This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.
An explosion causes a bridge to collapse onto a passenger train with 379 occupants in Bryansk Oblast, Russia, killing at least seven and injuring 70 others, one seriously, including three children. The incident is being probed as an act of terrorism. (BBC News)
More than 60 United Nations offices and agencies are requested to propose staff cuts of 20% by mid-June due to a funding shortfall, affecting around 14,000 positions. This includes staff from humanitarian offices, agencies supporting refugees, and other critical sectors. (AP)
Disasters and accidents
Twenty-two people are killed, including athletes, coaches and officials, and several others are seriously injured in a road accident as people returned from the National Sports Festival in Kano State, Nigeria. (CNN)
Thirteen people are injured, including one critically, when a 93-year-old man falls ill and drives into a restaurant terrace in Narbonne, Occitanie, France. (Midi Libre)
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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.
Comment The article needs significant work before posting, a post-match section needs to be added while expansion is required for the route to the final and pre-match. The background section is also largely unsoured. S.A. Julio (talk) 21:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article not ready Some section is lacking in content. Conditional strong support once article is ready.INeedSupport:321:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is certainly ITN-worthy, but I agree with others that the article is not yet ready.Some section is lacking in content. Jeong seolah (talk) 05:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Always loves the fact Abcmaxx always WP:IDHT, adds the final score of the match, and some stupid trivia (if applicable) about the match instead of suggesting the usual boring blurb formula we use for such events. Howard the Duck (talk) 22:35, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is the score not relevant or what is your point? You're always free to add an altblurb, I've added the most standard blurb here possible. I would say 5–0 in a CL final is highly unusual. Theres no rule saying I have to propose a blurb to your liking, but thanks for the unconstructive criticism. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:12, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We have posted the UCL for a decade now without the score. You have not added "the most standard blurb here possible". Suggesting, as the nominator of a blurb that will never, ever be used lengthens discussion. I hope this puts to end your practice. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:23, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a WP:ITNSPORTSBLURB I'm not aware of? Arguably the score is the most important aspect of a sports match surely Abcmaxx (talk) 15:09, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The aspect of the score that is the result is important, and is noted. This is nothing unique to sports. US presidential elections have never been posted with electoral college scores, even though that is definitely part of the coverage. I had half a recollection that Super Bowl LI was posted with the fact that it was the first to go to overtime, but I was wrong, it was posted with the score for 44 minutes. Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The women's final article requires significant expansion before posting. If someone's willing to do it then great, otherwise it shouldn't prevent the men's final from being posted, which is ITN/R. S.A. Julio (talk) 18:37, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@History6042: There's no background, pre-match or post-match sections, at least some additional prose should be added before posting. The result was quite an upset, it would be nice if this were explained in the article. S.A. Julio (talk) 09:24, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready - men's final has three citation needed sections, and there aren't nearly enough refs in the summary section currently. —Amakuru (talk) 16:18, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Posted) Josep-Lluís Serrano Pentinat becomes new Andorran co-prince
Support A change in the position of the co-prince of Andorra is rare, and this change roughly occurs every two to three decades. CastleFort1 (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This probably should not be ITNR, as the co-prince is not the position that administers the executive of the govt per our table. Masem (t) 15:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The 2 princes are heads of state (1278 treaty Bishop of Urgell and Count of Foix then Count of Foix became King of France 1589 so inherited by French Crown then French Presidency) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The change in heads of state in systems where this figure does not have executive powers, such as the case of Andorra as the Co-Prince Episcopal refers to, is not ITNR. However, given that the last time such a succession occurred was 22 years ago and is not common (but ordinary), it might be ITN-interesting. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - As with other collective heads of state, such as in Switzerland and San Marino, I understand some editors' caution in posting these stories. But changes of head of state are by and large extremely significant, and are arguably one of the most significant peaceful events in small nations like Andorra. And there are very few ecclesiastical ehads of state left, so this story is unusual in that respect. It's already noted above how rarely the episcopal co-prince changes; and when the secular co-prince changes, we usually just bill that as the presidency of the French Republic. GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For example, the lead says "He became Spain's youngest bishop." This claim does not appear in the article's body and it is not sourced. And it appears that there have been other, younger bishops such as Xavier Novell. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support head of state, and Andorra is quirky and interesting. I think highlight the bishop aspect, although this is potentially getting into DYK territory. Secretlondon (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Balochistan Liberation Army briefly seizes control of a high-security area in Sorab in southwestern Pakistan, killing a government official and looting a bank before fleeing. (AP)
The death toll from heavy flooding that submerged the market town of Mokwa in Niger State, Nigeria, on Wednesday, rises to at least 117. Thousands of homes have been destroyed and a nearby dam collapsed. (Al Jazeera)(Sky News)(DW)
At least 17 people are killed, at least 12 others are injured, including six seriously, and eight people are missing when a stone quarry collapses in Cirebon, West Java, Indonesia. (AP)(CTV News)
Twelve people are killed after a vehicle carrying Sudanese migrants collided with a truck near Kufra, Libya. (AP News)
U.S. president Donald Trump accuses China of violating the temporal suspension of tariffs accorded two weeks ago, while China accuses Trump of discriminatory restrictions against the country. (BBC News)
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: French scientist known as the “father” of the abortion pill. Article needs a little more referencing but overall in good shape.Innisfree987 (talk) 05:58, 2 June 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Posted Note that I removed the place of birth from the article as it was unreferenced. Feel free to put it back if you can reference it. Schwede6623:54, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even with high casualties and is pretty notable. Seems to be mostly well cited. BoomBoxBuddy (talk) 3:05, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
Support per nom and BoomBoxBuddy. Unusually high casualties, with evidence of widespread global coverage. I think the article has also been sufficiently improved by the nominator to meet our minimum standards. FlipandFlopped㋡16:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. This event is clearly notable due to the high number of casualties and widespread media coverage. The article seems well-referenced and appropriate for the "In the News" section. LookatmiWiki (talk) 2 June 2025 (UTC)
South Korea’s central bank cuts its key interest rate by a quarter percentage point to 2.5%, marking its fourth cut since October, and sharply lowered its 2025 growth forecast to 0.8%, nearly halving the previous projection of 1.5% announced in February after a monetary policy meeting. Share prices rise following the report, with the Kospi gaining 1.7%. (AP)
The health ministry of Khartoum State in Sudan reports a cholera outbreak in the state, with 2,119 cases and 242 deaths in the past week and this week, including 70 in the last two days. (News Central TV)
A court in Germany rejects a lawsuit filed by a Peruvian farmer against German energy firm RWE. Saúl Luciano Lliuya alleged that the firm's global emissions contributed to the melting of glaciers in Peru, threatening his hometown of Huaraz with flooding. (BBC News)
A court in Argentina nullifies the ongoing trial of Diego Maradona's former medical personnel accused of malpractice following the removal of one of the trial's judges for alleged lack of impartiality. (CNN)
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:ITNQUALITY.
Posting, the article is fine and since the nomination is about to roll off the ITNC, I am not waiting for more comments. --Tone19:40, 4 June 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: Designer of the Jarvik Hearts. All statements are cited to reliable source at first glance. RIP.Hugoaway (talk) 14:16, 2 June 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: American harpist, influential teacher in Bloomington for decades, active in organizations around the harp. Article was there but references missing. More detail possible.--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
I added a ref for that date. However, I can't access his personal website, which is used as a ref a lot, and find both a problem. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 3 June 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Oppose As much as I love M*A*S*H, this article has way too many unsourced statements for the main page. Ping me if this issue gets fixed, because I would be happy to support once that happens. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:13, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not Ready for the usual reason. I was going to nominate this last night, but when I looked at the article I realized it's in really rough shape as far as referencing goes. There are entire sections w/o any sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:54, 31 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
A few citations needed, and hopefully those one-sentence "Military" and "Private sector" subsections can be expanded or combined. –Muboshgu(talk) 17:02, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article:Luke Humphries (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Luke Humphries wins the Premier League of Darts, becoming only the fourth player to win the Professional Darts Corporation Triple Crown (World Championship, World Matchplay and Premier League). (Post) Alternative blurb:Luke Humphries (pictured) wins the Premier League of Darts, becoming the fourth player to achieve the Triple Crown.
Nominator's comments: Obviously a triple crown is a de facto big deal in any sport, but this one has come as quite the development in the ongoing battle for dominance in darts between 30 year old Luke Humphries (world number one) and 18 year old Luke Littler (current world champion). With the latter having been favourite to win the Premier League this year after setting numerous tournament records including his 45 point winning total, Humphries trailed in a distant second (34 points), but still far ahead of the rest of the field (26 amd below). All other players at this elite world level, including multiple former world champions and one of the other three Triple Crown winners, are currently, and perhaps for a very long time yet, frankly just spectators to this Lukeopoly.2A02:C7C:DA04:1200:F642:9179:DA3A:29EA (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The 'Triple Crown' isn't a thing in Darts. I don't know if the PDC are trying to market it as such, but there are several other tournaments which are considered to be more prestigious that the PL, which is a glorified exbo with only a few invited participants. Effy Midwinter (talk) 00:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sports things that aren't listed at ITNR doesn't mean that an ITNC can still be discussed, but the importance has to stand on its own. The fact we have an article on the triple crown for darts suggests the achievement is notable. Masem (t) 15:13, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If a sporting event isn't ITNR, it's probably not ITN-worthy. And having an article doesn't mean it deserves it either. At no point have I said that it cannot be discussed. Humphries is the "fourth" player to win the Triple Crown, not even the first; darts is a very minority sport, and this achievement has barely received any coverage from the international sports press. Perhaps that's appropriate for DYK, but nothing more. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:16, 31 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Oppose His birthdate fails verification on the currently cited source. His age at death is counter to the the source cited for his death date.—Bagumba (talk) 13:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support, fixed. It took a bit of searching to find when exactly his birth date was but it is determined to be August 30, 1947 and not 1948. Also found references on his age (77) and can be confirmed from sources before his death celebrating his 77th birthday (Limpopo Mirror, a local source). Courtesy ping Bagumba. ~ TailsWx14:00, 4 June 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
A Cambodiansoldier is killed in an exchange of fire with a Thaisoldier. Cambodia initially said that the Thai soldier opened fire, but Thailand denied this citing a misunderstanding when the Cambodian soldier crossed the border during a routine operation. (AP)
A boat carrying over 100 migrants capsizes within reach of the shores of the El Hierro island in the SpanishCanary Islands. Four women and three girls are found drowned, while a medical helicopter evacuates two other children in critical condition to a nearby hospital. (AP)
Five people are killed, including the perpetrator, and four others are injured, including one critically, when a drunk 17-year-old goes on a mass stabbing rampage before killing himself in an arson attack at a house during a birthday party in Irkutsk, Irkutsk Oblast, Russia. (The Moscow Times)
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio says his department will start revoking visas for Chinese students and increase scrutiny on all future visa applications from China and Hong Kong. (AP)
In sumo, Ōnosato Daiki is promoted and becomes the sport's 75th yokozuna. Ōnosato reached the highest rank of yokozuna faster than anyone in the modern history of sumo, achieving the promotion in 13 tournaments and never posting a losing record during a tournament. (Kyodo News)
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: Trophy win on its own is not significant, but the context of being the first team ever to win all UEFA European club competitions makes it a worthy ITN candidate. Others can suggest alternative blurbs.Heatrave (talk) 21:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the blurb makes it seem like more of an achievement than it is, it’s the third tier of European football, most top teams want to avoid it. Seems more like a novelty than an achievement. Interesting but maybe not ITN worthy Kowal2701 (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably because Real Madrid and Bayern Munich will never finish low enough in their domestic leagues to even play in the Conference League. This isn't the flex that people think it is. Unknown Temptation (talk) 08:11, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong SupportAlternative blurb cheers to Chelsea!! They're first club in history to win every European major honour. Congratulations CFCQalasQalas (talk) 01:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose largely per Masem, not seeing any evidence that this particular combination of achievements has much standalone enduring notability, and the nomination statement even concedes that the Trophy win on its own is not significant. According to NYT/The Athletic, this tournament has only been around four years (also meaning this combination of achievements has only been possible in the last four years), which is far less than what is typically seen of those at WP:ITNR#Sports. Left guide (talk) 02:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If Jaga or Djurgården had won it it would have been a major achievement. But a middling Super League Premier League team against an average La Liga side where the sides from the top 5 leagues already hover up all the money and best players, including the Champions League and Europa League, this third-tier cup is even less notable than the Intertoto at this point. Chelsea winning a new cup that's added every few years or so is no more than trivia. Abcmaxx (talk) 05:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But this is an ever growing list of irrelevant cups, and Chelsea won most of their trophies whilst being bankrolled by a very shady Russian billionaire. They only won this particular cup because it was a cup designed to bridge the gap between the top leagues and give some other clubs from other nations a chance, such as NK Celje for example. The competition was intentionally weaker, and Chelsea's league position shows that this season they would have only been able to compete for lesser trophies. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is not a new achievement. Four clubs (Juventus, Manchester United, Ajax, and Bayern Munich) have won all three previous iterations of the tournaments (European Cup/Champions League, UEFA Cup, UEFA Cup Winners' Cup). Our article is misleading here, because effectively the Conference League is a rebranding of the Cup-winners Cup. The Europa Conference League has only existed for four years (and one could argue that the Europa League has as well, though that was a rebranding). Indeed, there can't be that many teams that have even played in all three current tournaments. Black Kite (talk)08:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Europe's third-tier football competition, for clubs who finished 6th or 7th in their domestic leagues, or were eliminated in qualifiers for bigger competitions. I just saw that Chelsea's prize money for this whole tournament was only marginally more than Slovan Bratislava, who lost all eight of their games in the Champions League. So not even UEFA see this as a big deal. Looking at how mediocre you have to be to even get into this competition, I'm sorry but this achievement is as trivial as Coventry City being the only team to have played in every English league division in history (including Third Division North and South) Unknown Temptation (talk) 08:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The claim that they're the first club with wins in all four major European competitions is factually incorrect. Juventus did the same by winning the UEFA Intertoto Cup in 1999 after they had previously won trophies in the UEFA Champions League, UEFA Cup and UEFA Cup Winners' Cup.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. If we count that one, Valencia have also won trophies in four different European competitions, but I didn't mention it because they've never won the European Champion Clubs' Cup/UEFA Champions League as top-flight European competition.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not a major European competition and the fact that Chelsea is the first club to win all four "major" European trophies is something more appropiate for DYK than ITN. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Haven't had a chance to assess on notability, but oppose on quality - much of the "Awards and honours" section is uncited, and some of the "Publications" section is as well. TheKip(contribs)20:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose rd on sourcing and tags. I can squint between the lines and see why there's interest in a blurb but I strongly recommend having one clear section of the article to gather the various isolated statements about importance into one place in the article so the reader can clearly see that importance without squinting. Masem (t) 21:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb in terms of notability. Titanic figure in African literature, in particular due to his promotion of writing in local languages. Quality may need a final polish, but article overall looks good. Khuft (talk) 21:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD Unsure if the African figure has an important figure similar to President or other head of state regarding his/her death, but the posting as RD makes it more necessary for me. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 21:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'The African figure'? 'his/her death'? Try actually reading the article before commenting, so that you are aware of basic facts like the subject's name and gender. GenevieveDEon (talk) 22:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support blurb I've never heard of this person before but based on the article he appears decently important. The article is fully cited, although it is a bit short for a blurb biography. --SpectralIon02:39, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb He is a Level 4 vital article, which means that he is very important by community consensus. I think that he is important enough to blurb. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Article is clearly influential in his field, the article reflects his impact on literature and is in good shape (albeit the 4 cn tags). --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb The claim in the opening paragraph of the article, that he was the greatest East African novelist ever, appears to check out. As such, despite his lack of a Nobel Prize in Literature, he probably deserves a blurb. NorthernFalcon (talk) 05:46, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just would like to see the article give significant expansion to this. A one sentence summary trying to indicating why they are a major figure is not really a sign of a quality article for a blurb. Masem (t) 12:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb At the top of his field and clearly had a major impact. Also a chance for us to spotlight a major public figure from Africa and counteract systemic bias. FlipandFlopped㋡15:14, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"an elderly person dying" is probably not much of a headline. But this particular death, as often when such crude remarks are made here, was not that of just "an elderly person". ---Sluzzelintalk01:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remember that ITN is not about reporting the news, but featuring quality articles that happen to be in the news. This death made the news, and the article is of representative quality, as well as demonstrating significance as a major figure; all the checkboxes are ticked. Masem (t) 01:30, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support blurb. The Wikipedia article and published obituaries out there make it very clear that he reached the top of the literary field. Ed[talk][OMT]19:57, 30 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Comment: I came to nominate after updating a bit. Above, I added two names of editors who made this article what it is: fine quality. I also added an obit in English above (because more people will be able to read it than German or Danish). The composer was one of the giants in classical music. His works should have better articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 30 May 2025 (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.
