Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

Leonardo Ponzio in 2016
Leonardo Ponzio

How to nominate an item[edit]

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated) in UTC.
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process. Remember, we use UTC dates.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

Headers[edit]

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

Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
  • Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • The blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...[edit]

  • ... add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  • ... 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.
  • ... accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  • ... comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  • ... oppose a WP:ITN/R item here because you disagree with current WP:ITN/R criteria (these can be discussed at the relevant Talk Page)


Suggestions[edit]

December 11[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 11
Disasters and accidents

December 10[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 10
Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Voyager 2[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Voyager 2 (talk, history)
Blurb: NASA confirms Voyager 2 became the second man-made object to reach interstellar space in November 2018.
Alternative blurb: ​Scientists announce that Voyager 2 has left the heliosphere and entered interstellar space
Alternative blurb II: ​Scientists announce that Voyager 2 has left the heliosphere and entered interstellar space, becoming the second man-made object to do so.
News source(s): BBC, Independent
Nominator: KTC (talk • give credit)

 KTC (talk) 16:12, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Support As I was writing my blurb, I did point out that we posted when Voy 1 was confirmed to have crossed the threshold. --Masem (t) 16:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: There is no update to the target article as yet. It currently states: "the spacecraft may instead reach interstellar space sometime in 2019" - Dumelow (talk) 16:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    There's actually been update elsewhere in the article. That sentence have been removed by Masem now. -- KTC (talk) 16:25, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    Yeah, just moved a few things around to get the update to the body. The lede was updated. --Masem (t) 16:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    OK, thanks. Can't support it at this stage as the article is too poor - there are great swathes of unsourced statements - Dumelow (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support in principle, though I haven't had a chance to check the article quality. I've added an altblurb. Strictly speaking the announcement was made by Edward C. Stone of Caltech; NASA just issued the press releases. Modest Genius talk 16:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    • On a quick look, that article seems pretty good, just that pesky orange-tagged Uranus section to address. Modest Genius talk 12:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong support. I've also added second alt-blurb, which I would prefer. Openlydialectic (talk) 18:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality. Large sections of entirely unsourced prose (the "Encounter with Uranus" section has no sources and is orange-tagged as such, "Encounter with Neptune" is mostly unsourced). Not ready for the Main Page as it stands. Black Kite (talk) 19:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose this was always going to happen, so it's not surprising and therefore not particularly interesting. Banedon (talk) 20:03, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    Besides which, being second usually isn't a stunner. Sca (talk) 21:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    Lots of things we post (basically everything in ITNR) are "always going to happen". Doesn't mean it's not rare or notable. We're not in contact with either of the Pioneer, and New Horizons was only launched in 2006 (compared to 1977 of the Voyagers) and is slower. This will literally not happen again with any certainty for another few decades. -- KTC (talk) 22:01, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
It's not fair to say that everything in ITNR are "always going to happen". For example take the Football World Cup. The event itself might be "always going to happen", but a particular country winning is not, and that is what's being posted. Banedon (talk) 23:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose orange tagged for refs --LaserLegs (talk) 23:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose on the references issue only. The Uranus section is entirely lacking in refs, and the Neptune section is about 1/2 unreferenced. Fix those two things, and this is fine for posting. --Jayron32 05:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Subject to sourcings/improvements. Regardless if it is second or not, this is pretty mind-blowing, and is up there with the pinnacle of human achievement, along with the wheel, the Internet and the Corby trouser press. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on the merits; constructing something that then leaves the solar system is a rare and notable achievement. 331dot (talk) 12:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support alt-blurb2 on notability. We post flybies and this is at least as notable. wumbolo ^^^ 12:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I've made improvements to the "Encounter with Uranus" section, adding citations. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better. Ackatsis (talk) 12:59, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Good job! Now we only need some work on the Jupiter and Neptune sections, and this will be in a decent shape to post. --Tone 13:16, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

December 9[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 9
Disasters and accidents

Health and environment
  • A beaver is seen in Northern Italy on camera, a species that has not been seen in the country since 1471. (CBC)

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: John Joseph Gibbons[edit]

Article: John Joseph Gibbons (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator: Dumelow (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American lawyer. Article is short but looks to be well sourced - Dumelow (talk) 00:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

RD: Eric Anderson[edit]

Article: Eric Anderson (basketball) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): fox59
Nominator: DannyS712 (talk • give credit)
Updater: Rikster2 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

 DannyS712 (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment: two unsourced paragraphs - Dumelow (talk) 01:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
@Dumelow: Fixed --DannyS712 (talk) 02:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Issues fixed. Ready.BabbaQ (talk) 08:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

RD: Mohammed Aruwa[edit]

Article: Mohammed Aruwa (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator: Dumelow (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Nigerian senator. I have given the article a quick polish, it looks adequate - Dumelow (talk) 14:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) 2018 Copa Libertadores[edit]

Article: 2018 Copa Libertadores Finals (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In association football, the Copa Libertadores concludes with River Plate defeating Boca Juniors in the finals.
News source(s): The Guardian
Nominator: SounderBruce (talk • give credit)
Updater: S.A. Julio (talk • give credit)

Nominated event is listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.

