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
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
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
Voicing an opinion on an itemFormat 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...
Please do not...
Suggesting updatesThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
January 12
January 12, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Health and environment
International relations
|
RD: Deon Lendore
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News,Trinidad Express,CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Joseph2302 (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: Competed for Trinidad and Tobago at the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 15:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. No major issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
January 11
January 11, 2022
(Tuesday)
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Politics and elections
|
RD: Clyde Bellecourt
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Star Tribune, MPR, US News
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs a lot of updating -SusanLesch (talk) 23:20, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I expect we'd need his autobiography to source much of this bio. No Google or Amazon preview exists so I'm bowing out. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Bellecourt and AIM co-founder Dennis Banks (d. 2017) were very widely known. Our Bellecourt article has been updated and looks adequate. – Sca (talk) 13:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready Referencing needs a lot of work. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Gary Waldhorn
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Updated by Bloom6132 (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: British actor; needs updating and citations adding 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:E462:BF8E:70DD:6A60 (talk) 23:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose table needs referencing This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:09, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Orbitalbuzzsaw: done – table all sourced now. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Well written and sourced now. RIP Councillor David Horton. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Query Who will chair the Dibley parish Church meetings now? Chrisclear (talk) 07:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
2022 College Football Championship
Blurb: In gridiron football, Georgia defeats Alabama to win the College Football National Championship. (Post)
Alternative blurb:
News source(s): ews-24.fr/comptez-sur-nick-saban-pour-utiliser-la-defaite-de-la-georgie-pour-faire-avancer-la-dynastie-de-lalabama-la-saison-prochaine/, The Independent (the British one), Yahoo Sports Australia
Credits:
- Nominated by Sagittarian Milky Way (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: This was posted 2020, is always one of the biggest sporting events of the year in the nation with ~40% of en.wiki readers, the college football coach is by far the highest-paid government employee of many states with some (including this game's loser) having $9.5 to $10 million/yr guaranteed salary contracts and many other arguments that don't seem to convince non-North Americans. Also since the Supreme Court made the federal sports gambling ban unconstitutional in 2018.4 (also not posted) legal online betting has started in states exceeding 1 UK population by now including the biggest market for the foreseeable future — New York. The NY betting rate instantly increased tens of thousands of percent due to going from shops in the "wilderness" only to BetRivers, Caesars William Hill, DraftKings & FanDuel apps @ 9 a.m 3 days ago and more will come later. Thus the college game is becoming an even bigger source of U.S. economic activity over time (One dude even lost $6.15 million picking the wrong winner (to hedge a promotion where if Georgia loses anyone who bought $3,000 of Houston mattress shop stuff from him will get it for free) Would a single bookmaker accepting his bets of $1.5 million & $1.2 mil on a slight underdog without moving the odds much be a busy market by UK standards?) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is not an ITNR and should not be. The international impact and interest is very low and it doesn't seem to be the most notorious sporting event in the USA if we compare it with the Super Bowl or the NBA, which are ITNR and rightly so. As Masem said two years ago, "college footage is equivalent to minor league/amateur sports, which we should not post unless it is like the Boat Race, the most significant event in that sport". Nor do I think that the economic value of it is decisive, as it's something that interests only college football fans (and that's fine). _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Nonsense. There's no limit to how many events can be posted. The NCAA college basketball tournament is on ITN/R even though it is (1) amateur, and (2) considered less than the NBA Finals or FIBA championship. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Per WP:ITN/C (above):
Please do not ... oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive.
—Bagumba (talk) 23:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Major event, top annual event in college football, would increase us from one (1) American football item in a year to two (2), so not onerous or overbearing in this way. It's in the news, covered by all the top sources, and we have a quality article. A lot of people here just don't like it. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Just because I've justified why I oppose it doesn't mean I simply "don't like it". This counterargument is not valid for me. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Alsoriano97, that was not addressed specifically at you. The college football national championship game has been nominated every year since 2011, and a lot of the opposition is IDONTLIKEIT. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:18, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Just because I've justified why I oppose it doesn't mean I simply "don't like it". This counterargument is not valid for me. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- If you are going to bring up the Supreme Court, let's not forget they found the NCAA was exploiting student athletes too. Just because something is popular doesn't make it appropriate for ITN. --Masem (t) 22:16, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Popularity doesn't necessarily make it inappropriate for ITN either. Witness the failed Betty White Rule.—Bagumba (talk) 23:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support Given the precedent of posting this and related events in the past, including the INT/R status of the NCAA basketball tournament (per Muboshgu). I personally have questions about notability, but there seems to be enough reason to post. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support. In some ways college football is more popular than NFL football. The largest capacity stadium in the US is a college stadium. 331dot (talk) 23:27, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. A minor, amateur, limited status school sport of limited notability. - 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:E462:BF8E:70DD:6A60 (talk) 23:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Every word of your comment is demonstratably incorrect. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Obviously not. Not only is it a second-level competition, it is still an amateur school sport. 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:C149:7535:6073:F180 (talk) 12:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- The first hatnote in the college football article states "This article is about gridiron football played at an amateur level in the United States". Is the hatnote incorrect in stating that this is an amateur competition? Chrisclear (talk) 07:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Could be subtle trolling? It's only amateur cause the players would be banned for life if they took any money or free stuff for playing. The Supreme Court has now allowed 1 laptop, free tutors just for them and other things that can help their education. Some need tutoring cause colleges care little to nothing about your pre-college academics if you want to play football or basketball with them and your football skill would improve the team. They'll even give like 50 players an (almost) full football scholarship (free tuition+room and board) regardless of how much the player can afford to pay. It is a surviving relic from the time when amateurism in sport was more widely regarded and even the best Olympic champions could be and were banned for life for having the nerve to play after making money from sport. 15:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- There's 8 college football stadiums that are only exceeded in size by a soccer/track and field/mass games stadium in North Korea and 1 from Indian cricket. All 4 sports have bigger fields than gridiron too which means a 100K+ gridiron stadium has to be taller and thus harder to build for the same distance to the nosebleed section. And there's only ~half a dozen home games a year. The coaches only make a little less than the top league coaches, Georgia's coach makes $7 million a year and $7m isn't even in the top 3rd of his conference. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Every word of your comment is demonstratably incorrect. 331dot (talk) 00:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- This year's game drew an estimated 22+ million TV viewers.[1] For context, the recent ITNR darts promotion claimed 2M viewers in the UK and Netherlands. Comments that this game is "limited status", much like The Boat Race, will often depend on whether the !voter likes it or not, which is likely dependent on their locale.—Bagumba (talk) 23:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- The Boat Race isn't suitable for ITN either. The PDC item was at least a world championship, which this isn't. Modest Genius talk 12:50, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support this is a good quality article on an event that gets a lot of atttention. With the Super Bowl the only other American football story likely to be posted, I don't think two per year is excessive. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality the team list is unsourced, the match summary has one or two sources per paragraph which doesn't seem like enough. And the TV broadcast sections in the infobox are not verified anywhere. And the teams season summary is confusing to a regular reader because it's filled with unexplained specific terminology, and has peacock phrases like
escaped an upset bid
andsuffered their first and only setback
. All in all, not good enough article for a non-specialist reader to understand. Although I fully exprcr this to get posted during the European night time based mostly on American votes, and ignoring the quality issues.... Joseph2302 (talk) 00:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)- I highly doubt that. This is an annual timesink that (with the exception of 2020) usually gets closed after about three days of arguing as "no consensus." Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- I will comment that on quality, the article is way overly detailed, particularly on the season for both teams, and the recap (its supposed to be a recap, not play by play; must of that seems ripe for a box score table). Thus will help eliminate some of the slang and peacock terms. --Masem (t) 00:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, the recap looks like a live blog sourced to primary source play-by-play link. Should rely on secondary sources for highlights.—Bagumba (talk) 06:39, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Major sport, detailed article, big game, fine time, new champs. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose subnational competition. Banedon (talk) 03:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Almost like Oxford and Cambridge students rowing? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- !!!!!!BOAT RACE KLAXON!!!!!!! Banedon (talk) 04:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Almost like Oxford and Cambridge students rowing? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose 2nd tier championship and therefore not sufficiently notable. The wall of text (with its poor grammar and syntax) describing the economic effects of the sport are interesting, but do not make the competition any more notable. They just reiterate that the sport is played in a high-income country with a high population. I am guessing that the use of three non-American sources is possibly an attempt to suggest that this is "news" outside the US. However a mere cursory glance shows that the "UK" article is copied from AP wire, and the "Australian" article was written by an American, for an American audience, and then syndicated across all country-specific versions of Yahoo Sports. The French article link does not work. Chrisclear (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- The French link needs the space near the beginning removed and possibly also a www. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:39, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- All I read is a very long and drawn out WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Maybe try to start a real discussion? Thechased (talk) 07:25, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Your simplistic application of the "IDONTLIKEIT" label is both incorrect and unfortunate. As for a "real discussion" - it's in the sentences I wrote. Chrisclear (talk) 07:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- This is not a second-tier championship. Division II would be, this is little different from NFL football with larger audiences. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- From the college football article: "Therefore, college football is generally considered to be the second tier of American football in the United States and Canadian football in Canada; one step ahead of high school competition, and one step below professional competition." (My emphasis added). The first hatnote in the college football article states "This article is about gridiron football played at an amateur level in the United States". Is the hatnote correct in stating that this is an amateur competition? Furthermore, is it correct to state that the competitors in a/this College Football Playoff are limited to those that are, as the name suggests, college students? If I am correct on either or both counts (college students only, amateur competition), then I would disagree with your assertion that it is "little different" from NFL football. Chrisclear (talk) 12:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- That it is amateur(which has been litigated in the US courts and is actually debatable) and involves college students is immaterial. College football draws larger crowds, larger TV audiences, and has larger stadiums than the NFL(at Division I, which this is). In essence, this is merely a different league, not a lower level league. What matters is how reliable sources cover this. 331dot (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- To me, logic would dictate that if it is an amateur (or quasi amateur) competition, then the pool of possible players is almost certain to be of lower quality than a professional league. Likewise, if the pool of possible players is limited to college students, then again, the skill level will be lower than a league with no such restrictions. As for crowd size, TV audience and stadium size, these reflect popularity, as opposed to encyclopaedic notability. Chrisclear (talk) 12:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- From the college football article: "Therefore, college football is generally considered to be the second tier of American football in the United States and Canadian football in Canada; one step ahead of high school competition, and one step below professional competition." (My emphasis added). The first hatnote in the college football article states "This article is about gridiron football played at an amateur level in the United States". Is the hatnote correct in stating that this is an amateur competition? Furthermore, is it correct to state that the competitors in a/this College Football Playoff are limited to those that are, as the name suggests, college students? If I am correct on either or both counts (college students only, amateur competition), then I would disagree with your assertion that it is "little different" from NFL football. Chrisclear (talk) 12:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- This is not a second-tier championship. Division II would be, this is little different from NFL football with larger audiences. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Your simplistic application of the "IDONTLIKEIT" label is both incorrect and unfortunate. As for a "real discussion" - it's in the sentences I wrote. Chrisclear (talk) 07:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose lower-tier sports competition. Sports, music competitions/personalities should be judged on merit not on salaries etc, else any B/C-list pop musician will trump the best classical virtuosos and sports stars with celebrity value such as David Beckham will trump players with better competitive impact simply because the 'charismatic' players can sell more shirts/get more sponsors. Note also that the Arab and Chinese football leagues also pay similar or higher than European leagues, which does not make the quality the same or better. In fact, the Arab and Chinese leagues are worse than 2nd division European domestic leagues that are obviously not going to be posted. Bumbubookworm (talk) 07:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Strawman argument: college football players are not paid a salary from their schools.—Bagumba (talk) 08:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Don't put words into my mouth. I know that. Only insular morons wouldn't. I was responding to the arguments of your like-minded compatriots who were citing the coaches' salary and other non-sporting merit metrics as a reason to post Bumbubookworm (talk) 09:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- This is not a low-tier competition when it draws larger audiences and has bigger stadiums than the top professional league. 331dot (talk) 11:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- The EFL Championship play-off Final draws larger audiences than any match played in the Premier League, but it's still a match in the second tier of English football (for instance, the 2019 EFL Championship play-off Final was attended by 85,826 spectators, whereas the match with the highest attendance in the entire 2018–19 Premier League season had 81,332 spectators). Furthermore, note that EFL Championship is a professional league in a much more popular sport.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- I am not familiar with the British tiering system but what you describe seems akin to the difference between Major League Baseball and Minor League Baseball in the US.(The NFL does not really have a minor league system.) This is not like that. College football is a different league, not a lower league. College football has tiers based on university size and other factors(Division I, Division II, and Division III). This game is part of Division I, the top level of college football. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- US and Canadian sports are built like the ill-fated European Super League. Sports leagues are not connected to each other. You can argue college football is a totally different "code" of gridiron vs. professional American football (same can be argued to college basketball and professional basketball in the US, plus leagues that follow the FIBA set of rules almost everywhere else), so you can argue further that Division I FBS is the top competition of the gridiron code known as college football. Premier League and EFL have always been played in the same FIFA set of rules and are actually connected to each other via promotion and relegation. Gridiron does share that concept. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Much has been said in the past about why this shouldn't be posted (amateur sport, low-tier competition, low impact, lowering standard for similar sport events etc.) and, after ten years of debating, there are no signs that something has drastically changed. To those griping about why The Boat Race is an ITNR item, please go to the talk page and demand it be delisted if you think this is comparable to it. To those hanging on to the wide coverage, Novak Djokovic's entry to Australia is by far the main story (not only sport-related) in the world but we haven't even considered it, which clearly implies that news coverage doesn't always make a strong case for a story to be posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose for the same reasons as every other year. This is an amateur competition open only to students at a handful of universities, isn't the highest level of the sport, is partly decided by a selection panel rather than performance on the field etc. This has been discussed to death over the years. I understand that many Americans watch the event, but that isn't enough. I have consistently opposed any and all student sports items, in any sport or country, and will continue to do so. Modest Genius talk 12:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- We have broken down this barrier by adding the basketball tournament to ITNR. I don't see why being a student should matter. The US Supreme Court has found that student athletes are exploited and prevented from being compensated fairly. Universities use their sports programs to generate revenue just as any NFL Team does. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- I have consistently opposed NCAA basketball on the same grounds, including in the ITNR discussion you link below. I don't see how the court ruling or profit motives are at all relevant to the discussion here. Modest Genius talk 15:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- It's relevant because it means these players are not simple amateurs who play for the love of the sport. They are as invested as any "professional" player. 331dot (talk) 15:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- I have consistently opposed NCAA basketball on the same grounds, including in the ITNR discussion you link below. I don't see how the court ruling or profit motives are at all relevant to the discussion here. Modest Genius talk 15:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- We have broken down this barrier by adding the basketball tournament to ITNR. I don't see why being a student should matter. The US Supreme Court has found that student athletes are exploited and prevented from being compensated fairly. Universities use their sports programs to generate revenue just as any NFL Team does. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Kommentar. I urge participants here to review the discussion to add the basketball tournament to ITNR and while this is not an ITNR discussion, many of the same arguments apply. 331dot (talk) 14:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- You're trying to wring water from a stone. The opposition to this item is primarily because its inclusion will pave the way for posting numerous other sport events with the qualities of being amateur and low-tier competitions. If we really have to increase the number of sport stories posted, then we should definitely go with a horizontal rather than a vertical expansion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- I'm trying to uphold our mission here. I don't think what you say is the case, but what if it was? What is wrong with that? We have already broken down the "amateur" barrier. 331dot (talk) 15:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Per Modest, Kiril, Masem. Hyped. – Sca (talk) 14:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand "hyped" as an argument. Everything we post is "hyped". 331dot (talk) 15:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Rankings This event is all over the top read articles list currently. The article rankings for yesterday include:
- 2 Stetson Bennett
- 5 Kirby Smart
- 6 Nick Saban
- 12 Georgia Bulldogs football
- 13 Bryce Young
- 14 College Football Playoff National Championship
- 32 Alabama Crimson Tide football
- 41 2021 College Football Playoff National Championship
- 47 College football national championships in NCAA Division I FBS
- 58 2022 College Football Playoff National Championship
- It's interesting that the nominated article is so far down the list.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 15:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Andrew Davidson As you should be aware by now, ITN is not a most-viewed article list. If you would like to eliminate ITN and replace it with a most-read article list, please propose that. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but we are supposed to help people find articles they are already looking for, and clearly they are having trouble getting there. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Andrew Davidson As you should be aware by now, ITN is not a most-viewed article list. If you would like to eliminate ITN and replace it with a most-read article list, please propose that. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- The Gaelic Athletic Association items that have been at WP:ITNR would love to talk about amateurism. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Every single argument used to oppose this equally applies to events that are on ITN/R. We post many events that are 2nd tier (Japan Series, La Liga), amateur (Olympics, NCAA Basketball), have restricted participants (The Ashes, The Boat Race) or are of local or limited interest (PDC, Gaelic Football). Obviously, it's not that big of a deal if any of these (or CFP) gets posted or not. The issue for me is that we have guidelines and precedent that should be respected. Every so often, we throw them out the window and decide on pure sui generis, and this always leads to discontent and fights. The Betty White situation and Carrie Fisher before her are examples of this. People decide how they will !vote and then cherry-pick the evidence that supports their argument. There's no fix for this; like death blurbs, CFP is a blind spot of this project. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Weak oppose. It is my understanding that we tend to post sporting events at the top level of their field only. I don't believe "amateur" status matters (GAA fan here) but if we're making that comparison, there is a difference between posting the top level finals in football/hurling versus posting the Hogan Cup finals. I'm not a gridiron fan and may be missing some nuance as a result but this seems to be clearly a tier below the Super Bowl, no? I wouldn't be in favour of posting the Europa League, Rugby Europe International Championships, etc and this seems to fall under the same remit. ᵹʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 15:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- We can make the same comparison if GAA is also involved with organizing or sanctioning the Hogan Cup (I didn't bother to check, sorry). For what it's worth, the NCAA doesn't even sanction CFB, and the NFL more so isn't even connected in anyway with CFB. You can make the argument that NFL football and college football are different codes of gridiron, with CFB as the highest level of competition for the latter. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- The Hogan Cup is a GAA competition, yes; it's a schools and colleges level competition as opposed to the senior county level one. I certainly don't know enough about gridiron to make or refute any argument about "different codes" but, earnestly, is this bigger than the Super Bowl? ᵹʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 16:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- We can make the same comparison if GAA is also involved with organizing or sanctioning the Hogan Cup (I didn't bother to check, sorry). For what it's worth, the NCAA doesn't even sanction CFB, and the NFL more so isn't even connected in anyway with CFB. You can make the argument that NFL football and college football are different codes of gridiron, with CFB as the highest level of competition for the latter. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Ernest Shonekan
