Ongoing: War in Sudan (2023–present)

Nominator's comments: I am proposing this as an alternative to the nomination below. Also add timeline parameter per Godel2000. Lukt64 (talk) 17:39, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support though we can't just list the main article, as it doesn't have enough updates. Instead, we should do what we did for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and list the timeline (which has daily updates), looking something like: War in Sudan (timeline). Gödel2200 (talk) 17:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support timeline being added Lukt64 (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support timeline being added since the updates are daily and include frequent events from March 25, 26, 27, and 28 most recently Fileyfood500 (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Near daily updates to the article, and recent events added to the timeline from February and March 2024 Fileyfood500 (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Fileyfood500 Staraction (talk | contribs) 18:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per above, and list the timeline alongside. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Godel2200 (include timeline) Flip^andFlopped ツ 20:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per above. Almost daily, huge sections are updated. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support idk why the ever took it down it’s still massive Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:05, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per above, and include timeline. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 09:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• There are no dates in the article beyond March 21. It only takes 50 edits to go back to March 14. The article must be updated with current events? Stephen 11:00, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can't we do what we did with the Russian invasion of Ukraine? The Russian invasion of Ukraine article does not list many dates in March 2024, but that is fine as the Timeline of the Russian invasion of Ukraine (1 December 2023 – present) has daily updates. The situation is the same with the War in Sudan (2023-present) article, with the timeline getting near daily updates. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the last weeks that just seems to be a minor skirmish ticker, no significant events. Stephen 21:54, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some major events from the last few weeks include: RSF claiming capture of El Madina Arab (March 5), SLM-MM announcing it would fight the RSF/joining the conflict (March 24), SAF claiming capture of the Doha neighborhood in the city of Ondurman (March 26). Other days consist of airstrikes, vehicles destroyed, bridges being captured. Fileyfood500 (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, a lot of claims and very minor back and forth of low level conflict. Stephen 04:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this light, I am unclear about what makes the other 4 conflicts shown more significant. I reviewed the timeline from March for the Russia-Ukraine war, and found 3 instances where a village was reported to be captured. I otherwise found many reports of airstrikes and drones being shot down, and reports of single digit casualties. There is no doubt, there are significantly more policy updates and financial announcements, and the arms being used/destroyed are more expensive, however, it's not clear to me that the wealth of the combatants should set the distinction here. Fileyfood500 (talk) 04:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - ITN isn’t an armed conflicts ticker. 2A00:23C8:B00:AD01:106:C016:D59A:AA77 (talk) 14:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the only major things ongoing are armed conflicts. Lukt64 (talk) 15:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still doesn't make it a criteria. Ongoing is for when there is a continuous stream of blurb-worthy items; To me if we post this we might as well put up every other armed conflict. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is a whole civil war going on in the 15th largest country by area on the planet, so there's not much reason it shouldn't be up in the current event section. Asjhsz (talk) 02:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per above. A very active conflict going on right now in one of the biggest countries in the world. TomMasterReal^TALK 03:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, detailed entry, copiously sourced. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 08:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Up-to-date article receiving regular updates and still very much in the news. Looks like WP:SNOW support here.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 21:09, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying that I specifically support the timeline proposal mentioned above by Gödel2200. Timeline of the War in Sudan (2023–present) is being updated much more frequently than the War in Sudan (2023–present) article.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 21:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• There has been no content added since the article was nominated 5 days ago. This is not sufficient for ongoing. Stephen 10:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Checked the timeline, and there are 3 updates since 5 days ago. Updates from April 1, April 2, and April 3. Fileyfood500 (talk) 12:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Those are edits, but not updates. Updates bring readers new information. Edits like these three (and my nine) just change the way they/we see it. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The updates to the timeline I see are:

  April 1: First batch of food arrived from the World Food Program

  April 2: Twelve people were killed and 30 injured in a drone attack in Atbara

  April 3: The SAF launched airstrikes on the RSF 16th Infantry division

  April 3 2nd update: Sudanese prosecutors file capital offense charges against the state

  @InedibleHulk, these updates are in the timeline. Godel2000 pointed out that the timeline is where near daily conflict updates are reported, so the proposal under discussion is to have the timeline in parenthesis Fileyfood500 (talk) 01:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The main article needs updates too, as that timeline is literally a ticker of relatively minor events. Stephen 02:20, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Can you clarify what the distinction is between the events listed in the Russia-Ukraine timeline and this timeline that makes these events minor and the Russia-Ukraine events major? Both timelines show smaller battles, airstrikes, and dozens of casualties, and shifting battle lines around a handful of villages over the course of the last month. The technologies used in the conflicts are different (drones used heavily in Ukraine).

  From what I see, both events are quite major. I know you've provided a lot of qualifiers, saying the events are minor, not significant, low level, can you be more specific in your arguments? I've provided examples of different events, and am unclear on the basis of your reasoning. Fileyfood500 (talk) 05:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose ongoing Per Stephen, limited updates for significant continuing events. Spencer^T•C 03:31, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Masalit massacres

(Posted) RD: Bill Delahunt

Former House of Representatives, from 1997 to 2011.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:45, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Well cited and notable. Article is in good shape too. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: An expansive, well-cited article that does not appear to be biased by any means. However I would like to note that every Wikipedia biographical article is considered notable enough for RD; nominations are based on quality and quantity of articles instead. Jmanlucas (talk) 21:02, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• I do not post bios with unreferenced date of birth. Schwede66 02:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Schwede66, I think that's an odd line to draw (is his DOB really controversial enough to need a citation?), but here you go – Muboshgu (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:DOB applies and whilst that is part of the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, I assume that you are aware the BLP rules apply to people who recently died. Schwede66 02:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted – Schwede66 02:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Chance Perdomo

British actor. Jaguarnik (talk) 23:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Article in good shape and notable too. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Filmography needs sources as does his BAFTA nomination. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:30, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  His BAFTA nomination is cited, and the filmography is completely cited in the career section. Jaguarnik (talk) 19:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The article uses the term "accident", which is a loaded term. The first sentence of that article reads as such: An accident is an unintended, normally unwanted event that was not directly caused by humans. That is, by using the term, the article says that the traffic collision wasn't Perdomo's fault. This violates NPOV and needs editing before posting can be considered. Schwede66 02:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The word "accident" is not there anymore. Time for a re-review, please? --PFHLai (talk) 13:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support This article has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 01:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing removal : Red Sea crisis

(Posted) RD: Les Twentyman

Australian youth worker and community activist. The article could do with some work and more sourcing. HiLo48 (talk) 06:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on multiple uncited paragraphs, but that could change. Bremps... 11:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for now. Notable, but like Bremps said, uncited sections present. Feel free to ping me if that's resolved. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support looks good now. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ready Some excellent work has been done to update and properly source this article. I believe it is ready to post. HiLo48 (talk) 06:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, all unsourced issues done and finished! I did expand the lead a bit as well. Pinging Bremps and The Herald for the update! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 14:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 09:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Hans Joachim Meyer

