Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
![]() | Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
![]() |
---|
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary[edit]
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps[edit]
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
Headers[edit]
Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated. Please do...[edit]
Please do not...[edit]
Suggesting updates[edit]There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
[edit]Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives
Sections
[edit]This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.
February 13
[edit]
February 13, 2025
(Thursday)
|
February 12
[edit]
February 12, 2025
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
Elon Musk and unions
[edit]Blurb: Several unions are suing to stop Elon Musk from accessing personal data of workers, students and retirees in different agency IT systems in his role as the head of the newly created DOGE agency. (Post)
News source(s): CBS, Politico, Forbes
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Shushugah (talk · give credit)
~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There is a huge mass of lawsuits thrown at Trump and Musk/DOGE that focusing on any one would be inappropriate. The idea of there being a constitutional crisis has gained traction in the media, so that itself may be an appropriate ongoing if readily confirmed and a good article was there for it. Masem (t) 23:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose trivial lawsuit. Scuba 00:21, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per @Masem plus WP:STUB QalasQalas (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) AMAN (naval exercise)
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: AMAN 2025, a multinational naval exercise organized by the Pakistan Navy, concluded in Karachi, featuring naval forces from more than 60 nations. (Post)
News source(s): Arab News, AA, GT, The News, Dawn
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
- Oppose - Article has not been updated (it is still in future tense even though the exercises presumably already happened) and this exercise seems fairly routine so I'm not sure how notable it is ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The article states that it is
held every two years
and the section on the 2025 drill has only about 3-4 sentences about it TNM101 (chat) 15:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC) - Oppose The section that's about this year's AMAN is only 2 paragraphs. I'm also noticing a few errors in the sentences, Doesn't look like it has been updated very well. TheHiddenCity (talk) 17:28, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Routine event, no indication of any lasting impacts, very little information available in the article. Modest Genius talk 17:31, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - if it's not even notable enough for it's own article, it's not ITN. And only one independent (and local) reference about it? Nfitz (talk) 17:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
2025 Greek presidential election
[edit]Blurb: Konstantinos Tasoulas (pictured) is elected President of Greece by the Hellenic Parliament. (Post)
News source(s): Ekathimerini in English
Credits:
- Nominated by Moraljaya67 (talk · give credit)
Moraljaya67 (talk) 14:13, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Is this ITNR? Even the article about the President states that it is mainly a ceremonial role TNM101 (chat) 14:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Per WP:ITN/R, the election of whoever administers the executive of their state/government qualifies (whether that be the head of state or head of government). That then references this list which says that the Greek PM is the office that administers the executive, not the president. So long story short: no, it's not ITN/R and I am going to remove that from the nom. Thanks for catching that TNM101. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:32, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, all changes to head of state are ITNR. even ceremonial ones like the King of England, or President of Greece. Scuba 20:00, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose This is not ITNR per TNM101 above, and seems to be a very ordinary and ceremonial election procedure which will not have any lasting significance. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:23, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Greek President is head of state, qualifies for ITNR. Scuba 20:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- The President of Greece is not a head of state that falls within the ITNR definition as it is currently worded. Because there has not been a "change, reelection or reappointment in the holder of the office which administers the executive of the [Greek] state", this is not ITNR. WP:OTHERSTUFF examples of times when we have incorrectly treated changes in head of state as ITNR despite them not actually administering anything, do not overrule the plain language of the ITNR rule itself. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Greek President is head of state, qualifies for ITNR. Scuba 20:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait until he becomes president. Sakellaropoulou is still currently the president. Scuba 20:01, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support since we post changes of ceremonial heads of state (president of Ireland or GermanyP routinely This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality, but I see no reason why this isn't an update to an encyclopedic subject. What ITN has done in the past is an "other stuff" argument in either direction. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:15, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- ??? Was this posted under the wrong section? we have a change in the head of state, that's ITNR. Scuba 00:22, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
February 11
[edit]
February 11, 2025
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
RD: Helen Hays
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
- Updated by CAWylie (talk · give credit) and Neutrality (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American ornithologist and conservationist. Obit published 11 February. Thriley (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Donn Moomaw
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Football Foundation
Credits:
- Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced. Death announced on this date. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - well cited ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:08, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Margarita Forés
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABS-CBN News
Credits:
- Nominated by Moraljaya67 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: She was a Filipino chef. The article looks good. Moraljaya67 (talk) 05:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There's some cn tags since a major source that was used throughout the article was a deadlink that redirected to a car ad and no longer supported some of the article's statements. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Moses Lim
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNA
Credits:
- Nominated by Robertsky (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Justanothersgwikieditor (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: A household name in Singapore, and likely was well-known to varying extents in other countries as he was part of the cast of the Under One Roof (Singaporean TV series) that was exported to multiple countries. – robertsky (talk) 03:54, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support One cn tag shouldn't keep this article from getting posted. Overall, well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - yep, looks good enough ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:07, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Philip Brady
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1], [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TVHead (talk · give credit), Afterwriting (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Happily888 (talk) 01:10, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There are still a few uncited statements in the article. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Unsourced section and some cn tags. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
February 10
[edit]
February 10, 2025
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Nigel McCrery
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3], [4]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Keith H99 (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Happily888 (talk) 01:10, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Publications section needs more citations, and a CN tag still remains in the article. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:44, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Sourcing issues. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Donald Shoup
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): parking.net
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American research professor of urban planning at University of California, Los Angeles. Author of The High Cost of Free Parking. Death published 10 February. Thriley (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose 2 cn tags still remain in the article. Additionally, the Bibliography section needs more ISBNS or references to fill out the section. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Bibliography has sourcing issues. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
2025 Guatemala City bus crash
[edit]Blurb: A bus falls off a bridge (rescue efforts pictured) over the Las Vacas River in Guatemala City, capital of Guatemala, killing at least 54 people and injuring several others. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