Nominator's comments: Beyond being an ITNR and promoting geographic diversity, this final has been one of the top sports stories of the year due to the delays/change of venue for the second leg. SounderBruce 22:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Support – Article seems to have been updated after the match with the latest developments. Clearly a very notable game. MX () 22:47, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose No importance. We shouldn't post every single league from every end of the world to the ITN, otherwise the ITN would be flooded with sports news and not much else. Openlydialectic (talk) 23:43, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    • As an ITNR item, the event's merits should not be discussed here, only the content and worthiness of the article in its current state. Besides that, this is the second-largest continental club competition by revenue/viewership, eclipsing a lot of American sports championships, so perhaps you should check your biases before declaring it to be of no importance. SounderBruce 23:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Not ready. This should definitely be posted per ITNR, but there's no prose summary of the matches. Lots of material on the incidents surrounding the event doesn't make up for having no description of the actual sporting contests. Needs at least a paragraph each of fully-referenced prose on both legs. Modest Genius talk 00:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Weak support. The new match summaries just about meet the minimum requirements. The article isn't great but it will have to do. Modest Genius talk 20:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I've fixed the citation needed stuff, and the tenses, but it does need a prose summary of the matches. I haven't got time to do this now, but will do later if no-one else has. Black Kite (talk) 11:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Doesn't seem significant to most English-speaking readers. Unsee on major Eng.-lang. news sites. Sca (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
The Guardian and the Beeb are reporting on it, to be fair. Not much stateside, but then again it is football. Stormy clouds (talk) 14:59, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
It got plenty of coverage here in the UK, at least for the second leg - shown live on TV, the national newspapers had articles before and after the game etc. Regardless, it's on ITNR so significance is already established. Modest Genius talk 15:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
@Sca: Do you have proof that "most-English speaking readers" do not find this event significant? MX () 16:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Senior Guy At The Office Cartoon.svg


Yes, I have it right here in my desk drawer. Sca (talk) 21:43, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment Some writeup/recap on the final matches should be included. Those opposing on importance need to take that to ITNR. --Masem (t) 16:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Support w/ added prose. --Masem (t) 19:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Marked ready. The matches have prose, and with this being ITN/R the opposes that speak to notability as opposed to quality are of course not relevant. Black Kite (talk) 18:47, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Quality is the only criterion here and the prose looks sufficient.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Robert Bergland[edit]

Article: Robert Bergland (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The New York Times
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:33, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Posted Stephen 22:19, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

December 8[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 8
Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

RD: Rod Jones[edit]

Article: Rod Jones (tight end) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Seattle times (among others)
Nominator: DannyS712 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

 DannyS712 (talk) 05:03, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Actually not ready for mainpage. Very stubby. –Ammarpad (talk) 05:32, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
@Ammarpad: I've expanded it some more. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:51, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Changed to weak support. It's now stub, at less than 180 words it can be read within 45 seconds by average reader. –Ammarpad (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Support - Per assume good faith. Start class. Fully sourced.BabbaQ (talk) 09:52, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) 2018 MLS Cup[edit]

Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 04:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: MLS Cup 2018 (talk, history)
Blurb: Atlanta United FC wins the MLS Cup 2018
News source(s): [1] [2]
Nominator: LaserLegs (talk • give credit)
Updater: SounderBruce (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Atlanta United FC wins the MLS cup in only their second season. Top of field soccer tournament in the worlds third largest country. Article has prose updates, referenced. LaserLegs (talk) 13:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – In the U.S., MLS is widely understood as referring to the Multiple Listing Service of the real estate industry. Sca (talk) 14:23, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. We already post 7 football stories each year (per WP:ITNR), and this is not one of the top trophies in the sport. MLS is somewhere around the 10th best domestic league. The last time this was discussed MLS wasn't even mentioned as a possibility for a domestic league, and LaserLegs themselves felt we already over-represented the topic. Just not important enough. Modest Genius talk 16:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    Yes we post a lot of European soccer, this one isn't in Europe. ITN/R discussion irrelevant. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:02, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I generally don't support posting even the conclusion of the top domestic leagues that garner a lot more attention worldwide than the MLS. This is perhaps a good-faith nomination far from being sufficiently notable for posting.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose MLS is not at the level where it warrants ITNR coverage, unfortunately. It will take a few years of clear dominance at the continental level and domestically when competing with other sports leagues before it should be considered. SounderBruce 19:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article is good shape and MLS is one of the major leagues in US.--SirEdimon (talk) 19:06, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. We cannot post the conclusion of every domestic sports league in every country (we'd post little else), and so we have to draw the line somewhere. For me that means we should only post the most significant domestic leagues in the most significant sports. While football (soccer) is clearly one of the internationally most significant sports, MLS is not in the top tier of domestic football leagues (it's third tier at best) and it's not in the top tier of US domestic sports leagues (it's second tier at best) so it doesn't make the cut. Thryduulf (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - MLS isn't even arguably the best soccer league in North America, nor is it at the tier of other leagues that are on ITN:R as per other commenters. --PlasmaTwa2 20:35, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I think we've got the balance about right at the moment on ITNR football stories. Given that we don't post the results of leagues that are clearly higher tier than MLS (i.e. Brazil Série A, broadcast in half the countries of world, Serie A or Ligue 1), this is clearly a non-runner. Black Kite (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    • The "right balance" is 3 European domestic leagues and none from anywhere else? --LaserLegs (talk) 20:55, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment my disdain for soccer is known to a few -- I live in Atlanta which is how I learned about it this year, and the nom is indeed good faith. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:55, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - much and all as my inner football aficionado loves Atlanta's rise to prominence, the MLS is just simply not on the same level as any of the major European leagues, in terms of following or quality, (I would personally have France, Portugal, Netherlands, and Russia ahead of it), and is far behind the size and scope of its competing American leagues. The league is certainly growing, but it is not big enough for ITN yet. Besides, if you are sick of European football, the Copa Libertadores wraps up today too. Stormy clouds (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    • They filled that stadium to capacity too, which really shocked me considering we're in the deep south. Doomed as this nom is, I hope it gets left open a bit longer so I know what the objections will be going in to next year. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Never heard of this league. Openlydialectic (talk) 23:42, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    • This is the first division of the world's most popular sport in the most populous English speaking country. If you can't be bothered to inform yourself on the subject being discussed, stay out of the conversation. ghost 01:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Lyudmila Alexeyeva[edit]

Article: Lyudmila Alexeyeva (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator: Dumelow (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Russian human rights activist. I am going to try format the refs and add inline citations for the awards. Dumelow (talk) 23:10, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment Just added a bunch of [citation needed] tags. Also, I feel like the article should at least mention her love for Putin and other weird acts/statements. Openlydialectic (talk) 23:33, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I've dealt with the citations and added a bit about her meeting with Putin for her 90th birthday. Feel free to expand on this if you have the sources - Dumelow (talk) 23:58, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Support - notable dissident. Article is fully referenced, but appears incomplete as it has no information before 1968, when she was already 41. -Zanhe (talk) 02:08, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Looks much better now. Though I think it would be better if that book section is trimmed to list just few publications. We are not catalog. –Ammarpad (talk) 13:33, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Especially if the lead can be tweaked to remove or rephrase "one of the last Soviet dissidents still active in modern Russia" which seems like an odd thing to write about a deceased person. Yakikaki (talk) 18:35, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support The lead should not be tweaked: it's well-sourced, objective and describes an exceptional personality. That "eulogy" was written in 2004, when she was alive. There's a bit more info on her life before 1968 in the AP article, reference #3. Wakari07 (talk) 19:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    • I think Yakikaki's concern was the "still active" wording (and it's mine too). Perhaps just "active" or qualifying it with a date "at the time of her death was one of the last..." or "described in 2004 as one of..." or something like that. To me the "still" implies a continuing action, which cannot be the case now she has died. Thryduulf (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:13, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

December 7[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 7
International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Belisario Betancur[edit]

Article: Belisario Betancur (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): CNN in Spanish
Nominator: EternalNomad (talk • give credit)
Updater: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article is updated and well-sourced. EternalNomad (talk) 21:52, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Support I well sourced the article to make sure it would be ITN ready. Beat me to it! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:33, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - sourced and readyBabbaQ (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support meets RD requirements, updated and sourced --DannyS712 (talk) 02:45, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 19:25, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer becomes leader of CDU[edit]

