(Posted) RD: Lalitha Chandran

Nominator's comments: Indian carnatic singer. One half of the musical duo Bombay Sisters Ktin (talk) 04:16, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Edits done. Please have a look. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:56, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Angel Alcala

Nominator's comments: Filipino biologist and national scientist. Curbon7 (talk) 17:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support well-cited. Tails Wx 05:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Multiple unsourced statements in the article. Spencer^T•C 00:00, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: David Durenberger

 – Muboshgu (talk) 18:47, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Well-cited and holistic enough for our purposes. Curbon7 (talk) 01:36, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 16:48, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted—Bagumba (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Shanti Bhushan ‎

Nominator's comments: Indian Ex Minister and lawyer Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not yet ready A few CN templates. Date/place of birth is uncited, and entire early/non-political life are missing. The prose in political career is bare, but ok enough for our purposes. Prose in the activism section is fine, except for the 2010 contempt charge which needs updating. Curbon7 (talk) 15:11, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Any update? The article is fairly close to being post-able so it'd be a shame if it rolled off. Curbon7 (talk) 05:54, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Bobby Beathard

Nominator's comments: Could use some work. Pro Football Hall of Famer. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:18, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Almost I think this article is quite close. I don't know much about football, so correct me if I'm wrong, but the general manager is a fairly minor role compared to the same position in baseball, right? If so, I don't think too much more expansion is needed, as I do note that the article already names some prominent players he scouted. Just a few sentences of what he did while the scout/manager of the Dolphins, Falcons, and Chargers (particularly the latter) should suffice. Some spots also need sources. Curbon7 (talk) 10:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  BeanieFan11, Any update? Curbon7 (talk) 06:13, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Curbon7: I've got the referencing issue cleared up, but I just don't have the time currently to expand this... BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:13, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Charles Silverstein

Nominator's comments: The American psychologist who got homosexuality removed from the DSM. Curbon7 (talk) 18:17, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Works section needs refs/ISBNs. Spencer^T•C 05:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Now cited. Curbon7 (talk) 05:52, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted to RD. Brief but meets minimum standards. Spencer^T•C 23:58, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ann McLaughlin Korologos

Nominator's comments: Former U.S. Secretary of Labor. Some source work is needed. Curbon7 (talk) 18:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ouyang Pingkai

Nominator's comments: Chinese academic and party official. A bit short and over-reliant on one source. Curbon7 (talk) 18:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Will Steffen

Nominator's comments: Climate scientist. Article looks okay to me. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:26, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Short but adequate and well sourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Article is well-cited and holistic enough for our purposes. Curbon7 (talk) 01:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 05:51, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Cindy Williams

Nominator's comments: She died on Jan 25, it was just reported today – Muboshgu (talk) 00:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• :Support once Filmography section is properly sourced. Mooonswimmer 01:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Not Ready Significant gaps in referencing, mostly around the tables. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Not ready ((verification)) tag at the top of article, needs some sourcing. Tails Wx 05:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Source issues still present. Curbon7 (talk) 06:12, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Adams (drummer)

Nominator's comments: Known to many who follow American baseball and everyone in Cleveland, Ohio. Is a Good Article. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:18, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Well-cited, but there are significant prose issues. Will give a full breakdown in a bit. Curbon7 (talk) 20:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't want this to seem over-scrupulous, as we of course don't need the articles to be great or even necessarily good for RD; however, they have to meet a basic threshold of quality. The article is mostly fine for holisticity (wish there was a bit more to his non-superfan life, but it's understandable that sources may not cover this) and sourcing (his date of birth and education are uncited; these are more pressing, as you'll know we can't have uncited material on the main page).