ArionStar (talk) 16:30, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment @ArionStar: I urge you to review pages like WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NEVENT to make sure that you are creating and nominating articles that actually are encyclopic articles on events, rather than simply reporting an event. In this case an article with one one sentence is far far too early to even consider for an ITN (we never post something that short). Please at least try to have the article with a minimum length (roughly 1500 chat of prise) before nominating here. I don't have an immediate comment here on this specific event, just that like several of your past ITNC noms, the articles have been woefully lacking in details and there has been no clear sign they can be expanded. Masem (t) 16:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait a moment… ArionStar (talk) 16:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem: the event become notable as the death toll is high and further investigations are underway. ArionStar (talk) 19:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- ArionStar, can you point to the notability guideline that supports this? Cause that sounds like utter bull. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Thebiguglyalien: WP:INDEPTH and WP:DIVERSE. From local TV Azteca to The New York Times or even The Times of India, an unrelated country… ArionStar (talk) 00:08, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- ArionStar, can you point to the notability guideline that supports this? Cause that sounds like utter bull. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem: the event become notable as the death toll is high and further investigations are underway. ArionStar (talk) 19:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait a moment… ArionStar (talk) 16:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Article is in no state for the front page right now.Support Looking much better. This is getting wide coverage and the number of casualties is significant. Estreyeria (talk) 16:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)- Oppose. One sentence. As Masem says, write the article before nominating it. Moscow Mule (talk) 17:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- I did something now. ArionStar (talk) 17:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Lean support: 55 killed in the worst road accident of 2025 and one of the deadliest in Latin America in recent years. There's also sources claiming it was Latin America's worst road accident. I was going to say oppose due to the article being a stub and due to bus crashes or road accidents in general being common in Latin America, but the article is in better condition. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 13:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - I wouldn't even say the article should be in mainspace due to the state its in, but that’s just me. EF5 17:30, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- @EF5: now it's good enough. ArionStar (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - I see this nom going the same way as the last bus plunge. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- The 'bus plunge' cliche is helping no-one. Are these deaths really less newsworthy because of the type of vehicle involved? 'Bus plunge' is mostly used an excuse not to post mass casualty events from developing countries. GenevieveDEon (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, the type of vehicle is entirely tied to how newsworthy. One person dying in a spacecraft is inherently far more newsworthy than one person dying in an automobile. Generally, a road accident is not encyclopedic. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- The 'bus plunge' cliche is helping no-one. Are these deaths really less newsworthy because of the type of vehicle involved? 'Bus plunge' is mostly used an excuse not to post mass casualty events from developing countries. GenevieveDEon (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Even with the article’s expansion, there’s just a single sentence on the accident itself - the reactions section is over twice as long. The Kip (contribs) 18:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Lean Oppose I can see the reasoning that this is a lot of deaths, but it's a literal bus plunge and there was just another a few days ago. I don't think this is getting posted.Changing my vote to Lean Support due to increased casualties, an improved article, the Escarcega crash looking unlikely to be posted, convincing arguments by others, etc. --SpectralIon 18:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)- Comment The article is better now. ArionStar (talk) 19:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong support I find myself once again pointing out that in past circumstances where extremely similar accidents occurred but with far less casualties, less global coverage, yet in North America, we posted the incident rather resoundingly: see e.g. Schoharie limousine crash, Humboldt Broncos bus crash, Carberry bus crash. We also posted 2024 Mmamatlakala bus crash after a series of oppose votes, before strong objections about a double standard ended up swaying the consensus decision towards posting. Similarly to the 2024 South Africa bus crash, this incident is attracting worldwide press coverage from Reuters to Australian media to the Times of India. Nobody has provided any reasoning for why this bus crash is less notable than other mass casualty incidents other than, "it's a bus plunge". I would say that because we regularly post lower casualty accidents with Americans/Canadians as opposed to Guatemalans, further elaboration is necessary. In fact, this crash strikes me as MORE notable than the American crashes we have posted because it occurred in a dense urban area - those accidents were all rural! Precedent is important, as is the avoidance of anglocentric double standards at ITN. FlipandFlopped ツ 20:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- I would’ve almost certainly voted against all 4, in retrospect. The Kip (contribs) 23:01, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Comalcalco.Iglesia_y_Palacio.jpg/220px-Comalcalco.Iglesia_y_Palacio.jpg)
- It's not really a matter of "anglocentric double standards" but of the quality and availability of the news sources: what's the Guatemalan equivalent of the NYT or BBC News? And, to make it applicable to the Campeche crash too, what's the Mexican equivalent of the Guardian or CNN? Writing a decent article on your examples from the US or Canada is much, much easier. As just an example, what highways did these two accidents happen on? You'd have to dig very deep into non-English sources to discover those factoids, whereas for Schoharie we've got the answer in plain English in the first ref. (The answers, by the way, are Federal Highway 186 and CA9, the latter of which not only doesn't exist as an article but isn't even listed on the dab page.) As a result, the quality of the articles is ... not great, and likely to stay that way. In the Escárcega article, I can see misinterpretations of Spanish reports that have come down to WP through Eng-lang sources. For instance,"The local council, Palacio Municipal de Comalcalco..." from the BBC. No: Comalcalco is a place (it's where most of the holidaymakers were from, I think), it has a local council -- municipal govt, I suppose -- which is based at the Municipal Palace, or we might gloss that as "city hall". But that's what the WP:RS says; were I to change it, I could rightly be reverted on those grounds. And that's before getting into the more philosophical questions of long-term impact. WP:CRYSTAL and all that but no, Mexican trucks aren't going to have to pass mandatory roadworthy testing as a result of Escárcega, and Guatemalan buses aren't going to stop carrying passengers three-on-a-seat as a result of Puente Belice. Moscow Mule (talk) 03:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think these are fair concerns, Moscow Mule. My only real response is that these points all (mostly) sound to me like article quality concerns, as opposed to objections to notability. To make my point clearer: if a Mexican newspaper released a well-written English-language article tomorrow that allowed us to add more details to the article, then most of what you are concerned about would be remedied - so, a question of quality of sources, which is an extension of article quality. By contrast, my concerns with a "double standard" pertain to selectively opposing this crash on notability. Per your own admission, the only real argument on notability is your last point, which you readily admit boils down to WP:CRYSTAL. If this article failed to be posted due to a genuine consensus over article quality, I would not be bothered. The reality, though, is that many votes are simply reflexively writing off bus crashes outside North America on notability, which is what triggered my comment. FlipandFlopped ツ 03:44, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I found TV Azteca Guatemala and Prensa Libre (Guatemala). ArionStar (talk) 03:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - I wanted to add that Guatemala is also in North America like the United States and Canada --Pithon314 (talk) 01:32, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think these are fair concerns, Moscow Mule. My only real response is that these points all (mostly) sound to me like article quality concerns, as opposed to objections to notability. To make my point clearer: if a Mexican newspaper released a well-written English-language article tomorrow that allowed us to add more details to the article, then most of what you are concerned about would be remedied - so, a question of quality of sources, which is an extension of article quality. By contrast, my concerns with a "double standard" pertain to selectively opposing this crash on notability. Per your own admission, the only real argument on notability is your last point, which you readily admit boils down to WP:CRYSTAL. If this article failed to be posted due to a genuine consensus over article quality, I would not be bothered. The reality, though, is that many votes are simply reflexively writing off bus crashes outside North America on notability, which is what triggered my comment. FlipandFlopped ツ 03:44, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- It's not really a matter of "anglocentric double standards" but of the quality and availability of the news sources: what's the Guatemalan equivalent of the NYT or BBC News? And, to make it applicable to the Campeche crash too, what's the Mexican equivalent of the Guardian or CNN? Writing a decent article on your examples from the US or Canada is much, much easier. As just an example, what highways did these two accidents happen on? You'd have to dig very deep into non-English sources to discover those factoids, whereas for Schoharie we've got the answer in plain English in the first ref. (The answers, by the way, are Federal Highway 186 and CA9, the latter of which not only doesn't exist as an article but isn't even listed on the dab page.) As a result, the quality of the articles is ... not great, and likely to stay that way. In the Escárcega article, I can see misinterpretations of Spanish reports that have come down to WP through Eng-lang sources. For instance,"The local council, Palacio Municipal de Comalcalco..." from the BBC. No: Comalcalco is a place (it's where most of the holidaymakers were from, I think), it has a local council -- municipal govt, I suppose -- which is based at the Municipal Palace, or we might gloss that as "city hall". But that's what the WP:RS says; were I to change it, I could rightly be reverted on those grounds. And that's before getting into the more philosophical questions of long-term impact. WP:CRYSTAL and all that but no, Mexican trucks aren't going to have to pass mandatory roadworthy testing as a result of Escárcega, and Guatemalan buses aren't going to stop carrying passengers three-on-a-seat as a result of Puente Belice. Moscow Mule (talk) 03:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Off-topic accusation/discussion
|
---|
.
