---

 Hektor (talk) 14:08, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose: Don't see how this is all that notable. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, the article has an orange tag and clearly needs significant updating. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose posting a test flight; if this is on a new type of rocket it would be ITNR when it actually is launched on a mission. 331dot (talk) 20:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Something strange is going on there...and it's more notable in the light of the fiasco in Yemen... 120.62.28.109 (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Speculation this is tied in with other events, and this is not deposing the current leader in the country. Unless I'm missing something, there is no official duties tied to the Crown Prince (comparable: the US Vice President does have official powers) so this is mostly preparing the heir in the future. --MASEM (t) 16:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...the crown prince being deposed is not every day and its more notable with a new king recently. There is some sort of a power struggle going on in the world's largest oil exporter at the same time as an increase in regional conflicts. (also note the radical swings in oil prices this year so far...). See the first line in the "Succession" section. Personally, I would tie it to Bahrain too but that's more "speculative" so I'm not expecting that to be posted. Although I'm not saying its going to be replicated but South Sudan deposed the VP a mere 6 months before the violence of the civil war started...120.62.28.109 (talk) 16:07, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Wait 'til dust settles. Sca (talk) 16:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support A major shift of power in an important country. Even if things are in flux right now, what we know so far is enough to be notable. Thue (talk) 19:32, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait a bit as per Sca. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:42, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose; from what little I know about Saudi government, the King can change who is succeeding him at any time, so this is not unusual. It also seems that the Crown Prince has few if any official duties so there is little impact to the country. 331dot (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure the crown prince may have little power now. But it is the dictatorial equivalent of a US president being elected in November 2012; even though he only comes into power in January 2013, the fact that he is anointed is still considered news in November 2012. Thue (talk) 20:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A closer comparison would be a change in the vice president, since the crown prince has similar responsibilities and only comes into power if the king dies. As 331dot mentioned, the crown prince can and does change, which while uncommon is not unusual. Mamyles (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I further presume that the King would choose someone ideologically similar to himself, so any change probably would not represent a sea change in Saudi government. 331dot (talk) 20:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I fear that any comparisons with either hereditary monarchy or with populist democracy, as a means of understanding the significance of this change, are almost certainly bound to fail. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC) [reply]

I think it's important for readers to understand that the way that things are done in their own country isn't the only way of doing things. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC) [reply]

It is not that uncommon, 3 of the last 4 crown princes never became king. LoveToLondon (talk) 21:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Only if you count this change; only two of the previous four never became king, and both died in office. This appointment represents a major political upheaval. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A comparison to a vice president really misses the point. Joe Biden is not going to become President. If there were a rule change in the US so that the vice president automatically became heir apperent to the president, then you can bet that we would post new vice presidents. Thue (talk) 12:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose internal Saudi politics issue. Not significant. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose It's not quite at the level of a monarch himself being replaced, which would meet WP:R. Even if Prince Charles yielded his position as heir to Prince William, I doubt that would be included on here. '''tAD''' (talk) 22:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Comments like "from what little I know about Saudi government" convince me that this should be run. Part of the role of ITN and the wikipedia is to educate and inform. Saudi Arabia is a very important country, and the resders would benefit from knowing more about it. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:41, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, no one has shown how this isn't just a reshuffling of heirs without a major change of government or how this ties into larger events. We do want to education, but we need to be more than "oh, this happened, we have no idea what it actually means in larger context beyond there's a new heir to the throne". --MASEM (t) 03:53, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Not so much a shift in power as in shift in hypothetical, future power. That's not to say the Crown Prince isn't powerful, but he's no King. When he (or another) takes the throne, I'll support a blurb. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. This is a cabinet shakeup. ITN never posts those. Abductive (reasoning) 04:43, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where one of the "cabinet members" can go on to become the unelected ruler of the country? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:42, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Like in the US? --MASEM (t) 14:14, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's right; Nixon appointed Gerald Ford to be Vice-Pres, and Ford went on to be President without every being elected to either. Abductive (reasoning) 18:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose – Lacks immediate significance of broader impact. Sca (talk) 14:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Significant international relations repercussions as the Iranian nuclear deal is being discussing in washintgon. 120.62.28.109 (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for now. First I am not sure this is going to amount to more than a footnote in international news. Conceding this could become more significant in the future, I don't think it rises to ITN level at the moment. Secondly there doesn't appear to be anything relating to this incident to link to on the project. We are not a news service. ITN blurbs are supposed to link to a related article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 09:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough on the first point (the vessel just reached the port about 5-6 hours ago according to maritime tracking data) but on the second we don't need to have needless news articles when there already is an article that can carry the events. The ITN does the project a disservice otherwise.120.62.28.109 (talk) 09:09, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait until if this was confirmed to be on purpose with malicious intent, which might take a few days to determine. --MASEM (t) 14:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose: I think the case for ITN at this point is WP:CRYSTAL. There have been a lot of conflicting reports about what is going on, but the confirmed facts don't paint a picture of an international incident that would meet the notability criteria for ITN. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait as per Masem. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Even with malicious intent nothing that has happened so far would be relevant for a blurb. LoveToLondon (talk) 20:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait limited evidence so far, looks like this is to do with a dispute over Maersk being fined over something from 2010, they've agreed to pay ~$100,000 - and Iranian court wants them to pay $3.3 million. See Maersk#Business with Iran about issues from 2010. Further details about 2010 may come out in the following days. -- Aronzak (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Maersk is reporting this is apparently a civil seizure over a ten year old dispute with an Iranian company over a ship Maersk was paid for but never delivered, see source. μηδείς (talk) 16:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Major news story for quite some time, and Australia just recalled its ambassador from Indonesia. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 01:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom, was about to nominate it myself. Significant event with lots of news coverage and substantial international impact. Everymorning talk 01:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - significant international incident but the two executed should be bolder instead of the Nine. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 01:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Just run-of-the mill executions of career criminals. And that's a cute bit of grandstanding by the Australian government, given that it was Australian authorities who tipped off Indonesian authorities at the time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Baseball Bugs: Indonesia ceased its use of the death penalty for almost six years. See Capital punishment in Indonesia - Indonesia has killed more people in ~2 months than they have in ~7 years. This is not run of the mill. -- Aronzak (talk) 03:17, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Given the Australia-Indonesia dispute over the executions, it seems like this is a pretty significant on an international stage. NickCT (talk) 01:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Especially since the Australian authorities share in the responsibility for it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Being responsible matters little. This case, as well as another one that climaxed in January with a similar execution, were a source of diplomatic tensions between Indonesia and other countries, not just Australia. A schizophrenic Brazilian national was among the executed, despite several appeals by Roussef. Last month, the Brazilian government rejected the credentials of the new Indonesian ambassador there, and now they are "evaluating" ties with Jakarta. I do believe the Australians shouldn't be mentioned so prominently for simply being Anglophone nationals, so I've added an altblurb for that purpose. I don't recall the January story being posted, so posting this one would do no harm. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 02:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The article is now updated, and I've expanded the blurb to mention the six other drug convicts who were executed at the same time. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 01:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Was their (death sentence) conviction previously reported on ITN? If not, then Support. While on a functional level this isn't terribly significant, it has caused quite a diplomatic stir. Joshua Garner (talk) 02:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose: Executions of drug smugglers, including foreign nationals, is par for the course in Indonesia. If these unlucky Aussies were independently notable figures, I would support ITN, but they're pretty much only famous for being busted for drug trafficking in the wrooooong country to be busted for that. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Kudzu1: Indonesia ceased its use of the death penalty for almost six years. See Capital punishment in Indonesia - Indonesia has killed more people in ~2 months than they have in ~7 years. This is not run of the mill. -- Aronzak (talk) 03:17, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support For the following reasons-
  