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Channels Television
Credits:
- Nominated by Ammarpad (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 (interim) head of Nigerian Government – Ammarpad (talk) 13:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose some lines and paras are unsourced. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support – citations have been added. Princess of Ara 19:49, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
President of European Parliament
Blurb: Roberta Metsola becomes the first President of the European Parliament from Malta following the death of David Sassoli at the age of 65. (Post)
News source(s): Politico, BBC, France24, dpa
Credits:
- Nominated by BastianMAT (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: A RD nom has been made however no ITN nom, I think an ITN nom of mentioning Roberta becoming the first Maltese president of the European parliament and the mention of David Sassoli is needed and is a suitable nomination. Both articles are suitable for a news nom. BastianMAT (talk) 09:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment target article needs to be updated for this change of leader. And lots of the article needs sourcing too e.g. none of the presidents actually have sources for them (despite the table having a column for references). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:53, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Should be better now for all articles, I def think this is a very suitable nomination as its an important role, important death and notable background being the first from Malta. BastianMAT (talk) 12:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD only not too significant as death of the Queen Elizabeth II (morbid?), but still much worthly to be posted giving she was the first EP president from Malta but her notability is not so significant as prominent head of government/state. 125.167.57.110 (talk) 12:52, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- The comparison you make with Elizabeth II doesn't make much sense, to tell the truth. Sassoli's death is not the main subject of this nomination, and it shouldn't be. The debate here is whether the nomination of a new EP president should be on the Main Page. If it succeeds, it should obviously mention the death of the one who has been president until today, as it's the reason for the change in the leadership of this institution. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 13:05, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Questions Number 1: is the President of the European Parliament a "head of government"? List of current heads of state and government#Sui generis entities lists the heads of the EU as the President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission. Number 2: do we usually post changes where the person taking charge is in an acting role? Joseph2302 (talk) 13:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- No.
- Not all the time. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- I think the President of the European Commission is the key person in the EU (we posted Ursula von der Leyen election in 2019 but not Sassoli), besides, Metsola's article is not in shape to post at the moment. --Tone 16:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- As a side note, the main story here would be that Sassoli died in office. But it was posted as RD already. --Tone 18:23, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose this doesn't seem like a very prominent role (even though it's inherently international); in fact it looks more ceremonial than anything. Banedon (talk) 03:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- None of the "three presidencies" of the European Union is ceremonial in nature. Perhaps in EP president’s international activities, but its function is the same as that of any Speaker of any legislative assembly. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 08:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. The president of the parliament is the least influential of the three EU offices called 'president', behind the President of the European Council and President of the European Commission. Their role is equivalent to the Speaker of a national parliament. None of the recent holders of this office have attracted public attention. Being the first Maltese incumbent isn't particular significant either. Modest Genius talk 13:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose now people have cleared up for me that it's not the most important EU role. We wouldn't post the change of Speaker in the US or UK, so don't see why we should post this, as this EU role seem to be at a similar level to a speaker. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Ahmet Yılmaz Çalık
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DailySabah
Credits:
- Nominated by BastianMAT (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: Turkish national team and Konyaspor player, 27 years old, died in a tragic car crash. Article needs some work. BastianMAT (talk) 08:49, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- With only 888 characters (154 words) of readable prose, this stub needs to be expanded quite a bit before it can qualify for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 05:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
First pig to human heart transplant
Blurb: The first human heart transplant from a pig is performed. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The first pig to human heart transplant is performed.
News source(s): BBC; Reuters; NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Updated by RFZYNSPY (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: This is described as a groundbreaking breakthrough. There are some potential pictures on Commons. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Are they bloody? We don't need that. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the submission. Which is the better target article? I don’t see either article being updated yet. We need a substantial update for this to be considered. The altblurb I supplied may be helpful if this progresses. Jehochman Talk 08:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- I would assume the xenotransplantation article (ALT1) would be appropriate for this scenario. Ornithoptera (talk) 08:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) RFZYNSPY updated heart transplantation and started an article about the patient. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- If the patient article David Bennett Sr. isn't deleted for WP:BLP1E it might go nominated by the process at WP:DYKON. Xenotransplant has not been updated, and the update in heart transplant may not be sufficient. If this event is significant, it should be easy to find in those articles. Jehochman Talk 13:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support once some cn tags and some unsourced lines in both linked articles are fixed. A true milestone. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 13:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Only time will tell how significant this is, the first human-human heart transplants didn't exactly go well, to the point the ethics of continuing were questioned. If he lives for ten years I'm willing to overlook the criminal language redundancy (ground-breaking breakthrough), but not after a few days. This isn't a Louise Brown style moment with a natural point of success, nor the first xenotransplantation. 3142 (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle, subject to article quality. I think xenotransplantation would be the natural target article? —Brigade Piron (talk) 21:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Per 3142. DYK. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Both per 3142 and because it’s unlikely to make the Top 25 report, as the nominator is so keen on trying to skew ITN towards the most read articles. 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:E462:BF8E:70DD:6A60 (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per 3142 as not the first xenotransplating operation. --Masem (t) 02:27, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- 'Oppose for lack of event or biography article, but an interesting chapter in medical history, thanks! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:38, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose I'd support this but we lack a article on the event; the ones available are tangential. Banedon (talk) 03:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Per Banedon. No article, no blurb. – Sca (talk) 13:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, We have to wait and see what the results will be. Alex-h (talk) 14:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: David Sassoli
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DW France 24 Politico, BBC, dpa
Credits:
- Nominated by Dying (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit), Yakme (talk · give credit) and Alsoriano97 (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: incumbent president of the european parliament. died of a "serious complication due to a dysfunction of the immune system". article needs some work. dying (talk) 05:06, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle. Article looks okay, still needs a bit work, important person and a tragic death. BastianMAT (talk) 08:49, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Orange-tagging his article. Many unsourced paragraphs and lines. And I think his two years as president of the European Parliament should have deeper coverage. Far from ready, IMO. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 09:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sources have been added where missing. --Yakme (talk) 11:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Good job! _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 12:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Everything seems to be sourced now. --Vacant0 (talk) 11:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support looks fine for RD now. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support now looks good. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 15:16, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Strong support This is a heavily significant event and should be included. The article is additionally well written.Dunutubble (talk) 15:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 15:45, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
January 10
January 10, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Science and technology
Sports
|
RD: Deon Lendore
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport, World Athletics
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Joseph2302 (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: Needs some text expansion, as currently a stub Joseph2302 (talk) 11:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment expanded to start class, which I think is just about good enough for RD. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:21, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Chang'e 5's detection of water on moon
Blurb: Lunar samples brought back for analysis on earth by Chang'e 5 show evidence of water on the moon. (Post)
News source(s): Phys.org, Science Advances peer reviewed article
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: As noted by the news stories on this, this is the first on-site detection of evidence of water (the presence of hydroxyl molecules) on the moon. There have been prior from-orbit spectra detection of likely water, but this is from the samples that Chang'e-5 brought back to earth to study. Masem (t) 01:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support and Comment* Might not a better target article be Lunar water as that’s really the more newsworthy part of it rather than the probe that detected it? ~ 2600:6C44:237F:ACCB:ED31:A490:2B71:29B5 (talk) 02:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think there was a real chance that the "likely water" would turn out not to be water, in which case this is a minor advance. Banedon (talk) 03:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Firstly, the blurb is factually incorrect, this detection was not in the samples brought back to Earth, but using a spectrometer on the lander. Water has been found in numerous lunar samples returned to Earth, but by the Apollo and Luna missions in the 1970s. There are also numerous spectroscopic observations of water in lunar craters taken from orbit e.g. by Chandrayaan-1. Detecting it using a similar instrument on a lander is both expected and unexciting. Modest Genius talk 13:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Taskeen Manerwal
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DAWN, Daily Pakistan
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (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.