  The main issue here is the prose. This is far from the (very basic) level of quality we expect and needs to either go through WP:GAR to be delisted or needs a ground-up rewrite. To say the article's tone is very informal is an understatement; the entire thing reads like an article on baseball.wikia. That is to say, it doesn't read like an encyclopedia article, it reads like a fan write-up, chock with inside baseball ("making him the only fan for whom the team dedicated a bobble head day"??), weasel words, and general poor phrasing. It is hard to explain because there's not necessarily one specific thing wrong that I can point to, it's kind of just the entire article. Curbon7 (talk) 00:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Curbon7 I have been going through the article and making some edits along the same lines. I think the problem here is that the information in an article is going to be shaped by the information available in the sources, and generally speaking it's going to be Cleveland publications writing about him with a very casual tone. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 00:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Most of my concerns have been addressed, and the article is much better now! Just waiting for a source on the DoB. Curbon7 (talk) 20:44, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Support I've swapped out the DoB with his birth year based on age at death (DoB is commented out so it is still available if a source is found). Curbon7 (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've found a source for his birth date and added it back in.--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 01:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Curbon7 (talk) 02:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support (provided date of birth is correctly cited or removed) – I think the quality of the prose is perfectly fine for a front-page feature like this. It goes into details that other encyclopedic articles are unlikely to contain, and therefore can feel informal or odd, but I think it is acceptable at worst and charming at best. Article is well-cited and beautifully detailed, including his personal life (I'm not sure what else Curbon would want from that section (it lists school, marriage, occupation, volunteer work, and health issues). I think this is a lovely feature! ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This has Good Article status. Have we reached the point of arguing about quality for publishing a Good Article to RD? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenmelken (talk • contribs) 13:53, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Articles have to meet WP:ITNQUALITY, even if they're Good Articles, as you'll know GAs can diminish in quality over time. Curbon7 (talk) 20:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Kenmelken, this article was promoted to GA in 2012. Alot of bad writing can happen in 11 years. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  11 years?! No, no, 2012 was last year, right? :( --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 22:12, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Someone has updated the article after his death to replace Indians with Guardians in many places. I understand the intent, but it is now factually wrong in many places due to the time frame in which he was active. GreatCaesarsGhost 20:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have fixed this. Spencer^T•C 05:56, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Appropriate depth of coverage, referenced. Marking ready. Spencer^T•C 05:56, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Bobby Hull

Nominator's comments: A lot of work is needed sourcing-wise. Mooonswimmer 15:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support: pbp 20:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Not yet ready As stated by the nom, the article is still heavily under-sourced. Curbon7 (talk) 20:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Peshawar mosque bombing

 Ainty Painty (talk) 09:49, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not ready – Love an article where 80% of the length is a navigation template. This stub needs a lot of work to become suitable for the frontpage. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Article has been updated and is well referenced. I think it's already fit for ITN. It will continue to be updated as new information arrives. Very sad news. :( MSN12102001 (talk) 13:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now. There's a "failed verification" tag that needs fixing, and the article could stand for more expansion. --Jayron32 13:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Article is ready, definitely significant. Proposing altblurb -Azpineapple (talk) 14:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per @Azpineapple Editor 5426387 (talk) 15:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Article is definitely not ready yet, with all of its one-sentence paragraphs, but with how the death count is spiking up I'm fairly certain it will be posted soon. Very big tragedy.. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - about 2k characters of cited prose is long enough for DYK, and it's also long enough to meet the quality requirements of ITN, IMO. Levivich (talk) 15:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Altblurb is better. Levivich (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Notability is obvious, given 40+ deaths. I've also expanded the article and I think it's now good enough. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 15:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support because the article is good enough & the death toll is very high. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 15:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support article is good, and a lot of deaths. The death count makes it notable. TomMasterReal^TALK 16:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - As per above comments. Sherenk1 (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support alt blurb. First blurb is not grammatical. Notable for sure, article quality is good as is. There are a couple things on the article that need citations, but the article is being actively edited so I assume these will be fixed by the time of posting. e.b. (talk) 17:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Question: Do reliable sources provide any indication that this is having national or regional consequences? Has this affected the political climate in Pakistan in any way? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support altblurb The Kip (talk) 17:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Went with a variation on the altblurb. "Suicide blast" sounds sensational and a bit weird. Changed it to the terminology 'in the article' and said "suicide bombing". --Jayron32 18:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Naba Das

Nominator's comments: Indian MLA who was killed (possibly assassinated) by a police officer. Prose and sourcing both need significant work. Curbon7 (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Gero Storjohann

Nominator's comments: German politician, member of federal parliament from 2002 until his death (however in intensive care from April 2022), worked for traffic and other matters. Most facts were there, but referencing needed work. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Well-cited, and more-or-less holistic enough for our purposes. A minor point of issue is that Kreisvorsitzender is not defined or linked, but this one point isn't that big a deal in the big picture. Curbon7 (talk) 06:14, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Please help. It's not linked in German. "Vorsitzender" would literally be president, and "Kreis" means districts. Wiktionary has Kreisverband for the district level of some organisations, here the CDU party. Is there anything comparable in English, and if, should that be used? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I've parenthesized the word in Deutsch and preceded it with "district president"; this can hypothetically be reversed (parenthesize the English word) if you want. Excellent work as usual Curbon7 (talk) 14:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Satis. Grimes2 (talk) 14:35, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 05:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Handball Men's World Cup