1. Execution by firing squad: This should draw international condemnation.

2. Foreign Nationals executed.

3. Covered by media around the world and notable enough to be on ITN.Regards, theTigerKing  02:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• • Nothing more than tabloid garbage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• No. The Netherlands and Brazil recalled their ambassadors in January, and the Australian government has recalled their ambassador. Ban Ki Moon publicly called for these death sentences not to be executed. The death penalty was suspended for six years under a previous Indonesian president and has resumed under the current one because he campaigned on it - this is not routine, countries recalling their ambassadors does not happen frequently. -- Aronzak (talk) 03:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Nothing in the article suggests a massive international reaction that some supports above suggest. Drug traffickers were discovered, given a trial, and sentenced to execution. Seems very run of mill, and nothing indicating that Indonesia just executed people wrongly or did not give them a fair trial. --MASEM (t) 03:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• @Masem: read the article Capital punishment in Indonesia - no death sentences executed in all of 2014 - this is not "run of the mill" - in just this year they have killed more people than in the past ~7 years, and three countries have recalled their ambassadors, and lawyers allege sentencing judges sought $130,000 in bribes.-- Aronzak (talk) 03:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Which points to a long-term issue, this incident being one factor of that, and making this particular story less an ITN case. --MASEM (t) 05:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Support for many reasons:

• International Relations The Netherlands and Brazil recalled their ambassadors in January, and the Australian government has recalled their ambassador (Sydney Morning Herald Guardian). France and the EU have called on a moratorium on the executions of a French national, and Hollande has said he "would do everything possible up to the last moment" to prevent Serge Atlaoui's execution - (Euractiv) and France condemned the current wave of killings (news.com.au). Ban Ki Moon called on the execution not to go ahead (PhilStar Leadership (Nigeria) Philippines president Benigno Aquino III called for "humanitarian consideration" for Mary Jane Veloso, who was set to be executed. (ABC)
• Wave of killings See Capital punishment in Indonesia - no death sentences were carried out in all of 2014, and no death sentences were carried out between 2009 and 2012. The reason for the sudden recommencement of the execution of prisoners on death row is Joko Widodo becoming president. This is therefore intrinsically a political issue, not a criminal justice issue. See the graphs in this article - Indonesia has already killed more people in two months than any year since 1999, and they are overwhelmingly foreigners.
• Corruption The pair's lawyers say that the sentencing judges requested a $130,000 bribe. The Indonesian authorities pushed ahead with the execution, without waiting for the judicial review into the bribery accusations to take place.
• Inconsistency: Note that people involved in the Bali Bombings have not been given death sentences, and some are currently walking free. A woman who murdered her own mother and crushed her body inside a suitcase was given 10 years.
• Jimly Asshiddiqie, the previous chairman of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia (which upheld the death penalty in 2007) says that Indonesia should abolish the death penalty because "Global humanitarian values have changed" (Guardian ABC PM).

-- Aronzak (talk) 03:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Which betrays the true agenda, which is to make Wikipedia an advocate against the death penalty. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:11, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Recalling ambassadors to Indonesia does not mean advocate against the death penalty and Wikipedia is not supporting death penalty --AntanO 05:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support amount of diplomatic grief makes this in my opinion worthy of posting. SeraV (talk) 04:22, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as per other supporters point of view. --AntanO 04:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Barbaric. But unless the dead were actually innocent they knew what they were risking, not our place to write great wrongs. μηδείς (talk) 04:42, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• The Baltimore story, which is still ongoing despite y'all having killed it a day or two ago, is still the main front-page topic in the international edition of BBC.com. I'll concede that the disposal of a few drug smugglers is also mentioned on the page. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:14, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Given the Baltimore story is ongoing, Baseball Bugs, it could be renominated, given the curfew and the Orioles being forced to play in an empty stadium.

