(Posted) RD: Jayanendra Chand Thakuri

Nominator's comments: Nepali actor known for his work in Nepali cinema. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 13:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose pretty stubby for me, what's there appears okay but very brief. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 14:11, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The Rambling Man, I have added more info to the page. The article meets the requirements to be nominated for DYK. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 14:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Weak support it's still short once you eliminate the lead (which only should summarise the article) and the filmog table. But what's there appears to be satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support short but sufficient JW 1961 Talk 16:15, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support: per others, short but what there is looks ok. Some suggestions: (1) It is a pity that nothing is explicitly said about when he was born, although age at death and categorisation do seem to imply a view. (I have seen the talk page discussion.) (2) Given that he apparently became an actor in his 40s, it is a pity that nothing is said about the circumstances. (3) If his first film was in 1982 and his last in 2012, it seems a stretch to say he was "acting for almost four decades". (4) If Jeevan Rekha is a notable work of Nepali cinema, as a talk page commenter seems to suggest, there is (I think) no shame in having a red link to it, particularly if that encouraged someone to create that article. (Although CAPTAIN MEDUSA needs no hinting on content creation, so feel free to ignore.) -- PaulBetteridge (talk) 09:43, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 10:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mady Mesplé

Nominator's comments: Another opera singer of a century. I know there should be more lead, and a few ends lack refs, - could someone who knows French please help? The Figaro ref probably covers more. Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:54, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose as it stands, a lot of the prose is unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The Rambling Man please look again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Support good work, good to go. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:38, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - seems to meet the requirements now, good work on the updates Gerda Arendt. - Indefensible (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – well referenced; looks good to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:41, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 10:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Fabio Lombini

(Posted) RD: Osia Lewis

Nominator's comments: American athlete & coach. - Indefensible (talk) 04:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak supprt pretty much a CV with not much else, but what's there looks alright. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:03, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:04, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Christo

Nominator's comments: Conceptual artist known for large-scale, international spectacle events, many of which are independently notable czar 23:46, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - article has multiple issues which must be addressed before posting. - Indefensible (talk) 23:48, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose on quality alone - the article is long, but it seems to have many issues. By the way, shouldn’t the "Early Life" section be before the "Marriage and Career" section? RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 03:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC) Weak Support - article is in acceptable shape now, but would need some more sourcing to be completely acceptable. RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 04:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Indefensible and RedBulbBlueBlood9911, the article and its tags has been updated, if you'll revisit. To the question, no, the early lives of the artists need not precede their careers, which is the focus of the article. czar 04:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  User:Czar, good work with the updates but still not ready in my opinion, there is much that currently does not look referenced. - Indefensible (talk) 04:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose inline external links and unreferenced awards. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Umm, you mean those two external links, both in the awards section? RedBulbBlueBlood9911|Talk 10:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Umm, yes? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man and Indefensible, after much ado, fully sourced now, if you'll revisit czar 06:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support looks good for a near-iconic artist. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He was quite a wrap star, all right. – Sca (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - good enough now. Ever had a case where you changed your vote on an RD twice? RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 07:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - article looks like it meets the requirements now, good work on the updates. - Indefensible (talk) 15:57, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. 331dot (talk) 20:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Norman Lamm

(Posted) RD: Michel Gauthier

Nominator's comments: Leader of the Official Opposition in Canada from 1996 to 1997. Bloom6132 (talk) 11:33, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 11:43, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support decently referenced short article JW 1961 Talk 15:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - seems to meet the requirements, good work with the updates Bloom6132. - Indefensible (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Note - please see post timing of Jerzy Pilch's entry before bumping him off, or expand list temporarily again. Thanks in advance. - Indefensible (talk) 02:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 03:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Yawovi Agboyibo

Nominator's comments: Prime Minister of Togo. - Indefensible (talk) 05:06, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support one "myth" cn in there. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:12, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support fairly well referenced article but the sentence about the myth should be removed if not cited JW 1961 Talk 15:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Sentence re: myth removed. - Indefensible (talk) 16:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 00:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Nzenze

Nominator's comments: Kenyan musician. - Indefensible (talk) 05:06, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – well referenced. It would be nice though to have a sentence in the prose on his death (when, where, age and perhaps cause if one is given). —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:38, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 00:21, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Hassan Hosny

Nominator's comments: Veteran Egyptian actor and comedian who performed in almost 500 films, plays and TV shows over a 50+ year career. Well-known in the Arab World. Droodkin (talk) 13:25, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose filmography unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 19:23, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have adjusted the section accordingly and hope for a second look. Droodkin (talk) 23:16, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Both WP:ELP and WP:CITINGIMDB state that you cannot use IMDb as a reliable source. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:28, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Stale Stephen 23:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Elsa Dorfman

 Bloom6132 (talk) 12:27, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support one perm dead ref which needs to be replaced, otherwise satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 19:24, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support added another source where requested above, looks good JW 1961 Talk 21:09, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support I changed one section header, but I'm not attached. Nice looking bio. Kingsif (talk) 21:35, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 22:52, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• @Spencer, Stephen, and Black Kite: I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:15, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bobby Morrow

 Bloom6132 (talk) 02:43, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 19:26, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above JW 1961 Talk 21:11, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - seems to meet the requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 22:37, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• @Spencer, Stephen, and Black Kite: I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 05:38, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Crew Dragon

Article: Crew Dragon Demo-2 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ SpaceX's Crew Dragon and Falcon 9 make their first crewed launch (pictured) for NASA. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ SpaceX's Crew Dragon makes its first crewed launch (pictured) for NASA aboard Falcon 9.
News source(s): NYT; BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Andrew Davidson (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.