|
- Support The article is more put together and covers an important event with a large death toll in a part of the world that often isn't covered on English Wikipedia. NewishIdeas (talk) 07:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support 51 deaths from a bus crash is very notable. Also per above, a lot of previous crashes were also published, I don't see this as any different. TheHiddenCity (talk) 21:23, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Update: the death toll rose to 56: a investigation is underway; the article is bigger now. @Masem, Estreyeria, Moscow Mule, and EF5: ArionStar (talk) 23:07, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Prominent mass casualty event. GenevieveDEon (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Well, the article is good for now. ArionStar (talk) 02:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The details seem too thin. What sort of bus was it? Was it a chicken bus or what? Who was the operator and what was the service? Why was it going so fast? Is that normal? Andrew🐉(talk) 08:30, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- "Chicken bus" is an offensive term used by English tourists visiting Latin America. Totally out of place. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm just going by what I read about buses in Guatemala, which indicates that the locals use a similar term in Spanish: camioneta gallinera. The point is to get clarity about the model of bus. Was it a pullman coach, a city commuter bus, a converted school bus or what? Andrew🐉(talk) 11:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Adding the information. The work of finding sources is time-consuming but I'm getting it. ArionStar (talk) 11:41, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I see you've added some info about the passengers but I'm not seeing anything about the bus. There seem to be several theories about what went wrong but it still seems quite speculative. I wouldn't expect international sources to follow up and working from local sources will be difficult and take time, as you say, I suppose. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:46, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes but I don't see any reason for opposing due to it. ArionStar (talk) 13:09, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: information about the bus finally added. ArionStar (talk) 18:38, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- That's a good detailed source you found – well done. But I'm not seeing where you get camioneta from as the source doesn't seem to use that word; just using the English word "bus" even in the Spanish version. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- It wasn't me; I've already moved Bus transport in Central America to the "See also" section. ArionStar (talk) 20:08, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- That's a good detailed source you found – well done. But I'm not seeing where you get camioneta from as the source doesn't seem to use that word; just using the English word "bus" even in the Spanish version. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: information about the bus finally added. ArionStar (talk) 18:38, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes but I don't see any reason for opposing due to it. ArionStar (talk) 13:09, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I see you've added some info about the passengers but I'm not seeing anything about the bus. There seem to be several theories about what went wrong but it still seems quite speculative. I wouldn't expect international sources to follow up and working from local sources will be difficult and take time, as you say, I suppose. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:46, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Adding the information. The work of finding sources is time-consuming but I'm getting it. ArionStar (talk) 11:41, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm just going by what I read about buses in Guatemala, which indicates that the locals use a similar term in Spanish: camioneta gallinera. The point is to get clarity about the model of bus. Was it a pullman coach, a city commuter bus, a converted school bus or what? Andrew🐉(talk) 11:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- "Chicken bus" is an offensive term used by English tourists visiting Latin America. Totally out of place. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support as a clearly notable topic, and in good enough condition (quality/length) for a MP outing. Serial (speculates here) 13:27, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- It is uncommon to see top leaders of other countries reacted to a bus crash. ArionStar (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. A bus crashed. Not an encyclopedic subject. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:14, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Update: the government of Taiwan sent condolences: [5] ArionStar (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- By the way, the subject has already 4 language hiperlinks. ArionStar (talk) 01:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Maldives too ArionStar (talk) 01:33, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- The {{cite tweet}} template is kinda problematic… Any hint? ArionStar (talk) 02:28, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oh… The bot just corrected it! Thank you, machine! ArionStar (talk) 02:45, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Please do not WP:BLUDGEON the discussion. The Kip (contribs) 03:05, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm just in the middle of source readjustment, it's the first time I'm doing a massive work like that. ArionStar (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- You have commented here more than 20 times. You need to stop. Stephen 04:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- There is no reason for anyone to police another users comment activity. Pretty ridiculous. NewishIdeas (talk) 05:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- But, as WP:BADGER makes clear, overloading the discussion can ultimately be counter-productive. Moscow Mule (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- There is no reason for anyone to police another users comment activity. Pretty ridiculous. NewishIdeas (talk) 05:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- You have commented here more than 20 times. You need to stop. Stephen 04:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm just in the middle of source readjustment, it's the first time I'm doing a massive work like that. ArionStar (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Please do not WP:BLUDGEON the discussion. The Kip (contribs) 03:05, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Update: the government of Taiwan sent condolences: [5] ArionStar (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Done The 2025 Guatemala City bus crash#International part was written and sourced. ArionStar (talk) 06:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC) P.S.: I'm commenting on the improvements I did in the article.
- Support Article looks good in terms of sourcing and the high death toll does make it blurbworthy IMO. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Removed (Ready), there does not appear to be a consensus here quite yet. Black Kite (talk) 12:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Black Kite: 9 in favor (including a strong support) versus 6 against (including EF5 opposing on quality before that being improved); I guess it's a rough consensus, IMHO… ArionStar (talk) 12:25, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- And I still oppose. Events like this are strikingly common. EF5 13:03, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Indeed. And it's strikingly common for them to appear in the ITN: 2021 Bulgaria bus crash, 2023 Gualaca bus crash, 2024 Thailand school bus fire, 2024 Minas Gerais road crash, for example. All with lower death tolls than this. A tragic discussion. Serial (speculates here) 15:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- And every time, we have the exact same argument. One faction argues we are promoting un-encyclopedic articles about transportation accidents in violation of WP:NOTNEWS. A second faction decries a double standard and objects that those opposed are making WP:CRYSTAL type arguments by insisting these accidents must meet a speculative bar of lasting significance even when they have widespread coverage in reliable sources. We need to have some sort of clarifying overarching policy discussion, that has broader community buy-in, and settles this ongoing never-ending argument at ITN. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Per NOTNEWS, just because sonething gets widely reported doesn't necessarily make it appropriate to include in WP, since our goal is looking how topics are treated over time, not from a burst of coverage. If this accident happened in 1990, pre internet and 24/7 news, we'd likely never have had the coverage and thus no article on it. This is not dismissing all transportation accidents, but we should be looking at the higher bar if an accident is actually going to have lasting significance before rushing off to create an article on it, much less feature at ITN. if one really wants to write these types of articles we have Wikinews for that and if turns out the event has lasting significance it can be transwikid to en.wikibto to expand as an encyclopedic article. This is still currently not a good encyclopefic article as it is written like a newspaper. Masem (t) 19:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- It isn't CRYSTAL to say we currently don't have evidence of sustained secondary coverage. Saying that we might have it in the future is CRYSTAL. Articles should not exist until after that evidence comes into existence and is presented. Until then, this fits perfectly fine on a list of traffic incidents. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- That's my point, we feature these types of accidents all the time, in my opinion too much. And I'm not saying that doesn't make this crash notable, it's obviously a horrible incident, just that readers aren't going to want to know about a bus crash every few weeks (more or less, you get my point). — EF5 19:38, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- If our rationale for what we post is "what readers want to know about", it makes no sense that we pass on high-casualty accidents and celebrity deaths (e.g. Liam Payne), while consistently blurbing small elections in Liechteinstein or the outcome of Darts tournaments. Contrary to what you said, I actually think these crashes are instinctively supported by editors precisely because they generate outsized amounts of public interest (thus spurring the global news coverage). The reality is, people want to read Wikipedia articles which explain high-casualty accidents, much more than a majority of the other things we post. If it is a current event being widely discussed by reliable news sources, and has a freestanding subject article which meets WP:GNG, post it. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree with the "people want to read Wikipedia articles which explain high-casualty accidents" part you stated. If that was the case, 2024 Minas Gerais road crash (at ITN two months ago) wouldn't have only ~500 monthly pageviews, the biggest spike being when it was at ITN. We feature these too often, and my stance on that won't change. I also agree that NOTNEWS can apply to this. — EF5 19:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- The Guatemala bus crash has a wider local and global coverage/aftermath. That's the point of notability. ArionStar (talk) 20:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- A burst of coverage, even if international, is not a sign of notability. We expect enduring coverage, which is the problem for most of these accident articles. Unless it involves something heavily regulated that we see a long tail of cause seeking and blame, accidents like this only stay in the news for a few days and then are likely never covered again. Masem (t) 20:22, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Exactly. Many of these crashes are quickly forgotten by the media, I’d say because of how much they happen. EF5 20:25, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- So, what's WP:DIVERSE? ArionStar (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- It's one of several criteria to be met for an event to considered notable. The first is the enduring coverage which also must be considered. Those aren't to be read in isolation. Masem (t) 20:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- An underway investigation counts as a "enduring coverage"? ArionStar (talk) 20:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- "Enduring coverage" would be coverage that endures after the event is no longer in the news cycle. Coverage of the investigation is still live coverage, not enduring coverage published in retrospect. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Masem, I know this will likely be immediately criticized as a WP:OTHERSTUFF argument, but there is a problem with how onerous your "enduring coverage" criteria is, when it is just blatantly being very inconsistently enforced. I would argue that a sizeable chunk of even our ITNR items, such as the recent Liechtenstein elections as one example among many, do not come anywhere close to meeting the high bar of enduring notability which you describe. The effect is that WP:NOTNEWS ends up being a sledgehammer that is used only selectively and in a systemic manner against certain types of articles based on the subjective opinions of individual ITN contributors (and sometimes even their cultural or social biases, although for clarity I am not accusing any individual of that here). FlipandFlopped ツ 21:30, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Elections create a govt that lasts for multiple E years, so they clearly have enduring impacts. The problem is that too many editors are creating news articles and not encyclopedic articles, failing NOTNEWS and NEVENT in the first place. That problem leaks into ITN because these news articles are being nominated. — Masem (t) 23:22, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- An underway investigation counts as a "enduring coverage"? ArionStar (talk) 20:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- It's one of several criteria to be met for an event to considered notable. The first is the enduring coverage which also must be considered. Those aren't to be read in isolation. Masem (t) 20:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- So, what's WP:DIVERSE? ArionStar (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Exactly. Many of these crashes are quickly forgotten by the media, I’d say because of how much they happen. EF5 20:25, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- A burst of coverage, even if international, is not a sign of notability. We expect enduring coverage, which is the problem for most of these accident articles. Unless it involves something heavily regulated that we see a long tail of cause seeking and blame, accidents like this only stay in the news for a few days and then are likely never covered again. Masem (t) 20:22, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- The Guatemala bus crash has a wider local and global coverage/aftermath. That's the point of notability. ArionStar (talk) 20:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree with the "people want to read Wikipedia articles which explain high-casualty accidents" part you stated. If that was the case, 2024 Minas Gerais road crash (at ITN two months ago) wouldn't have only ~500 monthly pageviews, the biggest spike being when it was at ITN. We feature these too often, and my stance on that won't change. I also agree that NOTNEWS can apply to this. — EF5 19:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- If our rationale for what we post is "what readers want to know about", it makes no sense that we pass on high-casualty accidents and celebrity deaths (e.g. Liam Payne), while consistently blurbing small elections in Liechteinstein or the outcome of Darts tournaments. Contrary to what you said, I actually think these crashes are instinctively supported by editors precisely because they generate outsized amounts of public interest (thus spurring the global news coverage). The reality is, people want to read Wikipedia articles which explain high-casualty accidents, much more than a majority of the other things we post. If it is a current event being widely discussed by reliable news sources, and has a freestanding subject article which meets WP:GNG, post it. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- And every time, we have the exact same argument. One faction argues we are promoting un-encyclopedic articles about transportation accidents in violation of WP:NOTNEWS. A second faction decries a double standard and objects that those opposed are making WP:CRYSTAL type arguments by insisting these accidents must meet a speculative bar of lasting significance even when they have widespread coverage in reliable sources. We need to have some sort of clarifying overarching policy discussion, that has broader community buy-in, and settles this ongoing never-ending argument at ITN. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Indeed. And it's strikingly common for them to appear in the ITN: 2021 Bulgaria bus crash, 2023 Gualaca bus crash, 2024 Thailand school bus fire, 2024 Minas Gerais road crash, for example. All with lower death tolls than this. A tragic discussion. Serial (speculates here) 15:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- And I still oppose. Events like this are strikingly common. EF5 13:03, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Black Kite: 9 in favor (including a strong support) versus 6 against (including EF5 opposing on quality before that being improved); I guess it's a rough consensus, IMHO… ArionStar (talk) 12:25, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Update: a complete list of victims was released; the number of passengers is still to be determined; the cause remains under investigation. Definitely not "WP:NOTNEWS". By example: King Air F90 prefix PS-FEM plane crash in 2025 is clearly what WP:NEVENT doesn't represents; no diversity, low enduring impact, etc… ArionStar (talk) 23:28, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- WP:BLUDGEON. Take a deep breath, step back, and let the process unfold. And given that discussion of this nomination is still ongoing, I think it'd be better for someone other than the nominating editor to flag it as "ready" if/when the time comes. My final comment on this one. Moscow Mule (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Showing distinct arguments… ArionStar (talk) 00:35, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- WP:BLUDGEON. Take a deep breath, step back, and let the process unfold. And given that discussion of this nomination is still ongoing, I think it'd be better for someone other than the nominating editor to flag it as "ready" if/when the time comes. My final comment on this one. Moscow Mule (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Romanian president
[edit]Blurb: Romanian President Klaus Iohannis resigns from office. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Romanian President Klaus Iohannis resigns from office, and is succeeded by acting president Ilie Bolojan.
News source(s): [6]
Credits:
- Nominated by Sportsnut24 (talk · give credit)
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: ITNR as change in head of state. Announced today, but he said it'd happen on Wed. Sportsnut24 (talk) 15:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait until it happens (within a day if my time zones are correct). Will give time to likely know how the replacement process will go to include in blurb. Masem (t) 15:22, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait, and a new blurb should be in order. Seems very bare-bones for now. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 16:22, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - is it worth noting that he's called for the second round of elections to start again? I have to admit i myself dont know much about that part, but i agree with the wait. TrainSimFan (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait until it actually happens, the support. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 20:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Chorchapu: It happened. ArionStar (talk) 20:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support, this is big news for Romania and has many consequences for the country. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 01:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Chorchapu: It happened. ArionStar (talk) 20:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait. Until it has a new successor. Moraljaya67 (talk) 03:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose -- this is not ITNR, because the president of Romania does not administer the executive. He is not the Head of Government, that role belongs to the Prime Minister of Romania. I've also removed the itnr label. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 00:17, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- According to your the link you provided the Romanian president does wield executive powers, although not necessarily the same powers as the prime minister so this is in fact ITN/R. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- President of Romania#Powers and duties confirms this. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Per List of current heads of state and government, Romania is one of the few countries where both the PM and President wield executive powers and so both qualify as ITN/R ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:38, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- President of Romania#Powers and duties confirms this. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- According to your the link you provided the Romanian president does wield executive powers, although not necessarily the same powers as the prime minister so this is in fact ITN/R. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support now that he has resigned. Added altblurb with successor if people prefer to include that info ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support as he finally left office. Good to go. ArionStar (talk) 17:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait The Honours section lacks sources. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:07, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Major political event, crisis in Romania. BilboBeggins (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 Sri Lanka blackouts
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Sri Lanka faces nationwide blackouts after a monkey breaks into a sub-station in Sri Lanka's electrical grid (Post)
Alternative blurb: Monkey causes a ripple effect in Sri Lanka's massive power outage that lasted for hours.
Alternative blurb II: Sri Lanka faces a power outage after monkey had disrupted a key sub-station in electrical grid.
News source(s): BBC; Sky News; The Guardian; ABC News
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Abishe (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose - While funny, power seems to be returning and the effects seem to be limited. If the monkey strikes again, I could be persuaded to change my vote. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:46, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Monkey strikes? I didn't even know they were unionised. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose lack of power for a few hours is not ITN appropriate and may even be a NOTNEWS issue. Masem (t) 15:24, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Though discussions could be on quality, which is not that bad, this event is far more better than other which get posted albeit NOTNEWS. Isn't this what Masem says, ITN is to showcase Wikipedia articles in news and not necessarily a serious news business who shall shy from posting something hurting its so-called reputation. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 17:26, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- At the same time, WP is not a newspaper, and articles created about t events with no lasting impact or coverage lack the required notability and should not be featured on the main page. This is more an amusing news story ( an outage caused by a monkey) and really doesn't have a place on WP. If you want news, Wikinews is that away, we are here to feature quality articles about topics that happen to be currently covered by the news. — Masem (t) 18:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. Better fit for DYK. The Kip (contribs) 18:00, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, not important per Masem and mike_gigs, the interesting part is the monkey which makes this more suitable for DYK per The Kip. --SpectralIon 18:47, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, might have made it if it had been a whole series? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Microplastics in the brain
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Microplastics (pictured) are found to be increasingly polluting human brains. (Post)
News source(s): Nature; CNN; Science Media Centre; Smithsonian; Times;
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Comment - The target article and the article linked in the blurb are different, which one are you proposing? Both have quality issues, but one looks a little easier to fix. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:09, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe Microplastics and human health could be linked to polluting. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 14:19, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure which is the best article for this. Other candidates might be plastic pollution and health and safety hazards of nanomaterials. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:44, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose this is hardly a "current event". Studies about this are in the news all the time. Estreyeria (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Esteryeria. I'd love to see more medical and science stories, but something like this regarding microplastics where the information has been trickling out for years make it difficult to find an appropriate point to post. Masem (t) 14:40, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Not a “current” story. The Kip (contribs) 18:00, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- My starting point for this was the report in the UK's newspaper of record yesterday which said, "This study, published in the journal Nature Medicine, made headlines around the world last week." It is therefore "in the news". Andrew🐉(talk) 18:09, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
last week
- So you yourself have just admitted it’s stale? The Kip (contribs) 21:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- No. WP:ITN explains that "older than the oldest entry in the current "In the News" box is considered stale". The Nature paper is dated 3 Feb and the news coverage then followed. The oldest blurb is currently the Grammys and they happened on 2 Feb – 8 days ago. That's what's stale. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- My starting point for this was the report in the UK's newspaper of record yesterday which said, "This study, published in the journal Nature Medicine, made headlines around the world last week." It is therefore "in the news". Andrew🐉(talk) 18:09, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, this is not an event, it is a constant trickle of papers about microplastic pollution and this is merely a coincidental wave of them. --SpectralIon 18:32, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support, it is a new study, the sources provided above range from 3rd February to yesterday. The researchers have found around a spoon of microplastics in our brain, I think this is more notable than the winner of the Superbowl. Alexcalamaro (talk) 18:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Esteryeria TheHiddenCity (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. If there was a current event here it'd be the new study, but there is no article for that study (linked, or as far as I could tell, on Wikipedia) and thus I agree with Esteryeria. Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:47, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Peter Tuiasosopo
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline, EW
Credits:
- Nominated by harizotoh9 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Actor, known for playing E. Honda in the 1994 Street Fighter film. Harizotoh9 (talk) 09:44, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Filmography section is entirely unsourced. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Filmography needs some more sources. Close though! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
February 9
[edit]
February 9, 2025
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports
|
2025 parliamentary election in Kosovo
[edit]Blurb: The ruling party Vetëvendosje, led by Prime Minister Albin Kurti (pictured), wins a plurality of votes cast in the Kosovan parliamentary election. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Blaylockjam10 (talk · give credit)
RD: Edith Mathis
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): FAZ
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Heimstern (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Swiss soprano Grimes2 (talk) 07:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Although I'd like to see the lead expanded a bit, the article is good for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support I concur. Sound coverage and sourcing. --PaulBetteridge (talk) 14:29, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: I added more, a bit to the lead also. There's a wish list on the talk, and more lead is one of the items. - Difficult to summarise such a diverse career, - help wanted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:28, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Beverly Byron