Imagine that, posting an ITN about the Orioles playing in an empty stadium. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Non-notable persons were convicted of an actual crime which they evidently really did commit and handed a penalty that is hardly unique for the charges (several other Asian countries do the same). The volume of complaint about the execution was considerable but that alone means nothing to us and there doesn't appear to be any obvious political implications that don't carry a whiff of crystal ball. In short, merely posting that they were executed is meaningless as they are not notable on their own and executions in SEA are hardly news, but adding more than that would be doing something we don't do. - OldManNeptune ⚓ 05:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Yes, it is barbaric and does harm international relations. Western citizens executed in Asia, and everyone screams that this notable because it is a barbaric crime. How many of you did the same for each of the three foreign nationals that were executed in the US last year? It harmed international relations to a level that the US Secretary of State openly disagreed[4] when Mexican Edgar Arias Tamayo was executed in Texas last year violating international law and an explicit court order of the International Court of Justice. Saudi Arabia executes around 20-40 foreigners by public beheading every year. There have already been two cases of Indonesion women being beheaded in Saudi Arabia this year (also harming international relations) - noone seems to care because they were not Westerners. LoveToLondon (talk) 06:56, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to nominate any issue you feel is not getting a prominent discussion due to systemic bias at any time. We can only debate the nominations that we are given. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually no, Wikipedia is not intended to be used for the promotion of causes and agendas. -Ad Orientem (talk) 09:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who is talking about causes and agendas? I'm talking about systemic bias. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And we must for the current nomination also discuss which rationales for support votes are factually incorrect. Execution by firing squad: This should draw international condemnation. is incorrect when you consider that neither governments nor media seem to care much about the fact that Saudi Arabia has already done public beheading of around 50 people this year. LoveToLondon (talk) 12:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Notable international incident. It's not about righting wrongs; it's about what is in the news, as this is the 'in the news' section. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Executions are very rarely ITN material. The fact that foreign nationals were executed really doesn't alter that fact. When you travel to another country you are subject to their laws and legal system. The United States has executed foreign nationals and I don't recall them being featured on ITN. The diplomatic spat is just that and it will soon pass. On a side note, we need to be careful about using this page or the ITN section on the Front Page as a FORUM for pushing an anti-capital-punishment AGENDA. -Ad Orientem (talk) 09:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong but I don't think the US executions led to the recall of ambassadors(possibly because most executions in the US are at the state level) which is a very serious diplomatic matter. 331dot (talk) 09:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am pretty sure Mexico has recalled its ambassador at least once over the execution of their nationals. -Ad Orientem (talk) 09:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - we usually are hesitant to post crime articles. But in this case it is executions that has been mentioned in world media not just on the day of execution but for several years. --BabbaQ (talk) 09:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support very high profile event, all over the news here in Aus. —Jonny Nixon - (Talk) 13:14, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Bali Nine#Pre-trial investigation is unsourced. This will need fixed before I can consider posting. The reaction section immediately after excessively uses quote boxes. It would be nice is that was fixed, although it won't keep it off ITN. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support most of the known planet abhors capital punishment, and most of the world has been reporting this summary execution. It's a big, big multi-national story that, for a change, impacts a vast array of Wikipedia's readers, and which is being covered widely. That no Americans were put to death shouldn't stop this from being considered considerably important global news. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  The was an American called Frank Amado in death row in Indonesia, but I don't know if he is still there. Executions are fairly routine in the US, so I doubt if there will be much of a stir there. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Major international news. So far there have been executions of citizens of Nigeria, Thailand, Malawi, Vrazil, Australia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Pakistan, the Netherlands, India, Ghana and France. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I feel obligated to point out that "gets lots of coverage" and "high profile event" mean very little for ITN. Kim Kardashian's wedding got lots of coverage. The premiere of the new Avengers movie is "high profile." This doesn't make them ITN material. Recalling ambassadors is something that happens many times a year around the world over a variety of incidents and is likewise not newsworthy, and I haven't seen anyone threatening sanctions or the like. "Two governments disagree on whether or not to use the death penalty" is not news. - OldManNeptune ⚓ 22:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall Ms Kardashian getting front page coverage, nor the Age of Ultron for that matter. These were not grinning guests at some celebrity wedding or fashionable red carpet event. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To put it bluntly: so what? As I've pointed out, this isn't a news ticker making the front page of a newspaper means nothing other than that it sells papers/gets clicks. I'm quite sure those executed did not enjoy themselves, but nowhere do I find that as a qualifier for ITN, do you? Can you articulate a reason why this belongs ITN without resorting to emotional appeal? - OldManNeptune ⚓ 07:02, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Third story on the international BBC website, doubt Kim'd make that, ever... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:14, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right next to Freddie Gray protests in several US cities. I think the objections over that being closed were valid. It will be fairly similar. A number of incidents spread out over time, with varying levels of news coverage. Baltimore does seem to have risen to the level of Ferguson. Indonesia may end up doing several rounds of executions, and there will be news coverage each time. ITN doesn't deal well with sporadically re-appearing news stories. The 'ongoing' links are a bit of a joke - who ever bothers to read what is listed there? Carcharoth (talk) 07:20, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