Support - Promotion to yokozuna has for a long time been our standard story for sumo, and one of the only wrestling- or martial-arts related stories we regularly run. It provincial in a similar sense to the 'World' Series, but it's still highly significant. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support 75th Yokozuna of all time. Promotions are extremely rare and this is Japan's national sport. Following up on the World Series analogy there have been 120 World Series champions and only 75 Yokazuna in the last ~250 years. BHC (talk) 18:46, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At least five people are killed, nineteen others are injured and six are reported missing after an explosion at a chemical plant in Gaomi, Shandong, China. (Reuters)
SpaceX's first flight to reuse a Super Heavy Booster ends without achieving its goal, originally planned for Flights 7 and 8, which both failed, while losing the previously retrieved booster. (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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.
I respect your view, but this is (a) not about Trump (and the coverage is mostly not about him), and (b) not routine. The last time the Monarch gave a speech from the Throne in Canada was 50 years ago, and the last time a King or Queen visited was 2010. Its not a frequent occurrence. TimeEngineer (talk) 09:00, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean about Trump, that's my fault as I mostly consume american news. I nevertheless think that the first clause is a reason enough to oppose. It seems more likely to fall under "huh, that's interesing" rather than "this will have long-term conseuqences". It might make a good DYK though. –DMartin09:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Twice a century for the King of Canada to do this? I'd hardly call that routine. Heck, it's the first time a King has done it - the other two were by the Queen. Nfitz (talk) 22:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose notable? Like any visit by a Head of State to another country, especially if it is by a monarch. Routine? Also, it is one of the functions that HoS should perform. It's not ITN-worthy just because of the latter and if it has anything to do with Trump it's totally irrelevant and just another part of the political drama of his administration's bid to annex Canada. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:26, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The visit is certainly in the news but it's still ongoing and the King opens the Canadian parliament today, which is the main event. Updates to the article are needed as the plans turn into history. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:39, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support, but as blurb because it is basically already over. With respect, many of the oppose rationales are not policy-based, and likely come from editors who are simply associating the visit with Trump as opposed to fully appreciating the once in a lifetime nature of the event. In my view, it surpasses the notability threshold for two reasons: (a) even in spite of the Trump aspect, it is a historic, once in a lifetime type of thing (the last time this happened was in 1977, so claims above that it is 'routine' are objectively incorrect) and (b) it is getting objectively widespread, in depth coverage amongst global reliable sources: from publications in the UK, Australia, the USA, China, France, Germany, I could go on. Very little of this coverage is 100% focused on Trump, and he is not even involved in the event, so WP:NTRUMP does not apply. FlipandFlopped㋡18:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeWP:NTRUMP also applies to any public figure or institution that is influential enough to the point that the press reports their every single movement. Completely non-notable visit. —EF518:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Above, I hyperlinked publications like the New York Times, the South China Morning Post, Le Monde, and Spiegel, who each have indepth reporting on this visit. Do you have evidence to back your claim that they "report on the every single movement" of King Charles III? The opposite seems true to me - many of those outlets rarely report on King Charles's goings-on, but this is so notable that they have made an exception. FlipandFlopped㋡18:49, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Flipandflopped, I'll formulate a response shortly, but I highly suggest you strike the and likely come from Americans who are simply associating the visit with Trump as opposed to fully appreciating the once in a lifetime nature of the event part of your statement. It's completely inappropriate to discount votes because they are of a certain demographic and speculating on the nationality of editors can constitute WP:OUTING. —EF519:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's turn down the temperature a bit. In no conceivable way did I violate WP:OUTING, and I never said anyone's votes should be discounted. I respectfully stated an opinion that the WP:NTRUMP rationales were coming from an overly American perspective, which was not intended to be derogatory at all. FlipandFlopped㋡19:27, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You did not say that WP:NTRUMP rationales were coming from an overly American perspective, you said the editors themselves are Americans who are simply associating the visit with Trump, which is assuming every oppose voter is American and is, as I stated, inappropriate. Thank you for changing it, though. —EF519:38, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A visit of the King of Canada to Canada isn't a foreign visit. For the same reason that Canada doesn't have an embassy in the UK. Nfitz (talk) 22:34, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose as unimportant national-level address. If NTRUMP doesn't apply, then this was not notable to begin with. The relevant essay would be NCHARLES, correct? Departure– (talk) 19:40, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to add that I don't see how this is notable in of itself. The real story here is the opening of the Canadian parliament, but that's not ITNR and a done deal given the election.
To clarify my other reason, I take it that this is getting a lot of coverage due to the context that this is taking place during Trump's second coming, but a lot of the folks I see giving rationales on coverage also reject NTRUMP having any bearing. It's established that it's only an essay, but the underlying truth is still there, and that is that material can be substantially overreported on occasion, and given how this has to do with both the King of England and Donald Trump, this easily is covered by it. Simply put, if Trump was not involved, at least for context, then there would be substantially less coverage and this would likely not have been nominated, let alone posted.
I can't see how this is any more notable than any other "rare" event. Just because something hasn't happened in a while doesn't automatically make it notable. I'm really not seeing how this is notable; Charles made a speech, and that was that. Departure– (talk) 23:10, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such person as the King of England, and there hasn't been since William III died. There is, however, such a person as the King of Canada, and this story is about him. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:51, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The visit has been completed, widely reported and the article updated. Essays are irrelevant per WP:ESSAY, "Essays have no official status and do not speak for the Wikipedia community..." Andrew🐉(talk) 22:53, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not seeing why this deserves a blurb. Heads of state visit other countries all the time, and we almost never post them, so what makes this one so much more important that it deserves to be posted? QuicoleJR (talk) 23:59, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe grounds for a future DYK, but ultimately it’s just a head of state visiting part of their realm. Not remotely newsworthy internationally any more so than if the Danish monarch visited Greenland, the Japanese emperor visited the Ryukyus, or the French President visited Guadeloupe. RPH (talk) 01:12, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support it is a momentous occasion for the country to have the monarch open Parliament as King of Canada - the first King (male sovereign) to do so and only the third time in the country's history; Canada has a long and complicated relationship with the monarchy, and this move is a clear and decisive statement that Canada will be taking a turn away from the "post-national state" towards embracing a nationalist model of "three founding peoples: indigenous, French, and British", as PM Carney indicated in his inaugural speech. Most people are surprised to learn that Canada is a kingdom, this was not the visit of a foreign head of state as some are saying. This is a deciding point in the country's national narrative and evolution, as the previous two throne speeches by Elizabeth were. There is a throne speech at every new Parliament - meaning there have been 45 throne speeches in the country's history, 42 of which were delivered by Governors General. This is not just another royal visit but rather notable because the King is filling a constitutional role rather than merely meeting and greeting. The country is at an inflection point with new separatist movements rising in the West, meanwhile there is a kind of realignment apparently happening in Quebec after decades of separatism there. It is a chance to shine a light on this pivotal moment in the country's history, and there will likely be a "before" and an "after" for this historic constitutional, identitarian, and political moment-Larineso (talk) 05:02, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose un-elected head of state with no de facto power flies over on a tax-funded private jet for a formality and is present only due to a historical anachronism. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:57, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the monarchy neglected this aspect doesn't make it untrue. If anything it shows how little they matter politically given this fact. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:04, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, leaning oppose - There's a lot of misleading commentary about this. It's significant, and I don't want to dismiss it out of hand, but we don't generally report on, say, the State of the Union address. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This event was highly unusual and very significant for a number of reasons. To quote the Guardian of 29 May....
"This week, however, the modern British monarchy has stood up and demanded to be counted, doing something new and perhaps genuinely consequential."
"No monarch had bothered to make this trip for nearly 50 years."
[The speech had a] "far looser and more personal format than the Westminster version ... allowed the king to speak words that clearly mattered to him, and by which he will be judged."
"The larger point, however, is that this was a willed act by the king. Charles did not have to travel and did not have to make the speech. But he did both, even while continuing to be treated for cancer.....The contrast with his mother is impossible to miss. Elizabeth II’s hallmark throughout her 70-year reign was a studied neutrality on public affairs. She was much praised for it during her lifetime, leading some commentators to assume that neutrality was now a precondition for monarchy’s survival"
"So far, Charles has gotten away with it. Public concern for his own health, and for that of his family, has probably helped him. So has public sympathy over the behaviour of the Sussexes. To criticise Trump is also popular rather than risky. Amid all this, the public has cut Charles enough slack to be more himself. Those who warned that his more committed approach to public affairs could threaten the monarchy and boost republicanism have, at least at this stage, been proved wrong."
"Charles’s role carries risks which, when faced with a less patient public mood or different circumstances, could cause trouble for him and for the monarchy. Assuming that Charles remains in good health for years to come, how might he handle a change of government? If the current feeding frenzy about a Nigel Farage prime ministership really came to pass in 2028-29, Charles could be faced with a government that might embrace a Maga president in Washington, abandon European alliances, dismiss the net zero agenda, and go out of its way to antagonise Scotland and Wales."
In summary, the Government of Canada and the King of Canada together chose to turn what has for decades been a ceremonial and scripted study of constitutional neutrality into an overtly political and personal act in response to Trump's rhetoric. Potentially changing the nature of the monarchy in the United Kingdom forever, even though the UK government (in all likelihood) had zero input into this whole affair; certainly having no powers of veto on grounds of their own national interest.
On the flip side, it *was* just a speech and it *was* basically about Trump (even though he wasn't even mentioned in it).
Hopefully that clears things up for all those above who seem to be wholly misinformed on the importance and significance angles of this event. Or indeed didn't even seem to understand the (admittedly complex) relationship between the British Monarchy and the democratically elected governments of the United Kingdom, Canada, and all their associated nations, provinces and territories.
In short, the unelected monarch King Charles III is still the Head of State of Canada, as ridiculous as that sounds to many people. And rather than shy away from it, the de facto Head of State of the very clearly sovereign democratic country of Canada has decided to lean into this historical anachronism to defend Canada's enduring sovereignty against the equally ridiculous territorial claims of the United States. In the process potentially causing various domestic and international difficulties for the very country in which King Charles III spends most of his time in.
That alone probably elevates this above the usual circus that surrounds Trump. It's certainly a unique reaction to Trump's Presidency, one that no other country can really make use of, except of course the 13 others who have Charles III as their Head of State. 2A02:C7C:DA04:1200:F642:9179:DA3A:29EA (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your post is far too long, but its premise is false anyway. King Charles doesn't carry any political risk apart from abolition of the monarchy. This non-event has been overreported, and going around and giving speeches is one of his core duties, but even then if he couldn't attend for whatever reason or simply didn't feel like it, he doesn't have to; there would be no real consequences either way. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:57, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"King Charles doesn't carry any political risk apart from abolition of the monarchy.". Well yes, that's the point. As is the fact he did bother this time. This was a significant and highly unusual move by both the Canadian government and the current head of a monarchy covering 16 nations. As such it inevitably became a much discussed reaction to one of Trump's most absurd talking points, rather than the non-attended act of bland ceremony it has usually been for nearly the last half century. You clearly don't like what I've just written for whatever reason, but nothing you’ve said in response changes the basic facts of the matter, as reflected by The Guardian, a major UK newspaper. 2A02:C7C:DA08:AB00:6B1A:93AA:7DCA:9B79 (talk) 08:59, 30 May 2025 (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.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
I don't think EEng meant to be offensive, but was quoting a traditional journalism saying that is common in newsrooms and television studios. Happily, nobody was killed in what seems to be a very bad accident, and because it was an accident with no fatalities I'd oppose the good faith nomination. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:12, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just so. It surely should have been obvious that I didn't mean to be offensive, because had I wanted to be offensive I'd have made a much better job of it. EEng23:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)P.S., Randy: "If they're dead, it's widely read; if just hurt, it lies inert." Sorry, best I could do.[reply]
I am well aware of the common usage of the phrase (although many readers doubtless would not be). I have already said to you that I was sure you meant no offence, but I had hoped that in hindsight you would recognize the incredible bad taste of your attempted joke and reflect on whether it had any place here. Perhaps if you tried to reword it in plain English? Although I seriously doubt anyone here is unaware of the fact that tragic events such as this are considered newsworthy regardless of whether anyone actually died. 2A02:C7C:DA04:1200:F642:9179:DA3A:29EA (talk) 00:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And as I have already said to you, my post was not any kind of "attempted joke", so at long last please put a sock in it. As for the rest, see . EEng04:35, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - If there weren’t an unfathomable number of casualties I would oppose, but the sheer number of injuries is enough to be notable. EF520:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't appear to be a terrorist incident, (thankfully) no deaths; 79 injured is a big number but 30 of those were minor injuries who didn't attend hospital, and the majority of those who did were discharged quickly. If this does get consensus to post, please don't combine it into the football blurb, they're two completely separate issues. Black Kite (talk)08:53, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Black Kite. I would add that we regularly decline to post mass killings of even dozens of people when they do not come from the Anglo world; to post this would be to collapse any sense of consistency and fairness in terms of how we treat the notability of mass casualty incidents. FlipandFlopped㋡15:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I could support this for the dangerous precedent it set regarding the police releasing the ethnicity of suspects to quell misinformation and prevent further race riots. It is also rather obviously a highly unusual event in the UK context, one that raises serious questions about the police's ability to actually prevent a mass casualty vehicular terrorist attack when there is a sufficiently large target area and a sufficiently complex set of countermeasures. If such events are banned or dramatically scaled back as a result, that would be a very big deal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7c:da04:1200:f642:9179:da3a:29ea (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think that the sheer number of injuries makes this notable enough to post. Don't combine it with the football blurb, though, if it does get posted. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 11:23, 30 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Support I wanted to highlight that the GA is form 2011. With special attention to sourcing/content from after 2011, I still think the article looks good and is fit for ITN Czarking0 (talk) 16:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support and marking as ready, article quality is good to go. Not much to add other than what has already been said. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist800001:23, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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: Joint record 20th title with Manchester United. I posted this as a candidate on 26th April after they won the title, however some argued that it should be posted at conclusion of the season.yorkshiresky (talk) 22:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Conditionally support only if this original blurb also combined with recent incidents regarding Liverpool vehicle. Otherwise, it's a very good article. 182.1.232.170 (talk) 01:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't think we should attempt to shoehorn the collision article into the football blurb just because it happens to be related and has its own article; that could put undue emphasis on it. If the incident alone is significant enough to make it onto ITN on its own merits, then I think a combined blurb would be reasonable. FWIW, it seems that the vast majority of incidents at {{Road incidents in 2025}} and {{Road incidents in 2024}} haven't qualified for their own blurbs. Left guide (talk) 06:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait The nominated article has an orange cleanup tag and so needs work. And the parade incident needs time to establish the facts and correct language. Calling it a "vehicle collision" seems misleading and my impression is that it was more of a road rage incident. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:42, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Liverpool won the title a month ago. As many times before, failing to post this when they clinched the title makes this outdated, and we shouldn't give it a second chance if the article wasn't of sufficient quality when the winner was determined. Furthermore, WP:ITNSPORTS states In terms of timing, events are generally posted as soon as a winner is determined., so the conclusion of the season isn't really an ITNR item. The incident during the trophy parade is a separate event. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. WP:ITNR states "events are generally posted as soon as a winner is determined"(emphasis mine), which isn't a hard and fast rule that we can't wait until the end of season to post the winner. –DMartin08:56, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb The orange tag has been addressed by Black Kite. I see no issue with posting about it now, as Liverpool's victory continues to be in the news. However, I disagree with both of the alt blurbs - alt1 sounds a little too promotional, and alt2 groups in an event that I don't think meets the ITN notability criteria (nobody died, seems like a fluke incident as opposed to political/terrorism, etc). FlipandFlopped㋡19:55, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose alt2 as written - I have no opinion on inclusion of the incident, but it needs to be in the correct context, i.e. that it occured around / to the crowd at the trophy parade, rather than merely it happened after Liverpool won. -- KTC (talk) 07:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support the original blurb - the season has just ended, so the story is still ripe (if becoming a little over-ripe). Oppose alt-2, as the ramming incident, while tragic and significant, was not so severe that we would post it independently, and it lacks a clear semantic connection to the football title. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see nothing wrong with posting now, as the Premier League season has just ended. Technically Liverpool won on 4/27 but officially they won this past weekend, and that was also when their championship parade was. Natg 19 (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Russian forces launch their largest air attack on Ukraine, including the capital city Kyiv, since the start of the war, killing at least 14 people and wounding dozens more. At least 298 IranianShahed drones and 69 missiles are launched at Ukrainian cities during the overnight attack. (Reuters)(BBC News)
Disasters and accidents
Ten people are killed, including Humboldt University students and professors, and eleven others are injured in a car accident near Armenia, Colombia, when a bus loses control and crashes into a barrier. (WBBM-TV)(Daily Sabah)
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:ITNQUALITY.