The last Minister of Culture of East Germany, and then for years Minister of Culture in Saxony in a unified Germany, and president of the Central Committee of German Catholics, originally a linguist teaching in Berlin. The article was mostly there, - I trimmed a bit: too much about general political development. Most of the many sources were still working. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Article looks fine. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 08:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It looks like this is generally good enough to post. However, I’d note that it seems like the admins want to have the date of birth referenced in the article before they post an article to RD. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That information was already in the sources but wasn't mentioned in the prose for some reason. I've added it so it's referenced now. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 09:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Marked as "Ready". Flibirigit (talk) 00:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 01:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Emilio Lora-Tamayo

Spanish physicist and president of the Spanish National Research Council. gobonobo ^{+ c} 19:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Doesn't appear to have any problems. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 08:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support can be posted Flip^andFlopped ツ 15:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 01:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Louis Gossett Jr.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose orange refimprove tag in article. Support article looks ready now! Staraction (talk | contribs) 14:08, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Not Ready for the usual reason. Also the wrong article is linked. It should be Louis Gossett Jr.. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just fixed the link to the wikibio. --PFHLai (talk) 14:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added references for everything that had a CN tag, if anyone doesn't mind taking a look. Estreyeria (talk) 20:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks good enough now to me - Jayson (talk) 00:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose entire lead section is unreferenced. (Feel free to ping me when this is rectified) Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 01:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC) Support looks good. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 04:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aydoh8 Lead section doesn't necessarily need citations; see MOS:CITELEAD Staraction (talk | contribs) 04:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 04:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support-Article looks good now. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, 867,628 pageviews 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:27, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN is not here to consider page views. We are here to present topics with quality articles that are in the news. Masem (t) 16:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I was about to post but there are several items in the accolades section that are still unreferenced. --Tone 12:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I spent a lot of time trying to address your concern. awardsandwinnder.com had most of the listings. Unfortunately, my prolonged effortst got thwarted twice. By an "edit conflict" and my retry ended badly, too because that is a blacklisted website. I give up.

We could simply get rid of that section, if that would help. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:31, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If someone had access to these books (I don't) I'm guessing the problem is easily solved.

• Gossett, Louis, Jr.; Karas, Phyllis (2010). An Actor and a Gentleman. ISBN 9780470620946.((cite book)): CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Murphy, Douglas (2014). Louis Gossett, Jr.: 133 Success Facts - Everything You Need to Know about Louis Gossett, Jr. Emereo Pty Limited. ISBN 9781488561672. ISBN 1488561672.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:51, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could delete the section from this article, and move it to Louis Gossett Jr. on screen and stage. Problem solved. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's sweeping the problem under the rug. The filmography page was already separated off well before this no, but we should never move awards off the page just because they can't be sourced. Masem (t) 16:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or you just selectively remove awards that cannot be sourced. If they cannot be sourced, notability of those awards may be so-so. Tone 16:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the unsourced awards do look barely notable, but things like the Daytime Emmys or the NAACP Image Awards are clearly notable awards that should not be removed for this reason. Masem (t) 16:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I've removed the obviously non-notable awards, and one which appears to be wrong, but the NAACP Awards are a struggle - I've sourced one so far... even his 1998 win is beyond me at the moment, not helped by the fact the website doesn't appear to have any history pages. Black Kite (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There already is a source cited that documents the NAACP gave him awards. Doesn't go into much detail, but it is already there. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Awards moved Seems the awards previously in his bio were split to form List of awards and nominations received by Louis Gossett Jr.—Bagumba (talk) 09:29, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sigh. We really shouldn't be creating a pointless extra article purely to get an article onto RD, I really wish people would stop doing it. Black Kite (talk) 10:33, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The awards article is not "pointless" and is now cited. The biography article Louis Gossett Jr. is now completely updated and ready to go. But the ball is in your court. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It 100% should be merged back into the main article, especially given there was no discussion prior to it being split. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"there was no discussion" goes against WP:BEBOLD, but one is free to merge it back if they have specific reasons.—Bagumba (talk) 09:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly would move it back if it was completely sourced, but it isn't. It's still missing sources for the Daytime Emmies, most of the NAACP awards, and some CableACE awards (are they notable?). Black Kite (talk) 09:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm down to two NAACP nominations. There's plenty of sources out there, but none of them are reliable. Black Kite (talk) 10:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen 7&6 provide a reason for doing so. The article is not so long, nor the section itself, to justify splitting. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support no maintenace tags on the article. TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 13:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a cn tag in the section "1998–2024: Later works" and I've just added two more. I'm going to have another look at sourcing that awards article. Black Kite (talk) 09:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added one citation for "he provided the voice of Lucius Fox in The Batman animated series. [Lucius Fox in The Batman animated series" and removed the cn template. Deleted the "In 2008, he filmed the "Keep It Real" series of commercials for the Namibian lager Windhoek." which still would need a citation. All of the on line sources for that are wiki and fandom websites. I don't think it can be sourced from a WP:RS. So I think that it is unimportant, and deleted the unourced material. I think that was all the CN templates in the article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find a citation for the beer commercial, and put it back. In 2008, he filmed the "Keep It Real" series of commercials for the Namibian lager Windhoek.^[1] 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)thi[reply]

I did go to the three separate wikipedia articles on NAACP image awards. I took citations right out of those articles. Two of them have citations that are now on the blacklist. The third was not.

• ref name="Image1"//awardsandwinners.com/category/naacp-image-award/1998/|title=1998 Image Award Winners|website=Awards and Winners|access-date=August 2, 2016
• ref name="Image 2"//awardsandwinners.com/category/naacp-image-award/2005/|title=2005 Image Award Winners|website=Awards and Winners|access-date=August 2, 2016))
• ref name=”Image 3"Couch, Aaron (February 1, 2013). "2013 Image Winners". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved August 2, 2016.
  

The third one worked. the first two did not, and you have to either go to the award wikipedia articles, or put in "https://" in front of the links. I could not save them otherwise.

I have tried diligently to find reliable sources. I know the complaints about IMDB. And I've also been through the Awards and Winners blacklist recently on another article. Holding up the main article because we are on a mission impossible for the awards article seem harsh to me. The awards article is now split off. We have a well plead article with 142 sources. Lots of effort went into this, and one ought not to punish Lou Gossett and his interested readers for the penurious reportage of these particular awards. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the past, the community has often expected material split after the death announcement to still be sourced, to avoid gaming the system merely to expedite posting. What we generally don't want is verifiable content that is useful to readers to be quickly deleted to get a Main Page posting. In this case though, it seems much of the unsourced material was actually added after the death (see my comment below), so there might have been more leeway to delete that unsourced contested material, if it was identified as such at the time. —Bagumba (talk) 06:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the RD process should not be construed as a "award" for the individual posted nor as a punishment for those not. It's as much an incentive for editors to colloaborate on a recent news topic and improve the page's quality. —Bagumba (talk) 06:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• almost there - I actually like the awards split off. I see two citation tags, and believe that awards mentioned in the lead need some citation in this article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Awards additions It seems the list was smaller but fully sourced until this edit at 18:49, 29 March 2024 by SibTower1987. At any rate, it seems to be mostly sourced now.—Bagumba (talk) 05:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - A tip o’ the hat to the article improvers. Ready to post. Jusdafax (talk) 07:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the article is ready now, although it would look better if the "acting credits" and "Awards and nominations" section have some kind of prose. PrinceofPunjab^TALK 14:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted— Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen (talk • contribs) 05:11, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ross J. Anderson

OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 22:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Looks well cited and notable for RD. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Four {cn} tags remaining. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 12:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This article has enough details & references now. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 21:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tom Henry

Mayor of Fort Wayne, Indiana from 2008 until his unfortunate death. The article needs work that I'll fix in the next few days. Thanks! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 18:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Article has a bunch of unreferenced sentences. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TDKR Chicago 101, the article is now well-sourced, no unsourced issues remain. Pinging for the update! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Issues have been fixed. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Attention needed) RD: Thomas Mensah

Heatrave (talk) 10:07, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak oppose Only uncited parts are Corning Glass and education. Bremps... 11:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This article has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 09:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Limpopo bus plunge

Article: Mamatlakala highway accident (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A bus full of pilgrims falls from a bridge in Limpopo (pictured), killing all except an eight-year-old girl. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A bus falls from a bridge in Limpopo (pictured), killing 45.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC, DW, Le Monde, NYT, Sydney Morning Herald
Credits:

• Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
• Created by Brudelman (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Chomik1129 (talk · give credit)

Article updated

For precedents, see Carberry collision, Kenya crash, Epidemiology and List. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:20, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose For all purposes this is a unfortunate traffic accident that has been associated to fault of the driver. This is the type of stuff we cover in list articles, but not standalone ones per NEVENTS, and thus not really ITN material. Masem (t) 22:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose tragic event, but seemingly lacks any long-term impact 2A02:908:676:E640:99A1:1CB2:32ED:E1E6 (talk) 22:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose No long-term impact, and local incidents like this are why we don't have a minimum death criterion. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Provincial bus plunge per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:53, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is de-facto discrimination. If 45 people die after a bus falls off a bridge in the United States it would be ITN in hours. Lukt64 (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, I would also disagree with having a US bus plunge on ITN. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 00:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that it is a road accident caused by only one fault (the driver) that is likely going to have little long term impact. This is exactly what NOTNEWS and NEVENT recommends from having standalone articles on. If it was a mutli-factor situation (such as a mega-car pileup) that might be something. But normal road-traffic accidents tend to not be topics that can be expanded on further. — Masem (t) 00:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's discrimination based upon what's typical for a country: if this was were in the USA but a mass shooting, this would never get ITN. But were it a mass shooting in any other country it would get on the front page within a few hours. This is because the former is shot down as "Oh, a tragedy, but all too common because it's a country where there are few to no safeguards against such a thing." The exact same logic is being applied here, but for some reason people get a lot more up in arms about it when the country in question isn't the USA. Nottheking (talk) 01:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is only 4 pages on bus crashes on South Africa. Lukt64 (talk) 03:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If your intent was to argue that was evidence that bus crashes are rare in South Africa, that was a rather dubious selection. After all, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and thus won't record every single item of news. Rather, the fact that there's clearly a lot of crashes (a casual research pass suggests hundreds of fatal bus crashes every year, with one high-profile study showing 4,001 fatal crashes involving trucks & buses across a 5-year period) and yet only four received an article seems to be a very strong indication that such events... Are just not notable in South Africa. Nottheking (talk) 05:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I find it very hard to imagine a mass shooting in the US with 40+ deaths not being posted. In October 2023 we posted one with 19, and in 2022 we posted one with 10 (although there were racial/political elements increasing its notability). Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 13:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So the 2018 New Jersey bus crash wasn't nominated, the 2020 Pennsylvania Turnpike crash wasn't nominated, the Schoharie limousine crash was nominated for AFD, voted keep, and still not posted. What was posted though was a 2023 bus plunge in Panama, 2020 bus plunge in China, 2018 in Hong Kong, and one I think last year in Italy that I can't find right now among many others. Your assertion then that "if this had happened in the United States", as is always the case when claiming "American bias" is in fact unsubstantiated horse shit utterly devoid of any basis in reality and contrary to the normative behavior at ITN which is to ruthlessly suppress stories from or about the United States in some hysterial and misguided effort to fight "systemic bias" despite that not appearing anywhere at WP:ITN. If you want to do something useful, maybe review the wall of forever wars in the WP:ONGOING section and nominate for removal those which no longer meet the criteria for inclusion. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 11:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the list of similar blurbs and articles in the past, this is very interesting and helpful for understanding precedent here. We've posted many more busplunges than I thought we had, and the death-count of this one is double many previous blurbs. I think your aggression towards Lukt64 is wholly unwarranted and unhelpful... ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:15, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The outlier here is the Schoharie crash. I agree it probably should have been posted, but the New Jersey and Pennsylvania crashes had seven deaths between the two of them. They are simply not significant enough events to warrant posting. I have no hesitation in saying a crash with two casualties wouldn't have been posted no matter where in the world it happened. In fact, its occurrence in an English-speaking country is probably the only reason it has an article here. There's no sense in asserting anti-American bias because a non-American topic with 39 deaths was posted and an American article with 2 wasn't—and you were really quite disrespectful to an editor engaging in good faith while you were at it. Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 14:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, the first two didn't have as many deaths. Personisinsterest (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May I add that this particular incident had a higher death toll than all of those you mentioned. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 19:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - That's a remarkably high death toll for a single-vehicle accident. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per above. The article does not indicate this will have a lasting impact. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support the death toll is pretty significant for this news to be ignored. PrinceofPunjab^TALK 04:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose from what I've seen of it so far, it's been a tragic accident, but a comparative "blip" news-wise: no wider scandal or fallout, for instance. Instead, it appears to be the sad result of what (in this country) appears to be commonplace poorer safety standards, which result in accidents like these not being particularly noteworthy. (e.g, a bus was towing a trailer which would dramatically hinder its handling ability, making it unsafe for driving such dangerous mountain roads) To give an analogy, it's also why few mass shootings in the United States are given ITN treatment: particularly lax gun control laws in that country & the overall cultural environment make what would be a nation-defining tragedy in virtually any other country into a commonplace occurrence.