WITHDRAWN:
WP:ITN/R Kirbanzo (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer (talk, history)
Blurb: ​After the CDU leadership election Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer succeeds Angela Merkel as chairperson of the party in Germany.
Nominator: Kirbanzo (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Pretty large development, considering Merkel was party leader for 18 years until this happened, which may warrant a blurb. Article(s) are of sufficient quality as well. Kirbanzo (talk) 21:49, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Question: Does this qualify as ITN/R? See Wikipedia:In the news/Recurring items#Elections and heads of state --DannyS712 (talk) 22:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    I don't think so. If election of a head of a major party (which is, you know, isn't even a governmental post) in a 80-something million country qualifies for the ITN, I don't know how elections of actual governors in 100- and 200- million provinces across India and China should not. And that's a very slippery slope. Oppose. Openlydialectic (talk) 22:09, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Obviously if she had replaced Merkel as Chancellor, that would be ITN/R, but she hasn't, she's only replaced her as the head of the CDU. The next election for Chancellor isn't until 2021. Black Kite (talk) 00:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment In the 69 years that germany has their own government the CDU was 49 years of it in power as the ruling party. In these 49 years the chairman of the CDU has always been the cancellor until today. Its safe to say that the party voted today its cancellor candidate for the Next German federal election, as Angela Merkel resigns with the end of the current legislative period in 2021. Opinion If there is not any political news for saturday that is more history-laden than the CDU election, there is not much against it to show this news at the main page for one day. LennBr (talk) 00:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Actually that's all rather WP:CRYSTAL. AKK could be Chancellor even before the next election if Merkel retires and/or is forced out, tho even that isn't guaranteed given that CDU+CSU have no majority in Parliament. It is NOT 'safe to say that the party voted today its Chancellor candidate for the Next German federal election' (which is not due until 2021) - she could easily be replaced if she does poorly in opinion polls, or gets caught up in some scandal, or falls ill (or dies), or whatever - and in 1980 the Chancellor candidate for the right was CSU leader Franz Josef Strauss, not CDU leader Helmut Kohl, and this could happen again, especially if AKK's similarity to Merkel comes to be seen as an electoral liability, and/or if the CSU leader is seen as better placed to prevent CDU/CSU voters switching to the AfD. And it's not easy to win an election after your party has been in office for 16 years and your previous leader is retiring because voters seem tired of her and you are seen as very similar to her, so being CDU/CSU Chancellor candidate may not mean all that much in 2021. (Of course this is arguably also all a bit WP:CRYSTAL on my part, but then somebody seemingly ought to try to point out some of the apparent inaccuracies in the previous comment). Tlhslobus (talk) 05:14, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Important though it is for the EU, it's domestic politics. Sca (talk) 02:31, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
It's not even clear that it is important for the EU unless and until she becomes Chancellor (and even then it should be rather trivial for the EU compared to things like Brexit (let alone Climate change, etc)).Tlhslobus (talk) 05:38, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
In a general sense, high-level German political change is important to the EU, as Germany is the EU's most populous state and its leading economy. But yes, if she were to become Kanzlerin that would be blurbable. Sca (talk) 14:25, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose As noted above, domestic politics. Would be blurbed when she actually becomes the chancellor. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:20, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. If/when she replaces Merkel as Chancellor of Germany, then I will support a blurb. Unless & until that happens, this is just internal leadership of one political party. Modest Genius talk 00:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose As above, this is currently just a change in leadership of the party, not the chancellor. Hrodvarsson (talk) 02:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

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

December 6[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 6
Armed conflicts and attacks
  • A car bomb explodes near a police post in Chabahar, Iran. Two police officers are pronounced dead and around 40 people were wounded in the attack. Islamic militant group Ansar Al-Furqan claims responsibility. Iran accuses the perpetrators of being "foreign-backed terrorists". (Middle East Eye)

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

2018 Chabahar suicide bombing[edit]

Article: 2018 Chabahar suicide bombing (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In Chabahar; Iran, at least two policemen are killed and 48 others injured including women and children by a suicide bombing of Ansar Al-Furqan group
Alternative blurb: ​In Chabahar; Iran, at least two police officers are killed and 48 others injured by a suicide bombing of Ansar Al-Furqan group
News source(s): the guardianreuters
Nominator: Saff V. (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: a suicide bombing with High number of casualties (48 people) including women and children Saff V. (talk) 06:13, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose - if this had been a school shooting, or a bombing elsewhere in the general region it almost certainly wouldn't pass. Juxlos (talk) 13:11, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose another collapsing regime in the region. Not important. Openlydialectic (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
You'd better review Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, specially see WP:NOTBLOG. Saff V. (talk) 06:33, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Wow, regarding the two callous responses above. I could support this, but it is a stub at present. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I mean, it's a bad thing and all, yes, but if a school shooting killed a single digit number in the US it has a 90% chance of failing ITN. Bombings in Kabul don't even get nominated half the time. Juxlos (talk) 18:05, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Juxlos: I know what you say, but it's not accurate to compare school shootings in the United States or terrorist attacks in Kabul with a rare incident in Iran. --Mhhossein talk 16:32, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose terrorist attacks in Iran are not nearly as common as they are in the over-represented failed state of Pakistan, but the article is a little bit short even for the barely-above-stub standard we've come to accept for our usual disaster porn articles. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
It's an ongoing event, by passing the time, information will be collected, subsequently article will include more deteils.Any way if it is neccesary, I would ask Mhhossein to give it try and provide more information into the article.Saff V. (talk) 06:42, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi, sorry for the belated response. I'll add some more data to the article. But for now, I should say that the toll is not accurate. Most of the sources, are saying at least 2 people were killed, while the article is showing something else.--Mhhossein talk 18:31, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Weak Support article is short but adequate. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:03, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Per my previous comment. Moreover, I've added more info to the article so the article is no longer too short for the ITN. --Mhhossein talk 16:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - While terrorist attacks are not that common in Iran, 3 deaths (including the perpetrator) is not the kind of death toll that makes it to ITN. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 10:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) The Game Awards 2018[edit]