Nominator's comments: Not sure if there is a separate article on the final match. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 12:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Basically a table farm with very little prose. Not really main page ready. --Jayron32 13:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose on quality It's ITNR, but the article is almost entirely tables. The Kip (talk) 19:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Not ready. Unfortunately there is no prose on the games whatsoever, not even a description of the final. There needs to be at least a few paragraphs describing what happened at the tournament - tables are not enough. Modest Genius ^talk 17:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Three days later, there has been no progress with the article. Modest Genius ^talk 12:21, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose on qualityParadise Chronicle (talk) 10:13, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Masood Sharif Khan Khattak

 Ainty Painty (talk) 03:05, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not yet ready A number of CN tags. The other sources need to be spot-checked as well, as I have low confidence in them. Too many section headers, need to be condensed down. Article is almost holistic; expansion is needed on his 1996 imprisonment and his career between 1999 and 2009. If available, details on his army career from 1978 to 1986 and his life from 2009 until his death is desirable, but not necessary, as I understand sources may not cover those details. Curbon7 (talk) 05:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Barrett Strong

Nominator's comments: While the article likely needs editing, Strong is best known for singing Motown Records first hit, Money (That's What I Want). But as a songwriter, also in the Songwriter's Hall of Fame, he co wrote Motown classics I Heard It Through the Grapevine, "War" (The Temptations song), Just My Imagination, and Papa Was A Rollin' Stone. TheCorriynial (talk) 21:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Not yet ready – the discography section is tagged for clean up and also needs more references.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pawnkingthree: I've done some work on the article and added citations. Please take a few minutes to review again. —Matthew - (talk) 22:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good job! Happy to support now. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:23, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as improved. BD2412 T 23:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Well-cited and holistic. Excellent work! Curbon7 (talk) 03:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Let's Rock / Do The Very Best You Can InedibleHulk (talk) 12:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @Stephen and Tone: Pinging recently active administrators so that this doesn't get lost in the shuffle. —Matthew  / (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:48, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Annie Wersching

Nominator's comments: Significant referencing work is needed. Curbon7 (talk) 21:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Men's FIH Hockey World Cup

Nominator's comments: - Rushtheeditor talk 11:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose It's not an ITNR so the article should be of high quality, but there's very little prose involved including what is needed for championship finales. --Masem (t) 16:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose on both notability and quality. Not on ITNR, doesn't seem to be excessively popular, and most importantly the article is almost entirely tables with little to no prose. The Kip (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose on quality Just because it's not on ITNR doesn't mean it can't be posted, and as the top event in field hockey, it has at least a claim to significance. That said, as stated above, the entire article is composed almost entirely of tables with little in the way of prose. Curbon7 (talk) 21:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose For above reasons. Needs significant expansion to be on the front page. e.b. (talk) 17:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Not ready. There's no point in even discussing the significance when the article has no prose on the games. There need to be a few referenced paragraphs explaining what happened at the tournament - tables are not enough. Modest Genius ^talk 17:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Three days later, only two sentences have been added - about the official song. Still not ready. Modest Genius ^talk 12:23, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The idea of a film composer scoring a hockey anthem is rather outrageous, though...perhaps even novel. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:14, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose on qualitya well expanded table farm. But prose there is not much.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Hazel McCallion

Nominator's comments: Notable politician and centenarian. Some citations still needed. Flibirigit (talk) 16:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Article is fine for a notable person. Alex-h (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, article looks like it should be ready for posting. Ornithoptera (talk) 17:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, per above. Rushtheeditor (talk) 15:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - per above. Nfitz (talk) 20:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• A few tagged references needed. Stephen 23:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. Rushtheeditor (talk) 22:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article is now fully cited, but some bare URLs need a template. Flibirigit (talk) 01:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Iran drone attacks

Nominator's comments: I know the article is stub but it is a major news. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 03:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait "A blast recorded in defence ministry which caused minor damage" isn't the clearest English sentence, but it certainly sounds like the opposite of major news to me. The blowback could be huge, especially if bolstered by a video. But you never know how people will react to provocation, the supposed battle to come could also just be one of words. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think it is a major news because this attack '''can''' start a war between two countries. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 06:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It wouldn't be just two, in theory. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:CRYSTAL. The Kip (talk) 07:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait The impact of the attack, and its consequences, are yet to be seen. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 06:49, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Already CNN, Fox and Al Arabiya can't agree on which words from IRNA's tweet to replace with which of whose choosing. Are they drones or "small drones"? Them or "the drones"? One was hit by or "struck"? Props to UPI for the relative straight dope, just omitting parts, nice and objective-like. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wait - Per the above PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wait - Rumours are flying; solid news is still scarce. It currently seems like both Western world media and Iran want to hohum this. Without solid sources, WP is not going to override that. There doesn't seem to be any article on this in fa.Wikipedia - at least according to Wikidata. Boud (talk) 12:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Israel did it, it's being reported. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 16:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait a few days to see if more information is made available, but definite support if further reporting increases in confidence that it's an intentional attack by another country. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait we do not know the death amount, and damage these drones have done. TomMasterReal^TALK 23:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  No dead, no wounded. Both "sides" agree on that. Damage is more subjective, quantitative not qualitative, and making things seem better and worse than they are is inherent in political news...or entertainment news...human interests, overall. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for want of actual damage. Also, little reporting internationally on this (since, apparently, that's now a criteria). --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 02:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support an event of this nature ought to be postable, but news coverage of it appears to be dying down. Banedon (talk) 03:35, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose How is a drone attack ITN-worthy? Evan224 (talk) 16:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous circumstances in which a drone attack could be ITN-worthy. Curbon7 (talk) 20:20, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Australian Open