Nominator's comments: The hatch is closed and the countdown running but the weather is not looking good again.... Andrew🐉(talk) 18:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support article is fine, assuming she goes up only a tense update keeps this off the main page. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Weather looks good so far. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 18:56, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose even if it launches As someone who works in the space industry, this is a huge fucking deal for it, but I'm unsure as to its impact outside of the space industry or the United States. Perhaps something like a Moon return/crewed Mars landing might be better for us. I won't particularly mind being overturned by consensus though, and have added an altblurb. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:06, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Manned spaceflight is on WP:ITNR which means it gets an automatic pass for notability --LaserLegs (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hopefully that'll change this decade (since it'll be too common), but duly noted. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, unless it's called off in the next 2 minutes. We might want to find a way to note that it's the first private launch rather than calling out the specific company. ((u|Sdkb)) ^talk 19:22, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support it's happening Wqwt (talk) 19:22, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 19:26, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted For changes and updated photos go to WP:ERRORS - Fuzheado | Talk 19:34, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Change blurb to a more topical one that notes of its importance; "The first crewed orbital mission launched from the United States in nine years commences, with SpaceX's Crew Dragon for NASA". Also swap the featured image with the higher quality File:SpaceX Demo-2 Launch (NHQ202005300041).jpg – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 01:16, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would oppose that change given that it's a bit US-centric (I am aware of the "Please do not..." section on the matter, but still) compared to the current blurb. I have no opinion regarding the photos. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:19, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @John M Wolfson: Isn't that what makes it uniquely newsworthy than most human spaceflights, though? ITN is usually stuck-up about items having to be uniquely newsworthy, so being the first American crewed orbital spaceflight in nearly a decade seems to fit that bill. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 01:27, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • While that's true (and would itself be noteworthy), the newsworthiness derives from this being SpaceX's first crewed flight, which is in of itself a huge deal in the commercial space industry and thereby more globally than the US; besides, even if the ITN pedants complained about this (as I did earlier), crewed spaceflight is ITNR. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:31, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • The blurb is absolutely fine as it is. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:12, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • The blurb is very confusing. I had no idea who SpaceX or NASA was until I clicked the link, only to find out that once again they're in the US which is a great Satan where nothing interesting ever happens. How can I know to oppose and complain about a nom without reading the articles or understanding the subject unless it's clearly labeled "in the US"? --LaserLegs (talk) 21:53, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
            • I think the fact that the article is at NASA means the initialism is well understood, perhaps not by you but by the vast majority of readers. The nationalities of this "story" are completely irrelevant. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Shahine Robinson

Nominator's comments: Jamaican politician. - Indefensible (talk) 05:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support last sentence of prose is unreferenced, the rest satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 14:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last ref covers that, moved it to the end of the para. - Indefensible (talk) 16:37, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 00:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jerzy Pilch

Nominator's comments: Polish author & journalist. - Indefensible (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – there's still one paragraph and the second last sentence unreferenced. Also, the three books that do not have ISBNs should be referenced some other way. —Bloom6132 (talk) 14:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Bloom6132, unreferenced items have been removed. - Indefensible (talk) 16:41, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – looks like it meets requirements now. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Stephen 23:30, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Maikanti Baru

Nominator's comments: Nigerian oil marketer, former chief of state oil company. – Ammarpad (talk) 06:02, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support article just about long enough. I would move the sentence on the death though. Juxlos (talk) 06:35, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose Limited depth of coverage. His role as Group Managing Director of NNPC seems important; what did he do in that role? Spencer^T•C 15:04, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Now stale. Black Kite (talk) 10:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Twin Cities riots

New blurb posted, item bumped, issues with it can go to WP:ERRORS --LaserLegs (talk) 09:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

---

Articles: Twin Cities riots (talk · history · tag) and Death of George Floyd (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the United States, protests and riots (pictured) break out following the death of George Floyd during a police arrest in Minneapolis. (Post)
News source(s): WaPo, Yahoo!, BBC, France24, AP, Mpls. Star-Tribune
Credits:

• Nominated by Nice4What (talk · give credit)
• Created by Mccunicano (talk · give credit)