Doesn't look like consensus will ever develop here. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: The Game Awards 2018 (talk, history)
Blurb: God of War wins Game of the Year and Red Dead Redemption 2 wins in four categories at the The Game Awards 2018.
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter Variety
Nominator: Openlydialectic (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: First time ever nomination of this event or any video game award ceremony in general. The article's in a good shape, and so are the two video game ones. The one about the God of War is actually a Good Article, and the Red Dead is in the process of becoming one. About time we start putting the gaming Oscars in the ITN. Openlydialectic (talk) 07:09, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - I don't see any reason not to, considering the vast amount of media coverage the event got. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 07:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - I think widening the scope of award shows at ITN is good. Article is ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 08:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait This isn't really a support or oppose opinion. Merely that, with something like this, let's wait for a full consensus to develop, otherwise I can well see it devolving into a pull or not pull debate if it's put up too quickly. 88.215.17.228 (talk) 09:13, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose The Game Awards were established in 2014, just 4 years ago, so I'm not sure about its prestige and importance as the highest achievement in video game industry. Brandmeistertalk 10:06, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
The Video Game Awards bore out from the Spike Video Game Awards which started in 2003. Same core organizer but who wanted to get from Spike TV over commercialism. --Masem (t) 11:00, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose I do not see this as being particularly notable in the grand scheme of ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 12:00, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    @WaltCip: I am pretty sure that ITN exist so that people could provide arguments for and against their position, and not just state "this is not important" or "I do not see this as being particularly notable in the grand scheme of ITN". Also, since you're saying this, do I understand that right that you then do consider various horse racing events and other local Canadian hockey championships - that we do post here - to be "important" in "the grand scheme of things"? Openlydialectic (talk) 22:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    I've stated my position. This is not notable. There's nothing to establish its notability as an award show in comparison to other gaming award shows.--WaltCip (talk) 00:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
    No, you just baselessly made a vote without explaining why you voted in a way that you did, which goes against the WP:NOTVOTE rule. Good luck.
  • Question. I'm not opposed to having some form of games awards on ITN, but we should restrict blurbs to the most prestigious award ceremony. Are the Game Awards more important in the field than the Golden Joystick Awards, BAFTA Game Awards or Game Developers Choice Awards? Modest Genius talk 12:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    • We post several film awards, I'd be ok with several game awards which are both in the news and have a quality update. We've not had that problem yet, IIRC this is the first game award of any sort nominated of any sort. One reason I'm supporting this is I actually saw it "in the news". --LaserLegs (talk) 14:57, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Golden Joysticks are fully audience voted, so generally not top. Whereas the weight difference between this, BAFTA, and GDCA -- this tends to get the on the spot coverage in gaming RSes, while the others get noticed after said events, despite said events also being broadcast/streamed live. Its a perception issue. --Masem (t) 15:09, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
      • It could also be an advertising issue. A lot of companies means a lot of money to throw around. I know the argument goes that we can't deny an item for not being on ITN/R, but there needs to be at least a consensus first that this particular event is noteworthy given we haven't posted it before, because honestly, as a gamer, this is the first I've heard of it.--WaltCip (talk) 18:41, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
        • Completely reasonable, and if you look at the ceremony itself, 50% of it was just promos for new games. That said, the voting jury for the bulk of the awards (not the esports ones) are media outlets, listed here : [3], so I don't see this specific awards as commercially driven. In the case of the GDCA ones, that's run and organized by the industry's trade group so there's a tiny bit of nepotism there. --Masem (t) 20:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose There's a potential fallacy here of saying we post awards shows for movies, so not posting for games would be bias (especially given historical disdain for games as an art). The Oscars carry serious juice in Hollywood. Every physicist knows their Nobel winners. There's no evidence that artists or consumers view these as important. ghost 12:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    @GreatCaesarsGhost:The 2017 (so, the previous), Game Awards were watched by 18.7 million people. For comparison, the 2018 Oscars were watched by 26.5 million viewers Openlydialectic (talk) 21:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Per Walt. Lacks significance for a general audience. Sca (talk) 14:01, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support notability for me comes from the industry heavies who hosted and attended the event. Article is as good as any other awards article, is well referenced, and has some prose. We post all kinds of obscure literary, mathematics, architecture, and poetry awards, we should probably post things which do have interest to a general audience like film, television, music and video games. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Support. Going to nitpick the X of Y statement in the nom and point out for the people not familiar with this awards show that it is more like The People’s Choice Awards than the Oscars due to the voting method. The Oscars and similar award shows in its vein votes using a professional committee, whereas this award show uses a combination of a voting jury comprised of professionals (90% weight) + public polling (10% weight with some additional wackiness based on social media sharing). While it has become a significantly more popular event over the years, I wouldn’t say this is a prestigious Oscar/Emmys/Tony Awards/Grammy – style event. All that said, I think this event has grown just enough over the years to have enough notability, general news coverage, and sufficient article quality for ITN. ZettaComposer (talk) 15:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Only existed for five years; no reason given why this should be more important than the other events mentioned above; article contains practically no content apart from which new games were advertised at the event, and a list of results. Since there are a number of these awards, it would probably be useful to have a discussion about which are the most notable. If one particular award is seen as the "gaming Oscars", then fine - go for it. But AFAICS this is just another run-of-the-mill awards ceremony. Black Kite (talk) 15:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    @Black Kite:The 2017 (so, the previous), Game Awards were watched by 18.7 million people. The largest such ceremony by far For comparison, the 2018 Oscars were watched by 26.5 million viewers Openlydialectic (talk) 21:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Want to re-stress that before 2014, this event effectively was the Spike Video Game Awards, which started in 2003. There was a falling out between Geoff Keighley, the guy that organizes this, and Spike TV, who wanted entertainment value, so Keighley broke off and made a completely new awards show but based on the same principles that he ran Spike VGAs with. That lineage is recognized in the industry, it just doesn't show up easily on a quick pass of our WP coverage (but its there, I know I've wrote about it). --Masem (t) 20:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - It's already been called "the Oscar of video games" actually, both by players, game creators and specialist and generalist press. The event is young, yes, but grown dramatically, almost five times the number of viewers compared to the first edition and broadcast all over the globe. To this we add live musical performances and guests arrived from multiple branch of entertainment. It does not seem so absurd to have it in ITN. Lone Internaut (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Support in principle having Gaming Awards at ITN as an important (despite arguably still being a relatively new) economic, social and cultural phenomenon, despite my not being sufficiently interested to know or care whether these particular awards are the right ones to post. Although I have very little personal interest in video-games myself, some of the opposition expressed here reminds me of the misguided contempt by my ill-informed and complacent 'betters' for things like pop music and Science Fiction which I encountered when young (and which, incidentally, probably did me and others quite a bit of harm at the time in several different ways, but much of it to do with keeping us ill-informed, which is precisely what Wikipedia is meant to combat). Tlhslobus (talk) 17:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Which opposition are you referring to? I don't see any comment that video game awards are ig-nobel per se, just that THIS event has not demonstrated notability. ghost 19:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • In answer to your question, ghost, it was a (possibly mistaken) impression I got from reading the comments at the time. Perhaps unwisely, I didn't go looking for precise instances, either then or now, to try to minimize the risk that going into specifics might cause individual editors to take it personally and/or get me involved in a debate which I wasn't (and amn't) interested in having. Tlhslobus (talk) 16:41, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