Aryna Sabalenka

Article: 2023 Australian Open (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In tennis, Aryna Sabalenka (pictured) wins the Women's Singles and Novak Djokovic wins the Men's Singles at the Australian Open. (Post)
News source(s): BBC - Women's singles, BBC - Men's singles
Credits:

• Nominated by 45.112.200.3 (talk · give credit)

Article needs updating
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 45.112.200.3 (talk) 08:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note Prose summaries are needed for the singles finals in the main Open article. Joofjoof (talk) 09:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Lacks prose for the matches (Hopefull fares better than last year's).—Bagumba (talk) 17:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support once expanded. Individual events need prose descriptions. See the 2021 event for a model. With this win, Djokovic is now tied for the most men's Grand Slam titles and holds the record for most individual titles at the Australian Open (10), perhaps these records could be worked into a blurb? e.b. (talk) 17:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not ready. Neither the main tournament article, nor those on the men's and women's singles, has a prose summary of the events. There need to be a few referenced paragraphs explaining what happened at the tournament - tables are not enough. Modest Genius ^talk 17:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Article still has not been prose-ified. Curbon7 (talk) 09:48, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• CommentIf that doesn't make it to ITN I don't know either. One should not only nominate but also work on the article either before or after nominating it.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:25, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Melitta Muszely

Nominator's comments: Austrian soprano, legendary as the 4 loves of Hoffmann in Berlin in 1958 (pictured by GRuban). There's more detail in the obit, but I'm too tired. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I added that detail now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 22:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Amru Daulay

Nominator's comments: Indonesian politician and ruler of Mandailing Natal Regency for more than a decade. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 18:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Appears to be acceptable length and adequately sourced. A lot of the references are in Indonesian but I'm going to AGF here and assume they are reliable in the absence of evidence to the contrary. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Well-cited and holistic. The last sentence ("Prior to his death, Amru had suffered stroke for four years") needs to be re-jigged though. Curbon7 (talk) 14:39, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. @Jeromi Mikhael: any chance you could add links to the article elsewhere to other relevant article(s) on Wikipedia? It appears that it only appears in Deaths in 2023 and Portal:Indonesia from what I can tell. Spencer^T•C 05:42, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lisa Loring

Nominator's comments: Actress best remembered as Wednesday Adams from the original TV series. Article is short but in decent shape. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support looks fine. MyriadSims (talk) 01:31, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Appears to be well-cited and holistic enough for our purposes. Curbon7 (talk) 14:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 05:39, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Phil Coles

Nominator's comments: Australian Olympic canoeist, sports administrator, and member of the International Olympic Committee for almost 30 years. HiLo48 (talk) 04:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not yet ready Article is well-cited, but is quite short of being considered holistic and is hardly updated to reflect his death. If available, details should be added about his life before becoming an Olympian, his competition in the 1960 and 1968 Olympics, and his life after 2002. A primary example is the quote: "He was key to getting an Australian Olympic team to the Olympic Games Moscow 1980 against all requests for a boycott"; this is a key biographical detail that is not mentioned at all in the prose besides that condolence. The article also makes no mention of his death besides one paragraph of condolences (but again does not explicitly say he died on such and such date in such and such place); as such, I don't think it meets the updated requirement. The article doesn't obviously need to be GA-level, but it can't be a glorified stub either. Curbon7 (talk) 05:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  To shorten: brief details should be added about the '60 and '68 Olympics; his role in the 1980 Olympics needs to be included; his death needs to be included. These 3 points should be fairly easily achievable. Curbon7 (talk) 09:46, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Tom Verlaine

Nominator's comments: Lots of citations needed, will be working on it Mooonswimmer 01:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not yet ready Much better than when nominated, but still missing a significant number of sources. Curbon7 (talk) 14:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Czech presidential election

Petr Pavel

Article: 2023 Czech presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Petr Pavel (pictured) is elected as President of the Czech Republic. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Petr Pavel (pictured) is elected as President of the Czech Republic, defeating Andrej Babiš in the runoff.
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