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: International coverage, notable development. Though there is a proposed rename, it seems to be closing soon. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 15:57, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - would normally not support this straight away, but this is extraordinary events and escalations.BabbaQ (talk) 16:00, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Question isn't this in the box already? Are you seeking a blurb update? --LaserLegs (talk) 16:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, I'm proposing to add the riots to the blurb. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:46, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support the blurb update. Feels like the riots have overshadowed the murder itself in coverage. Juxlos (talk) 16:33, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support a worthy story(ies) for blurbing. ——Serial ^# 16:49, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support the confluence not only of the riots, but the arrests of the CNN crew, Trump's response which Twitter flagged tied to Section 230 stuff - all literally overnight - its a mess and agreed now this is much larger than the actual death issue. --Masem (t) 16:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support but some of the details in the the Death of George Floyd article should be trimmed. There is pretty significant duplication in both articles. TJMSmith (talk) 16:56, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - It is notable for inclusion. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 18:00, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:45, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted—Bagumba (talk) 19:57, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting comment – Does the name Philando Castile ring a bell, by any chance? – Sca (talk) 22:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Update – Fired police officer Derek Chauvin charged with murder, manslaughter in George Floyd death. – Sca (talk) 22:17, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which is true, but the protests are the news item not the police brutality nor the charges against the officer. No need to update the blurb. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:31, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also remember: we usually only post on conviction, not arrest. --Masem (t) 05:43, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Update as the protests (and rioting) seem to have spread to other cities across the US (AP reports clashes in Atlanta and NYC), should this link to the national-leval article George Floyd protests instead? Juxlos (talk) 05:34, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The protest article is not in good shape to be linked, but I have devised a solution by bringing some of the most notable/worst cases of those incidents into the riots article so that the highlighted article is covering them, so that we not buried the nationwide violence going on in the main topic story. --Masem (t) 05:43, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Absolutely no media mention where I come from of "Twin Cities". What is that? Described exclusively as being "Minneapolis". Any chance we can change this to a more globally recognisable name? Because "Twin Cities" simply isn't in the news here. HiLo48 (talk) 05:49, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  That is a comment for Talk:Twin Cities riots where several RM discussions are taking place — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:02, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  No it's not. That page is a mess, with all sorts of RM discussions (as you say) and none of them to what I'm suggesting. We can fix this bit ourselves. I checked all the sources at the top of this nomination. The first is paywalled, so I have no idea what it says, but all the others describe these riots as being in Minneapolis. No mention of Twin Cities. Minneapolis Riots is already a redirect to Twin Cities riots. For clarity, can we simply change the title of this section to Minneapolis riots? (How did this ever get the name Twin Cities riots in the first place? It obviously doesn't reflect the sources.) HiLo48 (talk) 08:52, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  A cursory search for "Twin Cities riots" give 25.6 million results, "Minneapolis riots" give 161 million. Juxlos (talk) 09:12, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I have attempted a reword of the blurb (comments invited) but I can't unilaterally move the article. That will have to wait for the RM to conclude. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Stale) RD: Abderrahmane Youssoufi

Nominator's comments: Moroccan lawyer, politician, former PM of Morocco, socialist activist and of other causes. On the short side, but sourced. ^_^ CoryGlee (talk) 12:47, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Well-referenced. Hanamanteo (talk) 17:01, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Insufficient coverage of the subject's political career; article is essentially a resume in prose format. His work as PM is summarized as "His government provided greater freedoms for the people and media", which is pretty vague IMO. Spencer^T•C 17:54, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's sadly true. CoryGlee (talk) 18:55, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Now stale. Black Kite (talk) 10:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Ajit Jogi

Nominator's comments: First Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:28, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Has some but not complete referencing; has a general list of political positions and committees without depth of coverage regarding what the subject did in those roles. Controversies section shows some depth of coverage but isn't really balanced by what the subject did as a politician (and thus could possibly be UNDUE, but due to the limited detail elsewhere in the article). Spencer^T•C 21:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Now stale. Black Kite (talk) 10:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Peter Alexander (artist)

Nominator's comments: Died on May 26, but his death was only first reported on May 28. Bloom6132 (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support pretty well referenced and updated article JW 1961 Talk 18:27, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose Limited depth of coverage of the subject; article seems to be essentially a resume in prose format, with a mild scattering of additional details. Would like to know about the artists' themes in his work. Spencer^T•C 21:45, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Spencer: Alright, I've started a new "Themes" section. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:30, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Marking ready. Spencer^T•C 01:36, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. No objection after being ready for 14 hours, so posting. Spencer^T•C 15:03, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decision on Hong Kong national security legislation