Ainty Painty (talk) 15:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- With 1999 characters of readable prose, this wikibio is a bit short but its length is still passable (Start-class). There seems to be enough footnotes. AGF'd all non-English refs. This wikibio is READY for RD to me. --PFHLai (talk) 05:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Bob Falkenburg
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Yoshi876 (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 reported today (January 10); died on January 6 (i.e. provable gap of at least two days). —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks pretty good. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Don Maynard
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NJ.com, NYT, ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by Muboshgu (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.
– Muboshgu (talk) 19:42, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support good article, well-referenced, NFL legend. The Kip (talk) 21:39, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Article is in good shape. I've added information about the first three references, which were just titled "Archived copy" - something I think we should be looking out to fix before promoting to the main page. Thryduulf (talk) 23:03, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
OpposeLead needs to highlight some of his major accomplishments.—Bagumba (talk) 23:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)- Bagumba, already done. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Struck.—Bagumba (talk) 23:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Bagumba, already done. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 06:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
(Pulled) RD: Robert Durst
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Davey2116 (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.
Nominator's comments: Past few weeks have been a famous name killer. Article looks solid. Davey2116 (talk) 18:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support, ticks the boxes. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Article looks good. Definitely notable. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support There are two CN tags near the bottom, but neither are of sufficient importance to hold up posting. Overall article quality is solid. Marking as ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Good state. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted -- the wub "?!" 20:09, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Kommentar Adding new cn tags. The fact that it was posted in less than an hour without having solved the tags that were already there and with several lines without source was, without a doubt, reckless. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the extra diligence. At time of posting the only CN tags were in the "In popular culture" section, plus two "failed verification" tags elsewhere that I resolved. I'm fairly new to helping with ITN though, so won't object if any other admins think this needs to be pulled. the wub "?!" 20:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- More than 10 CN tags now. Please pull. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.215.241 (talk) 21:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the extra diligence. At time of posting the only CN tags were in the "In popular culture" section, plus two "failed verification" tags elsewhere that I resolved. I'm fairly new to helping with ITN though, so won't object if any other admins think this needs to be pulled. the wub "?!" 20:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Pulled for now, as there are plenty of unreferenced statements. Stephen 22:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: James Mtume
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Black America Web New York Post
Credits:
- Nominated by ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 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.
ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 16:40, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Please remove me as an updater, all I did was fix the broken infobox and remove a low quality source, I was not involved with any of the content on the page. In terms of this RD candidate, I am currently Neutral, the page is nowhere near ready for RD, especially when it comes to references. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 16:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Ditto here. My edits were very minor, and the article does need more work. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready for the usual reasons. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
January 9
January 9, 2022
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
|
RD: Bob Saget
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Times Reuters, AP, DW
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by JosHeartTransplant (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.
JosHeartTransplant (talk) 19:44, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Famous actor, definitely reaches RD requirement 104.193.62.146 (talk) 01:40, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- "RD requirement" is a recent death in the news, which he meets, and an article of decent quality for the mainpage, which he currently does not. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now orange tagged for citations. No personal life section to discuss his two marriages? – Muboshgu (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Added a short personal life section. Please check out the citations. Mooonswimmer 16:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready per Muboshgu. Referencing in particular needs work. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Kommentar – I'm just glad Betty White and Sidney Poitier's articles were in better shape than Bob Saget's. That is an important milestone for en.wiki. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 01:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- I agree, Full House is not particularly funny. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:23, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support article looks fine now jonas (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – I originally came here for the express purpose of supporting this, but unfortunately, the article just doesn't look ready. The section '2001–2022' is entirely WP:PROSELINE, and the 'Personal life' section, while a good effort in such a short time, just feels somewhat empty, likely due to Saget's cultural relevance being at its strongest in the era of print newspaper. In addition to e.g. Newspapers.com, I feel like there has to be some uncontroversial stuff in his autobiography, 'Dirty Daddy'. I went ahead and moved 'Charity work' into 'Personal life', and even then it's just heavily overshadowed by the 'Death' section. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article has been improved. While there's two cn tags (that I've seen) I don't think they should hold up the nomination. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- There are a few {cn} tags in the prose. Multiple items in the tables in the Filmography section are unreferenced; perhaps some footnotes in the prose may be re-used in these tables. --PFHLai (talk) 04:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- CN tags you out for items that were already cited in either the prose or the tables. It’s disingenuous to call his HIMYM and Fuller House roles uncited. It feels like a deliberate attempt to make it look unready. Honestly I think the career section needs rebalancing. The post-AFV stuff covers 20 years while the section with AFV is considerably smaller covering 14 years--CreecregofLife (talk) 05:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- "disingenuous"? It is not "a deliberate attempt to make it look unready," but a deliberate attempt to highlight missing items. It doesn't look ready without the footnotes in the right spots. --PFHLai (talk) 06:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support only if... - The article, especially the subsection of his career between 2001 until his death, is written like a very simplified summary rather than an article. Could be edited to make it much, much more readable. -PenangLion (talk) 14:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) 2022 Bronx apartment fire
Blurb: A fire in The Bronx, New York City, kills at least 19 people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In the United States, two fires four days apart, one in The Bronx, and another in Philadelphia, kill a combined total of at least 31 people.
Alternative blurb II: An apartment building fire in New York City kills at least 19 people.
News source(s): NBC New York New York Times, CNN, Washington Post, The Guardian, The Independent, BBC, AP
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Major fire in New York City. Death toll growing, might be deadliest fire disaster in the city's recent history. Mooonswimmer 20:27, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support major fire disaster, should be mentioned on the front page. 2607:FEA8:E31F:FBC1:E8EA:A4B4:A991:C5B2 (talk) 20:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- at 19 deaths, this fire is one of the worst in modern US history. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support on the merits. Oppose tying in a fire from four days ago in a completely different city that was not posted. Not sure The Bronx is recognized worldwide. 331dot (talk) 21:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough -- I just figured that both could be combined in a single blurb, like we did when there were two mass shootings back-to-back in the US a few years back. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Also: The Bronx may not be recognized everywhere, but I'm sure New York City is. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:22, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- I've proposed an alt blurb with just NYC. 331dot (talk) 21:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Bronx, oppose Philadelphia The article for the Philadelphia fire remains a stub, and in any case I don't think we should combine two events into a single blurb if the only connection between them is timing. Ionmars10 (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- WAIT. The stubby wikipage only has 1417 characters of readable prose. Obviously too short and not ready. --PFHLai (talk) 21:50, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality. Both articles are far too short for posting on the main page. Will reconsider if/when they are expanded. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:17, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Wait/Oppose Article will improve when more details emerge. Would favor alt 2, as specifying borough seems unnecessary and potentially confusing. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose ... for now. At 237 words of text at 23:30, article is a stub. – Sca (talk) 23:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support NYC, Oppose Philadelphia the Philadelphia article is a stub and I’m not sure if coincidental timing merits including it if there isn’t sufficient coverage - but the NYC fire is a significant event which is all over the news. FlipandFlopped ツ 00:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose incorporating Philly story It is a completely unconnected event and far less eventful than the Bronx one. --Masem (t) 01:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support a major disaster. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 03:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support for Bronx, oppose for Phila - It is severe (as told by the government 'as the worst in NYK for decades'), but I have my personal doubts about it being a 'significant disaster' in the country (in relative, the severity of the fire at Osaka last month killed 26, a similar figure, and was deemed ITN-worthy) Is the death toll expected to rise? (PenangLion (talk) 07:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC))
Oppose on qualitybarely more than a stub article, needs more information. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Also, I'm a strong oppose on the blurb including the Philadelphia one, as the two are not linked in any way. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment We usually post fires with casualties but the article on this one is way too short and tells absolutely nothing about the investigation, reactions and immediate aftermath. I don't think that Grenfell Tower fire should be considered a standard, considering that it's really an excellent article, but there's definitely room for major improvement (note that even the 2017 Bronx apartment fire, which was not posted, has a much better article).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support first blurb. It's easily important enough & the article is good enough. Jim Michael (talk) 11:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Monday coverage says 32 people hospitalized, 13 in critical. Article still seems thin, with only 120 out of 325 words devoted to the fire itself. – Sca (talk) 13:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support despite quality - It's unlikely we will know more about the disaster's causes and background until an investigation is launched, which could take weeks, and then months thereafter to reach a conclusion. That does not mitigate the disaster's scope and newsworthiness.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Major disaster, the article has enough information.Alex-h (talk) 16:11, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support now for one of The Bronx blurbs (without Philadelphia). Article looks good enough now. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Bronx fire posting - major disaster, looks like being the worst in the city since the Happy Land fire over 30 years ago. Article is long enough now.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posting and I'm using "the Bronx" in the blurb, because it's recognizable enough. If you haven't seen A Bronx Tale, I recommend it. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Kommentar The death toll has been revised down to 17 (nine adults, eight children) per updates issued by city medical examiners earlier today. rawmustard (talk) 19:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Rawmustard, thanks for pointing that out. I've revised the blurb. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
January 8
January 8, 2022
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
|
RD: Michael Parks (reporter)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Los Angeles Times; Associated Press; University of Southern California
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (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.