• Nominated by BastianMAT (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Bedivere.cs (talk · give credit), Jdcooper (talk · give credit), Vacant0 (talk · give credit) and Filelakeshoe (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Petr Pavel has won the race according to projections and early results. Well PM is the one in charge which does not make this ITNR, but the president holds significant appointment and foreign policy power. President Zeman overused his powers, making the presidency pretty powerful. Very watched in Europe by the news and many observers. BastianMAT (talk) 14:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)744cody (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not ready as article needs to be updated. Added ITN/R label. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 14:39, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok I just looked at Wikipedia:ITN/R and I'm not very sure now whether or not this qualifies as ITN/R, so I'll remove the label. I'll still support on notability even if not ITN/R, but the article is not yet ready. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 14:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This definitely counts as ITN/R, I've updated the template. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 16:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @The Bestagon check now, it's still 99.99% reporting (there's always a few problem wards that take forever) but the main figures (58-42 and turnout over 70) are staying where they are and are already being reported in RS. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 16:13, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support now that the article has been updated enough. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 05:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - both election and bio articles look good to me as of now. Levivich (talk) 16:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. A presidential election by a popular vote should certainly count as ITN/R, even for countries where the president holds limited power. If our ITN/R guidelines say something else, they should be changed/clarified. In any case, support this item on notability. Both bolded articles appear to be in sufficiently good shape for posting. Nsk92 (talk) 17:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support This is a decently significant election, and it probably should qualify for being a successful candidate. However, it should be noted how few powers the Czech president really has, the impact on the country because of this election is likely to be minimal. Also, I believe the alternative blurb would be better to be used. Quinby (talk) 18:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Changes in head of state are WP:ITNR, so it doesn't matter if you personally consider it significant or not. Curbon7 (talk) 18:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  No they are not. Read the criteria again. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 20:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at List of current heads of state and government... President of Czech Republic is the head of state and thus does administer the executive office of the state, plus he is the commander in chief of the armed forces, another executive position. Heads of state are ITNR. Levivich (talk) 20:25, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  But he does not administer the executive; the head of government does. The monarch in the UK is the head of state; but he is not a member of the executive and does not administer it. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 20:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Note for admins (cc @Tone), the file in the suggestion has questions surrounding its potential copyright. I'd suggest File:Gen. Petr Pavel (2018) (cropped).jpg should be used instead, as is on the 2023 election page. Quinby (talk) 01:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. I was looking for this on the front page.--2601:C4:C300:A210:7836:446C:8BFA:F5CE (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Oppose -- This is not ITN/R, as the President of the Czech Republic is not the head of government. ITN/R says: "Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive". The President of the Czech Republic does not administer the executive, the Prime Minister does. Switching from ITN/R yes to no. I do however see discussion of this in the news, and the fact that he was a former general means there is something more notable here than "new President". --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 20:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Elections of the Heads of State like the Czech president are not ITNR. This doesn't prevent it from being included in ITN, it wouldn't be the first time. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note that the last two Czech presidential elections in 2013 and 2018 were both tagged as ITN/R. Has there been a recent discussion which changed this? – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  There was a discussion in 2021 that defined which kinds of transitions are ITNR. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:46, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think there was a more long drawn out discussion than that one but I'm too lazy to look for it. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - The President in Czechia is far more powerful than ceremonial leaders you see in many parliamentary democracies, even holding veto powers similar to the USA. This is a major change - I see no reason to not post this, especially given the international coverage. Nfitz (talk) 21:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• This is almost ready, I'd just like to see some more about reactions, then I can post. --Tone 21:39, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Tone: Just added a paragraph about domestic reactions to that section – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 22:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Supporty worty - Per the above statements PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Altblurb looks nice PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, obviously Both articles are in good shape and seems like a significant election which has European-wide consequences (mostly on the Babis aspect). Curbon7 (talk) 00:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Article is in good shape. Internationally covered. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 02:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support In a normal living or dead person's article, an unsourced paragraph revolving around a claim like In January 1993, his unit was sent to evacuate a French military base, where French soldiers were under siege by Serbian troops would be unacceptable, but this is an elected politician we're talking about here, the sort of person who doesn't even need to meet GNG. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Just FYI the citations for that part are at the end of the next paragraph – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Better than nowhere. Thanks for finding them. Still, you wouldn't see Sylvia Syms or Tom Verlaine get off so easy. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Posting. I am bolding just the election article, some paragraphs in Pavel's article could do with source improvement. --Tone 08:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think that this pic is much better, as the posted one is somewhat dim. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I like how the current one doesn't have a gigantic and irrelevant NATO logo in it. Not knocking NATO, but the Czech people have very little people power there. This guy here (who looks bright enough to me) is the guy they more or less chose to lead the way. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Pavel was Chairman of the NATO Military Committee from 2015 to 2018, so he had a connection to NATO. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Indeed. It's a fine picture for his article, just irrelevant to this election. He probably wasn't elected in the currently pictured shirt, either, but that draws way less attention to itself. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Blurb: Tyre Nichols and ensuing unrest