 — RealFakeKimT 10:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I think "pass…a law" should really read "approved a decision to draft and enact a [whatever] law", since the decision, as noted on the talk page, is not the law. Also, surely "autonomous from", not "autonomous to"? Docentation (talk) 10:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I have addressed your concerns. Thank you for the feedback. — RealFakeKimT 10:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Question What does "agree to a decision to draft and enact" mean in China? Is the law on the books today or not? --LaserLegs (talk) 11:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The decision authorises a separate body to start writing the actual law. It isn't really in and of itself much of a law in the ordinary sense; we can think of it more as a statement of intent, albeit one with legal effect. The national security law that will follow hasn't even been written yet. Docentation (talk) 11:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• When do government agencies start to carry out the intent of the law? Now, or when it's enacted? --LaserLegs (talk) 11:25, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• When it's enacted. There may also be new government agencies established, but, again, those will be created after the enactment of the law. Docentation (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• In that case I'm leaning more towards wait for it to actually come into force, or if it's posted now then to not post it again as it moves through the legislative process --LaserLegs (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hm, interesting suggestion. Perhaps you're right—maybe we should wait. I think the furore itself might be worth covering, but that's not as clear cut. (Obviously in that case my initial alt. IV is fairly unhelpful, so I'll change it.) Docentation (talk) 18:11, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Oppose in it's current state 2/3 of the article is "background" and "responses" filler and while some domestic responses are pertinent, a lot of it is just fluff. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:04, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I should say that the background/legal authority section is not just about background, and most of it in fact is pretty directly germane to the decision, in that it concerns whether or not the decision was constitutionally permissible. I agree that much of the "response" section is fluff, but at least the US international response section is probably worth including, in that more than words could follow. Docentation (talk) 11:32, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• That Dotard and his lackeys would use any excuse they can to antagonize the PRC should surprise no one. The US has zero credibility in this regard. I retract my objection to the background section, upon reflection, you are correct. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I've cleaned up the reaction section quite a bit. I wouldn't say it was fluff so much as inflated—I think it was more that undue weight was given to it, in that that section was far too long. I've cut it down so that now it's clear that many countries have opposed it without having to duplicate mostly fairly similar statements for each. And yes, as for the Trump stuff, it seems quite probable that there will be more than words here, and the conflict will escalate quite a bit, so it is worth leaving in the different steps—decertification of autonomy, proposals to impose sanctions, etc.—though I did remove some duplication and Trump asking exactly what was going on in his usual, er, bombastic fashion; we now have better idea from his officials of what exactly will be done. Docentation (talk) 16:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The proposed blurbs are too arcane - which I suppose is residue of the Chinese legislative process. The only think concrete at this stage is Pompeo's decertification - that might be a good way to position. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• GreatCaesarsGhost So would you be more comftuble with something like United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo informed Congress that Hong Kong was no longer autonomous from China (Im guessing Hong Kong would be the target article in that case) — RealFakeKimT 13:18, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, except the target would still need to be the law... it's tricky. GreatCaesarsGhost 00:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Agree that the suggested blurbs are too diffuse and prolix (as is the title of this nom.). Most of the mainstream coverage I've seen hangs its hat on a simple idea – usually the move to "make insulting China’s national anthem a criminal offense" (Time). – Sca (talk) 13:28, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The National Anthem Bill and the national security decision are two separate things that shouldn't be conflated. Docentation (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support in principle but the blurbs are lengthy (the protests should not be bolded, for example) and the quality of the articles is subpar. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 14:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support in principle, not a big fan of the blurbs though. Needs something more concise, something that's both not too long and yet clarifies what's at stake. Rami R 15:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added alt3 as a concise alternative; please tweak if the phrasing is inaccurate. Kingsif (talk) 16:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Made it more neutral as it doesn't do that on paper but probably will in practices. — RealFakeKimT 17:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• It's enacted, or they've decided to draft legislation? --LaserLegs (talk) 17:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @LaserLegs: I didn't see this question yet: the decision is a legal decision saying China is allowing itself to make a law (that Hong Kong's Basic Law says only Hong Kong should be able to). So they've enacted that bit of legal text, and can in the future can use it to pass a security law. I don't think they've yet decided to draft legislation, but the point is they're deconstructing Hong Kong's independent laws. Kingsif (talk) 21:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment yet another alternative, hopefully sufficiently clear, but more accurate. Docentation (talk) 18:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait. This is a significant story with major implications for Hong Kong's autonomy, but all that has happened so far is the rubber-stamping of permission to draft a security law that the central government is threatening to impose. If/when that law is actually completed and imposed on Hong Kong, that will be a major development worth posting in ITN. Mere formalities around the drafting process are not. We should wait until the law is implemented or there are major public protests (minor ones have begun). Modest Genius ^talk 18:18, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note that given China's political system, this would not be occurring if there was any chance the government would reject this effort. Their legislature is a rubber-stamp body. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to that, I should say that the US reaction is possibly newsworthy. Docentation (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, that's the point. The decision had already been taken privately; the NPC vote is just a rubber-stamp. Why post the stage that was never in any doubt? Modest Genius ^talk 20:25, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

China has a habit of doing this sort of thing in an incremental way that prevents people from taking note until it's all over. When would you have it posted? GreatCaesarsGhost 00:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above: when the law actually comes into force, or when large-scale protests erupt. ITN's role is to post important events, not minor ones that seem to be a step on the way to something significant. Modest Genius ^talk 11:31, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - For now. The law is not in effect yet. Until that happens I don’t see a reason to post.BabbaQ (talk) 08:46, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Until actually enacted. Gotitbro (talk) 01:36, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Agree this is a news item to post once it is enacted, but it does not appear to be close to that at this point. --Masem (t) 01:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Article is tagged and under review at DRN. It's a well-covered topic that would be posted quickly here but for wont of a suitable article. The comment above, to the effect that subject's political system operates incrementally and thus necessarily never affords a watershed moment for posting, is spot on. "Wait" is the wrong response, but the article has to be at least free of tags. Edit history suggests that article could use some pp.130.233.2.88 (talk) 07:07, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment—in view of developments a few hours ago I have altered Alt. IV. Also, I think the article has now been cleaned up to a reasonable extent. The reaction section is fairly short and concise, especially in the statements subsection. Most of the space is dedicated to actual policy responses. The factual accuracy dispute has been resolved. The earlier background/legal authority section mostly concerns whether the decision's proposals are constitutional, so aren't just about earlier developments. Docentation (talk) 22:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support (alt. IV)—suspension of HK trade status is reasonably impactful. There is an article about the thing that triggered this (the decision to draft and enact the law), and there is something reasonably newsworthy. Docentation (talk) 22:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Paul Shrubb