Support Article's sourcing and length is perfectly suitable for ITNRD. RIP to a longstanding bit of historical trivia. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist800019:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Beyond trivia, he was a decent man and I personally benefited from his support of William & Mary's history department. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:54, 29 May 2025 (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.
Tentative support. I think the article has enough bones to post, and at 2200 bytes is quite a bit beyond our usual stub level, plus there is a results prose section. I'm not sure what the time frame is for the president to he elected, but it does seem like that might be Jennifer, as things stand. Probably not final yet tho. —Amakuru (talk) 12:20, 31 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: Reality TV star (Duck Dynasty) and conservative religious figure. Article is not in dreadful shape, but needs a few cites.Ad Orientem (talk) 03:19, 26 May 2025 (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.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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.
Which specific sources are "feeble" or self-published? euroleaguebasketball.net is the official league website, so for the sake of argument, even if it is self-published, it's still suitable in an WP:ABOUTSELF manner. Left guide (talk) 23:00, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The rest appear to be major news organizations, so I don't see how they can be unreliable in the context of basketball content, unless there is evidence of them knowingly having published uncorrected basketball-related falsehoods. Left guide (talk) 02:25, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not seeing the major news orgs. Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, DW, France24 – none of them seem to have covered this even though they may have dedicated pages for basketball news. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, as it's an WP:ITNR event, the only consideration for posting is article quality, as notability of the event has been previously agreed. If you disagree, start a discussion at WT:ITN, but this should not inhibit this nomination (if article quality is addressed). Joseph2302 (talk) 16:20, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality a one paragraph match summary (plus one paragraph of stats and.post event things) is not enough to meet WP:ITNQUALITY. And half the matches covered on that target article have zero match summary either. Too many tables, not enough prose. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:46, 25 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
In association football, state-backed Ferencváros win their 36th overall and 7th consecutive league title after defeating ETO Győr 2–1 on the final day of the season. (The Guardian)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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.
Comment per ITNR, as this blurb has it correct, the winner of the award should be the bolded article. The Cannes article is nowhere close to being of quality for ITN as its pretty all much tables with little prose. Masem (t) 17:33, 25 May 2025 (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.
As The Guy Who Adds Match Summaries... I'm still aiming to improve last year's final article. But since the match was basically "both teams hoofed the ball back and forth until Arsenal scored", I'm sure anyone else could contribute a short match summary. Kingsif (talk) 14:08, 25 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: One of the most prolific actresses in the history of Sri Lankan Cinema, also a former Member of Parliament (2010-2015)Titanciwiki (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: Acclaimed independent filmmaker who left Nazi Germany as a Jewish child refugee, went on to win awards at the Venice Film Festival. Died May 20th but announced on May 25th, lengthy obituary in the NYTJudegr03 (talk) 08:53, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Guyanese Foreign Minister Hugh Todd says that Guyana will defend its sovereignty in the face of Venezuela's referendum next Sunday, passing a motion in parliament and reaffirming warnings that Venezuelans voting in the referendum in Guyana will be deported. (News Room Guyana)
In association football, SSC Napoli win their fourth Serie A title and second title in three seasons after defeating Cagliari 2–0 on the final matchday. (BBC Sport)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
Are you able to point me to the policy or guideline that required discographies to have references? I've been reverted for adding references to discographies to get an RD ready before. The discography for Klucevsek's article has title, publisher and year, meaning it is easy to verify each entry. I can convert these entries to use Template:Cite AV media but I don't see the utility in this. Vladimir.copic (talk) 04:19, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Vladimir.copic, I saw your query by chance. This page isn't on my watchlist, so if you reply to me, you will have to ping me to ensure that I see your reply.
@Schwede66 Thanks for replying! When you look at comparable FAs (not list articles, but actual music biographies), it is rare to see inline citations for discographies. See: Aaliyah, Regine Velasquez, Lorde, Randy Travis, Cher, David Bowie and so on. In my random sampling, I only came across one FA that did include inline citations for the discography section. When you look at both List of songs recorded by Kylie Minogue and List of songs recorded by She & Him (which are not discography articles any way), the inline citations are to the primary source - so the album or release that the song appeared on - not a third party source. These artists' discography articles (Kylie, She & Him) do not contain inline citations except to confirm chart positions (or in some cases to the user-generated site Discogs). Another random sample of FL discographies shows this seems to be a common practice (Lana Del Rey discography, Paul Kelly (Australian musician) discography). To follow the two list examples you provided, I would need to list the entry as Blue Window (Zoar Records, 1986) and then include the inline citation Klucevsek, Guy (1986). Blue Window. Zoar Records. which seems slightly redundant and, to be honest, silly.
I first noticed this weird discrepancy between ITN/RD and the rest of the project last year (I brough it up here) and I would just like to know what best practice is. It seems you would need to write an article one way for RD and then another for FA. Vladimir.copic (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(disclaimer: I'm not an admin, but a huge fan of Guy Klucevsek, despite his instrument) I don't know official best practice, and I don't see it as crucial, but it's not difficult to cite discography entries. On those occasions when I've went through discography sections I've only encountered mistakes in less than 10% of cases, but I don't think asking for citations at WP:ITN is excessive. (Yeah, yeah, so why don't I source them myself? Because, I really need to go to bed!) --Sluzzelintalk01:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm kind of agnostic on what the best practice is in general but have recently been leaning towards no need for inline citation where full discographic information is provided for WP:V reasons. It actually does become quite difficult to find reliable sources for older and/or non-mainstream artists whose work was reviewed in non-digitised publications. This is why we end up with so many low quality sources in discographies (to Discogs, Amazon, Spotify, random online stores etc). For side-men appearances you will almost always need to cite the liner notes of the album in question anyway. Vladimir.copic (talk) 01:58, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Complete lists of works, appropriately sourced to reliable scholarship (WP:V), are encouraged, particularly when such lists are not already freely available on the internet.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: President of Ecuador between 2005 and 2007. I've been working on the article and I think it's ready, even though some touch-ups might be necessary._-_Alsor (talk) 18:36, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great work on expanding the article! I'm very appreciative that you expanded the article seeing as how we don't get a lot of RDs from Ecuadorians:) --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
The source is very clear that he was killed. "The airstrike killed Mohammed Sinwar, who was quietly buried days later, along with other top militants including Mohammad Shabana, the commander of the group's Rafah brigade, the officials said." elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him)22:47, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The source you quoted says that it's an Israeli claim, which we should not treat as fact for obvious reasons. (t·c) buidhe22:50, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not have a subscription to the WSJ, but other news sources treat it as just an Israeli claim. We should wait for Hamas to release an official statement, confirming his death. Natg 19 (talk) 23:10, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: The deal has now been allowed to go ahead by the courts, and it can be considered a case of territory handover, similar to Hong Kong.Mr. Lechkar (talk) 16:00, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A few issues here: 1) The nominated article hasn't changed since 15 May, so where is the updated content? 2) Didn't we post this story already, when the deal was announced last year? 3) It appears that what happened today was the formal signing, but I don't see any statement about when sovereignty will actually transfer. The BBC article linked above mentions that legislation will be required, so presumably it's a way off yet. When is the implementation due? Modest Geniustalk16:39, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think this did go into effect today. CNN says "the British government has handed control of the strategically significant Chagos Islands to Mauritius". Natg 19 (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, you may be right. The text says This Agreement shall enter into force on the first day of the first month following the date of receipt of the later note by which the Parties notify each other that they have completed their respective internal requirements and procedures necessary for the entry into force of this Agreement, unless the Parties agree otherwise. (which would indicate June 1) However, this is in the news "today", so it is relevant now. Unfortunately, there are quality concerns (like usual). Natg 19 (talk) 18:12, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, oppose on quality Orange tags are prohibitive, but a territory handover of this nature strikes me as somewhat inherently notable. Regardless of when it technically will go into effect, it is ITN now, which is what matters: it has extensive coverage across continents. Support posting once the tags are addressed. FlipandFlopped㋡23:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
wait makes sense to wait (although the counter-point is elections are posted before taking office). At any rate, mauritius is celebrating. Weird, since the new PM said he din't accept the previous agreement, especailly Diego Garcia.Sportsnut24 (talk) 18:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Closed) 2025 killing of Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. workers
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.
Note: As evidenced by the article protection and talk page tag, this topic falls under WP:ARBPIA which has an WP:ECR restriction, meaning only extended-confirmed users may participate here. Left guide (talk) 07:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Buidhe. This is a terrible crime for sure, but there's no predicted long-term impact right now and no evidence it is part of a wider terrorist plot. —Amakuru (talk) 07:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for what Amakuru said. We currently have no information regarding this being part of a terrorist plot and we do not know yet what was the exact motivation of this horrible attack. WreeperPHX (talk) 10:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Unless this spirals out into something that either rises above the typical mass shooting in the US or something extraordinary in the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, this isn't ITN-level. It's possible it might turn out that way, but at this point it hasn't. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions10:45, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is tragic for those involved, but unfortunately murders by gunshot are a common occurrence in the US. The impact here is likely to be similar to the Nantes stabbing a few weeks ago (which was rejected from ITN): a short burst of media coverage but no broad or long-term impact. Modest Geniustalk11:31, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would dispute that an attack on a Jewish event hosted by a Jewish museum in which the seemingly randomly-chosen victims happened to be Israeli was “contextual,” yes. I might be more inclined to agree if it was at the embassy itself. TheKip(contribs)13:22, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then we have a different perspective of what the consequences of the continued Gaza War might be. Did you want me to strike my entire !vote, or just part of it? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The “context” remark is the problematic part in my view; it almost normalizes the idea that violence against American Jews should be expected due to the (horrifying) actions of a nation-state half the world away. I have no issue with your oppose vote, considering I also voted oppose. TheKip(contribs)13:32, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the suspect, Elias Rodriguez, reportedly chanted "Free, free Palestine!", I don't really see how these two things can be unconnected. I'm sorry if this means my comment reads like "a justifcation". Perhaps "context" is the wrong word. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Listing off the Palestinian death toll of the war as the context reads to me as if you’re at best slightly callously implying this attack was irrelevant/not encyclopedically notable, given the differing scales, or at worst implying it was justified entirely, given the nationality of the victims. That’s what makes me uncomfortable; if you’d simply mentioned the war might’ve motivated it/that it’s part of a greater pattern of violent incidents relating to the war, I’d feel less so. TheKip(contribs)13:47, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to reiterate that I am not seeking to imply "it was justified entirely". I think it is surprising that there have been just two deaths of Jewish people like this in America when 67,877 Palestinians have reportedly been killed in Gaza. I'm sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable. For the avoidance of any further accusations of WP:FORUM, if you would like me to change the link to simply read "Gaza war", then I will do that. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We shouldn't be politicizing in our supports or opposes at ITN or anywhere, that's the NOT FORUM issue. Trying to equate or compare these two deaths to what's happened in gaza has zero advancement of whether this should be posted at ITN, and instead drives this to be covered by arbcom sanctions if it continues that way. Masem (t) 14:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The alleged perpetrator seems to have been trying to make a political point. It doesn't look like this was a completely random killing of people who were coincidentally Jewish, in a coincidentally Jewish location. I'm sorry if that means I am "politicizing my oppose at ITN." Martinevans123 (talk) 14:19, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is surprising that there have been just two deaths of Jewish people like this in America when 67,877 Palestinians have reportedly been killed in Gaza
With all due respect, this reads similarly to the callousness I noted in the “at best” bit. There shouldn’t be a competition, we can have sympathy for both the war’s many Palestinian victims and two Jewish murder victims.
Oppose not terrorism related, just one crazed gunman. Very unlikely to become an international incident. Masem (t) 13:21, 22 May 2025 (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.
Two soldiers are killed in a shooting against the Khmeimim Air Base in Latakia, Syria. Both the perpetrators, who are also killed, were foreign nationals who had worked as military trainers at a naval college. (AP)
Israel's Foreign Ministry releases a statement saying that after the delegation "deviated from the approved route", Israeli soldiers fired "warning shots" to distance them away. (Time)
Kenya admits that it assisted Uganda in the kidnapping of opposition politician Kizza Besigye in Nairobi in November 2024. Besigye was later taken to Uganda, where he is currently on trial. (Barron's)
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:ITNQUALITY.
Comment I cleaned up the article, added some sources and took care of all of the cn tags. I believe the article is in good enough shape now for RD posting. Nsk92 (talk) 16:01, 26 May 2025 (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.