Note that were some of these elements to change (e.g, in the next day or two a major inquiry & public investigation gets touched off by the South African national government) then that could change the picture. But as it stands, there's no indication of that happening. Nottheking (talk) 05:24, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• CLOSED Consensus to post is unlikely to develop. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 08:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]
• RE-OPENED Sorry but half a day when there are multiple support votes and an ongoing discussion is way premature closing; we should let the discussion run its course at least and give a chance for editors to respond, discuss and other to have their say. I have re-opened as a result. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• I think an blurb like this would live or die on the article's quality. It's an intense tragedy with a big impact on many people's lives in the region. However, I don't think the article has quite enough depth/length for a front-page feature right now. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support High death toll and international coverage. Anon has done a good job of showing precedent. Article looks fine to me. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think the news is quite notable enough and should be included on the main page. LiamKorda 17:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support This is getting significant coverage. Government has indicated there will be further inquiry suggesting potential long-term impact. While the region has a poor traffic safety record, such large-scale incidents are uncommon. We blurbed the bus accident involving a hockey team in Canada a few years ago, so I don't see why we should not blurb this one. Kcmastrpc (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It's a notable accident with significant casualties and it's receiving some international coverage as well (fairly routine coverage, but enough). The article looks ok. I know some people will argue that they would also object if this happened in the U.S. but there's no doubt in my mind that this would get posted quickly. Less than a year ago we posted a bus crash in Canada with 15 deaths (which increased to 17 after posting). There was nothing particularly extraordinary about the Canadian bus crash, except for the fact that it happened in Canada. Johndavies837 (talk) 20:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per Johndavies. The Kip 21:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support abnormal high amount of death. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 22:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose. Most news articles I've seen so far for this event (including those nom includes) mention the same things (as a result of the coverage being based off of AP and Reuters): how the crash occurred (including 8-year old girl who survived), some limited context (Easter celebrations, road safety in Africa), and government responses. None of the coverage I've seen goes into depth about any of those responses - in fact, there is only one article sourced in the article that breaks out of this pattern in its headline (once you click on that article, it goes back to the routine coverage). I believe this puts the coverage under routine, which per WP:DIVERSE decreases its notability.

Similar arguments can be made about the precedent cited in the comments for this nomination. However, precedent acts as a rule/guideline, and per Wikipedia:IAR / WP:OTHER, if the precedent is making the project worse (by rotating tragic accidents that, while horrible, don't have long-term impact per Chaotic Enby), it ought not to be followed. I don't agree with the posting of some of the preceding articles either, in particular Carberry highway collision.

That being said, this is a horrific accident that definitely calls for reforms to be made to infrastructure in South Africa for safety. If this event sparks such reform, or otherwise leads to further action, I would support the nomination. Staraction (talk | contribs) 05:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's an extensive in-depth follow-up in the NYT: No One Can Explain This Miracle. The BBC shows forensic investigation. So, while the many lesser news organisations are just repeating the wire story, the big ones are making more of it.

Andrew🐉(talk) 08:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. A bus crash with an unusually high number of deaths, receiving an unusually high amount of international attention, and with some novel elements (that it was a religious pilgrimage, that there is a "miraculous" sole survivor). BD2412 T 17:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  We absolutely should not be posting stories because of those aspects (the religious pilgrimage or the sole survivor) as that's going along the lines of "won't someone think of the children"-begging rationale. Even if that's an aspect that the media focuses on, that's something we should be blind towards per NPOV policy. Masem (t) 19:56, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong support per Lukt64. Although pointing out systemic racism on wikipedia can be uncomfortable, it needs to be called out. We posted Carberry highway collision and Humboldt Broncos bus crash with minimal opposition. Both of these crashes were very similar on the facts: driver error resulting in a mass casualty incident, resulting in devastation to the local community affected + widespread public sympathy in the news. Interestingly though, even despite this crash having *more* casualties, all of a sudden there is mass opposition at ITN and even an effort to snow close the nomination. From where I am standing, the only easily discernible & substantive difference separating this bus crash from those aforementioned is that as opposed to white westerners dying, here it was Black South Africans. There is no good excuse for this to miss out on a blurb. Flip^andFlopped ツ 18:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  We shouldn't have posted any of these, actually. Bus plunges, whether they happen in the West or in Africa, are not the most defining events in international news. I wasn't on ITN at the time to oppose the other two, but they shouldn't have been there either, and the fact that we posted a bus plunge 6 years ago doesn't mean we should keep posting them now. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, the problem is that we've become too lax on enforcing of NOTNEWS and NEVENT. Most land-based man-made traffic accidents like this will have little lasting effect because there's nothing to easily regulate or the like as there is with airlines, trains, or ships. But editors are rushing to create articles on every news event just because its in the news without the consideration if it will become an encyclopedic topic. We do have list articles that cover nearly every type of such events where these can be listed, but we don't need standalone articles on each of these, and by extension, feature in ITN. Masem (t) 19:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Fair enough - I respect your position that bus crashes generally should not go to ITN. I might even agree with you as a matter of general policy. With this being said, it is important not to put on colour blind glasses even as you make respectable higher-level arguments about the parameters of ITN - there's a reason for the sudden broader surge in opposition to this bus crash when there wasn't to the Canadian crashes I mentioned: subconscious bias/racism, even if unintentional. Given the overarching context and the fact that so many other bus crashes have been posted, it is highly questionable that we as a community would decide to draw the line in the sand here. To that end, I think torpedoing this nom would unnecessarily stoke perceptions of racial inequity on Wikipedia... something that would be harmful to our project generally. All just my humble opinion though. I appreciate both of your respectful responses. Cheers, Flip^andFlopped ツ 21:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I couldn't agree more with what's been said here. This is a drum I beat constantly, attempting to stem the tide of systemic bias, but it's usually just greeted with polite nods and somehow people don't even see how blinkered their worldviews actually are. For example, we blurbed Italian president Giorgio Napolitano's death (someone who wasn't even a national leader, given that the PM wields the power there), and ex-Canadian PM Brian Mulroney, there wasn't that much opposition, yet when Daniel arap Moi died - ruler of Kenya for almost a quarter of a century - my initial decision to post a blurb was met with an outcry and had to be pulled. And 10-year Tanzanian president Ali Hassan Mwinyi, again it was deemed that he almost certainly wasn't notable enough for a blurb. I'm not accusing anyone of bad faith, I just think we need to collectively open our minds a bit more than we have done up until now, and I'm extremely glad this story got posted, given the precedents of the other similar cases. It's important to remember that despite the editor base being overwhelmingly based in US/Europe/Australia etc, we're not just here to serve those communities, we're here for the global English community, and sometimes that means covering things that aren't deemed important enough in the Western media.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Stephen 01:17, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Late request for feedback This should have been called a 'crash' from the start regardless of nomination, as none of the reliable sources are calling it such (I went through each one) Please sound off on the talk page. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then you might have missed the NYT article linked in the nomination: "8-Year-Old Survives Bus Plunge Off Bridge That Left 45 People Dead". Most of the other articles use the verb "plunge", not of all them use the word "crash". ---Sluzzelin talk 00:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all of them are running with 'crash' and I didn't argue against 'plunge' Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I guess I don't understand what you meant by "such" in "as none of the reliable sources are calling it such". I gathered it couldn't be "crash". What were you referring to? ---Sluzzelin talk 00:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all of the reliable sources are naming it as a 'crash' not 'accident' either in the headline or lede, and MOS says we should start with year, so 2024 xxxx crash Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In fact on clicking through to each, I can't find the word "accident" used at all in the first nine citations for the article, only crash or sometimes plunge. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now. I didn't know you were referring to the article title. Sorry for adding to the confusion! ---Sluzzelin talk 01:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Larry Lloyd

Football player needs some work.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose needs a lot more refs. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 08:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mukhtar Ansari

Indian Politican.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now The article currently has emotive language which violates WP:NPOV. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: George Gilbey

--2A00:23EE:14E0:15A0:D9D4:EACA:4221:4590 (talk) 22:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support Article is short, but what is there is of sufficient quality to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Stephen 23:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joe Lieberman