Nominator's comments: English football player and manager, seems a decently referenced little article JW 1961 Talk 21:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Short but sufficient.BabbaQ (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Biff Pocoroba

Nominator's comments: Died on May 24, but his death was only first reported on May 27. Bloom6132 (talk) 17:47, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Seems ready for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 20:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Short but well referenced article JW 1961 Talk 21:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:19, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sam Johnson

Nominator's comments: US congressman who served in both the Korean War and the Vietnam War. Bloom6132 (talk) 03:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose one or two citations missing and a few inline external links which need to be converted to references or moved to the "External links" section. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:38, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @The Rambling Man: Fixed – added a couple of citations, converted the inline external links into refs, and removed an unsourced statement that turned out to be false. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Cool, support. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as it is now a pretty well referenced article JW 1961 Talk 11:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 12:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Crew Dragon

Closing as the launch was scrubbed. Can be renominated when the launch occurs. 331dot (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

---

Article: Dragon 2 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ SpaceX's Crew Dragon (pictured) makes its first manned launch for NASA (Post)
News source(s): BBC; CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by Andrew Davidson (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.

Nominator's comments: I'm watching the countdown and feeling the excitement of the original space race. Coverage such as the BBC example is calling this a historic new era. The outcome remains to be seen but we should be getting an entry ready. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: @Andrew Davidson: we should focus on Crew Dragon Demo-2 as the target article in bold. It needs a little bit of work but we have an hour and half. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 19:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• That's fine by me. The exact details and blurb may need amendment if the launch doesn't go to plan. If it's aborted then we'd probably have to leave it for now but we shall see. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I agree; the article on this launch specifically should be the target article.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Put it up tomorrow if we can, today's launch has been scrubbed. Neverbuffed (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Scrubbed at T -16, alas. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest close without prejudice and renominating on launch. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:20, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Crew Dragon Demo-2 is decent, few CN tags I added but even without refs the passages aren't scandalous. A bit proseline-y and we should wait until the actual launch before posting (which I admit is in 15 minutes) due to the possibility of a weather related scrub. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Posted) RD: Larry Kramer

Nominator's comments: American playwright and LGBT rights activist dies at age 84. Non-COVID. Davey2116 (talk) 15:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose There are cite tags to take care of. P-K3 (talk) 17:26, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support He was one of the most important activists in the AIDS Crisis in the US. Fwiw, I'll spend some time on fixing refs over the next few hours. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk; please ((ping)) me in replies) 19:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Needs fixing of a few ((cn)) tags, otherwise appears fine. Gotitbro (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I've tagged it, plenty of unreferenced material in there, including awards.... The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support once the citation tags are addressed. Would consider a blurb. TJMSmith (talk) 00:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support He founded ACT UP and was a crucial HIV+/AIDS activist. Open to a blurb-TenorTwelve (talk) 06:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment there are still quite a few cn's in there, will support when fixed JW 1961 Talk 11:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes there's quite a long way to do quality-wise. It's all very well people saying they want a blurb, but the article needs to be fixed first.-- P-K3 (talk) 12:42, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I've provided refs for all the remaining ((cn)) notes that hadn't already been caught. (Kudos to Sunshineisles2, Bmclaughlin9, All Hallow's Wraith and Ryn AAPB in pticlr for their work in the last 24 hours.) I'm sure there will be other aspects of the article that can be improved before it could go to WP:GAN, but I'd suggest it might be good enough for ITN now? — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk; please ((ping)) me in replies) 22:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC) (PingingP-K3 and The Rambling Man, for updated feedback.)[reply]
• Support Now properly referenced, it certainly meets the ITN standard. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 22:56, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:59, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Irm Hermann

Nominator's comments: Another German actress, Fassbinder's confidante (19 of his films), and much more on stage, in film and TV. Better obits came only today, please have mercy regarding the date ;) - stubby thing needed expansion first. Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, looks good now. --Clibenfoart (talk) 08:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: agree - life and work described; adequately supported by range of sources -- PaulBetteridge (talk) 09:53, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marking ready, cannot see a lack of consensus -- PaulBetteridge (talk) 14:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you for adding a lot, especially films! Added to updaters. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:30, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Posted. El_C 18:06, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Prahlad Jani

Nominator's comments: Minor copyediting may required. Nizil (talk) 11:21, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Life described; adequately sourced. A reasonable balance seems to have been achieved on some extraordinary claims. Some minor copyediting has been done. -- PaulBetteridge (talk) 12:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marking ready, even if I am the only person to have read it -- PaulBetteridge (talk) 14:22, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. Spencer^T•C 00:29, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Arumugam Thondaman

Nominator's comments: Former Sri Lankan Minister Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Stephen 04:17, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Costa Rica marriage equality