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pemilligan (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former U.S. Congresswoman. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Article looks good enough (C level). Adding a couple more sources might be better, but there are citations throughout. Cielquiparle (talk) 02:29, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Good enough for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:39, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Rutherford Chang
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American conceptual artist. Death announced 9 February. Thriley (talk) 05:27, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: Article is much too short to be considered for notability at the moment. Highresheadphones (talk) 06:15, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Article is a stub. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:06, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: Way too short. Article is a stub. TheBritinator (talk) 01:11, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose 2 citations, 113 words, stub class. Not long enough for ITNRD recognition. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:13, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Tom Robbins
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NPR
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:E879:7EF4:6A8B:98D2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by SounderBruce (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American novelist. 240F:7A:6253:1:E879:7EF4:6A8B:98D2 (talk) 05:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is long enough and has enough citations to be considered ITNRD level quality. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 11:26, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support per Fake. Jusdafax (talk) 11:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - looks good enough ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Adequate for RD. No ISBNs for his publications, but they're there on the individual books' articles (for which kudos: having a complete bibliography w/ articles for each is unusual). Moscow Mule (talk) 17:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- A reader shouldn’t have to go looking in linked articles for references. Stephen 01:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Well, I said that on the offchance someone might take the hint. If no one does, and I'm at a loose end later... Moscow Mule (talk) 01:26, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- A reader shouldn’t have to go looking in linked articles for references. Stephen 01:04, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Five cn tags with some paragraphs completely unsourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:39, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
Baltic states join CESA
[edit]Blurb: The Baltic states join the Continental Europe Synchronous Area after disconnecting from the IPS/UPS. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Baltic states complete their synchronization with the Continental Europe Synchronous Area electrical grid after disconnecting from the IPS/UPS.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
ArionStar (talk) 02:45, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support This is a notable geopolitical development, and the article is of sufficient quality. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Added nomination header. @ArionStar:, could you please make sure to add your nom header when nominating next time? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 03:12, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- So sorry! ArionStar (talk) 03:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support An interesting insight into the world's infrastructure. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Pretty big power grid news, and it doesn't involve an accident! Very noteworthy indeed. Yo.dazo (talk) 11:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support definitely in the news and meets WP:ITNSIGNIF. Article quality is also good enough to be posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:47, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Significant development that's in the news & target article looks sufficiently detailed with no glaring issues. Vanilla Wizard 💙 12:03, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - Added altblurb to clarify that the CESA is an electrical grid ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- oppose nothiing notable about this fringe news story.Sportsnut24 (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - a technical change that has next to no actual impact on anybody. nableezy - 17:33, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: I can't say I'm convinced this is ITN-worthy. TheBritinator (talk) 17:38, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Nableezy. Somewhat important from a geopolitical standpoint, but not to the level of ITN. The Kip (contribs) 17:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Interesting, but I don't know what this actually means. Does changing grids mean that the Baltic states are no longer reliant on Russia? Does this have any impact on energy production or energy reliability? Natg 19 (talk) 00:45, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- For example, a Russian power outage could affect the Baltics, or even an attack on the region's electric power system could happen more easily. ArionStar (talk) 01:02, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- The article makes it fairly clear that the Baltic States have unplugged from the Russian grid and plugged into the main European grid instead. It's the electrical equivalent of joining Schengen. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:36, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Obviously major technical change, but also offers a glimpse into Baltic states' distancing from Russia. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:16, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support A complex technical and industrial accomplishment, which also has major geopolitical implications on the future of Eastern Europe. FlipandFlopped ツ 19:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support important geopolitical development. Makes you wonder why it took them so long. Scuba 20:02, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. I'd support if significance could be demonstrated by sources that describe why it's significant. This is just recitation of the sequence of events. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:23, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- I concur. It certainly seems like something significant enough for ITN to my non-expert eyes, but I cannot tell as the article does not demonstrate why this is significant. Curbon7 (talk) 01:06, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support, significant and unusual event, article in decent shape. CMD (talk) 01:14, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Amal Nasser el-Din
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by History6042 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:55, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Article is too short for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 03:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Little to no info about this life between 1928 to 1961 is covered. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:37, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 Liechtenstein general election
[edit]Blurb: General elections are held in Liechtenstein, with the Patriotic Union winning 10 of the 25 seats in the Landtag. (Post)
Alternative blurb: General elections are held in Liechtenstein, resulting in a win for the Patriotic Union with 10 out of 25 seats in the Liechtenstein.
Alternative blurb II: The Patriotic Union, led by Brigitte Haas (pictured), wins the plurality of the seats in the Landtag of Liechtenstein.
Alternative blurb III: General elections are held in Liechtenstein, with the Patriotic Union, led by Brigitte Haas (pictured), winning 10 of the 25 seats in the Landtag.
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by TheBritinator (talk · give credit)
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.
TheBritinator (talk) 00:34, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support: The article, including the results table are well cited. Moraljaya67 (talk) 02:38, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Added altblurb2. Moraljaya67 (talk) 05:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Automatically notable per ITNR which includes the general elections of any sovereign state. Article is in good quality. We previously posted the results of the 2021 Liechtenstein general election. --Pithon314 (talk) 06:19, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article's quality is good enough for Main Page recognition. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 11:27, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality article has table of results but no prose about the election or results itself. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment the article is not in bad condition, but, as Joseph says, the results section should have prose and a “reactions” or “aftermath” section would be desirable. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- The election happened a day ago. I'll add some prose but information is still coming in. TheBritinator (talk) 14:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Joseph2302 & @Alsoriano97: I have added some prose about the results. Hope this helps. TheBritinator (talk) 15:32, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry been busy, article looks fine now (so consider this a post posting support). Joseph2302 (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support looks good enough for me. @TheBritinator if you are involved in this article, I think it would be good to make some reference to the reactions and the aftermath. But good job. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Looks like good quality article and also notable enough. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 23:03, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support alt 2 Good and ready. ArionStar (talk) 23:23, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support no quality problems. Scuba 14:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: _-_Alsor (talk) 11:23, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Schwede66, Black Kite: the admins delay is a problem… ArionStar (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Weekday mornings (UTC) are always an issue for admins; much of the USA is asleep, and European admins are regularly at work or college (I just happen to work from home on Wednesdays). Anyway, Posted with alt2, will insert the image when it's protected. Black Kite (talk) 12:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- ArionStar, you say:
the admins delay is a problem…
No, it is only a problem in your head. Someone will get to it if and when they have time. I for one don’t appreciate multiple pings for the same item. And just so you know, there are editors who I ignore regardless of what they have to say; make sure that I don’t add you to that list. Schwede66 14:29, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Schwede66, Black Kite: the admins delay is a problem… ArionStar (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting oppose The article for Brigitte Haas is four sentences long and is a complete stub. Schwede66, I don't think it is at the quality level needed to justify having her portrait prominently featured on the main page. FlipandFlopped ツ 20:09, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support pulling portrait, ITN portrait article being a stub seems undesirable. Is it policy to always make election winners the portrait? I would have kept Nujoma or Jalen Hurts. LocoTacoFever (talk) 20:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- There are no quality requirements for non-bolded articles, and we picture the top blurb when a suitable picture exists. Stephen 20:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Stephen, and why is that? A picture stands out far more to a viewer than bolded text. Logically, readers are far more likely to click on the article linked to a giant picture which occupies a decent chunk of the ITN "real estate", relative to something merely in bold. Overly rigid interpretation of the rules should not end up in us guiding thousands of people to click on a four-sentence stub article from the Main Page: WP:BUREAU and WP:IAR were written with a situation like this in mind. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Flipandflopped, I'm not sure why you pinged me as I did not assess the nomination nor posted it. However, I do agree with Stephen; that's not the bolded article. Schwede66 22:39, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Stephen, and why is that? A picture stands out far more to a viewer than bolded text. Logically, readers are far more likely to click on the article linked to a giant picture which occupies a decent chunk of the ITN "real estate", relative to something merely in bold. Overly rigid interpretation of the rules should not end up in us guiding thousands of people to click on a four-sentence stub article from the Main Page: WP:BUREAU and WP:IAR were written with a situation like this in mind. FlipandFlopped ツ 21:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- There are no quality requirements for non-bolded articles, and we picture the top blurb when a suitable picture exists. Stephen 20:56, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support pulling portrait, ITN portrait article being a stub seems undesirable. Is it policy to always make election winners the portrait? I would have kept Nujoma or Jalen Hurts. LocoTacoFever (talk) 20:50, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Oleg Strizhenov
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): announcement from his aide to RIA Novosti
Credits:
- Nominated by Jaguarnik (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Jaguarnik (talk) 19:43, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Not long enough for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 19:51, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Length isn't a requirement for RD. Scuba 14:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Length does become an issue if it does not properly detail notable aspects of the person's career/why they are notable. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:35, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Length isn't a requirement for RD. Scuba 14:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support article looks good. Scuba 14:08, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Career section needs expansion and the award section needs sources. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:35, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) Super Bowl LIX
[edit]Blurb: In American football, the Philadelphia Eagles defeat the Kansas City Chiefs to win the Super Bowl (MVP Jalen Hurts pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: In American football, the Philadelphia Eagles defeat the Kansas City Chiefs to win the Super Bowl (MVP Jalen Hurts pictured).