Oppose as terrorist attacks happen all the time in Pakistan as there is an ongoing insurgency, and this one only killed seven. Also, the article could use some help. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 20:26, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Still a low number for just one of the attacks that usually occur with higher fatalities. Also, the nine number is including the perpetrator. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Bloxzge. Terrorist attacks are common in Pakistan and nine fatalities is not a high toll. Real impact on ongoing conflict between PK and India is still unknown. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. The Balochistan conflict has been escalating over the past several years, this isn't a supremely unique occurrence. TheKip(contribs)03:22, 28 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Former BolivianpresidentEvo Morales fails to secure his candidacy for the presidential election as the deadline expires amid a court's decision to uphold his ban to run for a fourth term. Morales announces he will appeal the decision. (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: Former president of Vietnam. Note that the early life and career sections are still without any citations for the time being.Mr. Lechkar (talk) 13:14, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Support Articles are good quality and there is evidence of broad international coverage (both in western media and Indian/Asian media). FlipandFlopped㋡15:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Although Mushtaq is a bit proseline-y in the bio/activism section. And I've pipelinked the title in the proposed blurb (Main Page ban on redirects misremembered as a ban on pipelinks). Moscow Mule (talk) 16:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The book article is short but of decent quality and sufficiently referenced. It meets our minimum posting standards and the prize is on ITNR. Marking ready and I've added an altblurb. Modest Geniustalk16:47, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I just did a Q&D translation of Deepa Bhasthi from w:de. It could use a good kicking into w:en shape, but it's there if the posting admin feels like including the link in the (probably alt1) blurb. Moscow Mule (talk) 00:38, 23 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Oppose on quality due to the orange sourcing tag at the top of the page. Ping me if the sourcing issue is fixed so that I can support. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:42, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Picture A picture would best for such a well-known face. I found a book – Drinking with George – which has lots of personal details including a picture of the subject as a baby. I've added that as a source and, as that hadn't been referenced yet, this shows that there's low hanging fruit to be found. As the article is going to be getting lots of traffic today, we need additions like this rather than tags and votes. The entry in Cheers TV Show: A Comprehensive Reference includes an extensive list of acting credits and I've added that as a general reference for the filmography. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:50, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This screams pandering to Western audiences. He had one very notable role and little else, giving him a picture just because he's recognizable makes zero sense and goes against the essence of WP. Masem (t) 13:11, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wendt's face is more recognizable than his name and so, to assist reader navigation, a picture makes most sense. Anyway, while ITN keeps posting politicians instead, many readers are still finding a way through and so Wendt has been the top read article for two days now. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:23, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is still a very much Western, if not US centric view. Wendt for all purposes is known for his role on Cheers, which is primarily a US show without significant international recognition. A picture would make sense for someone that would be an RD only but with far more international recognition from their looks. Someone at the level of fame of Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt, for example (though I'm not saying these necessarily would be RD-only at that point, just examples of what I'd expect for a picture to support an RD-only) And again, page views do not matter to ITN particularly since we're still waiting for article improvements to post. Masem (t) 13:08, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whether a subject is "Western" is irrelevant per WP:ITNDONT which says not to "Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country". The key point is that there is high demand for the topic in this language and so we should help not hinder this per WP:ITNPURPOSE. As for improvements, I seem to be the only ITN regular that has made any. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:42, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't against you, Andrew, but since I'm noticing it, I feel like this line of DONT is being misappropriated. It means don't oppose something because you feel it is limited to one country so most of the world won't care. It doesn't mean people can't argue that a posting (or another in a series of postings) unduly focuses on one country (or region), and similar things - which of course, other people are still free to argue against if they want. Kingsif (talk) 14:12, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't seem to be a significant distinction. According to this early discussion there used to be a rule that items should be of "international importance or interest". That was struck down and we now have a rule that it's ok if an item is local to one country – items such as the election in Romania.
In this case, Masem is arguing that Wendt's fame is not sufficiently international. That's not the rule now and, in any case, it's not clear that it's true. Looking at the German language Wikipedia, I find that the death attracted a spike of readers – about 40K – and that they posted it on their main page immediately. That's German efficiency.
Meanwhile, here the death attracted over a million readers, which is much more than most deaths get, and I suppose they were from multiple countries as I myself am British and the show Cheers was quite popular here too. But ITN has done little about getting this posted in any way. This is not quality or efficiency; it's gross negligence.
Oh so everyone interested is finding the article anyway and we don’t need to help them navigate with an image, thanks for that information.
(There is a clear material difference between opposing because “this notable event happened in X and only impacts X” and “this event is not sufficiently notable, IMO it has more attention due to US-centrism but large Western news coverage does not make it more important than it actually is”.) Kingsif (talk) 00:02, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, we don't know that "everyone interested" is finding the article because we don't know the total population of potential interest. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:36, 27 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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.
Oppose. This is a split among the defeated opposition. The Labor party still holds a majority in the House of Representatives and forms the government. Whether Labor's opposition is a Liberal-National coalition or separate Liberal and National parties is only of interest to domestic politics. Furthermore, the report you linked to quotes the National leader saying "the two parties could reunite before the next election", so this might be only a temporary split. Not significant enough for an ITN blurb. Modest Geniustalk11:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on notability ITN tends to avoid matters which are significant in domestic politics, but not significant in terms of international effects. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 12:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on notability and suggest close good faith nomination, but political parties' internal dramas are not INT-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:35, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability. With an eighty-year partnership, this is essentially as if a major party in a two-party system chose to split. If Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez went and split the Democratic party and formed a new party, would we not post it? If Jeremy Corbin took half of Labour with him and formed a new party, would we not post it? It doesn't follow any precedents ITN has dealt with previously, but it is newsworthy. Now if the National party were to rejoin and leave again repeatedly over the next four years it would cease to be newsworthy, but at this point, as a novel thing, it is newsworthy. I would suggest bolding the Coalition (Australia) article once it has been appropriately updated, but I could see putting this news into the election article and bolding that instead. NorthernFalcon (talk) 15:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez went and split the Democratic party and formed a new party, would we not post it? If Jeremy Corbin took half of Labour with him and formed a new party, would we not post it?
Per the article, they have been through splitsville before and they will likely be back if they don't want to divide the vote. Or like NZ sitting in coalition desptie diference parties (ACT obviously took National votes).Sportsnut24 (talk) 17:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose while it's an interesting tidbit of news, party splits or coalitions happen all the time across the world. The coalition that won the most seats in the recent Portuguese election was only formed a few years ago, for instance. French politics went through several coalitions, splits, party relabelings etc. Khuft (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2025 (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.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Support. I wish the article made it clearer that his ideas have not been accepted by other cosmologists. Still, it has been updated and the quality does meet our minimum requirements for posting in RD. Modest Geniustalk12:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While attempting to clarify the research parts of the article, I realised that there are a bunch of unreferenced statements, and most of the listed books need at least an ISBN. I've added several cn tags that will need to be addressed before posting this. Modest Geniustalk13:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A fourth escaped inmate, of a total of 10 escapees, is captured following the mass escape of prisoners in New Orleans, Louisiana, United States. Six escaped prisoners remain at large. (ABC News)
The nominees of the winning party-lists of the election held on May 12 are proclaimed. However, the proclamation of party-lists Duterte Youth and Bagong Henerasyon are suspended due to pending disqualification cases, leaving four seats unresolved. (GMA News)
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: Legendary Bolshoi Ballet protagonist, known especially as Ivan te Terrible, created for him by a legendary choreographer who died the same day. (May come here tomorrow.) The article was a rather poor machine translation stub, as the article of his wife also was (working on it). The ballet deserves an article. All help welcome.--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 23 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Four people are killed and twenty others are injured in a bombing near a market in Killa Abdullah District, Balochistan, Pakistan. Several shops collapsed, fires were started and buildings were damaged. (The Hindu)
Three people are killed, including a 5-year-old, and two others are injured, including an infant, when a train strikes five civilians near a bridge in Fremont, Ohio, United States. (Sandusky Register)
A court in Shiraz, Iran, sentences three people to death over two attacks on a Shiite shrine in 2022 and 2023 in Shiraz and several to others to different prison terms. (The Times of Israel)
Three people are injured, including an 11-year-old, in a mass stabbing attack outside of a house after an altercation in Halle, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. (Der Spiegel)
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: World's top competition in club volleyball. Not very widely covered in the anglophone world.Abcmaxx (talk) 14:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know much about professional volleyball, but Not very widely covered in the anglophone world. seems to be a good reason NOT to post. Natg 19 (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We are a global Wikipedia and the reason there aren't that many sources are for the same reasons there are not that many Italian sources covering AFL finals or Polish sources covering the Rugby Super League. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Per WP:ITNR, we do post the top international competition in volleyball. I'm not seeing a good reason to post the European club tournament as well, especially if it gets little media coverage. Regardless, the article is in nothing like a postable condition - it's purely tables, with no prose at all. Please don't nominate items until after the article has been updated and brought to something approaching postable standard. Currently there's nothing for us to assess, whatever we might think about the significance. Modest Geniustalk17:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Modest Genius: This an international competition though, and a top one at that. Where do you think all those international players ply their day-to-day trade? If anything, club sides tend to be better than national sides as you can in theory have any player you want, but it's still comparing apples and oranges. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The quality issue should be addressed. Lack of anglophone sources, though, is a skill issue on our part, not a notability problem for the subject. This isn't the Wikipedia of Anglophones, and we should resist pressure for it to become so. GenevieveDEon (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is the English-language Wikipedia, so our audience is comprised of people who can at least read the English language. That's not the same thing as the Anglosphere, but lack of coverage in English-language sources does suggest that this event isn't significant to our readers. Modest Geniustalk11:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like that as a reason. Lots of things may not be common in the Anglophone media but are still important. I've no comment on volleyball fwiw. Secretlondon (talk) 16:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SupportNot very widely covered in the anglophone world isn't a major reason for not posting this blurb. Anyways, it's still major international volleyball competition, and seems still worthly to be posted, regardless whether there's lack of source from English-speaking world or is the competition unknown from English-speaking people. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard the Duck: Volleyball is hugely popular in continental Europe especially in Southern Europe and the Balkans. This final was top news in Poland and Italy. Granted, the final concerned teams from those countries, but out of the ~20 nations represented in the Champions League not a single club is from an English-speaking country. In fact not even the third tier 2024–25 CEV Challenge Cup has any competitors from England, Ireland or Malta. By way of comparison one of the most successful English clubs domestically is called Polonia London, so it's easy to draw conclusions about why page views are likely to higher on other wikis than enwiki. I would also add articles concerning volleyball aren't great compared to e.g. itwiki. Same as Rugby League articles are much better on enwiki than plwiki, for the exact same reasons but in reverse. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I guess my point is if you'd want to get a volleyball tournament posted here in the English Wikipedia ITN, find a volleyball tournament that's actually popular here in the English Wikipedia, as evidenced my pageviews that I've shared. The article is piss poor at showing me how many people watched the final; apparently, "more than 11,000 people" watched at the Atlas Arena, which has a capacity of 13,805. So probably not a sell out, but the final had a team from the home country. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard the Duck: It was near capacity Atlas Arena in Łódź. Then again even domestic cup finals tend to be sold out or near sold out in Poland for volleyball. Finals tend to include the semi-finals the day before and 3rd place play-off so it's also seen as an all-weekend event similar to Formula 1, that's why it's hard to judge the attendance, there were a lot of Jastrzębski Węgiel fans in the crowd who would have been hoping it would have been their team in the final, and watched their team win the bronze few hours before. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I can understand on a technically neutral site final, you may not have a sold out arena, but for major sports these are usually sold out. In the 2024 EuroLeague Final Four, all four games had the maximum 13,578 people (although curiously the arena article specifies a larger number LOL). Howard the Duck (talk) 11:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All the tickets would have been sold out well in advance. Any empty seats, of which there would have been few singular ones dotted around, would be either from corporate not turning up or all-weekenders giving it a miss because their team didn't make it. Regardless attendance isn't the key factor here is it. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:36, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't it for most events, no shows who had otherwise paid their tickets (either by themselves or a sponsor) are counted to have attended anyway? Attendance is a key factor, as it shows you the interest in the local populace at least, more so if we're determining posting at ITN. If people in that area didn't care =for it to be a sellout, then why should we? Howard the Duck (talk) 11:40, 21 May 2025 (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.
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.
Not ready. As is unfortunately typical with golf nominations, the article is a mess. The 'criteria' section is an incomprehensible set of bullet points (largely unreferenced), the final round has no prose at all, the second round is unreferenced, the 'venue' section has only one source (for a statement about a completely different event in 2016!) etc. The article needs substantial improvement to bring it up to a postable standard. Modest Geniustalk14:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - we rarely seem to post golf tournaments these days, for the reasons given above. The articles are always a mess quality-wise, and this one is no exception. The field needs to be reduced or split into a separate article (see 2024 Open Championship field for an example) and more prose added for the rounds. —Amakuru (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The field/qualifying criteria section is one of the most useful things about these articles. Wikipedia usually is the best resource for neatly listing the field and grouping each player into a qualifying category. For someone following the tournament and wondering "how did this guy get into the tournament", it generally displays the information better than the references supporting the material do. Spinning the section off into a separate article just makes readers have to tap through into another article.
The main problem with these articles is that they are generally copy-pastes from a previous year's article so some of the content is supported by references that are out-of-date, and nobody cares enough to write prose summaries of the rounds. NICHOLAS NEEDLEHAM (talk) 22:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The qualification criteria may be of interest to experts on golf, but not a general audience. I don't object to that information being somewhere on Wikipedia if properly explained and presented, but at present it's a massive and unintelligible data dump that unbalances the article. Modest Geniustalk11:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree the qualification criteria is only useful to specific golf fans and not a wider audience. Because it's way too complex for an average reader to understand. This is an encyclopedia, not golf fandom. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:50, 21 May 2025 (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.
Support but wait We need to clarify the official result first whether the ruling coalition wins "majority" 116 seats or just "wins most seats" that falls short of majority. Otherwise, this article is very good to be posted as WP:ITNR. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 23:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It can be posted with a plurality or most seats caveat. In some cases, when the coalition is formed and sworn in that is also posted.Sportsnut24 (talk) 10:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm pleased to see that the article is in good shape, all the results tables have been filled out, and there are three paragraphs of referenced prose describing the outcome. While it could do with a light copyedit, the quality is fine to post. I've added an altblurb that I think is clearer and puts the bold link at the start. Modest Geniustalk11:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Need to be verified by more sources and the article slightly polished, but otherwise should be posted given that it is ITNR. Gust Justice (talk) 20:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb See the official result at its Wikipedia page, the vote count just much closer to 100% (99.98%). So, it appears very good timing to post this blurb. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 23:26, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The aftermath section now has a decent few paragraphs. Although 'results' is still just tables, I think this is good enough to meet out minimum requirements. Modest Geniustalk19:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready per Modest Genius. In addition to the issue with no prose for results or aftermath, the page is also bloated with excessive maps and tables etc. Per WP:NOTSTATS we don't need vast tables for endorsements and all that stuff. —Amakuru (talk) 14:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it's great that the article is locked to common editors while the registered editors wait for edits to be done before posting this. 194.102.58.6 (talk) 12:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nothing seems to happen with this now. The alt blurb seems alright, the information is in the article, so what's the hold-up? FluturelA (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It hasn't been posted because no-one has fixed the problems with the article. There is still no referenced prose describing the (second-round) results and the outcomes of the election. Modest Geniustalk16:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This update was done, and if you'd look at the section for the first round aftermath, it's still quite short. There should be something that could've been said, aside from the inevitable international reactions soup.