Nominator's comments: Nominating for something new to the now-stale box. I know we don't really post 'new country allows same-sex marriage', and that the first in Central America isn't that impressive. And that it has only come into effect after being passed in 2018. But... it's happy, and recent. Kingsif (talk) 23:49, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Oppose Article has a good explanation of the context for the delays following the ruling in 2018. Would like to see a little more reaction to the recent events. Spencer^T•C 00:21, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose as the 28th country to legalise is rather unremarkable. Stephen 05:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It is the first country in Central America with marriage equality -TenorTwelve (talk) 06:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support if the legalisation of same-sex marriage in Taiwan was in the news in 2019 for being the first country in Asia to do so, I don't see why it wouldn't apply for the first country in another region to do so. Nahnah4 (talk | contribs) 06:34, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The regionalism of acceptance must be noted - check out the maps here. Central America, Africa and Asia are dead zones. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Stephen. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support it's in the news, the article is interesting and is good enough to post. Ticks enough boxes. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:18, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support If it was nth country in Europe I’d oppose, but I think first in a continent Central America is significant. Article looks good. P-K3 (talk) 11:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Pawnkingthree: - continent? starship.paint (talk) 11:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I misinterpreted it as being first in Central or South America, sorry.-- P-K3 (talk) 12:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - first in Central America is remarkable. starship.paint (talk) 11:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Stephen and TRM.--WaltCip (talk) 12:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - historic first time.BabbaQ (talk) 12:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support first in Central America. Article is well sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 13:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. First in Central America, and our article is good. Davey2116 (talk) 14:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - article is good and this is an important milestone. Neutrality^talk 14:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose good news, but not particularly remarkable. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 14:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, still a major piece of news, especially since Costa Rica is a majority Catholic country. Nsk92 (talk) 14:52, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Central America is not known for their support of same-sex marriage, even with the IACHR nudging them in that direction at the request of Costa Rica, so this is definitely historic for the region. Nihlus 15:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - such a privileged position to call this "unremarkable". Rami R 15:19, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It is rather unusual for the region and is a major piece of news, I don't see the harm in adding it. The article is up to standard as well. Spengouli (talk) 17:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Ready Clear consensus, article is fine. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:56, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support in principle, needs a better blurb. We're long past the stage when every country that legalises same-sex marriage should be in ITN, but this is a regional first and we do have a lack of other stories during the pandemic. However, 'marriage equality' is a very bad way of phrasing the blurb - make sure it's clear this is same-sex marriage we're talking about. I expected the article to have a more substantial update, but as this has been scheduled since 2018 I suppose that's allowable. Modest Genius ^talk 18:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support For the first time in Central America. Hanamanteo (talk) 18:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted tweaked blurb in line with suggestions by Modest Genius — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Christian Mbulu

 The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:26, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Was just about to nominate this myself now people have updated it and added more sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:51, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – well referenced. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:52, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment has been ready for 12 hours. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:24, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Anthony Bailey (author)

Nominator's comments: Died on May 13, but his death was only first reported on May 26. Bloom6132 (talk) 05:14, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose alles in Ordnung other than the list of publications is not referenced. ISBNs are fine, but many don't have those. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:46, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @The Rambling Man: Added ISBNs for the ones that have them. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• @The Rambling Man: all the other publications are now referenced. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for the moment. Very first ref on spot check was a dead link (6, now tagged). Will come back to this later.130.233.3.56 (talk) 07:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @130.233.3.56: I've removed ref 6. The lead does not need to have citations, and the information is already cited later on in the article (the NYT obit above at ref 10). —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Post-posting striking my oppose. Good work.130.233.2.88 (talk) 06:47, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support Intro has info that could be better put in the body of the article (e.g. names of his children), but should be more or less good to go. Marking ready. Spencer^T•C 13:51, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Spencer: Alright, I just moved the names of his children to the body and added a ref for that (since specific names aren't mentioned in the existing ref provided). —Bloom6132 (talk) 14:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment has been ready for 8 hours. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:24, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Spencer^T•C 21:36, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Stanley Ho

Nominator's comments: known as King of Gambling, one of Asia's richest Man and easily one of the most recognizable figures in Hong Kong, Macau and Asia Dps04 (talk) 06:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Some remaining CN tags as well as a resume style position list (Stanley_Ho#Positions_held) that's almost entirely uncited. Spencer^T•C 19:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have fixed the citation needed tags, and improved the overall citations of the article. --Dps04 (talk) 06:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The article looks good and meet the requirements --Tensa Februari (talk) 08:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:07, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting support Significant COVID death, face of gambling in Macau. Gotitbro (talk) 20:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Renate Krößner

Nominator's comments: Actress from East Berlin who - as Solo Sunny - won the first Berlinale award for anything from the East in 1980. - Stub expanded and referenced more. As usual, there's more detail in the sources, feel free. I interrupted work with a deadline. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Ready to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Death of George Floyd