Nominator's comments: United States senator from Connecticut from 1989 to 2013. Nominee for vice president of the United States in the 2000 U.S. presidential election. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keeves (talk • contribs) 22:00, 2024 March 27 (UTC)

• Support. One section is tagged as relying on sources too close to the subject, but that is hardly the same as being unsourced. BD2412 T 22:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Comprehensive, B-Class article of an extremely notable figure. Staraction (talk | contribs) 22:04, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Extremely notable figure in U.S. Politics. Article is of high enough quality as it is now for inclusion. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 22:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Personal life section has several citation needed tags. Natg 19 (talk) 22:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Found sources for all outstanding citation needed tags in that section! Staraction (talk | contribs) 00:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Definitely a notable figure in American politics; article is not perfect but sufficiently ready for RD. Flip^andFlopped ツ 01:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• I was considering posting this however, there is an orange tag in the DHS section. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Ad Orientem: I have addressed the orange tag in the DHS section and added diversified sources (NYT, Bloomberg). Assuming no other issues, I think article is ready for RD. Cheers, Flip^andFlopped ツ 02:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Flipandflopped There are a number of referencing gaps that I have tagged in the article. Having edited the page, alas I am now WP:INVOLVED, so I can't post the article once it has been improved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Too many dead refs. Just randomly wanted to check some refs. 2 of the first 3 refs are completely dead. I haven't checked the rest. Hard to determine the quality of the article when its statements can't be verified. 51.154.145.205 (talk) 12:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support article quality meets threshold for posting Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Democratic Vice Presidential candidate in 2000 election and long running Senator and notable for being a key figure in many hot topic political issues in the 1990's and 2000's. Harizotoh9 (talk) 14:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support He was the Democratic VP nominee in 2000 and was a long-serving senator who influenced major legislation like the Affordable Care Act and the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnAdams1800 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose His notability is not a requirement for him to be included in the RD, as it's already presumed by having an article on Wikipedia. Many CN tags and two subsections are orange-tagged. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural oppose per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose It's actually a very good article, and none of it is contentious, but desperately needs more sources in order to make it reliable. I added more "citation needed" tags. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I've fixed 30/48 citation needed tags made since this post, but have to attend to other business now. Hopefully someone can pick up from here. Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment @Alsoriano97: @Orbitalbuzzsaw: @Abcmaxx: I've significantly updated the citations in the article. Let me know if it is good enough to post now or if I should add more citations. Staraction (talk | contribs) 02:38, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further to Staraction's comment, all citation needed tags are now resolved, either by the addition of citations, or by the removal of persistently uncitable claims to the talk page. BD2412 T 17:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. I see zero {cn} tags in this wikibio at this time. I still object to the bullet-points under Committee assignments for wikibios for US senators (prefer prose with more details on what they do and when), but I gave up on that a while ago. --PFHLai (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted to RD) Blurb/RD: Daniel Kahneman

Article: Daniel Kahneman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg, Washington Post, The New York Times
Credits:

• Nominated by Martinevans123 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit), Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit) and Ktin (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

• Nobel Prize winning author, psychologist and economist. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Almost there: very few statements lack a citation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  rather than discussing blurb or not, could we please have citations for at least two facts missing one? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks, Gerda. You might want to add some tags to direct effort. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No, Martin, I hate tags. I saw two things:

  1. "They would continue to publish together until the end of Tversky's life, but the period when Kahneman published almost exclusively with Tversky ended in 1983, when he published two papers with Anne Treisman, his wife since 1978."
  2. Both paragraphs under "Focusing illusion" end without citation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok, thanks. I also saw the first and thought it would be self-evident from his list of publications. Maybe not. Those other paragraphs are worth a look. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:43, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  So I repositioned the citations for "Focusing illusion" (although primary). Alas, the article has only a list of his books, not a full list of all his publications (I'm assuming that might be quite extensive). Martinevans123 (talk) 11:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, but how is it self-edvident that she was his wife from a certain year? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, that bit not self evident from a list of publications, but the year is given in the infobox and in "Personal life" where it is sourced? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This comes sooner. You could just duplicate the ref from personal, and had obliged to "have a ref at the end of each paragraph". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Blurb when ready. Ktin (talk) 18:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is to be blurbed, there should be a clear section besides a few lines in the lede to explain why he was important though impact and or legacy. Just being awarded including a Nobel isn't sufficient for a blurb. Masem (t) 19:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If only we were to apply the same standard (last sentence) to the PM of Ruritania. Nfitz (talk) 22:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't automatically blurb former PMs when they die either. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:05, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support RD, Oppose blurb I remember reading his work in school, especially his collaborations with Amos Tversky. That does not rise to the super-high level we need for a blurb. I think quality is sufficient for RD now, the few statements lacking citation don't need to hold this article up long. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support RD He was 90 and died in Parts Unknown from nothing of note. "Variants of utility" doesn't quite ring true to me, but it's footnoted and probably written for someone else. The two chunks in "Focusing illusion" could easily be deleted if backing them up with a reliable source or two proves difficult. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose blurb Old man dies. Noah, AA^Talk 01:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  In all seriousness, it doesnt rise to the level of significance for a blurb. Noah, AA^Talk 02:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I find statements like Old man dies when used as a comment in a discussion like this, to be extremely disrespectful. Ktin (talk) 02:53, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  When someone suggests a blurb that would relay exactly how old a man was when he died, it seems only fair to doubt the significance of that central fact. There's really nothing else to oppose. The age at death is the news item in question. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No, the blurb is the summary of the news item which is the death of the person. Age is additional information. Ktin (talk) 04:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, that's why it's in all the headlines provided above and why no such prior blurb has added a place or cause. I hope the small print means you're kidding. If not, maybe propose an ageless blurb that rather focuses on how the field of behavioural economics has been affected by the loss of its bedrock (or something RD can't say). InedibleHulk (talk) 05:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Small font because this conversation is irrelevant. Clearly you can think of a blurb which doesn’t include age. Go figure. Ktin (talk) 06:32, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There was a recent blurb that was about an old man dying. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think there's ever been a moment in the history of ITN when "we recently blurbed an old person's death" didn't ring true. Kurtis ^(talk) 16:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  If you mean old man Mulroney, yeah, quite unfortunate. He was 84. At least in that case, further information did appear for a week or so in his death section and funeral article. Kahneman's article doesn't even have a death section. We could link the whole article, in bold, with a photo and note of how old he was. But I don't think that update is ever going to tell a reader more, so there's really no point in following along. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:43, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Are you calling his death unfortunate or the fact it got blurbed? Traumnovelle (talk) 23:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Both (in different ways, of course). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The current criteria for blurbing deaths allows for major figures in any domain. The question to ask is -- as someone who served as the bedrock of behavioral economics as a field of study, was Kahneman a major figure in this area. My thinking is yes. Ktin (talk) 02:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb Certainly at the top of his field, one of the most influential economists of his time, and Nobel laureate. Also somewhat of a household name due to his bestselling book Thinking, Fast and Slow which encompasses much of his research. Davey2116 (talk) 03:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose blurb, a blurb on this would be an embarrassment to the Main Page. The nominator should refrain from making blurb suggestions going forward. Abductive (reasoning) 07:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Not my suggestion. I'd say it was borderline. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Even if it was your suggestion, and even if said suggestion would be "an embarrassment to the Main Page", that doesn't give anyone the right to cast aspersions against you or anyone else over a difference of opinion. Kurtis ^(talk) 16:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Perhaps I'll just make blurb suggestions going backwards. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Just as long as you're okay with receiving credit in a future that never comes. Kurtis ^(talk) 16:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Should make RD a lot more prdictable and won't take me a minute. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Seeing as a blurb has been receiving at least a modicum of support, I'd say it's not an unreasonable proposal. Kurtis ^(talk) 16:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, am tempted to change my mind. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose blurb Great thinker and theorist, but not really for a blurb. I included insights from the prospect theory in my master thesis some ten years ago, and the true brain who delivered that theory was Amos Tversky. Not to belittle Kahneman's work, but he came up with ideas regarding cognitive biases that Tversky managed to mathematicise and bring to the general audience. Moreover, his contributions to behavioural economics are not seminal enough as John Forbes Nash Jr's contributions to game theory (in fact, the cornerstone in behavioural economics that most other theories descend from is the bounded rationality, and the real equivalent to Nash in behavioural economics would be Herbert A. Simon). There are also other psychologists who independently developed mainstream theories with wide applications to economics, such as Gerd Gigerenzer with his work on heuristics, so Kahneman's work isn't really a starting point for anyone working in the field. That being said, the statements that he was on top of economics as a field are quite wide off the mark.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support blurb Just running his name alone in RD would be insufficient and the article seems quite comprehensive and worthy. The bottom blurb which would be replaced is two weeks old now and so is stale. It's also less interesting -- just another routine election. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• The few expansions of the past 24 hours have been nice, but I do believe we need more expansion on this article before a blurb is appropriate. In particular, I think more details on his later life and death would be necessary for a blurb. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose blurb I do not think this is blurb worthy as I believe we should only blurb when the death is notable enough. PrinceofPunjab^TALK 15:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Is there anything pending for this article to go to RD? Please can someone tag / annotate accordingly if there are any editor actions needed? Ktin (talk) 18:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Joseph2302 has asked for all items in the Notable contributions section to be given sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:53, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Bit of an overkill to add references to that section. Should ideally be treated like the "See also" section. Nevertheless, I went ahead and added references to that section. So, we should be good there now. Marking ready. Ktin (talk) 01:49, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support RD, oppose blurb. If we have to explain who the person is in the blurb, they really shouldn't be blurbed. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:04, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose blurb not a serving head of state or government and the manner of the death is not notable This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose blurb His death was not notable in and of itself, and there is only a two sentence update about it on his page. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD Stephen 02:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Brigid Kelly