125,000+ views of the Yemeni article in 20-odd days and 682,000 views of the ISIL article in the past month. So the answer to your question is, a lot of people. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:51, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but not by following the links from the ITN template, I'll bet. What I meant to say was "who ever bothers to read or click on the 'ongoing' links?" They are buried away and are easily missed. I've never seen the point of that, but that is maybe a discussion to have at WT:ITN. Carcharoth (talk) 22:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why even post this when it's a repetition of the very thing I've already raised objection to? Hell if we're going by sheer volume of coverage, I'd guess the Kardashian clan as a whole qualifies for an ongoing (in case anyone is really not reading sarcasm, I am not suggesting we actually do that). You're not going to convince me that third from top on BBC really means anything - we certainly don't post the top 3 stories each day, do we? It is of course moot now, but all evidence points to this being posted on straw poll, without regard to either valid reasoning based on policy or article quality at the time of posting. I was under the impression that's not how we do things. - OldManNeptune ⚓ 00:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. Spencer^T♦C 04:29, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - while I wouldn't have supported posting this, it has generated news coverage in the UK (though not at the level I would have thought warranted an ITN entry). Obviously the coverage has been far more extensive in Australia. The tragedy of this case is that it seems fairly clear that the two Australians (at least) were rehabilitated and reformed (the prison governor called them model prisoners and spoke out against the death sentences). Some of those executed were originally sentenced to life in prison, and this was changed on appeal to a death sentence. All clearly political (the president elected last October on a platform to win the war on drugs [5]) and very sad. There are other cases as well [6]. Those future cases may well generate similar levels of news coverage. A more measured response here suggests that relations will at some point return to normal - i.e. the withdrawal of ambassadors is more a protest than a permanent breakdown in diplomatic relations. Carcharoth (talk) 06:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• While I agree that there was a consensus to post, I don't understand why the orange tag (which I pointed out above) was ignored. That is normally an automatic disqualification, let alone in a case where the discussion is fairly close. (Someone else removed the section after the article was posted, specifically because the article was on the main page.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think there was any sort of consensus, and the orange tag on the page is evidence that this one moved too fast. There should have been more time taken to assess article quality and consider the arguments in opposition to posting, of which there were several. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Orange tag? All I'm looking at is a good article. And for what it's worth, several items have recently been posted with such maintenance tags, it appears those days of insistence on quality are way behind us. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, this version is the one that was posted. The issue has now been fixed, so consider the notice a reminder not to post such articles, not a request to do anything here... The article is designated as a GA, but it passed GA back in 2007 when standards were much, much lower. That combined with accumulated edits over 8 years meant there was no guarantee of quality just because it was a GA. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:43, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Doesn't seem to matter now, the article is in decent shape, it's still world news, particularly as they appear to have executed an individual with mental difficulties who was unaware of the proceedings until the last moments, something that I understand doesn't even happen in the US. Oh, and if you don't believe it to be a Good Article any longer, please send it to WP:GAR. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:19, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• (to note, it did happen before but now is considered unconstitutional). --MASEM (t) 20:36, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• My apologies, I completely missed that when reviewing the article. I reviewed the intro, noted the GA classification and reviewed the sections related to the updated content (Appeals on down); when I clicked on the TOC to move to that section, I missed the orange-level tag. I assumed since the article had a GA designation that the rest of it was GA-quality. I will take more care when reviewing candidate articles in the future. Thank you to ThaddeusB for adding references. Best, Spencer^T♦C 00:22, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Points up the problems with COI editing in Wikipedia Jytdog (talk) 14:11, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - of minimal significance outside Wikipedia. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:21, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose navel gazing with minimal significance. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Navel gazing. --MASEM (t) 14:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• comment, ok, that is SNOW. I have never done this before, and don't know how to withdraw a nomination. please feel free to kill this. thanks. Jytdog (talk) 15:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Per WP:IAR I changed the header to say "MEP", as Coburn is a Member of the European Parliament, not a 'Member of Parliament'. Nomination should stay closed, obviously, but that needed to be corrected. Carcharoth (talk) 07:26, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• My view is that any story that's about Wikipedia itself, now and in future, needs to be of major, major importance, to avoid the "navel gazing" as others have mentioned. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:16, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Fully agree. Jusdafax 19:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Although it can be quite meditative, I'll grant you. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Known for being an original member of the Kingsmen, and for singing their version of "Louie Louie", which the Guardian calls "one of the most famous songs of the 20th century." Everymorning talk 17:56, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - One-fifth of a one-hit wonder. --Bongwarrior (talk) 18:07, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Not seeing a sign of importance here. Being a member of a band with one major hit is one's 15 minutes of fame, and no further signs of fame or importance beyond that. --MASEM (t) 18:08, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose No awards no note of influence, no sign of notability - 15 minutes of fame for a song from half a century ago. Another that has their fans - but not remotely meeting any RD criteria. Challenger l (talk) 20:14, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose not RD notable, good article though. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Significant disaster with a large death toll. ThaddeusB (talk) 15:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak OpposeWeak Support - Our article starts off by saying "This commonly happens this time of year in this region", and that a similar landslide last year also led to deaths. It is equivalent of when tornadoes of moderate strength race through Tornado Alley - there's damage and deaths but it's the nature of living in that area of the world. That said, this also highlights that there are places in the world that we don't get news until much too late to actually respond to it. (And just in case, I originally thought this might have been tied to the large quake over the weekend but this happened before that, so not a related event). --MASEM (t) 15:34, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Landslides do occur each year. Large number of deaths is uncommon, though. Last year is the only one I am familiar with with >100 deaths (and is the only one with a Wikipedia article). Also, we would certainly post a US tornado with 50 deaths (we have posted many with ~20 deaths), so the comparison is a little weird as a reason to oppose. Finally, even if a landslide with 50+ deaths happened once a year on average (it doesn't), I fail to see how that changes the significance of the event. No one would argue that an annual sporting event should not be published just because it occurs annually. "Too common for ITN" should mean monthly, not once every few years. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "annually", it is "regularly" which is the point here. We post tornadoes that may have few deaths but millions in damage due to the intensity/size/duration of the store that generally makes these events rare. I'm just not seeing how this is a rare event for this area beyond that it claimed more lives than usual. But that's the nature of my weak oppose, I recognize it is a number of deaths to a natural event that couldn't have been readily avoided. --MASEM (t) 18:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Its only regularly if you are counting all landslides, the vast majority of which do little or no damage to human settlements. Just as tornados regularly occur in central US, but only occasionally cause significant damage. The amount of significant landslides in Afghanistan is very similar to the amount of significant tornadoes in the US. As we know, in 2014 a landslide killed ~350 in Afghanistan, which was more than the 2013 total by all natural disasters country wide. Since 2010, I could find only two others with 50+ dead: One in 2010 (170 dead) and one in 2012 (70 dead, but as part of an earthquake, so possibly not all deaths from the landslide itself). --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Masem. Tragic, obviously, but not an unusual occurrence in the area. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• @Masem and Kudzu1: Care to reconsider given that I've shown this is only "common" in the same sense that tornadoes are common in the US, or floods are common in China. That is, landslides in Afghanistan are common, but ones that cause large destruction/deaths are not. I doubt you can find a single case where ITN has rejected a similar story before - we have always posted this sort of story before, including many cases of Chinese floods and American tornadoes... It seems ITN standards have risen substantially lately, which is why we constantly have week old stories on the template. We need to get back to where we are averaging close to 1 story/day, which is what we were at for several years before late 2014/early 2015. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll change it to weak support. I'm worried that stories like this which are difficult to classify in the larger world picture are the types of articles that WP:NOT#NEWS tells us to avoid and that should be better documented at Wikinews, and yet they keep coming. Not every natural disaster in the world that leads to loss of life needs an article; only those that have a larger impact. ITN should be careful about this because we do set an example of what news is proper to cover in WP in the context of WP:NOT#NEWS. --MASEM (t) 16:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree with Masem. I'm not going to complain if it is posted, but the slides are a week stale at this point, I'm not persuaded the casualty count here is really out of the ordinary, and this nom hasn't attracted the kind of attention I'd expect for a disaster (not that a large number of participants are needed for consensus, of course). -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:43, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: (I'm not particularly expecting this to succeed but you never know...) Nominating as very important in their field of British ventriloquists. I suspect the Harris was still the best known living British ventriloquist at the time of his death even though he has not been very high profile for quite a long time. He was pretty famous in the 1980s even though our article covers this time period poorly. His obits are fairly prominent towards the top of British media website frontpages. JMiall₰ 15:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Clearly a good faith nomination, but he just doesn't rise to ITN/RD level attention. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:14, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I hate that duck. More seriously, he's just not that famous in the UK any more, let alone internationally. --Dweller (talk) 16:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose While perhaps a leader this field, the field is so small and lacking importance that its hard to consider this, and in considering the larger world of entertainment, a bit player in that. --MASEM (t) 16:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Cuddles and Dweller. Seriously, I'm beginning to wonder as to if we need to redefine "field": he was an "entertainer", and while he as a "British ventriloquist", I don't think we should make that a field. He was reasonably entertaining, and sold out in his later career to entertain students etc, but certainly not RD notable material.
• Support But only if there's a fair-use image of the duck so we have the juxtaposition of a 1980s children's hero, the Armenian Genocide and the Nepalese earthquake on the frontpage. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:49, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: He is one of six men inducted into each of the WWE, WCW, Professional Wrestling and Wrestling Observer Newsletter halls of fame. -The Herald • ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 07:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support He held a major wrestling world title (the AWA Title) for more cumulative days than anyone else. Admittedly, it comes with a caveat (he owned the AWA) but he was a major wrestling star in the Midwest for decades, so it does make him at or near the top of his field. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 09:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• That's not real. That's a storyline. When Phillip Seymour Hoffman died, we didn't credit him with Truman Capote's bibliography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.216.224 (talk) 15:34, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose He might have been top of his field, but "professional" wrestling is not something I'd say should be covered here. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why? No matter what professional wrestling is, it is still a field. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So if the first person to catch all 151 Pokemon was to die, would you include him as well? That is also a field... I can hardly believe that there are people here who oppose the inclusion of dead world leaders, but when some guy from a make-believe "sport" comes along, he is supposed to be a valid person for RD? Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:03, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you could demonstrate that someone who caught all 151 Pokemon was somehow notable to video gaming and received news coverage, I would consider it. I'm not sure which "dead world leaders" you are referring to, but not every world leader meets the recent deaths criteria. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that "wrestlers" are professionals and public figures, just like actors and singers. The scripted nature of their field doesn't cancel that out. How many people pay-per-view to see the guy who caught all the Pokémon, or buy stickers and action figures of him? '''tAD''' (talk) 11:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I also don't see it really being in the news. Washington Post has a tiny headline on their start page, nothing to be found at New York Times or CNN... Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, some of us are here to build an encyclopedia, not a portal to the NYT or CNN. Deferring to those entities over and over again causes me to wonder if anyone else really understands the difference. As for your point about a lack of coverage, that's actually not all that surprising for someone who has been out of the spotlight for over three decades. Some of these so-called journalists may have to actually do some research rather than lazily copy whatever they find lying around on Twitter and pawn it off as "news". RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that you have seen The Mirror, TI and CBS ?-The Herald • ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 12:53, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support From what I can see the article is in good shape and the subject appears notable since he won a major wrestling world title. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I never know with these pro wrestler articles how much is In-universe. Difficult to judge significance.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This particular article reads like it was heavily influenced by the editor having watched WWE's The Spectacular Legacy of the AWA DVD. It's missing tons of important points about Gagne, but doesn't really have any in-universe problems that I can see. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose – Having grown up in Minneapolis during Verne Gagne's active years ('50s and '60s), I must advise he does not meet RD criteria. Sca (talk) 12:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • He was actually active in wrestling until the '80s. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - It's difficult to argue importance in a sport where it is known there are crafted story arcs even if there are elements of athletism involved. If we take the stance that we are looking at actors rather than athletes, I don't see the importance here compared to, say, someone like Andre the Giant or Hulk Hogan which are names immediately recognized outside of the sport. --MASEM (t) 13:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One of the interviewees on WWE's AWA DVD was Mike Chapman, the executive director of the aforementioned Professional Wrestling Hall of Fame and Museum. In one clip, Chapman considered Gagne's impact to be on a par with not only Hogan, but Frank Gotch as well. That's saying rather a lot. I understand that many of you would not have these same objections were we discussing Hogan. However (and this applies to the past RD on The Ultimate Warrior, too), impact should not be gauged strictly by slick television production and marketing hype, no matter how much it translates to mainstream media attention. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I can appreciate that some users aren't always sure what's "real" when discussing pro wrestling. So here are some real facts, courtesy of this article and Dave Meltzer of the Wrestling Observer.
  • "became the first-ever four-time Big Ten champion. To top it off, the three-time All-American also won two NCAA championships."
  • He was a top amateur wrestling and might have won a medal at the 48 Olympics had he not been around at the same time as Henry Wittenberg.