Article: Death of George Floyd (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Protests break out following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, US. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Four police officers are fired and protests occur following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, US.
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
• Created by AshMusique (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Starship.paint (talk · give credit), Gobonobo (talk · give credit) and Kire1975 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Feel free to propose alternate blurbs or post as RD. The blurb I proposed is taken from the discussion below. TJMSmith (talk) 23:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Per Wikipedia:In_the_news/Recent_deaths#Blurbs_for_recent_deaths (specifically "Death as the main story"), I think this should be a blurb nomination rather than for RD. Spencer^T•C 03:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Unfortunately, I do not think that George Floyd's death is so significant until it warrants a blurb. starship.paint (talk) 06:07, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  After my above comment, protests outside Minneapolis have sharply increased the event's significance. starship.paint (talk) 08:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Given wide international coverage of event and subsequent protests. Spencer^T•C 03:32, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The instructions for RD blurbs leave the possibility open. However, the examples given in the instructions presume that the subject was notable beyond the death itself, and that the death should be unusual, or otherwise require explanation. For a BLP1E, the E being death, I think the suitable avenue is a regular blurb. What did we do for Freddy Grey et al? Additionally, the article is written as an event article, not a BLP. I humbly suggest that an admin convert this to a regular blurb nom.130.233.3.56 (talk) 07:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose RD per protocol and oppose blurb per standard police brutality outcomes, nothing really novel here. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Of course, if the "riots" escalate to any real level of significance, and someone proposes a newsworthy blurb, and it has encyclopedic value and longevity and relevance to an encyclopedia rather than just being a tabloid report of yet more disgust at American racist police brutality, I would re-consider. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:30, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support blurb If we judge that the event itself is not significant enough to warrant a blurb, then it would seem to follow that the decedent does not have sufficient notability to get an RD (per BLP1E). I think the circumstances here are a little beyond standard, and the article is good. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Not eligible for RD as it is an event, and I don’t support a blurb. P-K3 (talk) 12:14, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - It's really a shame. Unfortunately, police brutality events in the U.S. are almost as common as mass shootings there.--WaltCip (talk) 13:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Nothing remarkable comes out of the US. It's the most boring place there is. More things happen in Antarctica, hell Ganymede has more remarkable shit going on there. Mass shootings, cops killing African-Americans, hurricanes, blizzards, 100k people watching unpaid amateurs pass a football with their bare hands live, LeBron's hairline receding, those things happen everyday. When is the next European election? Next month? Lovely. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I'll get my violin. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment it's at all the main national news sources in the Netherlands (I live in the Netherlands). NOS NU.nl, AD.nl, Parool. So I assume in all/most other countries. SportsOlympic (talk) 13:23, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't have any problem with arguments that this is not significant enough, but suggestions that police brutality is commonplace are missing the point. It is the specific circumstances at play that make it significant, and those are very unique here. I cannot think of another occurrence (even Garner) where the evidence of wrongdoing was so clear, nor the action against the killers so swift. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:45, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support either RD (WP:IAR) or blurb. This is newsworthy and we have a decent article. I strongly disagree with the notion that just because a tragedy is "commonplace", we shouldn't post the highest-profile cases. This is getting attention all over the world for how clearly wrongful the officers' actions were, and their quick firing (compared to the Garner case). Davey2116 (talk) 15:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support RD — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Protests have started breaking out, maybe you guys might want to consider placing a blurb like "Protests break out in Minneapolis after the death of George Floyd". And the point here is not police brutality being commonplace – it's about the notability. This incident has been splashed all over the news on an international scale, you can't deny that it is huge. Nahnah4 (talk | contribs) 17:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb. The death of George Floyd and the resulting protests are receiving significant coverage in the U.S. especially, but also internationally (Reuters), including in the UK (BBC, The Guardian, The Independent), France (France 24, Le Monde), Spain (El Mundo, El País), and South Korea (The Dong-a Ilbo, Kyunghyang Shinmun). —Matthew - (talk) 19:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Which blurb are you supporting? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:25, 27 May 2020 (UTC)\[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Something along the lines of "Protests break out following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota." —Matthew - (talk) 22:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. But those "protests" obviously aren't convenient in the evenings, nothing substantial right? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:31, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Upon re-reading my idea for a blurb, I think what I wrote places too much emphasis on the ensuing protests. I think the death of George Floyd is the primary topic of interest here, rather than the protests. I was just trying to come up with a blurb with wording that didn't make it seem as though the reader is supposed to already know who Floyd is (see Kingsif's comment). Perhaps something like "Four police officers are fired and protests occur following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota" would be preferable. —Matthew - (talk) 00:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

With further protests occurring and a blurb about the situation now posted in ITN, my above comment has become outdated. —Matthew - (talk) 19:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Changed to weak support - Well, based on the international sources listed here, the rest of the world seems to have taken an extraordinary interest in this particular story. I'll only support this as a blurb, of course, not as an RD. Someone needs to come up with a blurb and adjust the template appropriately.--WaltCip (talk) 19:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  It's dropped off the BBC in favour of SpaceX scrub, Cummings, and test/track/trace. It was only a byline at best. Perhaps the UK are more aware of such police brutality and it doesn't strike the UK as abnormal to see this happening there? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:27, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I nominated this as a RD but I'm not opposed to other editors changing this template/proposing possible blurbs. Feel free to adjust. TJMSmith (talk) 22:07, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb almost unconditionally: just make sure it isn't 'George Floyd is killed by police' or similar as if the reader is supposed to already know who he is. Kingsif (talk) 23:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• RD only, oppose blurb per TRM remarks on BBC and precedent. Not even the acquittal of George Zimmerman nor the first wave of unrest / protests in Ferguson MO were posted, and those were two heralding events in BLM. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 23:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I find it a little concerning that certain significant incidents of police brutality were not approved for placement in ITN in the past. Looking back at the archives, I was surprised to learn that not even the death of Eric Garner in 2014 was approved to be posted. Editors who weighed in as opposition on the matter used terms like "parochial" to describe the event and called its nomination "ridiculous", with one editor writing that it was "Hard to believe this was nominated". The shooting of Michael Brown that same year was only approved after a grand jury declined to indict the police officer responsible for his death, and even then, many editors were hesitant about its approval. One editor wrote that Michael Brown's death and the ensuing riots in Ferguson would not be "something we will all remember in a month/year/decade". Well, over five years have passed since those events, and many people still remember them. It's one thing to counter systemic bias by highlighting news with a non-American perspective. I think it's another thing to consistently ignore the ongoing significance of police brutality and racism in the United States. —Matthew - (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Tragic event but unfortunately also routine with no distinctive impact. The police officers were fired, as one would hope and charges may be/likely to be forthcoming Bumbubookworm (talk) 00:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now. It doesn't meet the level of newsworthiness as another unfortunate even that was posted. If it becomes something more, it should be reevaluated then. Nihlus 00:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support It seems to have become something more rather quickly. Nihlus 13:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Suport Protests have turned violent and the event has gained international media attention.[3] Mccunicano☕️ 03:21, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – The protests have turned unusually violent. This appears to be notable enough for ITN. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 04:19, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support As above. I enjoy sandwiches (talk) 04:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The blurb does not state the country in which "Minneapolis" or "Minnesota" are located. Chrisclear (talk) 05:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chrisclear: Fixed. —Matthew - (talk) 05:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

•  Posted — Global headline coverage of event, meets ITN criteria, and sufficient consensus exists to post this. As always, continued civil discussion on the topic is welcome. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 05:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting support: Significant news coverage on both national and regional US new sources as well as global news sources. —Shrinkydinks (talk) 05:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting comment: The section Death_of_George_Floyd#Memorials,_protests,_and_riots has been split into 2020 Twin Cities riots. As several users noted, the significant part of this event is the public reaction. As such, I believe the word "protests" in the blurb should wikilink to 2020 Twin Cities riots: In the United States, protests (pictured) break out following the death of George Floyd during a police arrest in Minneapolis. userdude 07:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I will stress: that split is far too early in this process. Maybe we'll need it, but not yet, there's no size issue. --Masem (t) 07:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm inclined to agree; however, seeing as the article has already been split, the content from both articles ought to be accessible from the main page. I don't see the relevance of the appropriateness of the split. An inappropriate split should not be an excuse to let content be sequestered away. userdude 07:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • The protests are not limited to the Twin Cities. Stephen 07:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Doesn't matter, because now if you are going to talk two separate articles, we have to consider the quality of both and there's far too much overlap of these at this time. This is why people need to not worry about adding every little detail ("hyperreporting") that goes one. That there are riots going on, but level of detail is far far too great. Big picture focus is necessary, at this point. If these protests go on for weeks, well after this has dropped off ITN or we've changed the blurb, then a split makes sense. But right not ,half the riot article is being used to cover the death, again, and possibly get away from the protections that were on the death page. --Masem (t) 08:13, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Burundian general election

Article: 2020 Burundian general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Evariste Ndayishimiye (pictured) is elected President of Burundi, and his CNDD–FDD party wins a majority of seats in the National Assembly. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Sheila1988 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Number 57 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Sputink (talk · give credit)

Article updated
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.

Nominator's comments: Presidential and parliamentary elections of a sovereign state should be in ITN by default. Sheila1988 (talk) 10:07, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The results of general elections in all states on the List of sovereign states are WP:ITN/R. TompaDompa (talk) 16:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Oppose Article is pretty close overall, it just lacks a prose summary of the results. NorthernFalcon (talk) 21:55, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Sheila1988 They are. :) Assuming an update is made.331dot (talk) 22:13, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bucky Baxter

Nominator's comments: Pedal steel guitarist who toured with Bob Dylan in the 90s. Bloom6132 (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Article seems well-cited throughout, suitable update. Kingsif (talk) 01:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support looks alright, a little on the light side, but what's there is ok. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Balbir Singh Sr.

(Posted) RD: Jimmy Cobb

Nominator's comments: American famous jazz drummer. --SirEdimon ^Dimmi!!! 18:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Spencer, Stephen, and Black Kite: I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:44, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Yes, looks good to go.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:02, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 19:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: June A. Willenz

Nominator's comments: Died on May 3, but her death was only first reported on May 24. Bloom6132 (talk) 23:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I support this nomination. Additionally this specific obituary is currently the most prominent one on the New York Times obituary section. [4] Chess (talk) (please use ((ping|Chess)) on reply) 02:51, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• support - Ready for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 08:54, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted—Bagumba (talk) 09:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Pakistan High Court orders to release Kaavan

(Posted) RD: Saturn

Nominator's comments: Famous alligator. Born in Mississippi in 1936, he was brought to the Berlin Zoological Garden, where he was visited and reportedly enjoyed by Adolf Hitler. Survived the 1943 bombing of the aquarium building, being one of only 96 survivors out of Berlin Zoo's 16,000 animals. Was discovered by British soldiers in 1946, who handed him over to the Red Army, which transported him to Moscow and brought him to live at the Moscow Zoo. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 12:49, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• An update of the death with a source is needed in the article.BabbaQ (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  BabbaQ There was actually a Russian source in the lead section, but I’ve added an English source to the biography section. P-K3 (talk) 23:09, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]