(Posted) RD: Yang Yi

Nominator's comments: Died aged 103, so it's long, but definitely worth a read if you like Chinese history. Cielquiparle (talk) 17:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Thorough depth of coverage, referenced. Spencer^T•C 23:15, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support High enough quality; well-referenced. Happily888 (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 22:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mesir Suryadi

Nominator's comments: Politician and former MP from Indonesia. Date is burial date. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 15:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Jeromi Mikhael Any chance it could be de-orphaned with links from other relevant articles? Otherwise has appropriate depth of coverage and referencing. Spencer^T•C 06:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Spencer: I've added links to two different articles.Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 16:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Well-cited and holistic. A little underlinked, especially in the latter half, but not that big a deal for our purposes. Curbon7 (talk) 14:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support High enough quality; well referenced. Happily888 (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 05:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Azerbaijani embassy attack

Nominator's comments: Lethal attacks on embassies seem pretty rare and this one is the first such on an Azerbaijani one. Article is up to snuff. Brandmeister^talk 16:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. As per the nom, deadly attacks on embassies are quite rare - a rough estimate from List of attacks on diplomatic missions would suggest an average of once a year. The significance is increased by this being the first one on an Azerbaijani one, making this a very big deal there. It's also been reported across major global news outlets. I think this is a good example of an event that's blurb-worthy without being ITN/R or all over the place in Anglophone media. The article is in good shape, too. --GGT (talk) 17:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Attacks on embassies are significant. The article is sufficiently long and sufficiently well-cited. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per GGT. Levivich (talk) 18:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Attacks on embassies are quite rare, definitely something important. Vriend1917 (talk) 18:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Per above PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Support only on the grounds that it was very likely a terrorist incident. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support I think an attack on an embassy, whether terrorist or state-sanctioned or otherwise, which results in death of a state official is clearly something we should be posting. Curbon7 (talk) 00:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This killed a guard, not an official. I'm not saying officials are worth more, even if they have an article, or that I Oppose this post. Just a reminder. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The "guard" killed was the head of the embassy's security service. Curbon7 (talk) 04:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, and if he'd been the head chef, I'd still call him a chef rather than a state official. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  And before you dismiss that as coming from a far-out country bumpkin (which I am), note how the state's top diplomat officially refers to "another security guard" and "other employees". InedibleHulk (talk) 04:50, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 00:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull Observing this new blurb, I read the article and found it to be of poor quality – the English is stilted. And the incident seemed quite petty – a domestic matter about a wife which became lethal because the guy with a grievance had a gun. Browsing the BBC and the NYT, I see no mention of it whereas the drone strike on Iran is getting reported there. So, it doesn't seem to be in the news in a significant way. As shootings go, this seemed less significant than the recent ones in California. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• PullFor one dead? And it doesn't seem to be a terrorist attack for which one support was given.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Don't pull - An attack on an embassy is not everyday news, and we have a good enough article. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 12:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull One dead from an attack that for all purposes appears to be a lone wolf and not associated with any terrorist group? (Yes, they initially treated it as a terrorist one for easing the investigation, but they seem to have backed off that) Yes, it is an attack on an embassy but this is nowhere close to the scale of other events already on the board and likely to be added sooner, and a story on violence within a region already filled with violence. --Masem (t) 15:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting support Attacks on embassies are rare and are automatically diplomatic scandals with implications on the bilateral relations between the countries. So, comparing this to other attacks of similar scale is like comparing apples and oranges.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull. Likely no long-term significance. Attacks on embassies may be rare, but just because it's rare doesn't mean it's notable. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:35, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull for lack of any long-term significance. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 03:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Azerbaijan has evacuated the embassy staff and suspended the embassy's operation by now, article updated accordingly. Suggest keeping. Brandmeister^talk 10:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting weak support Quality article with good depth that pushes this toward support territory for me. Spencer^T•C 04:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep But Altblurb I got ghosted at ERRORS, feel free to disregard me here, too. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull because it's nowhere near important enough. We don't post the vast majority of attacks which have higher death tolls. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. This was a major news in international mass media, including CNN, BBC, NYT, The Washington Post, Reuters, etc. Also it led to a significant crisis in relations between Azerbaijan and Iran, with Azerbaijan closing operation of its embassy and evacuating its personnel. Grandmaster 19:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull The attacker was not politically motivated, as stated by the media. One dead? Not really important enough. --Mhhossein ^talk 05:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Dont Pull - I can not see why some of us are making such a big deal over the low death toll. The death toll is not the only factor that may make an attack notable. The armed attack on the embassy resulted in the death of the head of the embassy's security staff and the injury of two others. In addition, this armed attack was one of the factors why Azerbaijan closed its embassy in Iran. This is definitely not a routine event, thus it should not be pulled. A b r v a g l ^(PingMe) 06:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it this was significant worldwide news and it serves to show the wide range of Wikipedia's articles. We tend to focus too much on US the Europe. We should try to get more blurbs from other parts of the world. Jehochman ^Talk 06:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting support. These sorts of attacks capture the news cycle because of their international importance, and this article is high-quality enough to remain there. No need to pull. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Dont Pull — Some commenters seem to be either unaware of the incident or have not read the article.