I'm sorry for being a nuisance, but who's responsible for deciding to post this and when will that happen (approximately)? FluturelA (talk) 19:16, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I spot an orange tag (in the section "Candidate endorsements from the 2024 annulled elections"). Orange tags are showstoppers. Schwede6605:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What does this mean, this „ITN/R”? And where are we staying on posting this? The more we wait, the more irrelevant it becomes in international news. FluturelA (talk) 14:58, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:ITNR; it "being ITNR" bypasses discussions for importance and instead discussion should be about article quality. The importance seems to not have been discussed here (as people assumed it is ITNR), but I suppose it's important enough for it to be viewed by a lot of people inspite of this not being posted at the Main Page as of yet. You can try tagging this as "Ready" to see if another person thinks if this is indeed ready. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ready The grievances have been fixed, the article is of sufficient quality with clear results and it is an expected election result. FluturelA (talk) 15:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article's prose/readability could be better, but there are no orange tags or CN tags. This meets the necessary standards to post. FlipandFlopped㋡23:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Three Islamic State gunmen are killed and four others are arrested in Aleppo during a military operation by the armed forces. Weapons, explosives and uniforms with official insignia are seized. A security forces member is also killed in the confrontation. (Al Jazeera)
Two crew members are killed and twenty-five others are injured, including two critically, when Mexican Navy training ship ARMCuauhtémoc with a crew of 277 people on a festive visit collides with the Brooklyn Bridge in New York City, New York, United States. A search and rescue operation is currently underway. The bridge suffered no damage, and has since reopened. (WNBC-TV)(The New York Post)
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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.
Oppose While a few lives were lost, it was a minor ship accident (no damage to the bridge itself), so not really an ITN bit. Masem (t) 14:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose Not comparable to the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse. The Brooklyn Bridge is still standing and fully operational. This wouldn't be making headlines if it wasn't such a grandiose ship that did the colliding, and the worst has passed on this. The Cuauhtemoc still sails, it's a shame it had to be damaged. Departure– (talk) 16:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is an unusual event but it's effectively a traffic accident that killed several people. That's tragic but doesn't seem likely to have any wider or long-term implications. The bridge appears to have received very little damage; road and river traffic has resumed. I doubt this event would be getting so much press attention if it hadn't been filmed by multiple witnesses. If the article can be fleshed out it would make a good DYK item. Modest Geniustalk17:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. We are talking about an international disaster with dramatic footage. Long term the ship has to go somewhere, what the Mexican Navy decides to do will also be in the article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:22, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning oppose. Flashy, big news, but the most noteworthy impact is the damage to the ship itself, which does not rise to the level of the main page. Deaths, while tragic, where minimal, as was damage to the bridge. BD2412T21:58, 18 May 2025 (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.
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.
Support Not seeing any issues with the event article, updated in a timely manner as has been the case for multiple years now. Masem (t) 01:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article:Tornado outbreak sequence of May 15–16, 2025 (talk·history·tag) Blurb: A massive tornado outbreak (residential damage pictured) occurs from the dates of May 15th-May 16th, killing over 31 people in the process. (Post) Alternative blurb: A massive tornado outbreak (residential damage pictured) hits the Ohio River Valley and the East Coast, with 31 people left dead. Alternative blurb 2: 31 people are confirmed dead after a huge tornado outbreak (residential damage pictured) had hit the Eastern United States. Alternative blurb 3: A tornado outbreak (residential damage pictured) kills at least 31 people in the Eastern United States, including 24 in Southeast Kentucky and five in St. Louis. Alternative blurb 4: A tornado outbreak (residential damage pictured) kills at least 31 people in the Midwestern and Southeastern United States.
Also good to note that Eastern Kentucky rarely gets these type of tornadoes (last I can recall being March 2012) so definitely a rare occurrence. EF519:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose the mountainous terrain makes it hard for tornadoes to spawn (correct me if I am wrong). There are occasionally tornadoes, but they don't usually cause much damage, so I was extremely surprised when I heard about this one. Thank you for pointing that out. Kentuckian|💬19:17, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing that when you say "people" you mean Americans. I'm not American. I much prefer geographic precision in labelling over American slang terms for regions. I would interpret "Eastern United States" to mean the eastern half of that country. Remember that Wikipedia is global, not just for American readers. HiLo48 (talk) 01:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. Evaluation is still being done, and the outbreak sequence the article is about is still ongoing. SPC has continued activity at least through Monday. That all makes this a trick article to keep in posting shape. That said, the London Tornado alone makes this quite posting-worthy - I don't want to mention it in the same breath as Mayfield because that really was another level of tragedy, but it is true we haven't seen that level of fatalities from a single tornado since. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Somerset tornado was given a preliminary rating of EF4 or EF3+ very close to what the Mayfield was rated, even though that one had higher kills. Shaneapickle (talk) 17:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shaneapickle, the tornado is currently "EF2+" (article is inaccurate) and several tornadoes are usually rated EF4 each year. I wouldn't say this event rises close to the magnitude of December 10, 2021, but that's just me. —EF517:37, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support as article creator. It's looking like this is the most impactful tornado event of the year so far, about on par with March 13-16 (which we posted, though that had a higher death toll also attributed to wildfires etc). The London, Kentucky tornado had a very high death toll of 19, the deadliest worldwide in four years, and the St. Louis tornado caused major damage in a very populated area. More tornadoes are being surveyed, and while the rating of some tornadoes may not be in, the fact is the death toll and objective devastation doesn't wait for NWS Jackson (which is functioning below grade due to Trump's DOGE)'s slow surveying work. More severe weather is occurring today but that has been split into a separate article. The article is also up to quality in my opinion. Departure– (talk) 14:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Per altblurb 3, I would support removing links to the locations, or leaving only one link targeting Kentucky. The linked article for the region is more of a geological look at the region than a geographical one. Departure– (talk) 14:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That’s what it was tagged as on May 22 before it was marked as “ready”…not sure it’s gonna do anything. Unfortunately likely to be archived w/o action. 96.232.108.213 (talk) 18:09, 24 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Oppose Good to see high quality sources and a well-written article, however the "cn" tags really need to be resolved, especially given the nature of his career, and there's much more than just a couple of them too. It's possible the existing references can fill those gaps but until that is done this isn't ready for posting. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:48, 24 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
A locally renowned doctor in Sargodha, Pakistan, belonging to the Ahmadiyya community, is killed after an unknown assailant shoots him twice in the back. (Dawn)
Moody's Ratings lowers the United States' credit rating from Aaa to Aa1, citing the government's rising debt, widening deficits, and increased interest payments. (USA Today)
A court in New York, United States sentences 27-year old Hadi Matar to 25 years in prison for the August 2022 stabbing attack on Indian-British-American author Salman Rushdie, which left Rushdie severely injured while he was giving a talk in Chautauqua. (AP)
At least two people are killed, including the perpetrator and four others are injured, including one critically, in a mass shooting and shootout when a man opens fire inside of a gym in Las Vegas, Nevada, United States. (KTNV)
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Comment: Article lead states that "Lax made important contributions to integrable systems, fluid dynamics and shock waves, solitonic physics, hyperbolic conservation laws, and mathematical and scientific computing, among other fields", but there is no information in the article body about what these contributions were. SpencerT•C21:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
I'd agree on including the House election results, but this is a bit more complicated. The Alyansa is mostly a Senate-only ticket or list. Its component parties contest the House and local elections separately. One of the analysis from the election is that the polls got it wrong when they said the Alyansa will win a clear majority of the contested Senate seats, but wht happened is they won exactly half of the seats contested, with the last seat being endorsed by a rival ticket. As for the blurb I don't know if we can fit the fact that Lakas is a component party of the Alyansa. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Requesting this to be moved on May 16. National tally was completed on May 16. Until that time, local media were hushed on making pronouncements if candidates actually won. Howard the Duck (talk) 19:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Not going to purport to be an expert on how Philippine politics works, but I feel we probably should be having the House results lead the blurb, no? The realignment there appears to have been quite dramatic. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:33, 18 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Not ready, one unsourced statement in body of text, but there's also quite a bit of unsourced information in the infobox. And although article is not a stub, it is still very short. ForsythiaJo (talk) 21:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
British investigators say the cause of the sinking of the Bayesiansuperyacht that killed seven people, including billionaire tech magnate Mike Lynch in Italy in 2024, is from being knocked over by extreme wind and could not recover. (CTV News)
Three people, including two firefighters, are killed and two other firefighters are seriously injured in a fire at a former Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire, England. (BBC News)
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: One of the known lyric tenors of the 1960s and 1970s, - the list of capital cities where he performed could be even longer. The article was mostly there, thanks especially to Voceditenore - not literally the creator, but adding most of the content and referencing. I updated the Met ref and added the GSL. More expansion possible. ----Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 19 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Article 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.
Comment You've probably proposed literally hundreds of headlines, and your blurbs are way too long for almost all of them. When have we ever posted something like "with 2 matches left after a 2-0 derby win over RCD Espanyol" or even that it's the 94th season? Kicking222 (talk) 16:17, 16 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Oppose no citation for date of birth. Also, the footnote for the entire early life and education section as well as the first two paragraphs of the career section is not actually to a 'biography', despite it being described as such. Rather, it is actually to an unusual "biodata" PDF whose origin and reliability seems unclear to me. In any event, the biodata form does not provide support for any of the many claims made. Needs work. FlipandFlopped㋡23:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's from a government website. Try to translate the title of the website before commenting on the origins or reliability. If that's your main concern, there are several articles that I could offer as a substitute; I'll fix it shortly. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael23:32, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly, I read the source before commenting on it - I stand by what I said: it is unclear what context the biodata form comes from and it was being used as a source for claims not supported by it. The article has now been modified to remove the inappropriate citations to this source though, so I support. FlipandFlopped㋡15:30, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Is there any information about what he accomplished as regent/deputy governor? The body of the article mostly describes a list of roles and election results, without much additional depth about what he accomplished in key roles. SpencerT•C06:19, 20 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Two hikers are found dead and seven others are rescued after they were swept away by a river while hiking near Didier Waterfall on the island of Martinique. (AP)
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:ITNQUALITY.
@History6042: Good progress. I've only eyeballed it, but the lead needs more than the one sentence, there's one citation needed (that you added), and WP:ITNUPDATE specifically calls out bare url citations. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 02:14, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At least 28 people are killed in an Israeli air strike that struck the Gaza European Hospital, which the Israeli military claims had a Hamas command and control centre beneath the building. (BBC News)
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: American actor with some high-profile roles. Death was on the 7th but first reports of it seem to be on this date (and now only getting to major sources). Article has usual problems for actors, as well as lacking more info on his death.Masem (t) 12:04, 15 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Oppose This does not even have its own article, and is not important to post on ITN, this comes from a military junta, like Tajikistan and other nations, they do this, they are dictators, so we are not a newspaper. 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:4118:262A:9078:8BF5 (talk) 19:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural oppose The event described does not have an article. The dissolution is not discussed in any of the articles linked in the blurb (save for literally the five-word sentence, "On 13 May 2025, Goïta dissolves all political parties" in the Goita article). There needs to be a valid target article which will be bolded. FlipandFlopped㋡20:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a standalone article is not a requirement for ITN, just that there is an updated article. Per WP:ITNUPDATE, the decision as to when an article is updated enough is subjective, but a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable.Natg 19 (talk) 21:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment According to One-party state, Mali has been here before from 1960–68 and 1976-91. The current junta was already failing to hold elections and this decree is an extension of its tyranny. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this sounds significant, but there's no prose description of these events in any of the linked articles, so nothing for us to assess. If it's an update to an existing article, there needs to be at least a full paragraph of referenced prose describing the events, supported by references. If it's a new article, more like three paragraphs to avoid being a stub. Articles should be updated before making an ITN nomination. Modest Geniustalk11:30, 15 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: Influential former President of Uruguay, arguably an influential South American politician in the 2010s. International obits already being published. Article in decent shape.--TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as RD: The article is in good shape, but he's not big enough for a blurb. He's nowhere near the international significance of Pope Francis, a recent death that merited a blurb. Cambalachero (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Article looks good. Major political figure in his region as well as his nation. Passed several major reforms in Uruguay during his tenure. Ornithoptera (talk) 21:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb A household name for people around the world, especially due to his humility. I've heard his name many times in sermons and motivational seminars. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael22:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For those recommending a blurb, the article is very weak in explaining how he merits being considered a major figure. There are details scattered around but there should be a dedicated section that a reader can immediately be drawn to to understand that. Obits now may be able to flesh that out. Otherwise as it stands, I am not convinced he was a major figure to qualify for a blurb, as just being a former leader is not sufficient for that. Masem (t) 22:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For all purpose, yes, the basic RD support is there as the normal quality is met. I just don't like that to a reader coming to the page that his significance as a major figure is something not glaring clear and instead diluted through the article. Masem (t) 13:50, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb You may have to read the whole article to kind of understand the influence, but I don't feel that (if an "impact and legacy"-esque section doesn't evolve naturally, which it might, especially with obits) we should be summarising articles within themselves just so people clicking through from the main page don't have to read the whole thing. Kingsif (talk) 22:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - Notable indeed and worthy of a blurb. Article could be more comprehensive but is good enough at this time for the Front page, in my view. Decently written and cited. Jusdafax (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pull, consensus is that old politicians dying when they are out of office shouldn't get blurbs. Also, this discussion wasn't given enough time for editors to weigh in. Abductive (reasoning)09:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such consensus. Jiang Zemin, Mikhail Gorbachev, Jimmy Carter, Benito Aquino, George Bush, Sr., even Henry Kissinger who was not head of state, former Greece King, all got posted. Probably there were even more whom I can't remember immediately. BilboBeggins (talk) 09:58, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support blurb - Mujica's death made the BBC News homepage, which strongly suggests to me that his significance is more than merely local or regional. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I still have not seen, in the article, in this discussion, or in news articles themselves, anything that makes him so internationally significant to deserve a blurb rather than just a RD. Significant, yes: he was a president, he was popular in his home country, he did some stuff as president, he held diplomatic relations with his neighbors, some people said nice things about him... but what else? And with all due respect to Uruguay, he's not even the president of a significant country, such as those in the G20. Cambalachero (talk) 13:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pull This is not big news -- only 36K views yesterday -- but he's an interesting subject. And the priority for me is keeping ITN fresh. The blurb which would be reinstated is the Kentucky Derby. That was already over a week stale and it would be disrespectful to pull this for a horse race. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We can't force news to happen. Most of the major stories going on are either tied to existing ongoing or related to politics, which we have termined are not great ITN without clear sign of a larger impact (like the tariffs and trade war onset). Eg the media is obsessed with Trump taking the plane from Qatar but that's not really ITN material. Masem (t) 14:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And yet you support a blurb about the death of a politician, and my request of clarifications about his impact is still unanswered. Cambalachero (talk) 14:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear I didn't support posting in its current state - it should be crystal clear of someone's impact or legacy from sourced content in at least a few paragraphs within the article. I think there was some potential for that in this case but as of now the reader has to read through and pick that up from disparate parts of the article to see that. Masem (t) 17:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The new Pope was posted in just an hour at ITN while his article was the subject of intense activity of very variable quality. Speed was obviously the priority in that case; not quality. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:58, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An explanation of why you think he's so significant would be more useful than a mere vote. I would have no problem to change to support if someone bothered to point some significant impact of his presidency that I may have overlooked. Cambalachero (talk) 17:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
His govt legalized abortion, legalized marijuana, legalized same-sex marriage -- all in Catholic Latin America. I've just added a paragraph on those progressive policies (and others) to the intro in the hope of underscoring his impact (they were all in there but, yes, somewhat dispersed). Moscow Mule (talk) 06:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All that seems a bit too little and inconsequential to me (in Argentina, Alfonsín sent the heads of the military junta to trial, Menem and Milei solved two hyperinflation processes; that's a bit more of an impact than just getting some people to raise hands and pass a bill), but I can see why readers with lower standards would think that's important. Changed to support the blurb. Cambalachero (talk) 14:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The readership spiked high enough to put the subject in the top 10 for yesterday – up there with the Pope and Pete Rose. This is evidence that the story has generated good coverage and interest. If it works, don't fix it. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, posting an article at the top of Wikipedia's front page will send large amounts of traffic to that article. Is that what you're saying? Celjski Grad (talk) 10:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only some of those views will come from ITN. For example, most of the views come from the mobile view, not the desktop view and ITN is not at the top of that – it's way down below DYK. But either way, attracting lots of readers is a good thing. The staler topics at ITN like Merz or the snooker, are getting comparatively few readers now. ITN should feature fresh content about topics which are currently in the news. Stale stuff which has been run for a week or more doesn't work so well. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:50, 15 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
Soft support/almost ready I think the article is actually generally well-referenced, with two exceptions: (1) the committee assignments subsection is unreferenced and (2) the electoral results section is unreferenced. I can try to work on that later today or tomorrow, if it is still unresolved. In any event, that information is certainly publicly available, and I think the article is close to ready. FlipandFlopped㋡23:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just finished adding some citations to the rest of the bio. The only thing left is the electoral history and the committee sections.Scaramouche33 (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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.