Credits:
- Nominated by Ahuman00 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Fakescientist8000 (talk · give credit) and BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)
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: Per WP:ITN/R and examples of these articles being found in previous ITNs. I understand this ITN may be postponed until after the completion of the game. Ahuman00 (talk) 06:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Reluctant support since I don't believe the American Hand-Egg Championships should be ITN/R, but, until such time as that's corrected, they are This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:23, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- It generates more revenue than anything other than [possibly] the world cup of soccer. It is far more notable that kicking a ball around aimlessly and without strategy for 90 minutes.49.206.5.189 (talk) 11:01, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Gee, which is the more popular sport globally? On top of that why does Yank Football stop and start every second with little play for most of it?--2A00:23C7:4F92:4E01:9C74:2862:F1BB:11D4 (talk) 12:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- It generates more revenue than anything other than [possibly] the world cup of soccer. It is far more notable that kicking a ball around aimlessly and without strategy for 90 minutes.49.206.5.189 (talk) 11:01, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait then support. We will wait for the results and support as an ITN/R. Moraljaya67 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:39, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Procedural close notability isn't in doubt because it's ITN/R. It's not in a fit state to post until it says who wins and has a match summary, which won't be for over 16 hours. Therefore any debate is moot. We may as well start a nomination for the 2028 presidential election as that is on ITN/R. Unknown Temptation (talk) 10:42, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Added altblurb with SBMVP, but can we PLEASE not nominate stuff of this (scheduled events) hours before they happen? Please and thanks. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:47, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- It seems that someone is in a hurry than me around here. Lol ArionStar (talk) 15:18, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support per ITN/R --SpectralIon 03:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, wait for quality – there are still a few CN tags in the article and the game summary is still quite lacking—obviously this is ITNR and this may as well be one of the most notable events this year, but some time is needed before posting. Thanks. — 3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 03:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Only one CN tag now—I can thrust my full support now. — 3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 06:14, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong support because it's the biggest sporting event in America and it's the norm for it to be on ITN. GamerKiller2347 (talk) 03:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Also, I should add that I support the alt blurb so we can add Hurts' picture and explain that he's the MVP winner. GamerKiller2347 (talk) 03:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I do not believe sporting events should qualify for ITN/R. If the event has nothing to show outside of its results or its events, excluding things such as world records; it simply does not make sense to include it. By this logic, PAX East should be ITN/R
- PikminFan9000 (talk) 03:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- @PikminFan9000 this isn’t a discussion on whether or not sports items should be ITN/R. This is a discussion on whether or not this article is good enough quality to be posted to the main page. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 04:15, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- While I understand this, something like the super bowl will always receive a high level of attention from editors and is all but guaranteed to be ITN. It feels disingenuous to allow people to state opposition to something that passes through regardless without allowing them to address the root cause. I will acquiesce and agree this probably belongs on the ITN/R talk page, at least under wiki's guidelines PikminFan9000 (talk) 04:32, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- @PikminFan9000 this isn’t a discussion on whether or not sports items should be ITN/R. This is a discussion on whether or not this article is good enough quality to be posted to the main page. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 04:15, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment. Added "ITNR" parameter. The Super Bowl is listed in the ITN/R. Moraljaya67 (talk) 04:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Support: Adding the Super Bowl to ITN has been a precedence that has already been set, I don't know why we would make an exception for this one. Also, due to the current circumstances, I predict that this Super Bowl will be seen as one of the more culturally impactful ones. -MaximumMangoCloset (talk) 04:44, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles! Also, almost everything is referenced now. BeanieFan11 (talk) 04:49, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Support: Even Messi, Koke and FIFA president Gianni Infantino didn't want to miss the game! CoatCheck (talk) 05:25, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Reminder The Super Bowl is ITNR, there is no point in supporting on the nature of the story. !votes here should focus on the quality of the article, only. --Masem (t) 05:28, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Awesome work by the boys in this one and great to see Jalen and Nick get their due. Article looks good to go, though of course some additions can and will be made eventually, but nothing that should disrupt quality in any meaningful way. E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES! DarkSide830 (talk) 05:31, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Per ITNR and the article looks in great shape. --Pithon314 (talk) 06:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support — Only one CN tag left so more than ready for posting. DecafPotato (talk) 08:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. I'll add the image when it's protected. Black Kite (talk) 08:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Image added. Black Kite (talk) 08:45, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Picture didn't last long (a day at best). No idea why. Watch the next soccer photo be up for a week. CoatCheck (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- CoatCheck Because another story with a suitable image came along; this happens all the time. Note that the one that replaced it has since been replaced itself. If the image lasts only a few hours, we do sometimes delay the later image use, but this one was fine. It's nothing to do with what the article is about; all are treated in the same way. Black Kite (talk) 12:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support for obvious reasons, but agree that this shouldn’t be nominated until the game is actually over - it’s premature otherwise. Congrats Birds. The Kip (contribs) 17:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
February 8
[edit]
February 8, 2025
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Gyalo Thondup
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Darjeeling Chronicle
Credits:
- Nominated by Cielquiparle (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit), YordleSquire (talk · give credit) and Cielquiparle (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Brother of 14th Dalai Lama and de facto political leader of Tibet in exile. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Moscow Mule (talk) 21:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 23:52, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted as blurb) Blurb/RD: Sam Nujoma
[edit]Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Former President of Namibia Sam Nujoma (pictured) dies at the age of 95. (Post)
Alternative blurb: First President of Namibia Sam Nujoma (pictured) dies at the age of 95
News source(s): The Times of India
Credits:
- Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Amakuru (talk · give credit), Borgenland (talk · give credit), Kowal2701 (talk · give credit) and Moscow Mule (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: First President of Namibia Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:07, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - much of his early life and political career sections remain uncited --Mr. Lechkar (talk) 14:26, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Not ready. An actual Father of the Nation but unless someone can source that vast section on the independence movement he's not going to make it. Moscow Mule (talk) 22:32, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment A blurb would be appreciated for the “father of the Namibian Nation” and, for my part, I would support it as we have done in previous cases. But the quality of the article is not good: many sources are missing and it would be necessary to evaluate in detail if the content exposes his role as “father” and builder of the country. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose on quality Article needs some major ref work before this could get posted.Would support a blurb seeing as how he's a founding father of a nation. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:23, 10 February 2025 (UTC)- Oppose blurb not that he seems to be the type of leader that we should blurb, but the article does not clearly lay out the reasoning for this beyond the brief lede summary and a list of awards. There needs to be a singular section about his legacy or impact to explain why he was highly regarded in this role, which seems should be possible given what he did. However, given the significantly lack of sources, getting even to the RD may be difficult, Oppose RD on lack of sourcing. Masem (t) 12:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support RD with improvements but really for the blurb, having one or two condensed paragraphs summarizing the sourcing about his recognition (which exists throughout the article but not well summarized) would really help to make this a quality article for a blurb. I'm not denying he is clearly appropriate for a blurb, but from a quality aspect, having to sift through the entire article to understand this facet is not helpful to readers. Masem (t) 02:35, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think the first paragraph addresses this? Kowal2701 (talk) 11:19, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support RD with improvements but really for the blurb, having one or two condensed paragraphs summarizing the sourcing about his recognition (which exists throughout the article but not well summarized) would really help to make this a quality article for a blurb. I'm not denying he is clearly appropriate for a blurb, but from a quality aspect, having to sift through the entire article to understand this facet is not helpful to readers. Masem (t) 02:35, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb , referencing issues are sorted Kowal2701 (talk) 20:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb. This is an open and shut blurb case - he was perhaps the single biggest figure in the independence movement for Namibia, its first president for 15 years, and it's possible the country wouldn't even exist without him. Suggesting he's not of the calibre for blurbing would be akin to saying George Washington shouldn't be blurbed, and that given the proliferation of relatively minor figures being blurbed of late. I despair sometimes! Anyway, I've added some refs in the political career section, and Kowal2701 has done a sterling job with the rest so I think the quality is now fine. — Amakuru (talk) 21:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Agreed, if he doesn't deserve a blurb, no politician does. He was the personification of Nambia's liberation struggle. A legacy section would be ideal, but tbh it sort of goes without saying Kowal2701 (talk) 21:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb as he was the first president of Namibia. Good article. ArionStar (talk) 23:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb Notability established as first head of state for modern Namibia. Additionally, article quality is far better than what I saw when first checking over earlier this morning. Well done! Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:10, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb As leader of SWAPO and later president of Namibia, Nujoma effectively led the Namibian people for almost 50 years, and the Namibian war being such a quagmire was a big contributor towards the end of Apartheid in South Africa. This is as close to Thatcher/Mandela as we could get. Curbon7 (talk) 02:00, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted to RD while blurb discussion continues. SpencerT•C 04:03, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- OK, blurb him. His being on the currency kind of settled it for me. Excellent clean-up/referencing work by the other updaters. Two-para legacy section added. AltBlurb, unless someone suggests something better. And does anyone else prefer the 2003 photo where he's wearing a carnation? Moscow Mule (talk) 05:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Clear consensus for a blurb here... I'm flagging as "attention needed". Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 10:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:51, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Ne Zha 2 breaks box office records
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Chinese animated film Ne Zha 2 becomes the highest grossing film of all time in China and the highest grossing non-English language film of all time, grossing over $1 billion at the box office in just 12 days. (Post)
News source(s): Deadline, Global Times
Credits:
- Nominated by The Image Editor (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Support The article is in OK shape (maybe needs a bit more details about the plot), the fact itself is pretty interesting.Trepang2 (talk) 05:22, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: Box office (if not #1 in world) doesn't matter. Chinese films grossing higher and higher should be taken as a common event now. If there is something really special about it other than this, let us know. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 06:36, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Lean oppose Breaking news: there's a lot of people in China. More at eleven. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:19, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think we posted Inside Out 2 becoming the highest grossing animated film of all time. If this film surpasses that record, maybe we can consider posting.Scaramouche33 (talk) 13:51, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I can't think of any box office record other than becoming the highest-grossing film globally that would be ITN-worthy. TompaDompa (talk) 14:13, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - per above ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:24, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Why was this nomination WP:SNOW closed so quickly when others with similarly impossible support to oppose ratios have stayed open for so long? I feel like we should be more consistent with these. For example, looking at the timing of the comments and which were there when this closed, the bus plunge below should have been SNOWed simultaneously. --SpectralIon 18:54, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
2025 Escárcega bus crash
[edit]Blurb: A bus crash kills 41 people in Escárcega, Mexico. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A bus collides with a truck killing 41 people in Escárcega, Mexico.
Alternative blurb II: A bus collides with a truck resulting in fire killing 41 people in Escárcega, Mexico.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ExclusiveEditor (talk · give credit)
ArionStar (talk) 02:28, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. A bus crashed. This is not a significant event that merits coverage in an encyclopedia. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:03, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose for now, as the article is a stub. If the article is improved, maybe I will change my vote to support, as we posted the 2024 Minas Gerais road crash in 2024. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:04, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- I have some experience in searching sources and improving articles. Going to sleep and back to work… 💤 ArionStar (talk) 03:37, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. A 25-word stub. (And Escárcega is in Campeche, not Tabasco.) Moscow Mule (talk) 04:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- It says near Escárcega. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 05:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- The infobox says "near Escárcega, Tabasco". Fwiw, neither of the references say it occurred in Tabasco. Moscow Mule (talk) 05:52, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- It says near Escárcega. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 05:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose a near-literal bus plunge This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:25, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: I have expanded the article since, from the one line it was before. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 07:53, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability. 41 deaths from a weird accident where identification of bodies has become difficult due to burns, a mystery why truck driver invaded the lane, international coverage, and importantly an improved article. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 10:19, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks @ExclusiveEditor! ArionStar (talk) 15:08, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: I have
moved page 2025 Tabasco bus crash to 2025 Escárcega bus crash: Based on all the sources, it appears it happened in the outskirts of this city 'Escárcega' and Tobsco government is just taking active initiative in helping and providing information
. Also changed the blurb and target article accordingly. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 10:36, 9 February 2025 (UTC) - Comment These types of relatively low-level traffic accidents are the types of articles that are very much unlikely to develop into actual encyclopedic ones. This is part of what MINIMUMDEATHS get to, is that its not so much the death toll that matters but how likely is the event to have enduring coverage past a few days of news? --Masem (t) 15:10, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, especially Masem’s reasoning. The Kip (contribs) 17:59, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability per ExclusiveEditor, as well as my comments on the other Guatemala bus crash article above. 41 casualties is well-above the average bus crash, as well as above the number of casualties in other crashes from North America which we have previously posted (in those cases, less than 15-20). I see some reasonable distinction between this crash and the Guatemala one because it occurred in a very rural area, whereas the Guatemala crash occurred in the nation's capital itself (which is potentially more unusual/more likely to generate increased coverage due to proximity to many people). Ultimately, I think both are notable per our precedent. FlipandFlopped ツ 22:09, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Dick Jauron
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by Kline (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Hey man im josh (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former NFL head coach for the Bears and Bills. Kline • talk • contribs 18:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose As only the Early coaching career subsection needs citations.Rest of the article is good with regards to quality, lengthing, sources, etc. Support, as all issues have been cleared up. Thanks, @Hey man im josh! Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:51, 9 February 2025 (UTC)- Working on it. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Kline, @Fakescientist8000: I made some significant changes to the sourcing and improved that section quite a bit. I've got to pop off for the day though now. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Working on it. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:39, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- The article has now been significantly improved, going from 24 to 46 references. This includes replacing a number of dead links and poor sources while also re-using the references I added in a number of places. It's in a lot better shape now and I'd say ready to go, with the appropriate support of course. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:25, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:33, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) Ongoing: M23 campaign (2022–present)
[edit]Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: it’s an ongoing conflict with escalation and many wiki editors have been consistently editing and updating the article Wafflefrites (talk) 22:23, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Article is of good quality and is definitely being updated regularly. I think at this point it’s pretty notable with the UN’s involvement and the M23’s advancements, so I won’t have a problem promoting this to ongoing ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 00:15, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support as per above. There is escalation with daily updates, and the article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:54, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support per above. Major ongoing conflict. Wonder about a name change to something like "War in Kivu" or something, but that's mostly an aside This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk)
- Support, I think it should also be renamed but that's best left for the article's talk page. 675930s (talk) 02:01, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment is Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict (2022–present) not more appropriate?