Gagne stated that he was on the Greco-Roman team, which is a different competition from freestyle. He further stated that the 1948 U.S. Greco-Roman team was pulled from the competition because the U.S. was so far behind the curve in Greco-Roman wrestling that they would have had their heads handed to them had they competed. I haven't done any research which would confirm or deny that, however. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• • "he headlined cards from coast to coast in the 1950s, a handsome star, seen by millions on the DuMont Network"
  • He was the top name in the AWA for 40ish years at a time when it was a major promotion and was number one across the Midwest, including in Minnesota, Chicago, Milwaukee, Denver, Omaha, Winnipeg, Salt Lake City and San Francisco. He was a household name in many of those areas, especially Minnesota.
  • During that time he drew millions and millions of dollars and outearned many of the top "real" sports stars.
  • He was a skilled trainer and his pupils include Ric Flair, Ricky Steamboat, Curt Hennig, Bob Backlund and The Iron Sheik.
• So there is absolutely no doubt that he was at the top of his field. The only problem is that some users here think that their opinion is all that matters and they don't see an industry that's been around over 100 years, drawn a lot of money and been seen by millions and millions of people as something important. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

^{You might be interested in my "Gagne" note & link on this talk page. Sca (talk) 14:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)}[reply]

Yeah, I read that. The last sentence, "I suspect the audience for these programs consisted mainly of old men and adolescent boys.", caught my attention. Prior to the expansion of wrestling on television during the mid-1980s, it was typical for only one wrestling program to air in a television market, which was used as a vehicle to promote live wrestling shows in that market. Under that environment, that one wrestling program typically commanded ratings in the 20 to 25 range, with shares in the 65 to 70 range. This included AWA All-Star Wrestling. This despite the fact that it was about as far removed from Monday Night Raw as you could possibly get. In the early years of the Wrestling Observer, it was regularly derided by one Minnesota-based correspondent for featuring "left-handed squash matches in a garage in front of 30 people". RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Oppose I don't really think he meets our standards. Pro-Wrestling is not universally recognized as a sport and is often viewed as a form of scripted entertainment. Conceding that there is an argument that he was still in the top tier of his chosen profession, that is not an automatic qualifier for inclusion here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether it's a sport is not important here even slightly. What is important is that pro wrestling is an industry that has been around a long time and there have been periods where companies are incredibly popular. With that in mind, why shouldn't we note the deaths of the most notable people in it? Since the current system of Recent deaths came into play, there have been two wrestler RDs that I know of (Maurice Vachon in 2013 and The Ultimate Warrior in 2014) so it's not like we're featuring ever wrestler that died. I'd certainly say Gagne was more important to wrestling than Marcel Pronovost was to ice hockey (and this is coming from a Canadian hockey fan).
  • I wish people could let go of their dislike of pro wrestling. I don't like NASCAR, but I would never try to block the top names in that field being listed here. Gagne spent 40 years as a headliner across the world and is widely regarded as one of the all-time greats (though admittedly he is rather controversial). If he had equivalent accomplishments in soccer he would have been posted by now. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 16:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Basically a moderately well known actor, don't see any RD qualifications here. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 17:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To frankly state the impediment to inclusion in ITN: 'Professional' wrestling is not what it purports to be. It's a crude, ostensibly violent form of entertainment presented as sport. Even though anyone with reasonable intelligence can see this, it remains a charade that may deceive the gullible. Granted, Mr. Gagne was a colorful and successful personage, but IMO the dubious if not mendacious character of his venue detracts from his stature. Sca (talk) 18:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In that message on Herald's talk page, you outright called Gagne a "charlatan". To somewhat validate that point, the aforementioned Wrestling Observer correspondent wrote on one occasion that Gagne was contemplating challenging Rudy Boschwitz, until someone talked some sense into him about the consequences all that attention and scrutiny would have for the wrestling business (evidently, a lesson not learned by Linda McMahon many years later). RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KAOS, I said "something of a charlatan," but even that may have been too strong a term for a person peddling patent medicines. Nevertheless, Mr. Gagne's career reflected the ethos of the 'pro' industry by relying on some form of deception to make his performances marketable.

In fairness, a sampling of Minneapolis-St. Paul media coverage yesterday, prompted by this discussion, indicates Mr. Gagne was a likeable person. That however doesn't qualify one for ITN. Sca (talk) 14:14, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the "pro wrestling is too violent!!!" card. Anyone with reasonable intelligence can see that ANY sport contains violence and in many cases the violent aspects are accentuated for entertainment purposes (ie. fights in hockey and tackles in football). Pro wrestling is on the same vein, but the difference is that they aren't really trying to hurt eachother, unlike in soccer where some players try to injure the opposition to get them out of the game.