Bloom6132 (talk) 13:27, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Some tags are present. Article could benefit from more details, such as the context for his 1987 Pulitzer prize. Joofjoof (talk) 01:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Joofjoof: lead expanded. I cannot extrapolate more than what is said in the source that verifies the statement tagged as vague, I'll let other reviewers decide the issue. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:12, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
(Needs attention) Capitólio rock collapse
Blurb: A rockfall at Furnas Lake in Capitólio, Brazil, kills at least 10 people. (Post)
News source(s): BBC G1
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionEstar (talk · give credit)
- Created by Fixer88 (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Unusual disaster in Brazil. Death toll growing. ArionEstar (talk) 05:17, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
CommentOppose – Quite a bit of coverage, but lacks general significance. – Sca (talk) 13:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)- Weak Support primarily based on the highly unusual nature of the event. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Rockfalls are commonplace. What's unusual about this one is that several tourists were killed by it. I don't think that makes it important enough. It's more suitable for DYK. Jim Michael (talk) 15:47, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Unusual. Tragic. And you just know that had this happened in America, it would have been posted within the hour of the nomaination 5.44.170.26 (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not necessarily, although this discussion and the article would be a lot longer had it happened in the US. Jim Michael (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Or the UK. – Sca (talk) 20:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- It probably wouldn't have been posted if it occurred in the US or the UK. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- With just seven fatals, that's probably so. I was reacting, maybe excessively, to a faint sniff of anti-American bias. – Sca (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not necessarily, although this discussion and the article would be a lot longer had it happened in the US. Jim Michael (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support -- it is receiving coverage because of how unlucky the victims were to be right underneath the rockfall, but I am not sure if that alone warrants a blurb. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment -- Thank you for working on this article. Usually we post tragedies with higher numbers of casualties. This one is very marginal, but maybe it could be a WP:DYK. My reservation is that DYKs often have humorous hooks, but this article obviously is not for comedy. Jehochman Talk 02:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - Unusual incident, but it doesn't feel ITN-worthy to me. The severity is limited (10 died), the disaster isn't a defining event in the country or region (a tragic disaster, but not an impactful one). It's more of a bizarre tragedy suited for DYK instead (like how previous contributors have noted). If the situation worsens however (like an increased death toll), I would give my support, though I still have my doubts. (PenangLion (talk) 07:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC))
- Take it to DYK. We are likely not getting a consensus to post but the article meets all the requirements for DYK. --Tone 08:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, this would be suitable for DYK & its hook could be worded in a serious way. Jim Michael (talk) 10:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support the death toll is now 10, and it is being covered in news sources. Article is a decent quality. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Still don't see broader significance. – Sca (talk) 14:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Periodic reminder that significance is not a binary. 10 people may not meet WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, but a mass casualty rock slide is unusual, and the article is of good quality. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Per GreatCaesarGhost. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 08:39, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- I'm counting 6-3 in favor. Can an admin weigh in? GreatCaesarsGhost 15:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Mike Gore (physicist)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News; The Canberra Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (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.
Bloom6132 (talk) 01:22, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. Good job on the referencing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Ad Orientem. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 12:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted -- the wub "?!" 00:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Lourdes Castro
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mohamad Darilin (talk · give credit) and ArsenalGhanaPartey (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.
ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support Not wowed by the article's length but I think it is, barely, adequate. No other issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Robert Hughes
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Neveselbert (mobile) (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.
ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not Quite Ready A few cites needed. Article length is sub-optimal for promotion on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose too short and more citations needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Hiranmay Sen Gupta
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Financial Express (Bangladesh)
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (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: Bangladeshi nuclear physicist. Article is a tad short, but, meets very basic hygiene expectations. Rater.js classifies the article as a start class biography. Ktin (talk) 20:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready Article is a stub and requires expansion. That said, referencing is not bad for a change. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, article is not a stub, neither by tagging nor by classification. That said, I agree, as noted by me above, it is a tad short and can benefit from expansion. It is a start-class biography. Ktin (talk) 20:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose CV in prose format; only one sentence about research work. Does not meet 3 well-rounded paragraph minimum. SpencerT•C 06:48, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Murree snowstorm
Blurb: At least 22 people are killed by heavy snowfall in Murree, Pakistan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: At least 22 tourists freeze to death in vehicles in Murree, Pakistan.
News source(s): Guardian, NY Times, DW, Sky News BBC, AP
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: The article needs to be updated. Ainty Painty (talk) 16:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- "Incident" seems like an odd title. --Masem (t) 16:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality. It's a stub. Will reconsider if/when article is adequately expanded. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:24, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Wait/Oppose as article is only a stub. Once it is at least start class, !vote will become a Support. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support Dubious article but odd and noteworthy event This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Quite widely covered, considerable mortality, but basically a weather story. – Sca (talk) 13:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support - What makes this notable is the large number of people visiting Murree to see the snow, then many being stranded there when the snowfall increased, some dying as a result. It's not merely a run-of-the-mill weather event. Jim Michael (talk) 14:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- WAIT. Not counting the bullet-points under "Reactions", there are only 181 words of readable prose on this stubby wikipage. Obviously, still too short and not ready. Not to mention the orange tags for {missing information} and the need for more sourcing. --PFHLai (talk) 22:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- It's significantly better now. Jim Michael (talk) 10:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- WAIT, Article needs more information. Alex-h (talk) 16:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality we don't post stubs on the front page. Needs more information about the event/event background. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support — I've just expanded the article substantially and while it still needs a lot of work I think it's acceptable enough quality for the front page now.3 kids in a trenchcoat (talk) 05:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - There are still reference errors. Significant and decently covered but it's a bit low on citations. Would give full support if more citations are added. -PenangLion (talk) 14:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Getting stale. – Sca (talk) 15:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
January 7
January 7, 2022
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents Health and environment
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
(Posted) RD: Amanda Asay
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News / Canadian Press; The Prince George Citizen; Nelson Star
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (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.
Bloom6132 (talk) 23:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Good depth of coverage, referenced. RIP. SpencerT•C 06:46, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Eberhard Zeidler
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; Toronto Star; CTV News / Canadian Press
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (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.
Bloom6132 (talk) 01:03, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Adequate depth, fully referenced. SpencerT•C 06:43, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Francisco Laína
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El País RTVE
Credits:
- Nominated by Alsoriano97 (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: Spanish politician. As Director of State Security, he headed the civilian provisional government when the government of Adolfo Suárez was sequestered (alongside lawmakers and journalists) in the Congress of Deputies during the 1981 coup d'état. I just created his article and I think it's ready: deep coverage of his career and sourced. Copyediting is needed. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support No major issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:46, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support – article is well-referenced and meets minimum depth of coverage for ITN. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:22, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted -- the wub "?!" 00:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: José Évrard
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): JPOST
Credits:
- Nominated by Count Iblis (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.
Count Iblis (talk) 18:32, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready Article is a stub and poorly sourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:47, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- This stub has only 203 words of readable prose. Any more stuff to write about this guy, please? --PFHLai (talk) 17:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Gerson da Cunha
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of India, Hindustan Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pachu Kannan (talk · give credit), Nichalp (talk · give credit) and Ekabhishek (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: Indian advertising professional. Basic edits done. Ktin (talk) 03:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. No major issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:22, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support article is good to go. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 00:09, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 00:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jack Dromey
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Martinevans123 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Neveselbert (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: British Labour Party politician and trade unionist. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not ready for the usual reasons. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- If there are any remaining shortcomings, it would be very helpful if you could mark them. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:49, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Erledigt -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:28, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. I have added some sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Any more? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. I have added some sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support seems good to me. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- This looks ready to be posted. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:47, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lani Guinier
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Boston Globe
Credits:
- Nominated by Innisfree987 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by LifeHopeJoy (talk · give credit), AleatoryPonderings (talk · give credit) and Innisfree987 (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 is in fairly good shape but honors section needs verifying. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:41, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not Quite Ready Article is not bad but there are a couple of cites needed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Thoroughly referenced now and about as ready as we’re going to be I think! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support article is in great condition. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 00:11, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 11:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Sidney Poitier
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Bahamanian-American actor Sidney Poitier (pictured) dies at the age of 94. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Sidney Poitier (pictured), the first black actor to win the Academy Award for Best Actor, dies at the age of 94.
News source(s): Vanity, The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ed Poor (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (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.