American politician in Ohio. -- Blaylockjam10 (talk • contribs) 21:43, 2024 March 30 (UTC)

• The stubby wikibio currently has only 260 words of prose. The coverage of her political career seems to end at her election victory in becoming a member of the Ohio state legislature, with no info on what she did while in office, nor what she did afterwards (the intro mentions her becoming a county auditor...) and before she died. Please expand this wikibio. --PFHLai (talk) 20:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Article is feeble; sourcing is too. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• @PFHLai: I’ve expanded the article. Could you take another look at it? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 22:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: Slađana Milošević

Likely well sourced. 240F:7A:6253:1:74BA:3EEC:4DCE:E68A (talk) 05:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This article has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Richard Serra

American sculptor.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. A solid B-class article on a major figure. The "Collections" and "Awards" sections have an improperly formatted citation that goes to a dead PDF, and it's not clear why some of the images of his work are fair use while others are not (perhaps that just reflects different freedom of panorama rules for sculptures in different countries), but I do not see these as blocking issues. Sdkb ^talk 21:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per Sdkb. Flip^andFlopped ツ 01:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Well-developed article. interesting. Lots of sources. No visible gaps. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:29, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted – robertsky (talk) 15:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Swami Smaranananda

Hindu Monk.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Stephen 22:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse

Article: Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Francis Scott Key Bridge collapses (bridge pictured) after it is hit by a container ship at Baltimore, Maryland. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Francis Scott Key Bridge (pictured) collapses after it is hit by a container ship at Baltimore, Maryland.
News source(s): BBC News Online
Credits:

• Nominated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)
• Created by HAL333 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Queen of Hearts (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Major US bridge collapse. Potential for a high number of casualties. Mjroots (talk) 08:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support but wait unlikely to not be a mass casualty event, but article is too short at the moment and information is lacking. Juxlos (talk) 08:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support absolutely. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 08:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Breaking news. The target article is disputed so ITN can help with navigation. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I closed the merge proposal as it was getting no support. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on notability; article needs to be fleshed out. ^Queenof_Hearts 08:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Alt1 is good, but needs work. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Alt1 since it links to the reasonably developed article on the bridge itself. The collapse article is under construction. Abductive (reasoning) 08:26, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait – Both articles are in rough shape and the situation is still developing. SounderBruce 08:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support once it's ready. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 09:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose No fatalities have been reported so far. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Human lives are not the price demanded by an ITN.--Jasper Deng (talk)
    • There is no WP:MINIMUMDEATHS threshold. Mjroots (talk) 10:03, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ITN should not depend on fatalities. It should depend on how widely covered it is. Also, a disaster can be a disaster without fatalities. For example, ITN posted the Norfolk Southern train derailment back in February 23, 2023. No one died in that event. Djprasadian (talk) 14:33, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Thankfully no deaths, so doesn't rise to the bar of an ITN entry for a disaster.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Moving to support per below. I guess the infrastructure angle is interesting and newsworthy too.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral, leaning support - but it is certainly instructive to see how people vote and argue on this topic, compared to similar cases elsewhere in the world. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ITN has posted several bridges elsewhere such as India and Turkey in 2022. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know, and while I'd rather not see this feed run entirely on precedents, those are relevant points in favour of posting. But there is nonetheless a persistent strain of argument from various quarters that diminishes mass casualty events outside Europe and North America. In this case, all I'm arguing for is modest caution. This is a developing story, and it's likely to be posted for good reason. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of those had 100 deaths and the other was the world's longest suspension bridge. No opinion on this nom, but those aren't good comparisons. AryKun (talk) 10:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might equally say that one was just a footbridge and the other had no deaths. The best comparison is with the current bottom blurb which would be replaced by this one. That's the Portuguese election which was over two weeks ago and so is longer in the news. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't care if it was a cartoon log over a canyon that collapsed if the number of deaths was 135 in this instance. Great job entering a discussion where people are talking about arguments that diminish "mass casualty events outside Europe and North America" and doing exactly that. AryKun (talk) 14:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the talk page analysis, there's a table of noms. This currently lists 10 disasters/natural disasters. Six of these were in South Asia but none at all in Europe or the US. So, this is the first US one that we've had for a while. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