I said ostensibly violent. Sca (talk) 21:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that most people can't get past the "Oh my god, it's fake!" impediment and see wrestling for what it is. You know what else isn't real? Star Wars. Also: Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Lost, Unicorns, Game of Thrones, Call of Duty, etc., etc. They all fit under the banner of "charade that may deceive the gullible". So if Mark Hammill were to die tomorrow, would you also oppose on those grounds? In spite of what you think, pro wrestling is an industry where the top promotions are capable of drawing thousands of people to live events every day all around the world.

In short, can we make this a discussion of Verne Gagne's merits? There's precedent for including pro wrestlers in the RD section, so this argument is extremely unimportant. If Wikipedia were to censor the deceased because their claim to notability was unfavourable, the section would never include dictators, warlords, soldiers, politicians or anyone ever convicted of a serious crime. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose simply not in the news, for such a massive entertainment industry as wrestling, this individual has failed to make any major news outlets that I read. The article is okay, he bossed his own company's contests, but nothing much else going for this right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you TRM for an oppose actually based in policy. Yes, unfortunately most pro wrestling deaths don't get a lot of mainstream coverage. But it is still early. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When Gagne and Wally Karbo bought into the Minneapolis Boxing and Wrestling Club, that promotion was doing good if they drew more than a thousand people to an event. By the time the AWA hit its peak, it had had a string of a decade or more of drawing as many as 25,000 people to its largest events (mostly at Comiskey Park, though they also drew crowds in this range in the Twin Cities by close-circuiting events which had sold out the St. Paul Civic Center). RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• • • No worries. Of course, it's not a "policy", but I understand your point. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CBC is mainstream. So is The Washington Post and FOX Sports. I think The Independent is big in Britain. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - any doubts that Gagne was at the top of his field or lacking mainstream coverage should be quashed the Associated Press reporting that he was a "Wrestling legend" and "one of professional wrestling's most celebrated performers and promoters". The Independent "wrestling legend and Hall of Fame star". Canadian Online Explorer "one of the biggest stars ever in professional wrestling" ... "there can be no doubting that Gagne is one of the most important figures in the history of the game". @The Rambling Man and Ad Orientem: @Masem: He's also had books written about him: #11 on the 50 Greatest Professional Wrestlers of All Time. One of the Minnesota 150: The People, Places, and Things that Shape Our State, and inducted into at least five different Halls of Fame. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 00:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - It can be hard to determine how much significance comes from in-universe situations, but in this case, he was integral in creating that universe. --Onorem (talk) 01:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Whether or not one likes pro wrestling, it's hard to deny its global success and popularity. Gagne, particularly as promoter of the long-time top North American promotion (which also worked significantly with All Japan Pro Wrestling), was instrumental in that success. He also spurred the careers of wrestlers even non-fans know, like Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair, themselves large factors in the wrestling boom. In-universe, he was a world heavyweight champ for longer than anyone. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:32, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support There is some confusion, and often disdain, for the business that he helped mold, but whether one enjoys that product is largely irrelevant. Verne is on the Mount Rushmore of men who established Professional Wrestling as a staple of cable television and he had successful (almost unmatched) prolific in-ring careers in both amateur and professional wrestling. I believe that this has been reflected in the sources supplied above.LM2000 (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Relatively few news reports that often consist of repeated press releases and twitter posts - no real independent reporting to indicate that he was important enough for RD. LoveToLondon (talk) 07:12, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@LoveToLondon: - no real independent reporting - there's an article from The Independent I quoted in my 00:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC) post above. There's also the Associated Press. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 10:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I already wrote above there is not much written in the The Independent article apart from pictures of Twitter posts. It is also one of very few major sites that have anything at all. If you want to prove how important he was considered internationally, pick a country like Australia or Germany and tell how many of the major (non-wrestling) media in that country have reported his death. An AP news item is also not sufficient to imply very high importance. You also claimed He's also had books written about him, which doesn't seem to be true. Is there any book written solely about him, opposed to him being one of many covered equally in the book? LoveToLondon (talk) 12:56, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He's featured in the title of Minnesota's Golden Age of Wrestling - From Verne Gagne to the Road Warriors (available in South Africa, if that matters), and wrote a $425 book.

There's an in-depth Bleacher Report retrospective. Granted, that site is what it is in an RS way, but whatever it is, it gets a lot of traffic. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:18, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reading that Wikilink, I see it's essentially CNN's little sister, since August 2012. Could explain the lack of "real CNN" coverage. Just in its proper department. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:25, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your statements are just becoming more and more hilarious, and wrote a $425 book is a nice joke. For a book that was published 30 years ago there is no real availability, so someone seems to be trying his luck by demanding a huge price immediately after he died. According to your Amazon link they have zero reviews, which tells a lot about the popularity of the book. Being mentioned in the title of a self-published book by the Minnesota Historical Society Press about wrestling in Minnesota is also not a big achievement. LoveToLondon (talk) 11:09, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Suggest this discussion be closed. Sca (talk) 14:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Won an Oscar for his work on Lord of the Rings, obits in the New York Times and CNN. Was also a member of the Australian Cinematographers Society Hall of Fame. Everymorning talk 10:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Oppose Not really seeing a full career as a leader in the field - while Oscars for LotR films is impressive, that seemed to be a high point, with very little else of his career unremarkable. --MASEM (t) 14:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for now on article quality. Academy Award winner and clearly at the top of their field, the article needs some work and better references and inline citations. Challenger l (talk) 20:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on notability, Academy Award-winning cinematographer? Job done. Oppose on article quality, really weak stubbish article. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Somehow medical science has missed a very obvious anatomical feature that could have been discovered thousands of years ago. Count Iblis (talk) 20:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose no blurb, no update, at least one target article appears to have been vandalised for over a week.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose not an extraordinary finding, just enough peculiarity in evolution and biology. WP:ITN type of blurb I feel. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 21:44, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose this has been known for a long time, that our spines aren't perfectly adjusted to an upright walking position, and it causes back issues. At best this would be a supporting study, not a new idea. μηδείς (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Medeis. Doesn't seem like a surprising, breakthrough result. DYN seems like the right place for this if either article can be majorly expanded on that. --MASEM (t) 23:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