And having had a further look at it, I notice that there is often a significant difference between the impression conveyed by somebody's initial comment and the more nuanced impression conveyed once opponents have forced them to clarify their position (although this is not the case with regard to your own carefully-nuanced initial position). Quite likely much the same could also have been said about attitudes to things like pop music and Science Fiction when I was young, if such attitudes had been expressed on a forum such as this, had such a forum been available at the time. Incidentally much the same seems actually also true of the Ig Nobel Prize mentioned by you in your question - it seemingly began as ridicule pure and simple, but is now at least officially the more nuanced 'research that first makes you laugh, and then makes you think' (or some similar wording, which presumably among other things conveniently allows its organizers to deny all sorts of criticisms, such as that such a prize would have been used to ridicule Copernicus and Darwin in their day, etc). Tlhslobus (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
      • Which is weird because the show has gotten vast media coverage, even outside of the general gaming publications. New York Times, LA Times, and USA Today have all written about the event in some capacity. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:35, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
        • And those said by Dissident are just few, there are others all around the world in foreign language for example. I mean, hard to say TGA didn't have resonance. Lone Internaut (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support: Nowadays the video game industry is much bigger than the film or music industry. Yet we cover all kinds of awards of the latter two, but barely of the video games. It's about time to change that. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 19:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Black Kite. No evidence that this is particularly the top event in its field, or majorly renowned.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    @Amakuru:The 2017 (so, the previous), Game Awards were watched by 18.7 million people. For comparison, the 2018 Oscars were watched by 26.5 million viewers Openlydialectic (talk) 21:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – The The Game Awards seem to hold a relatively contentious role in the video game industry, moreso than the other awards frequently posted on the front page. I would prefer not to present them over other gaming awards, like the aforementioned Golden Joystick Awards, BAFTA Game Awards, or Game Developers Choice Awards. Though The Game Awards try to present themselves as the main award ceremony for video games, I do not believed they have reached that status yet. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 22:02, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    @Maplestrip: I think you just have to be immersed into the industry to know how small these awards are. I wish they announced their viewership numbers, but apparently only The Game Awards do. Openlydialectic (talk) 22:07, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    These three are certainly less popular, but they are longer-running and more respected. I do not entirely know what the ITN inclusion criteria is for award ceremonies. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 22:09, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    >they are more respected. I'd disagree. I wish there's a way to verify respectability, but I don't think there is. The only thing I know for sure is that they are both less popular and have far less coverage than the TGA. And I'd argue that this - this influence - is the only thing that matters. The Nobel Peace prize is hardly respectable nowadays, but it's still getting posted because it's widely covered by the media and everyone wants to know who the winner of this award is. Openlydialectic (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - this event has grown in prestige over the years and I think has taken a spot as one of the major nights for the gaming industry. Big-name developers and figures in the industry attend this event, major announcements are made during the show, and as Openlydialectic has pointed out several times it is watched by a large audience. Regarding its importance vis-à-vis other gaming awards, I don't really see that conversation as relevant given there is a lack of evidence about the prestige and importance of those other shows in comparison to these awards. If that conversation is to be had, I think it should be had at ITN:R since a reoccurring post about gaming awards is likely ITN:R material. A decision on which one people want to post about yearly can be made there, but on the presented facts of the Game Awards on their own, I think this should be posted. --PlasmaTwa2 01:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose, relatively niche pop-culture interest, and not of huge international or historical importance. WP already has a problem of too much focus on pop culture over more serious and important issues. Video game are really not that important. Harizotoh9 (talk) 02:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
As much as I might be opposed to the posting of this particular event, it's probably a bit of a stretch to say that video games are a "niche interest" given that at least this particular event had viewings similar to the Oscars. Outside of Western Europe, the U.S. and Japan, maybe.--WaltCip (talk) 13:32, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose In response to the comparisons to the Oscars and Grammys, I don't think video games have the same mass appeal as movies and music yet. It will take another 10-20 years or so for that to happen. Also, a good part of the Game Awards was advertising for upcoming games, which makes me take it less seriously as a genuine award ceremony and more of a commercial event. The ceremony is still pretty new and needs some more time to gain a track record. TarkusABtalk 10:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support because the oldest blurb is pretty old at this point. If we had no shortage of blurbs this might not be significant enough to qualify, but as it is I'm supporting. Banedon (talk) 02:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Poe's Law in effect here? Clearly we do not post something because we haven't posted anything in awhile. ghost 20:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Biggest event of year in gaming Тухлопуз (talk) 05:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Relatively insignificant awards ceremony. Hrodvarsson (talk) 02:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Significant coverage from reliable video game sources and non-video game sources alike. Significant viewership, especially in comparison to that of the Oscars. Video gaming is not a niche thing as it use to be. They are part of the mainstream. Practically anyone with a cellphone is playing a video game. In America at least (which this show is based out of), there are more households with game consoles than not. The article itself is well put together and well documented. Furthermore, for those saying this is a "new" show, not really. Yes, "The Game Awards" have only been around for five years, but this show was born out of the Spike Video Game Awards, which was around from 2003 to 2013, before essentially becoming The Game Awards. --JDC808 23:49, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Time to call this I think. A !vote count is even, a few opposes dismiss the "significance" of video games I think can be dismissed outright, some serious opposes around the relative newness of the event are reasonable and merit consideration. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:00, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Larry Hennig[edit]