Nominator's comments: Very notable actor, article needs quite a bit of work. Mooonswimmer 15:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- "Personally I pronounce it Harry Belafonte".Support blurb, nicely improved. SN54129 — Review here please :) 15:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Needs a lot of sourcing help before ready. --Masem (t) 15:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not ready Needs some referencing work. Once ready Support blurb, Poitier was a giant in the entertainment industry and arguably the first black actor to make the Hollywood A list. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is that the article does not give any indication he was a major force in Hollywood. I don't disagree with the assessment he was important, but the article lacks clear statements to this degree, and really should cover that if he was to get a blurb. --Masem (t) 16:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- To add, it does look like the long-form obits coming out should help establish this legacy. --Masem (t) 16:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Masem: & @Ad Orientem: I've added a legacy section. I'm still expanding it. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb when ready One of the most important actors who has ever lived, and his death is big news. If you want to talk "transformative in their field", that's Sidney Poitier. I do agree with Masem above who noted that the article isn't there yet and doesn't quite state his importance in a sufficient manner. -- Kicking222 (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality but support blurb in principle if fixed. The article is woefully undersourced, and fails to make clear his importance, which is not helped by the fact that all his awards and honours are listed in a separate page, with no summary on the article. Therefore, the awards and honours doesn't even mention that
He became the first Black actor to win the Academy Award for Best Actor for Lilies of the Field (1963). He also received a Grammy Award, two Golden Globe Awards and a British Academy Film Award.
Which would be the basis for blurbing this. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)- Just being frequently awarded would not be sufficient for a blurb. Poitier has a lot more than just a distinguished acting career that makes him a reasonable blurb, but the fact he helped break the race barrier for Hollywood, which needs to be emphasized more. --Masem (t) 16:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb when ready Most important actor and certainly (without debate) top of his field. Article needs work though. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb as he was an iconic actor and a household name.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb a highly acclaimed and renowned actor, first African-American winner of a Oscar for best actor.--TheDutchViewer (talk) 16:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb absolutely. What he accomplished is most certainly a sui generis example of what RD blurbs were made for.--WaltCip-(talk) 16:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- And FYI, at 16:47 GMT, the U.K. should be well and truly awake to weigh in on this discussion. --WaltCip-(talk) 16:48, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb when the article is fully sourced; it currently contains several cn tags. He won many awards, including the top ones. This is the level of achievement that someone should be at in order to be blurbed - rather than beloved, popular, national treasure, very long career etc. which was used to post Betty White. About 99% of notable entertainers aren't blurb-worthy; Poitier is one of the few who is. Jim Michael (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, support RD Body of work and impact of career not especially notable. Framing of Oscar win by others here is more an achievement by Academy voters. Dr Fell (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- This is an interesting stance to plant your flag on. WaltCip-(talk) 17:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting because it's true. A black actor can (and has been known to) work his or her dramatic ass off, and still easily be snubbed year after year. The dead white voters made that change, for one year, 58 years ago. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Still, it might have something to do with the fact that this particular performance was so undeniably worthy of the Oscar. BD2412 T 20:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, fair play to him. He met the annual Borgnine/Hackman standard someone always does. But how many here have seriously watched that 1963 movie this millenium? InedibleHulk (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Still, it might have something to do with the fact that this particular performance was so undeniably worthy of the Oscar. BD2412 T 20:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb when ready; possibly worth mentioning in the blurb the fact that he was the first Black man to win the Best Actor Oscar. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb based on "transformative in their field", which in my opinion describes him well and sets him apart from other popular actors who would fall short of a blurb. Rhino131 (talk) 17:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb: I haven't checked article quality, but Poitier is iconic and transformative enough to warrant a blurb. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 17:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb in principle If we are going to do the "transformative in their field" thing, this is a perfect candidate. (I'm aware it's not ready quality-wise yet).-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Serial Number 54129:, @Masem:, @Ad Orientem:, @Kicking222:, @Joseph2302:, @Jim Michael:, @Vanamonde93:, @Pawnkingthree:: I've fixed the article in terms of sourcing. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb now that sourcing has been fixed with no more CN tags. I would also support mentioning his transformative effect on race in Hollywood within the blurb. Kafoxe (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb if ready. Breakthrough black actor should deserve a blurb. -Angga (formerly Angga1061) 18:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment For a blurb (which agree here is a reasonable case for a blurb), we really should expand "enough" of the "Awards" section to talk of his legacy in addition to other accomplishments. This is more than just being the first black actor to win an Oscar, but the fact he continued to fight for better representation in Hollywood after the fact and several other black actors were influenced by his success. --Masem (t) 18:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted as RD as sourcing is there, but blurb discussion should continue. --Masem (t) 18:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- I think that the only remaining question is if the groundbreaking aspect is sufficiently covered. There is almost no opposition to a blurb(one oppose was for quality). 331dot (talk) 18:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Old Man Dies If this were 1964 and the blurb was about his Oscar, that'd be a story. Same as if this were 1983 and the blurb was about Atlas and Johnson's big step forward. But it's 2022, and the blurb is 100% about ripe old age. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Is your argument that he was not transformative in his field? 331dot (talk) 18:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- No, I'd have said so. It's that the blurb is about him dying at 94. Are you saying Rocky Johnson wasn't transformative? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- I apologize, but it wasn't clear to me that an issue with the blurb was being raised. When I wrote it, I used the standard format that we typically do here as a starting point, at least.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 331dot (talk • contribs)
- No worries, this is my standard objection to that automatically boring formula, alt's slightly better (still opposed, though). InedibleHulk (talk) 19:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- I apologize, but it wasn't clear to me that an issue with the blurb was being raised. When I wrote it, I used the standard format that we typically do here as a starting point, at least.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 331dot (talk • contribs)
- No, I'd have said so. It's that the blurb is about him dying at 94. Are you saying Rocky Johnson wasn't transformative? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- I was wondering when IH would hit us with the old “old man dies” and I’m glad you once again do not disappoint. Calidum 23:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Is your argument that he was not transformative in his field? 331dot (talk) 18:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 18:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support altblurb, with Academy Award win mentioned. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:12, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support +altblurb. Transformative figure. Shame we can't call him Sir Vigil Tibbs, but never mind. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Kudos to TDKR Chicago 101 for building out a legacy section to make this clear why we blurbed him. --Masem (t) 20:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support altblurb Transformative, should be updated. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 21:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support altblurb. BD2412 T 22:43, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting oppose blurb I know my opposition is pretty useless but just wanted to point out that this is, yet again, sheer americano-centrism. With all due respect to the actor, the rest of the world couldn't care less.Varoon2542 (talk) 08:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Big picture of this great actor on the frontpage of a major Czech daily newspaper I bought this Saturday. He was well known (and admired) even behind the Iron Curtain.Pavlor (talk) 09:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Varoon2542 If you would like to see more non-Americans posted, please nominate them. We can only consider what is nominated. Instead of suppressing stories from any particular country, which is reverse-bias, the way to see more postings is to work to get things you want to see posted, posted. 331dot (talk) 09:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Per instructions above:
Please do not ... oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one.
—Bagumba (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)- But it's the weight of American items. Similarly, RD is almost entirely people from the Anglosphere. We currently have 2 blurbs and 6 RD names, all from the English-speaking world (if you include India). If Mel Brooks and Dick Van Dyke go soon, the entire news section will be about geriatric American entertainers. The 5 main Anglosphere nations (US, UK, Can, NZ, Aus) are only 6% of the world's people, we should try and make it so that they only get say, maximum 20% of the news. I could submit Brazilian and Chinese news all day but that's unlikely to make any real difference. Surely discussing the matter on this page is the first step towards fixing it? Sheila1988 (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Re: "americano-centrism" and "American items", Poitier was raised in the Bahamas by Bahamian parents, and was for ten years the Bahamian ambassador to Japan. His acting awards include six British Academy Film Awards nominations, and two German film festival awards. BD2412 T 02:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- But it's the weight of American items. Similarly, RD is almost entirely people from the Anglosphere. We currently have 2 blurbs and 6 RD names, all from the English-speaking world (if you include India). If Mel Brooks and Dick Van Dyke go soon, the entire news section will be about geriatric American entertainers. The 5 main Anglosphere nations (US, UK, Can, NZ, Aus) are only 6% of the world's people, we should try and make it so that they only get say, maximum 20% of the news. I could submit Brazilian and Chinese news all day but that's unlikely to make any real difference. Surely discussing the matter on this page is the first step towards fixing it? Sheila1988 (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- If we had not posted Betty White (who is nowhere close to the same level of "major figure" as Poitier, I doubt we've people questioning this one. Hence why I think we need to be looking for higher bars to demonstrate "major figure" and avoid blurbs that are based on popularity or the like. --Masem (t) 02:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting because I have also seen it argued that the bar for a death blurb is too high, not too low.(I don't have it handy) 331dot (talk) 02:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sheila1988 (ec) Please do nominate articles about events from China and Brazil, if they are indeed in the news. We can only consider what is nominated. That's the way to fix it. Artificially suppressing stories from any particular country is just reverse bias. RD postings are easier than a regular ITN posting; to post to RD all that is required is that the subject have an article that is updated with information on their death. We can't control when people die(obviously). Sometimes it just happens that we get a spat of deaths from a particular area. It also happens that people choose to improve articles about people that they notice have passed in the news- this we can control, and I invite you to do so. 331dot (talk) 02:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Big picture of this great actor on the frontpage of a major Czech daily newspaper I bought this Saturday. He was well known (and admired) even behind the Iron Curtain.Pavlor (talk) 09:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Ongoing/Update blurb 2022 Kazakh protests
Blurb: President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev orders Kazakh military forces to shoot without warning at the protesters (Post)
Alternative blurb: At least 40 people are killed during country-wide protests in Kazakhstan.