 -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 12:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Elections of heads of state or government are generally included, although there is some question in my mind as to whether this exercise actually constituted an "election." Newyorkbrad (talk) 13:04, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the election is just for show or the outcome is known/predetermined, it is still their legally authorized election. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support based on WP:ITN/R. LoveToLondon (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support the update is minimal but probably not far from all that'll be available. Reminder: we're not here to make our own opinion on the legitimacy of elections around the world. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Re-election of a country's head of state is always important, per ITN/R. Quality looks sufficient. Mamyles (talk) 21:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - The election article is pretty weak: no prose in the results section and no reactions. Maybe there is not a lot to write aboutthe election, but I would think we can do better than this at least. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've started a discussion at WT:ITNR regarding dubious elections and associated blurbs. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Standard ITNR. Ali Fazal (talk) 21:58, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Unmarked as ready - there is still no prose on the results or reactions. There are plenty of sources which contain reaction [7][8][9] and is does appear any admin is willing to post as is since it has been marked ready for a couple days. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Suspected death of the proclaimed head of ISIL and the most wanted man on the planet. -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 09:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose convention is to wait for independent confirmation, moreover the article has not been updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose posting "suspected" deaths; quickly checking some of the sources, it seems there is disagreement about whether he was killed or not. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• if verified it would warrant a full blurb.120.62.26.196 (talk) 10:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Tentative Support Blurb but as identified above we need 100% affirmation from sources, not what is currently second-hand information. --MASEM (t) 12:57, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• If-and-only-if there's some hard confirmation, this death is clearly blurb-worthy. However, it appears he has only been injured, per [10]. If he dies, given how prominent ISIL stuff is in the news, we should have a blurb and not just an RD note. --Jayron32 16:44, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support blurb when confirmed: This man is one of the most wanted in the world and heads an organisation known in all corners for its wickedness. His death would have the same impact as that of Bin Laden, or if we has Wikipedia 1,500 years ago, Atilla. However, such an announcement would be news all over the web, and we can't trust Iranian state media alone without widespread backup '''tAD''' (talk) 16:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, you're giving Attila a bad name there.... Abductive (reasoning) 18:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose no rationale given for the nomination. μηδείς (talk) 16:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done..-The Herald • ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 17:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, The Herald, I may change to support with a blurb when I have time to read up. μηδείς (talk) 19:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait until or if it's confirmed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait for confirmation. If confirmed, a blurb would be warranted but at the moment, there's no confirmation from other sources Palmtree5551 (talk) 19:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Unconfirmed headlines today sre treating the question of confirmation as the main story, since it seems the claims all trace back to one announcement on Radio Iran. μηδείς (talk) 16:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've started a discussion at WT:ITN about unconfirmed deaths and their treatment here. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Akin to the Burkina Faso protests last year and this is still ongoing. 120.62.26.196 (talk) 08:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose no article. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the news is relevant enough then just maybe people will spend the time and effort to create one.120.62.26.196 (talk) 10:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose The area already appears to be one rife with such conflicts and thus not news at the current scale. --MASEM (t) 13:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Pro forma oppose No article means we can't judge the quality of what we are putting on the main page. Whether or not this is a current event is irrelevent if we have no article to judge. The purpose of Wikipedia's main page is to direct people to quality Wikipedia content. A redlink is self-evidently not quality content. Give us an article to assess, then we can make a decision. --Jayron32 16:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Not sure how bad protests have to get to become ITN worthy, but USA Today reports that the protesters are breaking windows and throwing things at police. According to the Guardian, some of them are also smashing police cars. The number of people protesting in Baltimore has been reported to be at least 2,000 by Reuters [11] which seems significant. Everymorning talk 02:21, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Didn't post Ferguson, didn't post the more recent shooting in SC, this is more of the same. I would think we'd need something more akin to the riots after the Rodney King decision to consider a major topic. --MASEM (t) 02:28, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• What's needed is an "ongoing" about the continual citizen revolt against police brutality. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose just a few angry idiots. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Not nearly at the level of even the not-posted Ferguson protests. 331dot (talk) 11:41, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Y'all are not seeing the pattern here. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • What pattern is that? Has the National Guard been called out in this case? 331dot (talk) 14:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • The National Guard was called in Ferguson but that wasn't posted... –HTD 15:05, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm aware of that (and I supported posting Ferguson for that reason) but I'm trying to figure out what the "pattern" is that BB referenced. 331dot (talk) 15:07, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Police kill a man in custody and/or unarmed on the open street, violent protests ensue. This has been going on intensively for quite a few months now. It's been in all the papers. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I disagree with this being listed in Ongoing. If you think police brutality is bad in America, try about 50-100 other countries. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 17:13, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In many countries, it's the norm. In America, things are not supposed to be that way. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support I usually oppose demonstrations, especially in free countries, but this turned into a riot, and prevented people from being able to leave the Baltimore Orioles game. To characterize this as protests is like calling the Colorado Batman mass murder "role playing". μηδείς (talk) 17:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment if, as alluded to above, there's a persistent and terrifying turn of events in the United States where the police can no longer be trusted and blood runs on every corner, please direct me to an article discussing such flagrant indiscretions and also to the reliable sources that consider it to be something significant beyond standard household incompetence. We're discussing the legal system of the most advanced country in the known universe, right? (I think what is most charming is that for the template "((List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States, Description))", there's even a "Refresh counts" link! Perhaps an "Ongoing" is required, along with a counter of people killed that automatically increments on our main page?) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• This is an issue that is massively overblown by media outlets looking to exploit the racial element in order to generate clicks, headlines... etc. As long as there are police officers, there will be bad police officers. However, the perception does not match the reality due to undue coverage of the negative and complete ignorance of the positive. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 19:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Agreed, "complete ignorance" seems an entirely appropriate assessment. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:29, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Pretty much. These types of stories demonstrate the issue with racial tensions and profiling that has had a long (decade+) history in the States; some citizens are getting more worked up about it. I've noted before that we'd be need to looking at the scale of the 1992 Los Angeles riots for an ITN on this type of story. --MASEM (t) 13:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose This is fairly run of the mill as demonstrations and minor civil disturbances go. We have rightly declined to post far more significant protests and riots. If this qualifies then we are setting a very low bar for this sort of thing and had better get ready to have demonstrations on the ITN section more or less permanently. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:45, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

• I suspect that if this were 1965, you all would have been calling Selma "run of the mill" and "massively overblown." Yes, this business of cops treating blacks differently from whites has been going on for a long time. The difference is that the victims are no longer willing to put up with it. The trigger for this series of related stories may well have been the Trayvon Martin case, and the initial inaction of the police. There is an ongoing trend here, whether y'all are seeing it or not. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:27, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• You, like much of the mainstream media, appear to have an agenda in this matter. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 17:33, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Which is what the right-wingers were saying about the media in the 1960s. Go check your own agenda. Mine is simply to not have Wikipedia look stupid and out of touch. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia will neither look stupid nor out of touch simply because it doesn't allow itself to be used as a forum for your anti-police message. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Ignoring trending news can make Wikipedia look stupid and out of touch. And twisting complaints about some police brutalizing citizens, to being characterized as "anti-police" (which the New York cops have done, for example), is comparable to when complaints about child abuse by some Catholic clergy, were characterized as "anti-Catholic". I am not anti-police. But I am anti-police-brutality. Please don't tell us you are in favor of police brutality??? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• If you're going to accuse me of twisting your words, don't twist mine. I never said I was in favor of police brutality. I just think it is overblown and definitely not something we need to highlight with an Ongoing entry. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 18:12, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I never said you were, I asked you to tell us you aren't. As for your characterization of it, why should I trust your judgment vs. the judgment of journalists? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Journalists are not inherently right and it is dangerous to unquestioningly trust them. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 18:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia is not for righting or publicizing wrongs just for the sake of doing so. This individual protest was simply not as significant as other, more notable protests(at least one of which was not posted). 331dot (talk) 18:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• It isn't about "righting wrongs", it's about not making Wikipedia look stupid. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Have it your way, but your investment in this subject suggested that to me. 331dot (talk) 19:18, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• You have lost all sense of proportion if you think not running this makes Wikipedia look stupid. I think I need to echo what others are thinking - you need to step back and take a breath here. Resolute 20:24, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