South Asia has roughly six times the US's population and way more creaky infrastructure, it obviously has more mass casualty events. Just because American newspapers tend to feature American and non-American events as their headline about the same number of times doesn't mean that the US is magically as important as the rest of the world combined. My comment above was specifically about your "just a footbridge" comment; if 135 people died in the Anglosphere because they sank into the sidewalk, you wouldn't be making the same flippant remarks. AryKun (talk) 18:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further discussion continues at another bridge incident: Limpopo bus plunge. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Significant destruction of a major engineering structure with international coverage. Alt1 preferred but either are ok. yorkshiresky (talk) 09:48, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- this is awful. Likely 20 people have fallen in the water and at this point they have likely died of hypothermia. It's horrible. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 10:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - major story which has been given a dedicated live feed on BBC, and with 20+ people missing it's just as presumptuous for us to assume there are no deaths as it is for us to assume there are. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And yet when twenty people are confirmed dead in a transportation accident in the Global South, the usual suspects turn up here with tired arguments about 'bus plunges'. I'm leaning more and more in favour of this story being posted - but let's not kid ourselves that ITN !voters treat all such cases fairly. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's to miss the key thing being noted, which is how atypical such an event is. When striving to take efforts to avoid being tunnel-visioned, one would notice (for instance) that a mass shooting event rarely makes ITN... If it occurred in the United States. However, mass shootings elsewhere on the globe very readily get posted, because they are unusual for those countries. So to prescribe one effect as purely one form of bias is to ignore the reality of the broader picture. Nottheking (talk) 10:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair point. It's certainly not my intention to claim this is a universal problem with a single right solution. I would just like to see some fairness. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support This is definitely a very unusual disaster of high encyclopedic value which sends a clear message that the infrastructure built in the 1970s may not be sufficient to accommodate the current transport needs carried on the modern watercraft.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: it is now clear that this is a major event, and the article is good enough to stand on the front page given the high value of putting the event there. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 11:23, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Article quality is only going to improve and this is very clearly ITN. Kcmastrpc (talk) 11:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. A major and unusual infrastructure disaster, the artticle is in good enough shape already. Nsk92 (talk) 11:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Major piece of infrastructure involved, completely destroyed, and making world headlines. 108.7.44.20 (talk) 11:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Highly unusual event that is receiving widespread global news coverage. Flip^andFlopped ツ 12:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support on notability due to the extreme abnormality of this event. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Abnormal, outstanding event. Article is good. -Bedivere (talk) 13:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Good job on the article, and the international press coverage shows there may be an effect on commerce. Kablammo (talk) 13:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Not only is the impact on shipping and traffic notable, the media seems to be taking this by storm. Gøøse060 (talk) 14:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Per above, Event is notable despite lack of major casualties, Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Major infrastructure collapse. Biggest headline on CNN and BBC. Djprasadian (talk) 14:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support fucking crazy shit Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 14:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Alt 1. Courcelles (talk) 14:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just found out Commons is firewalled at my location's network, so any sysop please feel free to copy over the image, protect, and change to the bridge. Thanks.

  Courcelles (talk) 14:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  You beat me to posting. I've added two bridge images to the protection page. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not opposing the posting, but MUST comment on the international coverage. I'm in Australia. Our media LOVES content from the USA, and LOVES dramatic imagery. This was a certainty to get coverage in Australia's news. That doesn't make it more important than a less dramatic and more deadly event, of which we have no pics, in a third world country. HiLo48 (talk) 22:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can only report on what it is given. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 23:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia must always be vigilant to not allow its systemic biases to get in the way of balanced reporting. HiLo48 (talk) 00:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Can an admin change the image on the mainpage to ? It illustrates the disaster better. Bremps... 23:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add it to the image protection queue (see navbox at top of page) and give a bot about an hour to apply protection. Masem (t) 23:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can't; I don't have enough permissions to edit that page.

Or was that an instruction to an admin? Bremps... 23:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot that the image prot. page is admin protected, and couldn't easily edit it from my phone. The image has since been added and protected, and I have swapped the photo. — Masem (t) 04:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Post-posting support per above. Six people are presumed dead in this bridge collapse. Davey2116 (talk) 04:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Question: should the (presumed) 6 fatalities now be added to the blurb? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think it should be added. Jbvann05 19:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Admins willing to post ITN: Also, this could be asked at WP:ERRORS for a faster response. Natg 19 (talk) 05:01, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's best asked here, it's already been removed from Errors as it's a change to an existing blurb. I personally don't see the need to mention deaths as that number is not something that would normally drive a posting. Stephen 05:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Stephen. In the big scheme of things, the fatalities are not what makes this event notable. Therefore, it's not necessary to expand the blurb for this. Schwede66 07:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thirded, Stephen and Schwede. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Elisabeth Guttenberger

Romani Holocaust survivor and human rights activist. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 04:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support from my perfunctory review, the article is pretty well-sourced & good enough for ITN ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 01:23, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 08:35, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Reviewers needed) RD: Ian Heads

Australian historian, journalist, commentator and author. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 04:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now Aspects of the intro aren’t discussed in the body of the article. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Reviewers needed) RD: Claude Alphandéry

Needs Expansion. Thriley (talk) 13:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - has not been expanded given the time that has lapsed. Staraction (talk | contribs) 00:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Diana Wall

Scientist.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose 2 cn tags, one of them being an entire paragraph without a source and the other being the majority of a paragraph. Also some info in Awards and honors and other activities sections lacking sources. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 19:01, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support I think this is well-sourced now, or at least very close. @MonarchOfTerror could you take another look? gobonobo ^{+ c} 16:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The article looks fine now. Support. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 16:54, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support This article has enough details & references now. Good job gobonobo! Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Günther Leib

Internationally performing baritone, whose death (on 3 March) was entered here only yesterday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support everything looks well sourced and ready to go. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 23:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Senegalese presidential election

Rival candidates have conceded defeat meaning Faye has won BastianMAT (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - I just saw this on NDR's Tagesschau. ITN/R, so if the article is in decent condition, this should go ahead. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Massive feat in Senegalese history. Jebiguess (talk) 16:56, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Article seems to be fully sourced. Gödel2200 (talk) 17:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Looks good and sourced. Terminator46man (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Article seems well-written and well-sourced, marking as Ready. The Kip 18:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Update The associated picture does not reflect the image of the elected President Heatrave (talk) 12:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull. Still very limited results in the article (.3% reporting) and the article states the results are not finalized yet. I believe this posting was a tad premature. DarkSide830 (talk) 23:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Results aren't finalized, but the opposition has conceded defeat and the election is widely reported as a Faye victory. DecafPotato (talk) 00:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Very few of the articles I've read state that he's won, more that he's "projected to", "likely to" or is "expected to" win. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again: The opposition has conceded, as has been widely reported in reliable sources. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Projected to" is generally the bar we use or, more specifically, the fact that reliable sources are calling it. In the US presidential election of 2020, the opposition rather notably did not concede the election, but we still posted once reliable sources projected the win for the Democratic candidate.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm not arguing that we should only post when the opposition concedes. But when it comes to assessing reliable sources for who has won the election, the defeated party saying they're defeated is pretty significant. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is going on? Conceding an election with .3% reporting is bizarre. Is there any more context we can give in the blurb? Bremps... 17:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Incumbent APR party was extremely unpopular due to some pretty blatant corruption, and opposition candidate Faye had some big endorsements, so it was already expected that he was going to win by a landslide. Election was free and fair keeping up with Senegal's strong democratic traditions, nothing unusual here. Curbon7 (talk) 06:04, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) UNSC ceasefire resolution

(Posted) RD: Imogen Stuart

Notable German–Irish sculptor who died aged 96 leaving behind a significant body of work. Page as is is cited, but does need some more expansion which am still working on...will take a day or two. Ceoil (talk) 03:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The article is well-cited and looks ready to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• The article has three citation needed tags. Flibirigit (talk) 15:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks...resolved now. Ceoil (talk) 15:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. I see no issues remaining. Flibirigit (talk) 16:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted—Bagumba (talk) 07:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Marjorie Perloff

Noted Poet.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:10, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Anyone interested in beefing up the single-sentence intro in this wikibio? --PFHLai (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This article has enough details & references now that the intro’s been expanded. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:32, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:49, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Judith Hemmendinger

Centenarian psychologist who helped children survivors of the Holocaust. Found article in fine shape. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:21, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Can someone who can read Hebrew confirm the date of death in the source, please? I cannot find the date of death in the Google-translated version or the online English version. Is there an English source for the date of death? --PFHLai (talk) 19:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I just found this in English, - will add to the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Added, but when I wanted to look if there were details we didn't have yet, I was offered a free trial procedure which I'd like to avoid. I am sure I saw the date at the bottom before that happened. Good luck with the rest, anybody. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks, Gerda. The Telegraph works. The date of death is now confirmed. Hopefully, someone with access can read and add any materials later. With more than 1000 words of prose, this wikibio is more than long enough to qualify. No glaring gaps in coverage of the subject's life. Formatting looks fine. Footnotes can be found at expected spots. Earwig has found no problems. IMO, this wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I didn't go into much depth in reviewing, but the article looks good enough for ITN. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 19:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Stephen 23:47, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takerufuji Mikiya

Article: Takerufuji Mikiya (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Takerufuji Mikiya becomes the first sumo wrestler in 110 years to win a championship in the sport's highest division during his first tournament at that level. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3 (in English) 4, 5 (in Japanese)
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by OtharLuin (talk · give credit)

Rare feat in an ancient sport like sumo, although the tournament was won on March 24. Potentially complicated but at least worth discussing. OtharLuin (talk) 10:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Unfortunately not ITN/R and not really that notable to be ITN-material. TwistedAxe [contact] 10:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Whilst a notable achievement, this doesn't really stand out overall. Our usual ITN story for sumo is the promotion of a new yokozuna. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Not being ITN/R is a plus as that means it's not routine. And it seems to be a once-in-a-century record. It's also a non-Anglo sport which provides some diversity. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:16, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on notability as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose as trivia. Just because something is rare doesn't mean it is important. If he rises to the top of sumo (by becoming yokozuna) then we'll post that. One tournament along the way isn't suitable. Modest Genius ^talk 12:11, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Once-in-a-century achievement, and a good quality article. Would make a refreshing change to highlight something like this at ITN. That there is an ITN/R entry for sumo doesn't preclude us from posting something different once in a while. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per above. This is a rare achievement, but he hasn't become the top of sumo yet. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The oppose votes here seem very circular and gatekeep-y to me. We should not post this to ITN as this is not the kind of thing we post at ITN. In what way does this not meet our purpose? A recent event, getting wide coverage in the media, leading to a substantial, quality update to the encyclopedia. Let me put it this way: would posting this story help or hurt the project? It's a no-brainer. GreatCaesarsGhost 16:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose the essence of this story is an athlete happening to win a major championship the first time they participated in that. That sounds like a happenstance and does not reflect on a career-spanning achievement, which would be a better story for ITN' s purpose. Masem (t) 16:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Most people are destined to die, yet their death is recorded in ITN. I honestly don't see why achieving a feat that hasn't been seen for a century should be disqualifying just because an athlete is doing his job... and on the subject of "career-spanning achievement", I think that, on the contrary, people now remember Takeruufuji precisely because he achieved this performance. - OtharLuin (talk) 17:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Their death is recorded on ITN at the bottom of template in a smaller subsection with a bunch of other names, not at the big list of news that prominently sticks out and you read first, where the target article is bolded and highlighted in an entire sentence amongst the other news. Comparing this blurb nomination to an RD is not right. 2001:4651:F168:0:F55B:64A8:3A9C:A50A (talk) 21:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose as trivia. nableezy - 16:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kuriga kidnapping

Bremps... 23:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The initial kidnapping apparently flew under the radar, but the release is probably also ITN-worthy. A BBC piece (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-68649221) states that the army contested the number of students released (137 instead of 280), but I cannot find this information elsewhere. Bremps... 23:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would also appreciate an altblurb because I apparently suck at writing these things Bremps... 23:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on notability due to the scale of the event being larger than many of the previous kidnappings in the Nigerian bandit conflict. Oppose on quality due to the article being a stub, and having multiple statements in the infobox unsupported elsewhere. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: George Abbey (NASA)

A list of sources is provided. Help is needed to place more citations inline. Flibirigit (talk) 22:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment shouldn't this be George Abbey (engineer)? Bit weird to have a disambiguation after an employer, even if it's a notable one. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• He was notable for being a NASA administrator and his work in US Air Force. I found no notability at all for his work as an engineer. Please see the article's talk page for a previous discussion on his disambiguation qualifier. Flibirigit (talk) 13:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wholly separate from this at ITN, there should be a review of that approach for other NASA staff. That is very atypical of how biographical articles should be disambiguated, which should use their primary occupation (in this case "engineer"). That he worked for NASA would be captured by search matches and the disamguation page. — Masem (t) 22:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment sad to see that he just died. Will get to sourcing work after I complete some schoolwork. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 22:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• No {cn} tags remaining. Time for a re-review, please? --PFHLai (talk) 18:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Alright, it looks pretty much ready. I will note that there are some holes in the article related to some of his more controversial deeds but that shouldn't stop it from appearing at ITN. I will look into doing more serious expansion soon, although real life might postpone that. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 18:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @HistoryTheorist:, you made significant updates to the article. The review needs to come from an uninvolved editor. Flibirigit (talk) 19:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh. I still stand by what I say though. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 23:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Generally support since it seems to have enough details & references for posting, but I’m curious about the holes mentioned by @HistoryTheorist:. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I would have to do a bit more research on this as I'm not sure I have a complete understanding of the situation, but there seems to be complaints about him creating a toxic workplace and showing favoritism and that he would fire those who disagreed with him (among other problems). This Washington Post article seems to offer the most scathing criticism [5] and the books I've read (namely The New Guys by Meredith Baby) seem to highlight flaws in his leadership.

  note: the external link leads to ProQuest so I don't know if you'll have access ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 23:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. We can always add more stuff -- with sources! -- to the wikibio. --PFHLai (talk) 12:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Péter Eötvös

Hungarian composer, conductor and teacher. 240F:7A:6253:1:54D8:C475:B710:FFE (talk) 08:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]