News source(s): Reuters, BBC, Al Jazeera, DW, ApNews, France24,CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by BastianMAT (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: A moving story and development. An very notable and concerning update to the blurb with all RS reporting it, ’shoot to kill orders’ to put down uprising. [3] The president of Kazakhstan claims he has regained control over the country, he has thanked Russia and he has ordered the military to shoot at protestors without warning. Very notable, article is in good condition and this might signal the end of protests with this announcement and Russian military deployed. On the otherhand, a massacare could also happen now as dozens have already been killed and arrested and the military is now free to fire. Definitely the most notable and most concerning update since the protests started. BastianMAT (talk) 11:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Why not using WP:ERRORS to update the blurb, or at least becoming ongoing? 36.77.64.79 (talk) 12:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - The correct process for updating an incremental story such as this is to move it to ongoing.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Changed to ongoing @WaltCip:, @36.77.64.79: Never done an ongoing nom before, better? BastianMAT (talk) 15:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Escalating story, definitive support--Roncanada-(talk) 15:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – A blurb is preferable until it rolls off the page. Not sure an ongoing discussion is necessary now. Can an admin just update the blurb and close this discussion? Obviously, if this situation is ongoing in a couple of days and new ITN items have pushed it off the Main Page, it should be added to ongoing. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 16:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hey, this is the top blurb at the moment, with a picture, moreover! Leave it until it rolls of ITN, then consider ongoing (which should be easy if the story is still unfolding). On the other hand, if there is some major development, the blurb can be updated. (this is the standard process) --Tone 16:40, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not top anymore. Photo gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.215.241 (talk) 19:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Pretty agree with Tone. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Note: "A request that the page title be changed to 2022 Kazakh uprising is under discussion." Martinevans123 (talk) 17:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Wait per Tone. NW1223(Howl at me/My hunts) 18:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Wait support ongoing once it moves off the blurbs, although as that'll be in a week or so, may need to re-nominate for ongoing then Joseph2302 (talk) 09:45, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Coverage Saturday includes 40 dead: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] – Sca (talk) 13:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- I think the blurb needs an udate. Some "protests against a sharp increase in fuel prices" are one thing, but at least 40 dead, a huge influx of Russian troops and a "shoot-to-kill" policy are another. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Do something. Clearly, the current blurb is not suitable, and if we can't work out one that is I believe we should pull it now and add it to ongoing. BilledMammal (talk) 13:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- I agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- The blurb has been updated to "
Protests against a sharp increase in fuel prices result in at least 40 deaths and 4,400 arrests across Kazakhstan.
" for now. Please continue with the discussions on moving to "Ongoing". I don't see consensus to move there yet. --PFHLai (talk) 22:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC) - Post-posting comment – Thanks to all who helped make the blurb correspond to several days of RS coverage. – Sca (talk) 23:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Kommentar, @PFHLai:, confirmed by the government to be over 5800 detained now and over 160 killed.BastianMAT (talk) 12:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Updated to "...at least 160 deaths and 5,800 arrests..." --PFHLai (talk) 13:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
January 6
January 6, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents Health and environment
Law and crime
Sports
|
(Posted) Zamfara massacres
Blurb: Bandits in Nigeria kill over 200 people during a three-day campaign. (Post)
Alternative blurb II: Over 200 civilians in Nigeria's Zamfara State are massacred in a series of attacks by bandits.
Alternative blurb III: A three-day-long series of massacres in Nigeria leaves hundreds of people dead and several villages torched.
Alternative blurb IV: A series of massacres by bandits leaves more than two hundred people dead in Zamfara State, Nigeria.
News source(s): Al Jazeera Voice of America Deutsche Welle Reuters The Guardian France24
Credits:
- Nominated by Dunutubble (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jim Michael (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jim Michael (talk · give credit) and Dunutubble (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: This is a major event that could very well impact the near future, and one of the first massacres this year. It is also an important moment in the Nigerian bandit conflict. Please note that the attacks lasted for more than one day. Dunutubble (talk) 17:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Support because it's certainly notable enough & the article easily good enough. A triple-digit death toll and thousands have been displaced. Jim Michael (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support article meets quality requirements, and attacks appear notable. NorthernFalcon (talk) 05:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted – obvious notability, article is of sufficient quality. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 05:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: F. Sionil José
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Straits Times, The New York Times, Rappler
Credits:
- Nominated by DadOfTheYear2022 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ganmatthew (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and ArsenalGhanaPartey (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.
Nominator's comments: Very notable Filipino writer. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 03:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not ready Significant gaps in referencing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Much of the Works section remains unsourced. Some older links used as refs need updating or replacement. More refs, please. --PFHLai (talk) 17:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Peter Bogdanovich
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): THR, NYT, DW
Credits:
- Nominated by TenTonParasol (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit) and Clear Looking Glass (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: The article is currently missing a lot of citations at the moment, but I've noticed there's work being done to clean up the article, so this nom is in anticipation of that work being completed at some point. Context on the subject: influential American director (What's Up, Doc?, Paper Moon) and noted film historian and critic. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 02:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not ready per nom. Referencing is quite poor and will require dramatic improvement before we can post this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Influential filmmaker. As a director, was "A leading voice of ’70s Hollywood"[1]. He is called "legendary"[2][3][4], iconic[5], "fearless genius of cinema"[6] and "champion of cinema"[7]. Also was known for his appearances as an actor. Numerous tributes accross film industry. He was also called legendary previously.[8] Kirill C1 (talk) 16:43, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose article is orange-tagged. Also, oppose blurb even if sourcing is fixed, as no evidence he's as transformative as the people who get blurbed on ITN. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Scorcese and Coppola elaborate on his influence [9]. He " inspired a new generation of filmmakers, from Wes Anderson to Noah Baumbach" [10]. "Influential director"(The Times)[11]. He was everyone in film industry, from director, auteur, writer, actor, to film critic and film scholar("has an equally storied legacy working as a film critic, historian and speaker", The Wrap)[12]. "He served as a surrogate film professor for a generation"(THR)[13] And he was nominated for Academy Awards. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Arguably this is all pointing to being influential (which numerous directors and actors tend to be), but not transformative in establishing new approaches or the like. Plus the article is lacking any detailed explanation that would help to convince on this point. --Masem (t) 17:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- I am struggling to grasp the difference between "legendary", "influential" and transformative. He inspired filmmakers. Here[14] is written more: "Peter Bogdanovich set the table for the Coen Brothers and Quentin Tarantino by pioneering an intriguing new approach to cinema: making movies about other movies". He was also "Pioneer Of New Hollywood"[15], "a key figure in the New Hollywood Movement of 1970s".[16] I think "pioneering" indicates that he was transformative figure. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, he was influential and so we can find many quotes to attest to that fact. But the same would hold for other film makers. Some objective evidence is provided by this list of the most critically acclaimed directors (https://www.theyshootpictures.com/gf1000_top250directors.htm), and there he ranks "only" 180. So not in the same league as say Coppola, Hsiao-Hsien or Malick. 2A02:8109:9C80:2054:DC76:45E9:14A5:FE83 (talk) 18:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Considering that website is not reliable source and that lots of filmakers on the list died, I am not sure what this url brings to the discussion. "But the same would hold for other film makers." - not many filmmakers were nominated for Academy Award and were listed along with "Dennis Hopper, Arthur Penn, Robert Altman, Hal Ashby"[17](see Peter Bogdanovich there). Kirill C1 (talk) 18:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- It's a reliable and objective source, certainly more so than cherry-picked statements. On academy awards, yes, he was nominated once and only once. Like many other filmmakers. In fact, some of these other filmmakers even WON the academy award ;-) And btw, the article you cite emphasizes six filmmakers as key filmmakers. Guess what - Bogdanovich is not one of them, and is merely mentioned as being part of a broader wave of filmmakers. 2A02:8109:9C80:2054:DC76:45E9:14A5:FE83 (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- A website named theyshootpictures.com which has 14 urls in Wikipedian articles is more reliable than The Guardian, Wrap, THR, Variety. The director is called legendary. See the full quote"Legendary director Peter Bogdanovich, who came to prominence amid the Hollywood Renaissance of the '70s, has died at the age of 82. He leaves behind an astonishing film legacy, with the likes of Paper Moon, Daisy Miller, and his Oscar-nominated hit The Last Picture Show having an immeasurable imprint on Hollywood history." And more:"...there's no doubt that Bogdanovich will be remembered as one of New Hollywood's most prominent pioneers...The passing of Bogdanovich feels like an epochal moment: one of the greats of Hollywood's most shining era, gone at a time which has never been more uncertain."[18]"An icon of “New Hollywood” of the 1960s and 1970s".[19] He was nominated for two Oscars, won BAFTA, Grammy, won at Venice Film Festival and San Sebastián International Film Festival, and was nominated for Palme d'Or and Golden Berlin Bear. So he had an illustrious career. Kirill C1 (talk) 20:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- It's a reliable and objective source, certainly more so than cherry-picked statements. On academy awards, yes, he was nominated once and only once. Like many other filmmakers. In fact, some of these other filmmakers even WON the academy award ;-) And btw, the article you cite emphasizes six filmmakers as key filmmakers. Guess what - Bogdanovich is not one of them, and is merely mentioned as being part of a broader wave of filmmakers. 2A02:8109:9C80:2054:DC76:45E9:14A5:FE83 (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Considering that website is not reliable source and that lots of filmakers on the list died, I am not sure what this url brings to the discussion. "But the same would hold for other film makers." - not many filmmakers were nominated for Academy Award and were listed along with "Dennis Hopper, Arthur Penn, Robert Altman, Hal Ashby"[17](see Peter Bogdanovich there). Kirill C1 (talk) 18:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, he was influential and so we can find many quotes to attest to that fact. But the same would hold for other film makers. Some objective evidence is provided by this list of the most critically acclaimed directors (https://www.theyshootpictures.com/gf1000_top250directors.htm), and there he ranks "only" 180. So not in the same league as say Coppola, Hsiao-Hsien or Malick. 2A02:8109:9C80:2054:DC76:45E9:14A5:FE83 (talk) 18:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- I am struggling to grasp the difference between "legendary", "influential" and transformative. He inspired filmmakers. Here[14] is written more: "Peter Bogdanovich set the table for the Coen Brothers and Quentin Tarantino by pioneering an intriguing new approach to cinema: making movies about other movies". He was also "Pioneer Of New Hollywood"[15], "a key figure in the New Hollywood Movement of 1970s".[16] I think "pioneering" indicates that he was transformative figure. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Arguably this is all pointing to being influential (which numerous directors and actors tend to be), but not transformative in establishing new approaches or the like. Plus the article is lacking any detailed explanation that would help to convince on this point. --Masem (t) 17:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Scorcese and Coppola elaborate on his influence [9]. He " inspired a new generation of filmmakers, from Wes Anderson to Noah Baumbach" [10]. "Influential director"(The Times)[11]. He was everyone in film industry, from director, auteur, writer, actor, to film critic and film scholar("has an equally storied legacy working as a film critic, historian and speaker", The Wrap)[12]. "He served as a surrogate film professor for a generation"(THR)[13] And he was nominated for Academy Awards. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. Come on, we seem to be dropping the ball a bit here. Blurbing is rare, not the norm, and is only reserved for truly transformative and unique figures. — Amakuru (talk) 18:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- "the unique and extraordinary role Bogdanovich played"[20]. I would certainly describe writer-director who clearly had a reputation of auteur but also appeared on top-rated shows such as Sopranos, Simpsons and Good Wife and was also journalist and film scholar, inspiring many filmmakers[21] as unique. Kirill C1 (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Old man dies, no blurb Yeah I don't see why he warrants a blurb. Was not "transformative" at all in his field. KingOfAllThings (thou shalt chatter!) 18:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Oh come on, this is getting a bit silly. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- OMD As silly for a white guy who made not-exactly-popular-but-familiar titles as it is for a black guy or Antonio Inoki. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb as nominator. It's probably self-evident since I didn't nominate it as such, but to make it clear. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 21:08, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Let's all forget about blurbing and focus the discussion here on article quality and readiness for use on MainPage. There are quite a few paragraphs with zero footnotes. There is an orange tag at the top of the wikipage asking for better sourcing. Can we have more refs, please? --PFHLai (talk) 14:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
January 5
January 5, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
|
(Posted) RD: Neil Nongkynrih
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): India Today
Credits:
- Nominated by DadOfTheYear2022 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dipen21scc (talk · give credit), Ktin (talk · give credit) and Niyorbordoloi (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: Indian Pianist and founder of the 2010 India's Got Talent winning group. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 23:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
OpposeSeveral gaps in referencing and the article has a rather promotional tone to it. Needs some work. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)- Support Much improved. Marking as Ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: There are still 2 {cn} tags. And, some of the more flowery language needs to be rewritten in a more encyclopedic tone. --PFHLai (talk) 23:46, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai: [citation needed] tags have been filled. I have made edits across the article to improve the tone. Streamlined sections as well. Reasonable C-class biography. Please have a look and let me know if you want any additional edits. Thanks for checking. Ktin (talk) 00:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, Ktin, for the new footnotes and the revisions. This wikibio looks READY for RD to me. I wonder if Ad Orientem would like a second look at this nom. --PFHLai (talk) 06:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 17:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lawrence Brooks
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ArmyTimes, AP
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by DadOfTheYear2022 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Koridas (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: Oldest US Veteran of WWII, article looks decent, may need updating. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 22:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short article but sufficient for RD, pretty well sourced JW 1961 Talk 22:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. No major issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Short and clean RD. Good for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 01:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support. RIP! Sad to see him go. Short article but sufficient for RD. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 12:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 15:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Kim Mi-soo
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [14], [15]
Credits:
- Nominated by ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Btspurplegalaxy (talk · give credit), NelsonLee20042020 (talk · give credit) and Aoowassana (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.
ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Article is a stub. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose article is too short, and violates fair image usage, as we shouldn't have two fair use images on the article (doing so violates fair use, thus the article's images are a copyright violation). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- very weak support. Everything is referenced (indeed overly so in a couple of cases), and there are no images so that seems resolved. However it is short and would significantly benefit from expansion. Thryduulf (talk) 00:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Events described in future tense (funeral) have already happened. Updating is needed. Expansion there may help make the article a bit longer. Currently with 1737 characters (294 words) of readable prose, not much additional text is needed to make it a passable non-stub. --PFHLai (talk) 13:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
RD: Saleh Al-Luhaidan
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The National, Saudi Gazette, Al-Arabiya
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (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.
Ainty Painty (talk) 15:28, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on Quality. For a top Saudi scholar, the article is quite short, and the only sources are those reporting his death. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Article is a stub. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Though a bit short with 1919 characters (337 words) of readable prose, this non-stub has a passable length to qualify. Need more footnotes, though. Please add more refs. --PFHLai (talk) 07:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Sindhutai Sapkal
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hindustan Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Rushikesh.tilak (talk · give credit), Ktin (talk · give credit) and GreaterPonce665 (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: Indian social worker. Article should be updated soon. Ktin (talk) 01:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Article looks good and well sourced. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 03:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Nice, well-sourced article. AryKun (talk) 10:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support per both the above JW 1961 Talk 22:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support Marking as Ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 15:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
References
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:
- ^ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-06/hollywood-reacts-to-the-death-of-peter-bogdanovich?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google
- ^ https://nypost.com/2022/01/06/peter-bogdanovich-last-picture-show-director-dead-at-82/
- ^ https://collider.com/peter-bogdanovich-dead-at-82/
- ^ https://decider.com/2022/01/06/peter-bogdanovich-dies-at-82/
- ^ https://variety.com/2022/film/obituaries-people-news/peter-bogdanovich-dead-dies-director-1235148166/
- ^ https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/06/peter-bogdanovich-a-loving-cineaste-and-fearless-genius-of-cinema
- ^ https://www.thewrap.com/peter-bogdanovich-remembered-as-champion-of-cinema-marvelous-film-critic-and-author/
- ^ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/peter-bogdanovich-recalls-horrified-local-reaction-last-picture-show-1273842/
- ^ https://www.indiewire.com/2022/01/peter-bogdanovich-tributes-del-toro-coppola-1234689058/
- ^ https://www.euronews.com/culture/2022/01/06/wonderful-great-artist-famed-film-auteur-peter-bogdanovich-dead-at-82
- ^ https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peter-bogdanovich-director-of-the-last-picture-show-dies-aged-82-wxn30g82t
- ^ https://www.thewrap.com/peter-bogdanovich-remembered-as-champion-of-cinema-marvelous-film-critic-and-author/
- ^ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/peter-bogdanovich-dead-last-picture-show-1235070769/
- ^ https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/01/an-exasperating-brilliant-filmmaker-who-changed-his-art-form/
- ^ https://screenrant.com/peter-bogdanovich-death-obituary/
- ^ https://www.screendaily.com/news/peter-bogdanovich-the-last-picture-show-director-dies-aged-82/5166387.article
- ^ https://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/movie-brats-movie-era/
- ^ https://collider.com/peter-bogdanovich-dead-at-82/
- ^ https://www.avclub.com/r-i-p-peter-bogdanovich-1848315460
- ^ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/one-skinny-dipping-scene-proves-peter-bogdanovich-hollywoods/
- ^ https://www.thewrap.com/peter-bogdanovich-appreciation-critic-filmmaker-hollywood/