 -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 06:39, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it's still early to tell for certain but the early reports indicate significant damage to Kathmandu, especially the older part, so this will probably merit posting. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Damage is quite extensive. The Dharahara has collapsed. Also, tremors were felt in various parts of India, including Calcutta, and Ahmedabad and Delhi. Magnitude at the epicentre was 7.7 on the Richter scale. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support subject to a little more improvement. The bare urls need to go, and there are a few unreferenced sentences. Once these are fixed then it should be good to go. Mjroots (talk) 09:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support but wait until an official death count is obtained. We can also include that the building of the UNESCO World Heritage site - Kathmandu Durbar Square have collapsed. USGS reports 7.9 magnitude. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 10:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support highly notable catastrophic event. —Jonny Nixon - (Talk) 10:28, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support As well as the terrible loss of life, UN designated heritage buildings have been lost. The magnitude figure in the blurb has been superseded. I suggest "estimated between 7.8 and 8.1M_w". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:52, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

USGS has not reported above 8. I suggest we don't resort to the media's numbers but verifiable ones.120.62.13.239 (talk) 10:56, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It won't be more than 8. If it was, then I won't be editing this. I felt it and am living just 160 kms from the epicenter. -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 11:02, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support quite a terrible one. --Whaterss (talk) 11:07, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted While the death count is not final yet, it is obvious that it is high enough to be newsworthy. Thue (talk) 11:10, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are many more dead. Article says "918+ deaths" so update to front page description is needed. 86.150.91.187 (talk) 14:13, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ERRORS is the best venue for comments like this. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Major quake. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:07, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting support - A quake over 7-7.5 with its shocks felt as wide an area as it did, even without loss of life or damage, would still be a worthwhile post given how infrequent that scale is. --MASEM (t) 02:30, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - thousands of dead people. plenty of damage.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:26, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: Notable NGO and social worker of Pakisthan -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 05:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Article was only created today, which is evidence enough for me that she did not reach the RD level of notability. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:20, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose not seeing any real indication of RD notability. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:36, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per what TRM said. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 15:47, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose That is an amazing amount of references for an article with so little information. I am not seeing how she meets any RD criteria. Challenger l (talk) 20:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominator's comments: This is the 100th anniversary of the first genocide of the twentieth century. It has been all over the news for weeks. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:30, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support the canonization (which I was going to nominate when I had a chance to write an update). A canonization on this scale is unprecedented and the Armenian Church hadn't canonized anyone in 400 years. Neutral on mentioning the 100th anniversary. It has indeed been in the news for weeks, but it is still just an anniversary which normally would go on OTD not ITN. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:36, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that OTD would be the better place, but for whatever reason they have ignored the anniversary which is today. IMHO it is sufficiently newsworthy that it warrants front page attention. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:45, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Note that the genocide's 100th anniversary was previously nominated and closed as better suited for other aspects of WP's front page. The canonization aspect, however, is a new factor. --MASEM (t) 02:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose anniversary but support canonization once there is an article for it. The MP currently has three topics related to the genocide/anniversary (in OTD, TFL, and POTD), and as previously stated anniversaries tend not to be ITN material. The canonizations are different, though, and newsworthy. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose canonization has no timeline, so what other consideration made the Church do this now? μηδείς (talk) 03:39, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the impetus was the 100th anniversary of the near extermination of the Armenian Christian people. What does the timing have to do with whether or not this is ITN worthy? -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support something along the lines "AAC canonizes the 1.5 mil victims of the 1914 Armenian Genocide." Nergaal (talk) 03:58, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose ITN isn't the place for anniveraries. I might have supported the canonisation if there was a separate article for it, but there isn't at present.  — An optimist on the run! (logged on as Pek the Penguin) 06:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support ...Canonization. It's a headline that's pretty newsworthy. It is a once in a lifetime event. Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Per Medeis, but I also doubt that those saints will be revered in the same fashion as Catholic saints. I haven't seen any posted canonizations outside Roman Catholic Church, such as Ethiopian Church, etc. It's unclear whether the names of all those canonized are actually known. Brandmeister^talk 08:07, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Oriental Orthodox venerate saints in much the same way Catholics do, perhaps even more so in the post Vatican II world. Also en-masse canonizations, especially of large numbers of martyrs is not without precedent. Although more than a million is extremely rare. The Russian Orthodox Church commemorates all of the martyrs of the Communist persecutions, which certainly numbers in the millions. And the Roman Catholic Church has done large scale canonizations for martyrs. Recently the Coptic Orthodox Church canonized the Martyrs of Libya beheaded by ISIL. Knowing the names of all the victims is not relevant. -Ad Orientem (talk) 12:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose blurb Turkish atrocities is a problematic way to phrase it. After all, we are not talking about a Turkish national state at this point. Not that I want to defend Turkey's stand on this, but we should be careful here and phrase it properly. Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:14, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support the canonization upon their being an adequate article. It seems rare for such a thing to happen. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Altblurb proposed and support both. Centenaries attended by world leaders to commemorate events that shaped a region and people's history are certainly notable enough for ITN inclusion, and a similar nomination was posted last year. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 10:30, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support first blurb. 'Turkish atrocities' seems like a legitimate way to describe Turks killing 1.5 people. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support first blurb. "Turkish atrocities" doesn't seem to be problematic, but it is redundant. Let's keep the blurb as concise as possible. --Երևանցի ^talk 14:17, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as I think that this should be included on the main page at some point, and the canonization/anniversary have certainly been in the news recently. I also oppose using "Turkish atrocities" at the end - it is redundant and feels like an unnecessary snipe at the country. It is sufficient to call attention to the genocide. Mamyles (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Marked ready - The posting admin will need to determine whether there is consensus for the longer blurb that mentions the anniversary, but there is clear consensus to post at least the canonization. I have now expanded that section of the article, so this is ready to post IMO. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - definitely a notable event and it needs to be posted.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted canonization only; clearer consensus for that. Article quality looks sufficient as well--Jayron32 16:41, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support I would post anniversary as well, no real reason to not post that part as well. SeraV (talk) 17:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]