1) Attacking embassies is a common practice in Iran. There were attacks on the US embassy in Iran in 1979, on the British embassy in 2011, and on the Saudi Arabian embassies in 2016.

2) After this attack, Azerbaijan evacuated its embassy Tehran.

--Rəcəb Yaxşı (talk) 05:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't pull So we have the Iranians claiming it was a domestic incident and the Azeris claiming it was a (possibly state-sanctioned) act of terror. Now, both sides are wildly unreliable authoritarian regimes, so I don't see why we should take either at their word. Regardless of the intention, this attack is spiraling relations between two countries who are closer to war than a lot of people realize. Curbon7 (talk) 09:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Cyclone Cheneso

 HurricaneEdgar 00:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support article looks good. 22 deaths is quite significant. It seems that last year a tropical storm hit Madagascar leading to 142 fatalities, and that would have been nominated if the article quality was good enough. Azpineapple (talk) 15:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Even though it isn't as serious as last year's storm, 22 deaths isn't a small number. The article is pretty good as well. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 15:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. Levivich (talk) 15:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support As said by @The Bestagon Vriend1917 (talk) 23:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Query Is the inclusion of "For the latest official information, see: links" standard for ongoing storms? Curbon7 (talk) 00:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Posting. --Tone 10:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Jenin killings and East Jerusalem synagogue shooting

Nominator's comments: I was hesitant to post this, but it appears that this is a significant political escalation. I've done my best to write a few options for neutral joint blurbs. Note that the Israel–Palestine conflict is listed as a contentious topic, and editing restrictions may apply to this discussion. I will support sanctions against any user that attempts to WP:DISRUPT the conversation, use it as a WP:FORUM, or WP:BLUDGEON the process by replying to everyone that has a different opinion than them. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• There are several parts that could be included, but the most significant outcome so far, obviously besides the loss of life, is the Palestinian Authority suspending security cooperation with Israel ([10], [11]). Could be something like The Palestinian Authority suspends security coordination with Israel as tensions escalate following an Israeli raid in the West Bank and a Palestinian attack in East Jerusalem. Also, the two articles maybe should just be merged together. nableezy - 21:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Id support altblurb1, but would prefer now offered alt3. nableezy - 23:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• While I do think it should be posted, we shouldn't conflate the killing of people at a synagogue with those killed during a raid on terrorists. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 21:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  How would we be conflating them if the synagogue attack was a response to the raid? – Muboshgu (talk) 23:04, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The two events are clearly connected, with several Palestinian factions and sources celebrating the synagogue shooting as "revenge" for the raid. Plus, the "raid on terrorists" also killed civilians. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 05:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support combined blurb – Muboshgu (talk) 23:04, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural comment All editors participating in this should be aware of the sanctions and remedies established in WP:ARBPIA. Per those remedies, this discussion is restricted to users who have ECP. As a personal note, as this is a clearly contentious area, let's all try to stay on topic and keep the temperature low. Curbon7 (talk) 23:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Combine them, all major sources report one as a response to the other. Else, neither. Selfstudier (talk) 23:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Alt blurb 3 should say "at" rather than "on"? Selfstudier (talk) 00:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support blurb on the attack, and support altblurb one if there is a consensus to combine. However, oppose combining as while coverage of the attack does mention the raid the blurb puts undue emphasis on the raid - the BBC article on the attack, for example, includes 24 paragraphs, of which only one discusses the raid. BilledMammal (talk) 00:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article still mentions the raid, which proves Thebiguglyalien's point that it's seen as a retaliation. Only talking about the synagogue attack makes it seem like the attack came out of nowhere, when the timing shows it's most likely otherwise. Mount Patagonia (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • They are connected, but to comply with WP:N we need to ensure that we reflect the respective emphasis in reliable sources. None of the proposed blurbs do this, as they put too much emphasis on the raid. BilledMammal (talk) 01:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to be clear, this is not a blurb about the attack that just happens to mention the raid. This is a blurb about two significant events. The raid has received extensive coverage in its own right. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support altblurb I or III. This is clearly a tit-for-tat attack, so it's important to mention both. To only blurb one or the other invites accusations of bias. Mount Patagonia (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  agree, both should be featured. Mhhossein ^talk 05:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait. I think it stands to reason that these two events are connected, but it might be worth us waiting for a bit more verification. To link these events. Sure Hamas claimed responsibility, but I don't feel we should be inclined to take their word for it. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:39, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It could be best to wait a bit, I'm not seeing a clear cut claim from Hamas/PIJ in the latest sources. Of course, viewing it as just a coincidence seems a bit of a stretch. Lone wolf is a possibility, however. Selfstudier (talk) 02:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The lone-wolf aspect of it is what I'm wary of yeah. Hamas could totally be piggybacking off it. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Support On the one hand both incidents involved multiple fatalities and are clearly terrorism related. But being brutally honest, this sort of thing is not exactly uncommon in that part of the world. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt3 - The Guardian described the Palestinian attack as "the worst in years" and made the connection with the Israeli raid, describing it as "the deadliest in two decades". Both events are thus significant and connected. Note as well that the death toll has risen to eight. The articles are good enough too, except for one CN tag in the 2023 Jenin killings article. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 05:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Also, the Israeli raid killed ten people and not nine, so the article should be updated to reflect that. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 06:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, no strong preference about which blurb. Levivich (talk) 05:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since there has been more violence today, I would support (and prefer) an updated blurb that works that in. Maybe even a generic "violence erupts" blurb if it's too complicated to discuss the individual events. Or, better, Support adding I-P conflict to ongoing where it should have been the entire time ITN existed. Levivich (talk) 16:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The NYT report says that this is "latest escalation of a particularly violent cycle in the region, where the situation — never calm — began to worsen last spring". So, it's an ongoing situation. This appears in the list of ongoing armed conflicts as going back to 1948 with about 27,000 deaths total to date. That just rates as minor, as these things go. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose per Andrew. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support - Escalation of the conflict, In The News. While I can see the argument that this is unfortunately nothing new in Israel/Palestine, I still think that this should be posted on the basis of notability. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Altblurb III PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Violence around the Gaza Strip region (including into Jerusalem) is sadly too common there due to the long-term conflicts there. --Masem (t) 13:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It is being described as the worst terrorist attack on Israelis in years. [12] Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support altblurb 3 to avoid undue weight. And yes, consider me warned about the discretionary sanctions. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 13:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  After much ado, ds is now ct :) Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Comparison with discretionary sanctions Selfstudier (talk) 14:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Ooh, that's right. I forgot all about that change. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:10, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Update: A 13-year-old Palestinian gunman injured two Israeli civilians in East Jerusalem today. Adding an AP News article to the sources list, but I'll leave any additions or rewriting of the blurbs to discussion. In regard to significance, the new source also notes that the Jan 26 raid was the deadliest single incursion in the West Bank since 2002, so it's not business as usual for the region. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This article gives a longer perspective, the temperature has been increasing slowly for a couple years now and the new Israeli government is considered to be raising it some more. Definitely not business as usual. Selfstudier (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support alt3–sadly too common, but still important. -- lomrjyo ^talk 20:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support altblurb II and this one should replace the attack on the Azerbaijani embassy in Tehran. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 15:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dunutubble, we don't get to pick and choose what does and doesn't roll off. The blurb that rolls off is always the oldest blurb on the list (i.e. the bottommost one), which is currently the Kyiv helicopter crash. Curbon7 (talk) 21:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

:Support alt3 Wait for further clarification. There are contradicting reports. is was the most NPOV blurb.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. This report for instance. Selfstudier (talk) 15:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. Spencer^T•C 06:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Douma chemical attack

RD: Sylvia Syms

Nominator's comments: Referencing needs improvement! Mjroots (talk) 18:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not yet ready A few spots in the prose need citations, and her entire television filmography is uncited. Curbon7 (talk) 05:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The BFI source covers both her film and television credits. The only exception was the 2019 credit, which I found a separate source for. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 01:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I had spot-checked it, and unless I'm mistaken, there are a bunch missing. 1972 The Adventurer, 1991 Countdown, 2002 Doctor Zhivago, 2008 New Tricks, and 2009 Blue Murder, as just some examples I randomly selected. Curbon7 (talk) 15:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(closed) Blurb: Tyre Nichols