Article: Larry Hennig (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator: Dumelow (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American wrestler. I added some missing refs and think the article is now adequate - Dumelow (talk) 10:37, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - Ready.BabbaQ (talk) 10:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Good to go. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:04, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 20:54, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • "During this time, Hennig also appeared in the independent film, The Wrestler, where he faced Verne Gagne at the Cow Palace in the opening match." In the opening match of the film or the opening match of the card at the Cow Palace? I would assume the former, but it's unclear from the way it's worded. More importantly, the AWA didn't run shows at the Cow Palace until at least five or six years after the film's release. There was another promotion affiliated with the National Wrestling Alliance which ran the Cow Palace throughout the 1960s and 1970s. The paragraph's only source makes no mention of the film or the match. Speaking of unclear wording, one would assume from the photo and caption that he was making a personal appearance at Domino's Pizza, yet one is left to wonder whether they could have been announcing that they actually hired him to work there. Finally, such a fractured chronology may work for a Tarantino film, but it left me somewhat dizzy. The section "Knee injury" begins by discussing a knee injury, while the section as a whole covers many distinct phases of his career stretching over nearly a decade. Many folks from outside WP:PW have complained over the years that these biographies are really dumping grounds of wrestling trivia and the project's cherry-picked sources. It seems to me that separating everything by wrestling promotion puts too much weight on the promotions themselves at the expense of this being a proper biography. We're rewarding that behavior by placing a link on the main page? Hmmm... For example, Hennig enjoyed a fair amount of success in Japan throughout his career; according to his ja.wiki article, he toured there over a span of nearly two decades. This longevity was mostly due to his connection to Harley Race, who became one of the more beloved gaijin wrestlers long before that became a popular phenomenon. Pro wrestling in Japan receives significant mainstream media attention. I see no reason why that was ignored other than the fact that someone wanted to give undue weight to other things. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 02:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Luis Valbuena[edit]