- Kowal2701 (talk) 12:21, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- The Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict (2022–present) does have a better title, but the article is not very long and doesn’t seem to be as frequently updated. The scope of that page currently seems to be mostly a summary timeline of major events. The editors of those pages chose to split the articles and they’ve been focusing on the M23 military campaign. Maybe they chose Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict (2022–present) to be an overall summary of the conflict for now, and they are focusing their editing efforts on the M23 military campaign. Maybe the articles needs to be merged or the article that is supposed to be the summary needs to be updated more. Wafflefrites (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Probably not worth changing anything until the conflict escalates/ceases Kowal2701 (talk) 20:32, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- The Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict (2022–present) does have a better title, but the article is not very long and doesn’t seem to be as frequently updated. The scope of that page currently seems to be mostly a summary timeline of major events. The editors of those pages chose to split the articles and they’ve been focusing on the M23 military campaign. Maybe they chose Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict (2022–present) to be an overall summary of the conflict for now, and they are focusing their editing efforts on the M23 military campaign. Maybe the articles needs to be merged or the article that is supposed to be the summary needs to be updated more. Wafflefrites (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I question the quality of the article. It is well sourced -- but also over-excessive on details and day-to-day events. Its very hard to follow because of this. I realize this is a long-running campaign and thus its hard to necessarily write an overall picture, but some of the earlier sections (in chronological time order) could easily be better summarzied. No comment on significance for ongoing beyond that it is appropriately updated with ongoing news coverage. --Masem (t) 18:10, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment If needed, please see earlier nomination at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/January 2025#(Posted) M23 offensive (2022-present). Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:21, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment started an RM
- Kowal2701 (talk) 21:33, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Ongoing & Comment just out of curiosity why are we nominating just the offensive and not the whole kivu conflict? sorry if this is a dumb question i’m just curious. Ion.want.uu (talk) 15:19, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support per above, seems good enough quality-wise and is receiving frequent updates. The Kip (contribs) 16:23, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 23:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
February 7
[edit]
February 7, 2025
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Tony Roberts (actor)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP News: Stage and film actor Tony Roberts, who often starred in Woody Allen movies, dies at 85
Credits:
- Nominated by Jaguarnik (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Jaguarnik (talk) 10:09, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - the vast majority of the "Life and career" section, as well as the entire filmography, is unsourced. The Kip (contribs) 16:59, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Dafydd Elis-Thomas
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Duke of New Gwynedd (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Welsh politician, life peer, former MP and leader of Plaid Cymru. Duke of New Gwynedd (talk | contrib.) 21:48, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - one CN but that shouldn't completely stop this nom. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 23:57, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support. There's more to be said (18 yrs at Westminster, propping up Callaghan in the Winter of Discontent and VoC, 1979 referendum...), but it's unobjectionable for RD as it stands. Llywydd Senedd Cymru, indeed. Moscow Mule (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support The article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:28, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
February 6
[edit]
February 6, 2025
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Virginia Halas McCaskey
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune
Credits:
- Nominated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 207.172.32.211 (talk · give credit), BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit) and Hey man im josh (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Owner of the Chicago Bears, 102. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:06, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is well cited and is long enough for ITNRD recognition. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:50, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. Da bears! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:24, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Looks good ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 13:39, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- @BeanieFan11: I've done a lot of work on the refs and have also added some sourcing for a number of spots that I felt the references didn't verify. I don't want to boldly add myself for credits, and would understand if you wanted to object, but I'd appreciate if you were willing to add me as an updater. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:41, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Added. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- You're the best :) Hey man im josh (talk) 20:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Added. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Posted charlotte 👸♥ 07:44, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
RD: Irv Gotti
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter (reliable), WBLS
Credits:
- Nominated by Imconfused3456 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Imconfused3456 02:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Improvement needed: It is currently orange tagged, and citations for discography section could be picked from the main article. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 09:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Needs review as it's no longer orange-tagged. Schwede66 22:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Bering Air Flight 445
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: A Cessna 208 Caravan (similar aircraft pictured) carrying ten people disappears over the Norton Sound, off the coast of Alaska in the United States. (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
- Oppose No one died and this isn’t particularly notable Personisinsterest (talk) 13:06, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- You don't know that though. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 13:18, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support Aircraft disappearances aren't particularly common and this plane had 10 people on it. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 13:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Wait It's only been missing for a matter of hours, and it would probably have been found already if it went down on land.Oppose on notability. Estreyeria (talk) 13:24, 7 February 2025 (UTC)- Wait - Give them time to look for the plane... Also there are some quality issues with the article. It says the plane disappeared at 3:16pm AKST on February 7th, but it is currently 4:23am AKST on February 7th...? ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 13:26, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I've updated the article per sources. FYI this accident took place on February 6, 2025 - not February 7th as the article incorrectly stated before. ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 13:30, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose opening the floodgates to every minor plane crash/incident being posted to ITNR. Not every incident has encyclopedic relevance. The Kip (contribs) 14:41, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment - I'm inclined to wait for news in this story; but the nominator's comment seems a little bit pointed. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:23, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wait one more day, then support I think the nominator is trying to make a point, but I am undeterred. The fact remains that American plane crashes in general are exceedingly rare, attract immense social interest, and have long-standing impacts on both the aviation industry and the community where the crash is located (in this case, most lethal crash in Alaska of a generation). Put that all together with this being an aircraft disappearance (not just a crash on landing for example), and that makes this notable. The fact that a few of them have coincidentally happened back to back doesn't really negate this fact. FlipandFlopped ツ 16:18, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment We're not even two months in and this is already a very bad year for aviation. Depending on what happens next I might give my support. Departure– (talk) 16:30, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Another small aircraft just crashed in São Paulo today, and killed two people. ArionStar (talk) 16:36, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Looking at 2024, there seems to be an aviation accident or incident every week, on average. WP:NEWSEVENT applies. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:44, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support as per Chorchapu. 64.114 etc 18:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose We generally do not post private/non-airline crashes or disappearances unless there is far more to the nature of the story. Unlike commercial airline crashes which get heavily investigated by national air safety boards, private ones rarely do, so there's no indication this will have a long tail of coverage. --Masem (t) 19:31, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem It actually was a commercial flight operated by Bering Air, but agree otherwise; it's a comparatively minor accident on a flight operated by a small intrastate (not even regional) carrier. It doesn't seem too far off from Thai Flying Service Flight 209, which is currently at AfD and wasn't even nominated when it happened, let alone posted. The Kip (contribs) 20:02, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Other incidents of similar scale/(lack of greater) notability that weren't nominated/posted include 2023 Rio Branco Cessna Grand Caravan crash, 2023 Manaus Aerotáxi Embraer Bandeirante crash, 2022 Mutiny Bay DHC-3 Otter crash, and Siberian Light Aviation Flight 51. The Kip (contribs) 20:05, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- While I do agree that by itself a plane crash wouldn't be important enough to put on ITN, this is a aircraft disappearance, which doesn't happen nearly as often. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 20:08, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem It actually was a commercial flight operated by Bering Air, but agree otherwise; it's a comparatively minor accident on a flight operated by a small intrastate (not even regional) carrier. It doesn't seem too far off from Thai Flying Service Flight 209, which is currently at AfD and wasn't even nominated when it happened, let alone posted. The Kip (contribs) 20:02, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Small aircraft crashes are quite common in Alaska (because of frequent bad weather and because it is often the only way to travel). Curbon7 (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- How common? Show us some stats. DrewieStewie (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- These two articles are a bit outdated (dating 2019 and 2008) but get the idea across. Curbon7 (talk) 09:38, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- How common? Show us some stats. DrewieStewie (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support disappearances with 10+ passengers with no concrete answers on its fate after 24 hours are highly unusual in aviation. I’m immediately reminded of Malaysian Airlines Flight 370. DrewieStewie (talk) 22:41, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - not every plane crash needs ITN. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 23:08, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support per Chorchapu, + can't remember the last time I heard a plane went missing. I do understand that it most likely crashed, but it may have survivors. TheHiddenCity (talk) 23:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Update — The US Coast Guard has located the wreckage, 3 fatalities confirmed so far. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 00:05, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There is nothing inherent about fatal aircraft incidents that make them historical events worthy of mention in an encyclopedia, let alone on the main page. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:27, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability. 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 07:42, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Not notable. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose due to the current phrasing of the nomination – The article was nominated for ITN when the aircraft had disappeared off radar and when search and rescues were still being conducted. This should have been nominated after more information was known, at least waiting one or two more days before doing so. Now that the aircraft's wreckage has been found, a renomination or amendment to the nomination can be made, because, as it stands, the nomination is clearly outdated. As to whether I would support it, I'm still unsure. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:09, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Support 10+ deaths, no concrete reason for why the plane went down. Scuba 18:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- If this was postable any how, would we not have posted it if the reason was known? 𝓔xclusive𝓔ditor Ping Me🔔 21:09, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Comment should this be WP:SNOW closed? I personally don't have much of an opinion on this but I don't think it's getting posted. --SpectralIon 18:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
References
[edit]Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com]
rather than using <ref></ref>
tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref>
tags are being used, here are their contents: