [Ongoing] Compares well in impact and notability to most disasters posted on ITN. Lacking known deaths/damage doesn't help the case for such an event, but also doesn't disqualify it. EDIT: modified support for ongoing due to continued eruptions and impacts. DarkSide830 (talk) 19:26, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    Another reason to wait. – Sca (talk) 19:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    It can always be shifted to Ongoing once there's consensus for that. By the time it's cleared for an ongoing tab, it could be approaching stale - if not be completely stale. I don't see the point of sitting on a nomination if it meets criteria now, just in case it goes on longer than anticipated. Canadianerk (talk) 21:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted – Consensus in favor of posting, with some suggesting to wait. This is a significant geologic event with global news coverage and impact (even if it doesn't reach WP:MINIMUMDEATHS). It could be months before the full-scale of the eruption is seen, as major volcanic events can have an impact on global climate. The magnitude of the eruption (Volcanic Explosivity Index) is undetermined so a recurrence interval is not available as of yet. Pressure fluctuations are being observed halfway across the globe (with seismographs measuring the shockwave in the Cascade Volcanoes), which is not a frequent occurrence as far as I'm aware. A blurb is most appropriate over ongoing given the main event happened within the last day. Ongoing can be discussed down the road when this item rolls off the ticker. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Post-posting comment – Sunday coverage includes: "Tsunami threat over after huge Pacific volcano eruption" (BBC), "Pacific tsunami threat recedes as volcano ash cloud covers Tonga" (Guardian), "Surging waters sank at least one boat in Ventura (Calif.) Harbor" (AP). As of 13:00, no casualties had been reported. – Sca (talk) 13:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Another large eruption detected See here. Count Iblis (talk) 03:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

January 14Edit

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Science and technology

Sports


(Posted) RD: Alice von HildebrandEdit

Article: Alice von Hildebrand (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Catholic News Agency; Aleteia
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 21:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Long enough (527 words) and with enough footnotes, this wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support article is ready. It's great that we can have a woman with a great Catholic theological work on Main Page. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 10:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 13:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Peter SeabrookEdit

Article: Peter Seabrook (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times, BBC
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:A0C5:599C:4B84:672 (talk) 22:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Popular gardening advisor, looks fine. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Insufficient depth of coverage. Lede starts "He wrote a gardening column in The Sun newspaper for over 40 years." but body of the article has no info about this. SpencerT•C 05:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
That is now covered. 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:F9AB:D2E7:65C2:9600 (talk) 17:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Edward Roberts (Canadian politician)Edit

Article: Edward Roberts (Canadian politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; Toronto Star (Canadian Press); Memorial University of Newfoundland
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 15:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Article is solid and well referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • More than long enough (900+ words) and with enough footnotes at expected spots, this wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 17:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Eleventh lieutenant governor, good stuff. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 05:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jim FahyEdit

Article: Jim Fahy (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Irish Times; Irish Independent; RTE
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 10:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Respectable article. Referencing is solid as is usually the case with Bloom6132's nominations. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Looking good for RD JW 1961 Talk 11:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 11:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ronald StewartEdit

Article: Ronald Stewart (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV News; BarrieToday.com
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (January 14); died on January 10 (i.e. provable gap of at least two days). —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Short but adequate. No major issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 19:48, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Maria Aurora CoutoEdit

Article: Maria Aurora Couto (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of India
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian author. Padma Shri awardee. Article requires good amount of work before it can be ready. Edits done. Article has shaped into a nice C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 02:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support No major issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:41, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 19:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Toshiki KaifuEdit

Article: Toshiki Kaifu (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Wall Street Journal
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Japanese Prime Minister. He died on 9 January, but his death was only announced on 14 January. Fulmard (talk) 08:26, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

  • I removed some of unreferenced material and added two cn tags. The text reads solid otherwise. --Tone 09:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Not Ready For a change referencing is not the issue. The article is just really subpar for a former prime minister of one of the world's major countries and needs expansion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support when ready Article is really shorter than it should be. One CN tag, but that can be fixed along with expanding it This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • The prose lacks info (and refs) on many of the subject's political office and honorary titles as shown in the infobox and the succession boxes on the wikipage. Please expand the coverage. --PFHLai (talk) 20:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

January 13Edit

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime


RD: Junior SiaviiEdit

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

 ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 03:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  • There are about 8 {cn} tags in this 529-word wikibio. Please add more footnotes and refs. --PFHLai (talk) 03:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jean-Jacques BeineixEdit

Article: Jean-Jacques Beineix (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Monde
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: French film director Thriley (talk) 19:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Not Ready for the usual reason. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment Citations have been added. Thriley (talk) 02:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Much improved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Citations for a few of his awards are missing. Please add more refs. --PFHLai (talk) 03:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 05:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Herbert AchternbuschEdit

Article: Herbert Achternbusch (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Bavarian film director, writer and painter. Death announced at this date. Grimes2 (talk) 09:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Solid article and well referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Terry TeachoutEdit

Article: Terry Teachout (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Wall Street Journal
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American author, critic, biographer, playwright, stage director, and librettist Thriley (talk) 05:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

  • @Spencer and Ad Orientem: - Fixed the references and the orange box. Feel free to let me know if you'd want any additional edits. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 20:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Anwar Raslan convictionEdit

Article: Anwar Raslan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​A German court convicts Anwar Raslan on 58 accounts of murder and at least 4000 cases of torture, in a world first conviction of torture by the government of Syria (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​A German court rules that the Syrian Bashar al-Assad regime commits torture and convicts former Colonel Anwar Raslan to life in prison for his role
News source(s): BBC, Taggeschau, AP, Guardian, DW, France24, AlJazeera
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: : Arguments in favour of the nomination: first court ruling worldwide explicitly ruling that the government of Syria commits torture and mass killings of civilians. The ruling has a high impact well beyond the case of the person convicted today. Arguments against the nomination: the defence lawyers can still appeal the conviction and the article on Anwar Raslan needs to be expanded. Gerrit CUTEDH 22:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose on article quality. Article is far too short. Will reconsider upon expansion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Article strikes me as being a little too "preachy", i.e. too eager to push a particular POV. Claims have been over-egged in furtherance of this. The Syrian government was not on trial and the "first" claims are either narrowly defined or seemingly in contradiction to the Al-Gharib case referred to in the references. 3142 (talk) 07:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Target article is an UNDUE and wholly NPOV BLP.2001:708:20:1300:0:0:0:1650 (talk) 09:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose BLP issues- he has a right to appeal the verdict, and the article is question is wholly focused on this trial, and so is not NPOV. Also, numbers in article don't match the blurb, ALT1 is POV and not in the article, and the article needs more sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Leaving the other issues aside, we usually post convictions and do not wait for all appeals to be exhausted(which can take years and even decades). If a conviction is overturned, that can be posted. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
To clarify, there are no BLP issues when RS's supply the information. The last sentence here is whistling in the wind: Bill Cosby's overturned conviction was not posted. I doubt any would be, unless ITN policy on this is locked in place. 96.5.122.4 (talk) 15:46, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
There are however BLP violations on an article when it's written exclusively about this, with a massive focus on the conviction, and no other content. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Cosby's should have been posted. 331dot (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
I absolutely agree. But unless such conviction status updates are locked in as ITN policy, it will not happen. 96.5.122.4 (talk) 19:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support ... in principle, pending cleanup or separate article. A significant event and precedent. Very widely covered on Thursday; some follow-ups today. [5] [6]Sca (talk) 16:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support, This is the first of its kind, opening a new session in the international judiciary.Alex-h (talk) 14:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

January 12Edit

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations


(Posted) RD: Adi Andojo SoetjiptoEdit

Article: Adi Andojo Soetjipto (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Kompas
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former associate justice. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 15:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Support Article looks solid. Good job on referencing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted. Non-English refs AGF'd. --PFHLai (talk) 01:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Stephen H. SachsEdit

Article: Stephen H. Sachs (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Baltimore Sun; WTOP-FM
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 05:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Comment: Any info about what he did in his role as Attorney General, which seems to be his most notable political position? SpencerT•C 06:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Adequate depth, referenced. SpencerT•C 16:33, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 23:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ronnie SpectorEdit

Article: Ronnie Spector (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP, BBC, WaPo
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American singer who formed the girl group The Ronettes JosHeartTransplant (talk) 22:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Not Ready Referencing is very poor and will require some work before this can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Too much unsourced content, and this does not really comply with WP:BLPSOURCES. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:25, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
    @Ritchie333: What's wrong with New York Daily News? GA-RT-22 (talk) 22:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
    Yes it's generally seen as reliable and as this is a report of a court proceeding I can't see the issue. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • As soon as sourcing issues are resolved, Strong Support. Highly influential and significant singer, and many of the songs by The Ronettes remain widely recognised to this day. TheScrubby (talk) 00:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
'Strong support' = support. – Sca (talk) 14:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Also, the only criteria for a biographical article to be posted at RD is article quality. So, "support when issues resolved" is kinda redundant. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Stats FYI, this was the top read article yesterday. The readership was 465K and so not in the same league as Betty White, who is still in the charts after two weeks. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Discography still unreferenced. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
  Done References added to Discography section too. Alexcalamaro (talk) 14:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Support Good job. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support. Article looks in good shape. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:34, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support – I just got rid of the last of the cn tags, and will continue to watch this article and provide sources as needed. It looks to me to be in pretty good shape right now. GA-RT-22 (talk) 02:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment: While we wait for a spot to open up on the RD line, can we have a non-primary source for the solo singles, please. And preferably not on the subject header, please. The footnotes shows up in the table of contents and looks rather odd there. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 12:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Good point, although a quick check at discogs and 45Cat (as usual) reveals they are all genuine. I'm not sure why any of her official discography should really be doubted. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Well, that was tagged. It's a minor thing that should not hold up this nom, but would be nice if it can be resolved before the link goes on MainPage. (Sorry, I have no clue what 45CAT means, but it's amusing to see it next to DiscOGs.) --PFHLai (talk) 16:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I see... thanks for the link. --PFHLai (talk) 18:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • You can't trust it, as it's not WP:RS (... it's written by record experts). Martinevans123 (talk) 18:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oh, well,... I'll leave things the way they are. BTW, thanks for fixing the table of contents. --PFHLai (talk) 18:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 19:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Shebby SinghEdit

Article: Shebby Singh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New Straits Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Malaysian soccer player, coach, and sports broadcaster. Article requires some work. I will get to it later tonight if no one gets to it earlier. Ktin (talk) 18:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Not Ready for the usual reason. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:05, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Long enough (600+ words), but needs more refs (4 {cn} tags). Would be nice if "He won every domestic honour, including the Malaysia Cup, Malaysian FA Cup and League Championship." can be expanded to include some details on what he did to earn all these honours. --PFHLai (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

RD: Luis CastañedaEdit

Article: Luis Castañeda (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [7]
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former Mayor of Lima. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 17:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Not Ready Referencing is quite poor and will need some work before this can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment: His bio in Spanish Wikipedia has three times as many refs. Perhaps someone who knows the language can look into porting some of the refs from ES to EN, please? --PFHLai (talk) 20:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

ReferencesEdit

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

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