Absolutely not, and this shouldn't even have an article. It's a big nothingburger. As of yet, it's just a direction to agencies to request things. If it were a mandate, it would almost certainly be overturned in the courts. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |me|talk to me!05:15, 13 May 2025 (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.
The U.S. and China agree to a trade deal in which, for 90 days, U.S. tariffs on most Chinese goods will drop from 145% to 30%, while China's retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods will drop from 125% to 10%. (BBC News)
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:ITNQUALITY.
We have now a fine obituary by the Washington Post (17 May), from someone who wrote her biography, with more detail. A added a bit but am too tired for more. Help welcome. She'd deserve it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:35, 18 May 2025 (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.
Oppose on quality as there are multiple issues with the article. Firstly, there are swathes of unreferenced text. Secondly, the 'Results' section has no prose. Thirdly, the 'Results by county' sub-section contains an empty table. Fourthly, there is nothing about the post-election reactions from politicians and observers. The article has way to go before posting.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:06, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready. The material in the article seems fine, though could do with some copyediting. However, there is no prose whatsoever in the 'results' section or explaining the outcome, and the 'Results by county' table is empty. That needs to be filled out and at least a full paragraph of referenced prose added to the results section. Modest Geniustalk12:39, 13 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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 is like a ceasefire in a hot war and seems quite a significant withdrawal from the precipice. What the final outcome will be is still uncertain but so it goes...Andrew🐉(talk) 11:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, anything that this White House does is prone to massive and total reversals at the drop of a hat, so there’s no real point in posting anything policy-wise that they announce short of a declaration of war or launching an internal self-coup. RPH (talk) 11:44, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Its a 90 day pause. Not yet permanent. And unlike a combat situation ceasefire where we can tell if things are changed immediately, the impact of a pause in overseas trade will take weeks to see. Masem (t) 12:00, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good faith, but tariff rates from this administration are too volatile for us to post something like a temporary reduction to massive tariffs that he himself put in place just a few weeks ago. A few months from now, the massive tariffs on not only China but also the entire rest of the world will all be unpaused, and who knows whether he'll keep them, scrap them all permanently, or raise them even higher. Vanilla Wizard 💙14:43, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We can't post every change in tariffs that Trump introduces / cancels / changes after a few days, especially in deals with individual countries. A lot of the US-UK tariffs were just removed or reduced by a new deal a few days ago, and I wouldn't expect that to be in ITN. Besides, this is removing a barrier that Trump himself introduced just a few weeks ago; it's performative politics designed to generate headlines not make sensible economic policy. Modest Geniustalk14:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(Posted) End of the Kurdistan Workers' Party insurgency
Support altblurb in principle, but the insurgency article needs more updates. This is a major step in a serious conflict. The article is generally good, but only the lead & infobox have been updated with the latest events. The '2025 ceasefire' section halts at March this year, with no explanation of the recent events. That needs sorting out, as does the table that is orange-tagged for original research. The article on the party is no better, with just one unreferenced sentence on the ceasefire and a huge copy-paste of the PKK statement, which is probably copyright infringement. Modest Geniustalk14:02, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article now has two sentences (with one reference) of updates, which still isn't sufficient. It shouldn't be hard to write a paragraph about this, given the numerous media reports that are available. Modest Geniustalk11:06, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality About 5 or so unsourced paragraphs, one orange tagged section (which may not need to be tagged but one should check if the sources support the data in that tab) and some bad proseline in the latter third of the article. The item is significant enough for ITN, but quality is far from ready. Masem (t) 15:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, oppose on quality the end of such a long insurgency is definitely notable enough for ITN, but agree with Masem that the orange tags need to be addressed. FlipandFlopped㋡19:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on significance and quality. There are a few inline citation needed tags, but no orange or red section tags, nor are any needed, so if I'm reading ITNCRIT correctly this is acceptable. For the humungous length of the article, it's in pretty decent shape sourcing-wise. Toadspike[Talk]08:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support End to a 46-year insurgency which killed tens of thousands of people.
Admin comment I've gone through the article and either deleted or hidden all unreferenced content. I've also protected a suitable image ("Female PKK guerrillas pictured"). However, the article is too thin on updates; there are a mere two sentences in the body and nothing in the lead. From my perspective, once that's been amended, this could get posted. Schwede6620:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support—A major, long-running insurgency that has had a long-term and often destabilizing effect on the nation of Turkey is coming to an end. This is very significant news, and very worthy of a blurb. I agree with the consensus that the altblurb is preferable. I haven't reviewed the article's quality, but support for a blurb is always contingent upon adequate sourcing. Kurtis(talk)18:06, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nice4What: That edit fixed the problem, bringing the update to two referenced paragraphs. Thanks. I agree the article is now good enough to post - but it wasn't ready until after you added that material. Modest Geniustalk13:01, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At least two police officers are killed and three others are injured in a roadside bombing targeting a police vehicle in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. (CTV News)
Five people are killed, dozens are injured including three critically, and hundreds are displaced in a fire at a four-story apartment building in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States. (WTMJ-TV)(CNN)
A runner collapses and later dies near the finish line during running event Loop Leeuwarden in Leeuwarden, Netherlands, causing the organizers to cancel the event. (NOS)
A man hangs desperately on a burning hot air balloon and falls to his death in Zacatecas, Mexico. Two others were injured.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: Czech organist who played internationally, served as rector of the Brno Academy and was instrumental in working towards a new concert hall there: the cornerstone is laid. She had no article.--Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:07, 16 May 2025 (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.
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:ITNQUALITY.
Oppose barely more than a stub at 1400 characters. If this is all the information and sources about him, then also not convinced he's actually notable enough for an article, but that is a separate question. For now, WP:ITNQUALITY is not met. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support As of now article is about 1600 bytes of prose which is over the minimum required for DYK (and my personal benchmark), which is 1500. Short, yes, but it meets all requirements of citation, etc. ❤HistoryTheorist❤01:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Slightly smaller than is required for ITN. More expansion would absolutely mean this article meets expectations; until then, no dice. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist800013:49, 16 May 2025 (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) 2024–25 Basketball Champions League Winner
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.
The best teams play on the Euroleague, but is on a franchise system just like NBA and what they had wanted to do with the soccer European Super League. This has clubs enter via merit but since the best clubs bypass this competition the level is lower than the Euroleague's. Howard the Duck (talk) 03:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing that says a non ITNR sports event can't be posted, but one must show why, if that event is not at ITNR, its significance to be posted on its own for ITNC. Masem (t) 12:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The top tier of European basketball is the Euroleague, which we already have on ITNR. Our article on the European professional club basketball system indicates that the Basketball Champions League is a less prestigious competition run by a different organisation. We already post at least three basketball competitions per year and I don't think this one is sufficiently impactful to include as well. Modest Geniustalk13:46, 12 May 2025 (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.
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:ITNQUALITY.
At least seven people die and others are injured over two districts in Mogadishu, Somalia, after a flood triggered by severe rainfall sweeps infrastructure including Aden Adde Airport. The rain also collapses nine houses and floods over 200 others. (Reuters)(Devdiscourse)
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:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: English "teenage founder of the Corydon Singers and commanding Covent Garden bass", as the 13 May obit says, - there wasn't much of an article until that came, finally.--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 15 May 2025 (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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
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:ITNQUALITY.
It was NOT unreferenced. In fact, there is a note immediately following it that says "the source at the bottom of the infobox deals with this", which it does. However, to make it more obvious, I've added a source direct to the birth date and place. HiLo48 (talk) 08:52, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The death date is inconsistent. The prose sources "in May 2025" to an announcement which make no mention of a timeline for his death. The lead and ibx has an unsourced 11 May.—Bagumba (talk) 03:50, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article:Kosmos 482 (talk·history·tag) Blurb: A 1970s failed Venus probe from the Soviet Union named "Kosmos 482" re-enters the earth's atmosphere, landing west of the island of Java in the Indian Ocean. (Post) Alternative blurb:Kosmos 482 lands in a part of the Indian Ocean, west of the city of Jakarta, Indonesia, after losing its tracking over Germany. Alternative blurb 2: A failed Venus probe enters the earth's atmosphere over India, landing west of Jakarta, Indonesia, in the eastern Indian Ocean
Nominator's comments: Long anticipated crash landing, considering back in 1972 and 1981, many pieces of the main bus of this probe fell back into earth. a few in 1972, and others in around 1978-1981. There is still ongoing coverage of this probe after it fell. Passes WP:N because of this, it has had coverage before the event and after the event.2606:9400:98A0:92A0:C4D9:BD2C:F4D8:E357 (talk) 15:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)}}[reply]
Oppose I personally think it's really cool that a failed 50 year old probe just reentered the atmosphere, but in reality, it just crashed harmlessly into the ocean. I'd say this is good faith, but it's not very important, nor did it have an effect on anything. qw3rty22:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb Interesting event getting coverage that would help diversify ITN. An argument could be made that this is DYK and not ITN but I would personally like to see this posted. The article is in good shape. I also fixed the grammar of the original blurb. --SpectralIon03:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Misleading blurbs The alt blurbs read as if the probe landed sofly somewhere on the island of Java, near Jakarta. The original blurb sounds more correct, although too wordy. Besides that, weak oppose in terms of notability - no damage and no injuries; besides, space junk crashes frequently on Earth. Khuft (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality. The article really glosses over how this mission failed. Its interesting about it finally reentering the atmosphere and crash, but the article needs to properly reflect the whole mission. Masem (t) 17:34, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It came down roughly when predicted and fell into the ocean. There was no damage and no hardware has been recovered. This was a mildly diverting story for a few days, but will quickly be forgotten. This would make a nice DYK if the article can be sufficiently expanded (or brought to GA standard), but it's not significant enough for an ITN blurb. Modest Geniustalk13:50, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's been over a week since creation so unless we can get this article to 70,000 bytes within the next few days (current size 17,000 bytes) or to GA quality it won't find itself at DYK. Departure– (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2025 (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.
Oppose on the quality issue raised in the last related nomination, in that there were at least five separate articles covering this one flare-up and rife with POV issues. Significance of this is ITN-worthy but we need these articles sorted out first. Masem (t) 14:23, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose we keep posting the same, relatively minor, story. The cease-fire line, and the occasional skirmish, are over 75-years old. Notwithstanding that, the articles are a hot mess; why there's actually 2 3 articles I don't know. Nfitz (talk) 15:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Reports indicate that Pakistan has violated the ceasefire, which could lead to a resumption of hostilities.--9ninety (talk) 16:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support on notability, as the sole blurb needed for the conflict as the previous one was pulled per ERRORS. The ceasefire's shaky, yes, but per Al-Jazeera the ceasefire has been agreed to by both sides and the "explosions" appear routine and nothing's happened since then; this is akin to what Israel calls a ceasefire, and most of us rightfully have no problem posting those on their own merits. Oppose on quality, as the article that should be the target, 2025 India–Pakistan conflict, still has two orange tags. Departure– (talk) 01:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Reports indicate that both countries have already violated the ceasefire. This makes it about as credible as any ceasefire Israel makes. --SpectralIon03:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait – More recent news indicates that the ceasefire still holds despite several violations (per CNN ), but those violations and wording from Indian officials indicate that the ceasefire is shaky at best. ArkHyena (they/any) 11:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is in good condition and sourcing is complete. Suggesting this to be posted as soon as possible before it is swallowed by the inevitable archiving bot. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael10:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is in good condition and sourcing is complete. Suggesting this to be posted as soon as possible before it is swallowed by the inevitable archiving bot. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael10:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The entire bibliography section is completely unreferenced. To be frank, I think the article would be in a post-worthy state (even if bordering on a stub) if that section were completely removed. The entire biography section is otherwise well-cited. FlipandFlopped㋡23:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is in good condition and sourcing is complete. Suggesting this to be posted as soon as possible before it is swallowed by the inevitable archiving bot. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael10:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Got those now, too. Hopefully, this can still be promoted. Lemon was one of the classiest players in baseball and deserves the main page attention. Cheers~ Cbl62 (talk) 16:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't a clear winner, though. That's my point. Unless the blurb is "Cardinals conclude the papal conclave" or some variant an election with obvious unknown results shouldn't be nominated. Departure– (talk) 16:34, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, which is within the next hour. I'm invoking WP:IAR by nominating this now, as there is a 100% chance it'll be posted. —EF516:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support once we know who was elected and the name taken. I would have the blurb mention both the papal name and the personal name of the one elected. Gust Justice (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Simply saying they have elected a pope isn't a worthy article to post, wait until they announce who the new pope is Egg470 (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait and post when announced. This is ITNR (change in most relevant head of state/government) and the quality is fine. With white smoke up we should know shortly and we can add the details. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions16:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support within an hour, the new pope will be announced. So, please keep the blurb nomination open in order to update the blurb once the name is announced. I also agree that this is ITNR so we should update the blurb according to how ITNR guideline does. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 16:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Everyone is really gunning to get this on the front page. The pope hasn't been announced, but he will be within the hour. No reason to rush things, obviously whether to post it won't be controversial.Support alt 3 There we go. Estreyeria (talk) 16:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why the rush to nominate? I think everyone recognizes that we aren't going to post this until we have the actual name of the new pope. Mlb96 (talk) 16:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, he's going to be announced in the next hour, no? Per above, I invoked WP:IAR given this will 100% be posted regardless today. —EF516:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, like seriously. The entirety of ITN really wants to get this on the front page lmao, but please wait atleast until we have an official name. TwistedAxe[contact]17:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait and close this pointlessly premature nomination. We are an encyclopaedia, not a breaking news service. Even once the winner has been announced, their biographical article needs to be updated and brought up to a good enough standard to be bold-linked from the main page. That work hasn't even begun yet. Nominations should not be made until after the event has happened and the article has been updated. Modest Geniustalk17:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
usually with an election the article on the election is the bold-linked one, which in this case would be the article on the conclave. ✨ 4 🧚♂amKING17:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait: Hold your horses. We don't even have a name to report on. When his identity is known, let's totally put it up. BOTTO(T•C)17:16, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Make that more than a tiny bit. Friends, the purpose of ITN is to showcase quality articles, not get things out fast, and there's very little analysis and context for this result right now. In fact, when I made the above comment, there was a glaring typo in the conclave article and the new pope's article was not updated at all. Please check the quality of the articles. And until this edit is published, the best blurbs weren't even bolded. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Currently, the new pope's article is in no state of posting. There's formatting issues, duplicating sections, and accidental mass reversions from edit conflicts, and I've edit conflicted four times in a row now trying to fix that and failing to. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maintaining my oppose for now - I still don't think the article on Leo XIV is up to quality or otherwise properly updated. Departure– (talk) 17:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is ITNR. The only thing that matters is the quality of the articles. It's been predetermined this us important. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support, the article looks decent enough now. The blurb should mention Peru where he was active for long periods, instead of a narrow North American image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:36, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment per discussion as WP:ERRORS, I switched this to "United States-born" per the overwhelming coverage in the news focusing on his birth country and not his birth continent. «Gonzo fan2007(talk) @ 19:57, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"United States-born" is so awkward. Why not just "American-born"? We are an English encyclopedia after all. Or if we're going to be real sticklers about it (despite the fact that in English, "American" means "From the US"), then "US-born" works too. There's really little doubt anyone reading the front page is not going to know what the US is. -- RockstoneSend me a message!20:59, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting Support Massive international news, however are we going to consider his ties to Peru in the blurb? He was Archbishop in Peru afterall. Normalman101 (talk) (late signature)