Article: Luis Valbuena (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): OC Register
Nominator: Nohomersryan (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Added some sourcing, article looks generally solid. Nohomersryan (talk) 06:49, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - Sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 10:49, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - I would like to include in the nomination José Castillo, if possible, who died alongside Valbuena in a traffic accident. --Jamez42 (talk) 12:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Add a new nom for him. BabbaQ (talk) 13:11, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Castillo's article is not in such great shape as of now. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:10, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Looks good to go. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:01, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 20:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Pete Shelley[edit]

Article: Pete Shelley (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: SchroCat (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Putting down a marker for the moment while I work on filling in the missing cites Now ready, thanks to the several people who turned up to clean, tidy and cite. SchroCat (talk) 21:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Pretty much fully cited now. Black Kite (talk) 00:14, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - ready.BabbaQ (talk) 00:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment There are a few LGBT categories on his article, but I don't see them supported in the article. There's a mention of Homosapien being banned by the BBC for the references to gay sex, but nothing to support that Shelley was bisexual. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
    • "It was at this time that Shelley talked about his bisexuality". - SchroCat (talk) 07:52, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
      • I also stuck an extra cite in after that sentence, just to make it clearer. Black Kite (talk) 08:03, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
        • Thanks - I stuck in the Rolling Stone ref for the same reason (but dropped it at the end, as it covers the whole bit). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Much improved by SchroCat, This has now been ready for nearly 14 hours? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. SpencerT•C 14:21, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: José Castillo (infielder)[edit]

Unimproved. Stephen 22:10, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: José Castillo (infielder) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): ESPNCBS
Nominator: Jamez42 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Died alongside Luis Valbuena in a traffic accident. Jamez42 (talk) 21:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 5[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 5
Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Closed) RD: Dynamite Kid[edit]

Stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Dynamite Kid (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): [4], [5]
Nominator: The C of E (talk • give credit)
Updater: Anant318 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former World Wrestling Federation Tag team champion and one of the most successful British pro-wrestlers  The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now, too many uncited paragraphs - Dumelow (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Dumelow, too much of it is unreferenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Still drinking the Kool-Aid, I see. The nomination template and WP:ITNRD both make a vague reference to "quality". Every time I come to this page, the discussion frames "quality" solely in terms of the mere existence or non-existence of citations, often without regard for whether they're to reliable sources. This article has at least a few other problems than that. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 01:38, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Well solving one problem at a time seems most logical to me. Cite everything (it's a BLP after all, nothing to do with RD or its nomination template) and then check over for reliable sources. Then check for NPOV and encyclopedic writing. Then consider supporting. Right now, we're on step 1. And I have no idea what Kool-Aid has to do with this. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:26, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
We routinely discuss the use of unreliable sources here. BLPs often cite wikis, personal blogs, and IMDB. But step one of evaluating sources is having sources. ghost 19:25, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

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

(Closed) GSAT-11[edit]

No consensus to post. Stephen 22:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: GSAT-11 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​India's heaviest satellite has gone into orbit on a French rocket to help boost broadband internet services.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Sherenk1 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: India launches 'heaviest' satellite for internet access. Sherenk1 (talk) 08:05, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – I'm sure it's no small feat for India, but a relatively unnotable event in international spaceflight, as many satellites with the purpose of aiding telecommunication are launched by various countries and launch service providers on a regular basis. In addition, the GSAT-11 and Ariane flight VA246 articles leave much to be desired. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 12:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The heaviest satellite by one particular nation is not a particularly noteworthy record. Also, the article is still in future tense, with no prose update since the launch. This might make a good WP:DYK, if it can be sufficiently expanded to qualify there. Modest Genius talk 13:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Article quality is very low and the event itself not notable enough for ITN. Mkwia (talk) 15:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose until now I wasn't aware that "heaviest satellite" was even a thing really. Stubby article, not really seeing it as newsworthy, maybe a DYK option. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

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

December 4[edit]

Portal:Current events/2018 December 4
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

(Closed) RD: Michael McComie[edit]

Stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Michael McComie (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator: Dumelow (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Trinidadian footballer and coach. A little short perhaps, but I am expanding - Dumelow (talk) 19:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose appreciate the nom's comments, it's still barely above stub for me, everything there is fine, but just not full enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It was a fair bit larger but my additions were reverted. I am in discussion with the other editor to readd what I think is useful information, but I'll not die in a ditch over it - Dumelow (talk) 20:46, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Understood. I'd move on and ignore. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak support Seems the issue has been resolved, the article looks little better now. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Nika Rurua[edit]

Article: Nika Rurua (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Georgia Today
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Has been updated and article is well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:05, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Posted Stephen 04:43, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Selma Engel-Wijnberg[edit]

Article: Selma Engel-Wijnberg (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NRC.nl
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Has been updated and article is well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - Seems ready. sourced. --BabbaQ (talk) 23:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 23:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

References[edit]

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

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