Comment. Why "United States-born"? Since it's bigger, the focus should be on North America. I think "overwhelming coverage in the news focusing on his birth country" is unconvincing - most of the "overwhelming coverage" in question is American. We are an encyclopedia, not an echo of editorials. —Brigade Piron (talk) 22:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
BBC, Al Jazeera, dawn.com (hard to see but its there!) all have on their front page that Leo is the first US pope. I wouldn't be opposed to also adding Bishop of Chiclayo, Peru or somethign to that effect QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 22:21, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that 'North America' should be preferred in the blurb. If you take a deeper look at the sources, even though 'American' is mentioned in the titles, first pope born in/from 'North America' is in the text (e.g. [The Washington Post]). There are also reliable sources that use 'North American' (e.g. The Telepgraph). If we want to underline that he's the first in a geographical context, we should always refer to a wider geographical area, which in this case is North America. Another option is to simply remove that fact from the blurb as redundant. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
> we should always refer to a wider geographical area
Firstly, I'm not sure he does release it, he says "that's with jdflynn", perhaps that's the true copyright holder of the work? Secondly, I think for the licence to be valid the copyright holder should release it somewhere formally with that licence (e.g. Commons or Flickr), or file a Commons:OTRS ticket to the effect that he's releasing it. I wouldn't put on the main page until that's done. —Amakuru (talk) 14:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also prefer the bold link to the person rather than the election process, parallel to Merz, - there are many more Catholics on earth than Germans;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This is like posting the US election on polling day and removing it the next. Could be over tomorrow for all we know. EF521:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a similar nomination was closed a few days ago. This is not an unprecedented process - there was a conclave 12 years ago when Francis became pope. Natg 19 (talk) 21:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the fact that it is happening in the extremely digitalised world of messengers, smartphones, so that it can be followed live, but I am also interested in the answer. BilboBeggins (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose since the bulk takes place behind closed doors, the only reporting we can do is "nope, wasn't selected today". The selection will very likely be a good standalone itnc, but the process is not. Masem (t) 22:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Instead of nominating "Ongoing" event of Papal conclave, i will rather agree for nominate a blurb about the result of the conclave (which is similar to how ITNR does). The result of the conclave will be declared either on May 8 or 9, depending of white smoke from Vatican's chimney. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 22:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've tried to clean up the bibliography section with verifiable posts, and added a more extensive bibliography in the external links section. Yakikaki (talk) 19:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose at this time We clearly should post the recent strikes, and then if there's continued hostilities, then move to ongoing. We shouldn't bypass a blurb for this. Masem (t) 00:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if a full-scale war breaks out, we could consider posting it for ongoing, but right now it's 'only' missile strikes and plane shootdowns, besides which it's already covered by the ITN item just below. Chorchapu (talk|edits) 01:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait on notability (likely will roll to support at some point). Strong oppose on quality. As you say, it's a developing story. Departure– (talk) 20:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per the sources, all flights at New Islamabad International Airport are suspended, the strikes resulted in one death and two injuries. Pakistan's air force is mobilized, and their defense minister claims an escalation of conflict is imminent. India claims strikes were targeted at some variant of terrorist sites in Jammu and Kashmir region. The limited scope should be specified in the blurb. Departure– (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Major escalation between two nuclear powers but Oppose on quality as of now edit: it Appears to be in good quality now but some of it reads like a bit much like AI LLM Von bismarck (talk) 20:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Notable development between two nuclear-armed neighbors, article is now in sufficient quality to be posted on the Main Page (thank you to the editors who quickly did this!) Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks♥) 21:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This has become a major escalation, especially now that Pakistan vowed to retaliate. Article looks to be of fine quality now. PrimalMustelid (talk) 21:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support, article could do with more improvement though. Nowhere does the article say cities were targeted, maybe Template:Tq. The response can be added to the blurb when it happens, worth starting an ongoing nomination if this goes beyond the two exchanges. Kowal2701 (talk) 21:45, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability and note I would also recommend nominating this for ongoing if tensions are still high and further retaliatory attacks unfolding by the time blurb rolls off. Neutral on quality, agree with above that the article could be further improved but it has been rapidly expanded so far. FlipandFlopped㋡21:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose on quality of the second article - can we please nominate after the article is more than three sentences long? EF523:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but then why is it also nommed? If you nominate two articles, you have to keep both up to quality. The Kashmir article is also nommed, so in my view it should be up to par. EF523:11, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That article is only about Pakistan shooting down three Indian aircraft. Not sure it is even necessary to have it as a separate article, and certainly not the main story for ITN. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as obvious. Dramatic escalation between two nuclear-armed states, and unlike Iran-Israel there’s the grim possibility of a direct land war as well. TheKip(contribs)23:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Having two separate articles for what is clearly one connected event doesn't make any sense. These should be merged before we post. Masem (t) 00:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dislike the current blurb, which gives undue weight to the Pakistani retaliation without expanding on it at all via an article. Suggest moving it to the end (e.g. "..., leading to Pakistani retaliation), or linking the newly-created 2025 Pakistani strikes in Kashmir (which is of dubious quality and may be merged into the former article in the future). DatGuyTalkContribs02:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, Alt1 also feels the worst to me to read, as if it's very obviously missing information, where Alt2, and the original do not (despite the lattler fully omitting Pakistan's respone) V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 03:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt2, the first blurb doesn't inlcude any details regarding Pakistans response, while Alt1 leaves out how Pakistan responded, and overall feels rough V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 02:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blurb modified ALT1 didn't feel quite right but it's obvious – Pakistan's retaliation should have been mentioned last. I've reworded it. Thanks for your feedback, and if there are further improvements, please debate them. Schwede6603:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support on notability but oppose having 2025 Pakistani strikes in Kashmir as the bold link. That's just two paragraphs, barely more than a stub, only discusses the Pakistani retaliation, and is currently nominated for both deletion and merging. 2025 India–Pakistan strikes is in much better shape and gives a more balanced coverage of the attacks by both sides. Modest Geniustalk09:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have closed the merge discussion with WP:SNOWing consensus to merge. @Fuzheado , @Schwede66 or another admin should consider unlinking the page. I believe the redirect is no longer appropriate to keep on the Main Page. Soni (talk) 12:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Bad writing" is a bit of a gratuitous insult... How would you phrase it differently then? I was aware of this issue, but the problem I had in phrasing it is that some of the cities are internationally-recognised Pakistani while others are only in the Pakistani-controlled areas, it's hard to phrase that neutrally without a bit of repetition. And the third mention is to clarify that Pakistan retaliated. This was labelled "a good rewrite" at WP:ERRORS too. —Amakuru (talk) 12:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Amakuru, how about "India conducts missile strikes on several areas in Pakistan, prompting the country to retaliate with strikes of its own"? The "bad writing" was completely unnecessary, I agree, but I do understand the point Arion got across. —EF512:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Saying escrita ruim (maybe because the adjective comes after the noun) doesn't sound as an insult in Portuguese, but I don't knew it is rude in English, sorry… ArionStar (talk) 14:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"India conducts missile strikes on several Pakistani and Pakistani-controlled cities, with the latter reciprocally retaliating." ArionStar (talk) 14:14, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why not some variant of "India and Pakistan exchange missile strikes following the Pahalgam attack in Indian Kashmir"? The Pahalgam attack being the root cause of this, to me, seems like a major part of this. Departure– (talk) 14:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That could also work. Template:Tq The only issue is that it might give the impression that the Pahalgam attack is also part of "the news", but having it be unbolded and preceded by "the" should make it clear enough. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this is the clearest blurb we have proposed. Pahalgam attack is clearly valuable context for this, and there's nearly no repetition here. I am also open to Enby's Alt4 below being modified Soni (talk) 17:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm surprised this is so for quick. We already posted the first attack by "Pakistan" into Kashmir, right? This is just routine tit-for-tat showmanship. Did we report on the Iranian missile attacks on Pakistan and the resulting Pakistan missile attacks on Iran last year? Nfitz (talk) 00:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is very contentious whether the terrorist group represents Pakistan, and this attack is the first one in this saga in which India the state unquestionably used weapons on Pakistan territory. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:17, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot just unquestionably claim Pakistan made the first attack into Kashmir. Thus, the Indian missiles on Pakistan count as the first interaction unquestionably known to be between the two states, not just an unofficial terrorist group. And either way, we posted Iran-Pakistan only when Pakistan retaliated. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:42, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - this item has been pulled for the time being, per discussion at WP:ERRRORS, it is orange tagged and seemingly unstable with possible POV pushing. If the issues are sorted out it can be reinstated. —Amakuru (talk) 14:10, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm confused as to why this got pulled without an immediate replacement. It's clearly the most notable world event of the week even if it doesn't escalate further. Can we not just come up with a simple NPOV sentence about the skirmish that mirrors whatever reputable news outlets are calling it? --Posted byPikamander2(Talk) at 18:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is POV concerns in the article, so article quality is not met, not an issue with the blurb sentence. Natg 19 (talk) 19:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse pull Every time I looked at this, it seemed to be poor quality with misinformation, partisan claims and little independent confirmation of the facts. Per WP:ARBIP, India/Pakistan is a controversial topic and so care and caution is required. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Template:S The topic is extremely newsworthy, but the state of the Wikipedia articles on the general topic is currently waiting for sorting out scope and deciding on mergers: there are at least five articles with almost the same scope: 2025 India–Pakistan strikes, 2025 India–Pakistan air engagements, Operation Bunyanun Marsoos, Indo-Pakistani war of 2025, 2025 India–Pakistan standoff. Until the scope of these articles is sorted out, the quality is likely to remain poor because of the inefficiency in adding parallel content to multiple articles and trying to sort out parallel editorial conflicts. There is no point attracting wide attention to what is currently an editorial mess that needs sorting out. Boud (talk) 12:07, 10 May 2025 (UTC) (update below Boud (talk) 16:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC))[reply]
To add, there is now apparently a ceasefire , which if true, makes this no longer a newsworthy story (particularly with the quality issues). Masem (t) 12:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A ceasefire doesn't make the conflict any less newsworthy. It looks like soon there should be snow consensus to merge in most of the sub-articles. Right now, the links have disappeared from the lead even though the merge requests have not been formally closed. The Template:T and Template:T tags at the top don't really seem to be justified. But the quality of the article as a whole does still need some work: the fact that the merge tags disappeared prior to the merger debates being closed is a sign of chaotic editing ... Boud (talk) 17:02, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The truce seems to be serious Template:Small, and the parallel-articles chaos seems to be sorting itself out, but overall the ratio of inexperienced to experienced editor activity might be too high for the quality to become acceptable on ITN. It's good that there are lots of new editors motivated to edit, and they'll learn from the experience, but WP:ITNQUALITY could still be some time off. There's even editing opposition to encyclopedic coverage of international law aspects in this article about an international armed conflict. Boud (talk) 10:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Template:S2025 India–Pakistan conflict is generally looking a lot better quality than it was a few days ago. The merge debates of the main parallel articles have been closed as WP:SNOW and done. There's a standoff with the 2025 India–Pakistan standoff article but that's not a problem - it'll have its scope clarified or else be merged or AfD'd later. There's an RS tag in the timeline section of 2025 India–Pakistan conflict, but I think that's really just an indication that longer term debate about sourcing for South Asian sociopolitical events is needed and either WP:RSP or a subject-specialist WP:RSP page might be needed.Template:PbMy impression is that the quality is enough that new participants will not overwhelm the currently active editors. There seem to be a bunch of moderate-experience editors whose edits are not strictly per WikiLaw but close enough and well-intentioned and with sufficient experience that the editing community together is more or less effective.Template:PbI've proposed altblurb3 to update to the current content of the article. Boud (talk) 16:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably Template:Tq could be removed from the blurb? The word "briefly" already indicates that this (hopefully) has stopped, at least for the moment. Boud (talk) 16:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Close At least in terms of orange cleanup tagsTemplate:DiffTemplate:Diff with rather dubious justification, I guess the article is not going to satisfy ITN quality requirements any time soon. The mix of editors is enough that the quality should gradually improve, but the time scale is more likely to be weeks or months, not hours. Boud (talk) 16:37, 13 May 2025 (UTC) (+bouncing back into place diffs Boud (talk) 16:41, 13 May 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Wait until the new pope is chosen. The last several conclaves have only taken two days, I don't see a point in posting the beginning of the conclave when it'll need to be replaced a day later. Estreyeria (talk) 19:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait on principle. I actually sympathize in spirit with the conclave itself being newsworthy, but the issue is that we have an article quality criterion for a reason. We should guide readers to visit the bolded article only once it has met our quality standards. Even if it is "ok" now, if we preemptively post it before the "main event" so to speak (the selection of a new pope), then we won't be able to make a quality assessment about the article's substantive coverage of the conclave and the new pope (checking for adequate prose, references, readability, etc), before it goes up on the main page. FlipandFlopped㋡19:36, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and suggest close. This is premature. Assuming article quality is up to scratch, the actual election of the new pope will be posted per ITNR. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support It's a pretty slow burner as geopolitical hot spots go, but periodic attacks on shipping, and retaliatory strikes are still happening. Article quality appears adequate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It might have been caused by the Gaza war, but it is in its current state a completely different conflict from what's happening in Gaza 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨Abo Yemen (𓃵)16:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - ceasefire just happened between the US and the houthis so this conflict isn't really that important for ongoing now. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Israeli strikes yesterday and today were limited/retaliatory and unlikely to routinely continue, while the U.S. just announced they’ve reached a ceasefire for their strikes. TheKip(contribs)23:50, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support for altblurb or altblurb2 - its not that often that a chancellor is elected in germany, the last three were in 2021, 2005 and 1998. --LennBr (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We posted the election result, which is an ITN/R item, so no need to post today's political drama. As for the historical first, it sounds more suitable for DYK.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I read this in the exact opposite way. The emphasis in my opinion is the CDU/CSU parliamentary victory, not the leadership of Merz. My reading of that ITNR note is that we should not post the same story twice, e.g. the election of Donald Trump and the inauguration of Donald Trump, so this does not qualify, as a parliamentary election is not the same story as the changing of a German chancellor. Without knowing anything about German politics, I would not assume that these are the same story. Natg 19 (talk) 17:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support first blurb. the newsworthy story here is the failure to elect in the first vote. This isn't DYK, it's major political news. Awkward42 (talk) [the alternate account of Thryduulf (talk)] 15:01, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose given that we typically post the result of the election itself, not subsequent appointment itself. Especially given that the outcome which was widely expected, ultimately did happen. If Merz failed to get elected on the second attempt and/or had to step down as a Chancellor candidate, then it clearly would be so notable that it should be posted. In any case, the first blurb should not be used the way it is phrased. It sounds a tad too sensationalistic for ITN. It would be better phrased as "after failing to secure a majority in the first round". Gust Justice (talk) 15:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Arguably this isn't the election result; it's the result of the coalition agreement being formed. If different parties banded together Merz wouldn't be chancellor since it isn't the general election that decides who the chancellor will be, rather it is dependant on how the subsequent negotiations go. ✨ 4 🧚♂amKING22:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support- election result is one thing, actual change of the head of the government is another. It was not 100% certain that Merz would become the Chancellor, that depended on the coalition agreement.Wi1-ch (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is in the news and quite significant. In any case, it's clearly ITN/R as the Chancellor heads the executive and the first vote shows that this wasn't a sure thing. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is the same case as when Donald Trump was inaugurated. We posted the election with a big picture if Merz, so we don't post the inauguration, even though there was a bit of drama and it's a couple of months later. If someone else had ended up being Chancellor them of course that would be a different thing. —Amakuru (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trump becoming president required the Congress to certify the results of the election, and as we've seen in recent history that is no longer a given. There isnt any real difference here, the ITN/R is for results of elections, and only have changes in heads of state/government except when that change was already posted as part of a general election. The change was already posted as part of a general election. nableezy - 16:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb This is a change in leader, which is ITN/R. The fact that he was not elected on the first vote is also noteworthy and doesn't really lengthen the blurb too much, so I would prefer that in the blurb. --SpectralIon17:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought I support Alt1 and believe this does meet ITN/R , as this is a change of head of government. The previous blurb that was posted was for the parliamentary election (Template:Tq), not for the election of the chancellor. Natg 19 (talk) 17:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Federal election already posted on 24 February: In the German federal election, the CDU/CSU, led by Friedrich Merz (pictured), wins the most seats in the Bundestag. per Departure. Grimes217:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The story here is that just because he leads the largest party, and as negotiated a coalition agreement, him becoming chancellor was not a formality, even though everyone thought it would be. Also, the election was over two months ago - even if it were the same story (which it isn't) it wouldn't be problematic to post it again after such a long interval. Thryduulf (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt2 per ITNR. Sure the election already happened, but it wasn't a formal change of government as we still didn't know what the coalition's composition would be. Scuba18:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree this is technically not ITNR because the election result itself was already posted. However, I would analogize this situation to how we have, in the past, posted two blurbs related to Mark Carney and also other countries with parliamentary systems. One vote about a new PM becoming the new Prime Minister, and another about the election itself. Even though both aren't ITNR and they are two related events part of the same overarching "story", in the circumstances they both could be notable enough to warrant an independent blurb. The surrounding political drama and in-depth news coverage over the failed vote makes this true: even if it is not ITNR, it is a distinct event which is in the news and being covered by the RS. FlipandFlopped㋡19:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Normally this would not be posted, but I think the failure of the first vote, which was supposed to be a mere formality pushes it over the edge. That failure also resulted in more international news coverage than it otherwise would have gotten. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions20:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think there is a lot of misunderstanding of the electoral process here. Winning the highest number of seats nearly never results in a path straight to governing, as the the vote share is split between many parties and unless one happens to get over 50% it doesn't mean anything. It is the electoral capabilities and negotiations which determine who will get the highest office, a process which can take weeks, months (like here) or even sometimes years (Belgian, Bulgarian crises for example) which means that this is on fact the result and event that dermines who governs, not the vote itself. Restored ITN/R the Chancellor in Germany is the head of Template:Strike government. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In no way shape or form is this ITN/R. Or, at least, per all known past application of the ITN/R rules. Where there's an election we post that. The subsequent changing of leader is assumed, and is not then posted as a duplicate. —Amakuru (talk) 21:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping I strongly disagree. The election doesn't determine the head of government, it merely decides which party gets how many seats. The only reason Merz was hailed as the winner was due to political predictions and likely outcome of this process of choosing the chancellor, which happens after the election. Technically CDU could have joined a coalition with the AFD, which was unlikely only due to political will of those two parties, or if they wished, they could have chosen a different chancellor in their coalition agreement with SPD. The election result does not determine any of this. Abcmaxx (talk) 14:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, by the same token we should have posted Trump's inauguration, because the election then didn't decide who would be president, it merely selected which parties could send delegates to the electoral college to decide the president. The fact is, it was widely reported after the election that Merz would be chancellor based on the results and the stated intentions of the parties, we posted the election on that basis with a picture of him, and now - lo and behold - he is chancellor. We've simply posted the same story twice. And yes, there was a bit of shenanigans yesterday when he didn't win the first vote, but so what. That was just a flash-in-the-pan suited to a news ticker, and it's not that aspect of it that's been posted today. I don't object to the story being posted on its own merits, if people so desire, but I do object to the same story being posted twice masquerading as ITN/R both times. It's one or the other. —Amakuru (talk) 15:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support it's been some time since the election, and the failure on the first ballot is notable in itself. Certainly more notable than the World Snooker Championship and some of the other sports events that, Lord only knows why, get to be ITN/R This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ITN's purpose is to incentivize feature quality content about recent events; "significance" is just a secondary thing. Having a list at ITNR balances the prominence of different sports and incentivizes them all. Plus, you're drastically underestimating the significance of this year's World Snooker Championship, but that's another discussion to be had. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Kiril Simeonovski, I don't think that the procedural second round is noteworthy enough to entail a blurb on its own and as mentioned before, the election result was posted as well. Ornithoptera (talk) 19:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - article looks in good shape. Just finished watching the game, very entertaining and congrats to the first winner from China! —Amakuru (talk) 19:58, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not, but it will make an entertaining TFA down the line! I believe he may be the amateur winner too, although presumably that's somewhat nuanced... —Amakuru (talk) 21:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unless someone has managed to take a picture in the auditorium (where phones are banned) I think it's probably unlikely; someone may have managed to meet the players before or after play, I suppose. Black Kite (talk)10:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Phone use is prohibited during match-play (although this is sometimes ignored and elicits rebukes from the referee), but may be used at other times? So a photo may not be so unlikely. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting comment: this is an excellent article which deserves a lot of praise. It is exemplary for ITN sports items; I wish they were all like this. Congratulations to everyone who worked on it, particularly Template:U who seems to have been the lead author. Modest Geniustalk11:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 1,250 characters of text means it's a stub. Three paragraphs of career, of which one entirely unsourced, as with the claim he was an assistant manager. I don't know why articles are continuously nominated in a condition like this. Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Soft Support as of now So far, the article looks comprehensive and well referenced. I believe with the ongoing rapid update, it will even be better. SurveyMonkey...13:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. What? We post the result of the elections, not an interim first round result. Wait for the second round, it's only two weeks away. —Amakuru (talk) 13:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose posting a preliminary election result, support posting the PM's resignation when a) it happens and b) the article is properly updated. Bremps...18:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support only after May 18 run-off We can post the result of presidential election once second round official result is revealed on May 18 after election runoff vote. Given that in the country use runoff system and no candidates had more than 50% of votes, the blurb needs to be on hold until after May 18 runoff election results. Regarding the resignation of PM, i Support them to be included if the blurb was updated, as long as it didn't prematurely coincided with posting of first round election results. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 19:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose When the debate is over importance, we should gauge not based on personal opinion but rather whether it is being picked up by reliable sources and covered in depth. In this case, there is no significant coverage from major outlets like the NYT, BBC, CBC, etc. There is really only a hodgepodge of miscellaneous articles from the AP, some European news sources, and one article in the Toronto Star. FlipandFlopped㋡15:28, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Except for the quotes section (which I removed) that can be moved to the sister project, this seems whole and well-cited enough. Writing is a little bit sentimental but it's not major enough to stop posting. Bremps...18:47, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Bibliography needs references. Aside from the introduction, the body of the article does not appear to mention his political career outside of the election result tables (also unreferenced). SpencerT•C19:42, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The blurb alone will do for Singapore, we don't need the photo for this as the Australian election is more significant; per nom's comment that the results are a foregone conclusion. - Mailer Diablo16:53, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If both items are posted up at about the same time, it is customary to delay the switching to the second item's photo for about 24 hours. – robertsky (talk) 02:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb0, as it's important to note that this supermajority is simply a continuation of the norm rather than something new, as other users have noted. Loytra (talk) 05:14, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And the first round of the Romanian election today, with a second round expected on the 18th... lots of elections going on now I suppose. Chorchapu (talk|edits) 01:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb 2 as the initial blurb suggests a plurality win and therefore minority government, when all the major media is projecting a majority government. Melmann11:51, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite the same as the Canadian Labour Party won a plurality of seats, while the Australian Labor Party seems to be on track to win a majority of seats. Prince Of Iso (talk) 14:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb2 BBC's even calling it a "landslide" now. Other blurbs would be more appropriate in a plurality result. Yo.dazo (talk) 14:35, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb 2, because as @331dot pointed out, the Australian election already resulted in a majority even in the current unfinished vote counting, not a plularity minority like the Canadian election. Additionally, lean waitfor atleast 2-3 hours just for the final seat results, even if it's just a marginal result for Labor's majority seat number. SymphonyWizard72 (talk) 15:35, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article looks to be in good shape, it's long enough and has a good amount of prose. Could use some more info in the results section, though. Chorchapu (talk|edits) 17:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As long as the official count is not done, maybe no one will. Also most election results page don't even have it, aside from sometimes a boldened "Results from XXXX year Country X Election" text. SymphonyWizard72 (talk) 16:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Career section is mostly a list of positions without information or depth on what he did in each of those roles. SpencerT•C04:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the DYK check showed that the page was just over 1,000 characters of prose text, with the stub limit being 1,500. The entire first 20 years of his club career up to age of 37 is one sentence sourced to a database. My discussion here just about proved that WP:ITNQUALITY is whatever two or three people in a discussion deem it to be, but surely this can't be posted unless it passes Wikipedia's stub limit. Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this is more fall-out from the Yoon impeachment, changing the acting president so candidates can run in the election to be Yoon's permanent replacement. I don't see anywhere in the proposed article that discusses these changes and the blurb is far too long. I won't !vote for now, but I suspect we'd be better off waiting for the election to choose an actual president, rather than changes in the acting head of state. Modest Geniustalk15:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for the presidential election in a few weeks time. I've tried to find more English-language media coverage of this, but there's very little available, which already tells us something about the importance. This is a change in an acting position, seemingly as part of the election campaign; no president is taking anything more than caretaker action until after the election on 3 June. We should therefore wait for the winner of the election, and post that. Regardless of whether an acting president does or doesn't count as a head of state for ITNR purposes (which is debatable), we can WP:IAR to get a more sensible outcome. Modest Geniustalk12:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As of right now, this has been the norm in the Republic of Korea, do not see why it would be important to do this, we posted the fall of Damascus and the kicking out of Bashar as president of Syria, and his replacement. That was because of its massive reprecussions on the politics within that nation and around it. Does not mean we should post this. Shaneapickle (talk) 16:25, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose/Wait: agree with Modest Genius that we should not post changes to the acting president, and wait to post the winner of the election in June. Natg 19 (talk) 17:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Neither of them were elected to the office, and this dosen't seem unexpected. Simply politicians doing politics. The Yoon impeachment was already run as a blurb and I believe his arrest was as well, so this has been well covered. Normalman101 (talk) 18:10, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Never in South Korean history was there a acting x3 president. Lee is now tasked with managing US trade talks, a pretty important decision in my opinion. Catalk to me!22:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would probably wait for now. Also, small mistake. I don't think Choi succeeded him; Choi resigned before Duck-soo did, so Ju-ho straight assumed the presidency. Either way, this can be circled back around to after the election, maybe in a blurb where [X] succeeds acting president Ju-ho (or whoever's in power atp).
Oppose. Just jockeying for position and politicking in the wake of an unusual situation that we already posted. We'll post the result of the election and that's sufficient. —Amakuru (talk) 23:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm pretty sure we've already had at least one posting about the presidential crisis in Seoul. This (these) are just caretaker/interim Presidents - as far as I know none are running in the election. Carney was in full control of the government, with no election scheduled for over 7 months! That he chose to call an early one after it had been blurbed isn't relevant. They are separate events - these are linked. Nfitz (talk) 04:24, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. On March 24, Han reinstated as the acting president of Korea as Constitutional Court decides to not remove him. The event, which is the change of head of state, was not even nominated here. So I think this is an exception of "Change of head of state is ITNR" rule. Didgogns (talk) 06:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged as ITNR item, undisputedly qualifies as "Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at List of current heads of state and government". Howard the Duck (talk) 12:17, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not ITNR. We've already blurbed the collapse of the presidency, and these are a series of interim caretakers during an election. Nfitz (talk) 08:57, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Put in Ongoing/Oppose I am opposing per my oppose from earlier, but I agree with @Bremps put this in ongoing as this has blown out into a full political crisis due to a mistake that, by May 4th, will be the official 5 months since this happened, and since this political crisis has been exploded into something bigger, put it in ongoing. Shaneapickle (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its not a good ongoing story as these events are not news on a daily basis. It might be a long-term story due to how long this is taking, but its not new events every day that we expect in Ongoing. Masem (t) 20:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Surprised the fact that it was ITN/R was not caught earlier. Ju-ho's article might need to be expanded but the others are fine, I think this can be posted. --SpectralIon20:12, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not ITN/R. Only permanent leaders would be covered by that, this one is just acting and he'll be replaced in just a month's time after the election, which we'll of course post. We're not going to post every single twist and turn of this saga. —Amakuru (talk) 23:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We have posted every twist and turn of this saga though, I opposed the arrest of Yoon Suk-yeol and we posted that too. Leader for a month is not too insignificant and the uniqueness of two leaders resigning in succession only contributes to this being postable. SpectralIon04:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is correct re ITNR, but I will stress that this feels like a situation that IAR definitely applies due to these all being acting roles with an election for a permanent one in the next month or so. Masem (t) 12:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd implore to people not remove ITNR tags when the blurb actually undisputedly qualifies for it, and just argue WP:IAR if they feel that way. It's bordering on vandalism in having this reverted. You guys (not necessarily you Masem) won't do this on interim PM in European countries. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
IAR Oppose and wait for the election. The guy was never supposed to stick around for long, and South Korea keeps going through so many presidents that we can't blurb them all. The ITNR listing was clearly not designed for this. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:47, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as ITNR The article is of sufficient quality and is ITNR per Howard the Duck. IAR is a drastic measure that should only be resorted to in circumstances of last resort or where there is clearly a "gap" in how the ITNR rule was written. Here, it seems reasonable to post this and its within the plain language scope of the rule. Opposes on notability should be discarded within the consensus assessment unless they make a clear case as to why WP:IAR should apply. FlipandFlopped㋡23:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait I earlier opposed this blurb and I still stand by that, however we will blurb the election that is happening in under 1 month so we might as well wait. There is little english-language coverage and we have blurbed this general situation I believe twice, not to mention that we are running 4 election blurbs as of now. This would simply crowd the other blurbs and would have to be updated or (if it fell off) need to be reinstated at the time of the election in June. Normalman101 (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I Reviewed the archive for ITN and we have blurbed the declaration of martial law, yoon's impeachment, his arrest, and his removal. Not to mention that when the declaration was lifted the blurb was changed, this has been well covered even as important is it may be and we can easily wait a month. Normalman101 (talk) 18:30, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Neutral on whether to post this, but I've added an second altblurb which focuses specifically on the change in leadership. I think trying to explain the line of succession in a blurb is unwieldy. - Presidentmantalk · contribs (Talkback) 19:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ITNR and the article is in decent shape. ALT2 is probably best for simplicity. If the election was within a week, then maybe IAR would apply, but it is a month in the future. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions14:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
12:45 PM, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg)
Done. Black Kite (talk) 17:25, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
