Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/August 2020

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form; any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

(Posted) RD: John Thompson

 *  Oppose  Multiple outstanding CN's and a few unsourced, untagged paragraphs.—Bagumba (talk) 15:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per above too many missing cites, the whole stats section is missing any kind of reference as well. Gotitbro (talk) 20:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support I've worked on the sourcing since my prev !vote.  Please take a look again. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD Referencing issues resolved.  Spencer T• C 15:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted RD) RD/Blurb: Pranab Mukherjee

 * Support - former President of India. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 12:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment How does this nomination look like for a blurb? I remember that Atal Bihari Vajpayee had one when he passed and Mikherjee is getting significant coverage. Curious. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Pranab Mukherjee, former President of India, dies at the age of 84". His son's tweet is the main source for all news reports as of now and it does not provide any relevant details beyond this DogeChungus (talk) 13:41, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , so is that the reason Prime Minister and the current serving President of India tweets condolences? (just because his son confirms death via tweet.?) -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 13:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * News sources mention his son's tweet as the conformation. Furthermore, neither persons you've mentioned elaborates relevant details beyond what's tweeted by his son. DogeChungus (talk) 14:07, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , valid point. Request submitted. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 14:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ANI also tweeted  ❯❯❯  S A H A   15:28, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support: The death section is updated, and being improved further. With the news articles being published there is more to write other than the tweet. Because of Pranab Mukherjee's contribution to and influence in the Indian politics, I believe support the RD nomination. I also agree that there is scope to convert the RD and publish it as a blurb. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 14:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as per nominator's comments DogeChungus (talk) 14:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment A scan shows one CN and the paragraph that follows it lacking a source, and one "Failed verification", and the books section lacking ISBN. This should be easy to fix to get quality there. --M asem (t) 14:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Assuming these are fixed, I Support blurb/rd, RD obviously, Blurb that I think any past sitting leader of at least a G20 country should be recognized in passing (if that's not top-of-their-field, I don't know what is...) --M asem (t) 14:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed DTM (talk) 15:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Several new CN tags have been added since I last looked, so please review those. (The books have been fixed). --M asem (t) 17:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I have merged the RD and Blurb request, less cluttered and easier for everyone to follow. --M asem (t) 14:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also image added to image protection queue if blurb is the option. --M asem (t) 14:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, but Comment for blurb I think the blurb needs to be updated i heard information from the guardian that he dies after tested positive COVID-19. So i needs to be included in death because Covid-19 in the COVID death article. Apart from that, the article looks a good shape. 180.244.191.60 (talk) 14:39, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We rarely include the reason for death in the blurb unless it was accidental (like Kobe Bryant's helicopter crash). --M asem (t) 14:42, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment The blurb says he was a former Prime Minister of India. This is not correct. He was a former President. --2405:201:7000:A004:B087:3067:CE86:8859 (talk) 14:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Updated. Thanks. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 14:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Tentative support for a blurb; the Indian President is largely a figurehead, but even so, a figurehead of some consequence (largest democracy etc etc). I think dying after getting Covid is close enough to an accident that I'd like to see that in the blurb. Vanamonde (Talk) 14:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * cause of death is not Covid, though he did contract the virus. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 15:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * comorbidity  ❯❯❯  S A H A   16:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - former president and minister  ❯❯❯  S A H A   15:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, obviously but for a blurb a thorough check for factual inaccuracies may be needed for the article. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 15:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Blurb, in line with what Black Kite has already stated, having gone through a portion of the article and the sources used. The article needs a overhaul or rewrite with higher quality sourcing which most probably isn't going to be possible in the short term. Tayi Arajakate  Talk 01:29, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Blurb and RD. Agree with Masem's rationale, former head of state of a G20 nation. RIP. Ktin (talk) 15:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Blurb not because he was president, which is mostly a figurehead role, but because of his long and distinguished career serving in many important roles, including as leader of both legislative houses and in two major cabinet positions.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 16:38, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Blurb Former President of India, well-known figurehead, it's like Prince Philip dying. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 16:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Which begs the question, would we have posted the death of the Queen Mother? --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 19:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Blurb the president is a figure head, completely and utterly nonequivalent in any way at all whatsoever to Bush or Obama. The Prime Minister runs the country. RD is fine. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Changed analogy. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 17:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Closer :) It's more like the Governor-general of Canada dying. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb. I admittedly know little of Indian government and politics, but I do know the President of India is largely a figurehead and that he at least from what I can see was not a world transformative leader. 331dot (talk) 17:24, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb Every Prime Minister of India is fine with me, but every president is a bridge too far.  GreatCaesarsGhost   17:29, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, Oppose Blurb per LaserLegs--the Indian president is a figurehead, only Indian Prime Ministers should be in the conversation for a blurb, presidents should not unless there was a high profile assassination. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb Neither an unexpected death nor a transformative figure.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb, Support RD. Article is good for RD. He did not have enough of a lasting impact on the international stage to warrant a blurb.  Bait30   Talk 2 me pls? 18:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment We did post when the last Indian president died (though he was clearly more notable). While the position is ceremonial it doesn't diminish its role nor of this individual who has served in various important positions [such as the foreign minister when the largest terrorist attack in the country happened], was also awarded the highest civilian award of India [a rarely given title, unusually by an opposition government]. If we are still following the Thatcher/Mandela model then this doesn't pass but otherwise a serious consideration is due rather than focusing on the "figurehead" label. Gotitbro (talk) 19:59, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The prior posting was somewhat controversial, being done quickly with very few votes and before many editors had a chance to see the nom. A person is not diminished by holding a ceremonial role, but rather that role fails to elevate them to the very lofty standards for a blurb.  GreatCaesarsGhost   01:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb, and Oppose at the moment due to being significantly undersourced. Apart from the CN tags (of which there are far too many), there are other issues.  Paragraphs such as the one that begins "Mukherjee's political skills and long experience in government..." is actually completely unsourced because the source is merely a government page which explains what the work of the Cabinet Secretariat is. Furthermore, because of poor writing there are several paragraphs composed of numerous short sentences where only the last sentence is actually sourced by a reference.  For example, the paragraph starting "Mukherjee returned to handling the finance of India..." has five sentences, but only the last one is sourced.  There are also numerous sources from the Times of India (generally unreliable per WP:RSP), tabloid papers and blogs. Black Kite (talk) 20:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Nothing else matters until this comment above is addressed. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 22:15, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , All citation-needed and dead-link tags have now been removed. The yellow banner is off as well. If there are additional citations needed -- if someone can tag them, I can give it a go. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 02:54, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: I am surprised to see a few comments stating 'he was not a Prime Minister' or "President does not run the country.' This blurb nomination is important not only Dr. Mukherjee was a President, but also for his five decades of contribution and impact/influence on the Indian politics. His half-a-century contribution (see Career section in the article, various ministries he handled etc) makes him one of the most influential political leaders. --Titodutta (talk) 20:24, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support on RD, weak on blurb IMO, this people that died because tested positive for COVID-19 are more to mentioned it in the blurb. Ignoring my comment on blurb, i think he is making a major contributions in Indian politics not only as the ceremonial rule of president, but how contribution are made of him in the past. 118.96.254.151 (talk) 22:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support for blurb: subject's contribution to Indian politics alone is very significant. And, the fact that he was president (even if a ceremonial position, but this role is not exactly like Governor-general of Canada; President is the head of state of India) and received highest honour of India makes him more notable, at least, enough for warranting a blurb.--Deepak G Goswami (talk) 07:22, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD only. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD only. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Posting to RD, as the consensus has formed and the article has been fixed. --Tone 10:24, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb - In order for a politician or world leader to be blurb-worthy by ITN's standards, they need to have significant world-transformative contributions to politics, not just in their national space. This is what made George H.W. Bush distinct; his actions as U.S. President affected the geopolitical spaces of many other countries. Such is not the case here.--WaltCip- (talk)  12:33, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

(Stale) Mustapha Adib Prime minister designate

 * Support if is officially appointed I rather to see they are appointed as official Lebanese PM. 180.254.161.72 (talk) 12:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support when he takes office per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Would support per above (when appointed). Could take some time to form the new cabinet though, so the nom seems premature. Gotitbro (talk) 19:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I don't think we post routine government appointment. The prime minister is a head of government and is a mere political appointee who can be hired and fired at the will of the country's head of state. If there's change of head of state (who gains legitimacy through election), then that's even ITN/R I think, but this, no.– Ammarpad (talk) 08:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support in principle but Wait. Dan the Animator 20:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Routine internal politics of the kind we don't normally post. P-K3 (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – If Mustapha becomes the official head of government, it might not be ITNR, but given Lebanon's recent past it would be ITN-significant. – Sca (talk) 22:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Posting of PM-designate. I am uncertain of the political mechanics of Lebanon, but at the very least I would like this to become official before considering. Of note, the list of Lebanese PM's asserts that Diab is still caretaker.130.233.2.170 (talk) 11:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: S. I. Padmavati

 * Comment. I think this is good for RD. Appreciate others' input here. Ktin (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Well referenced, passes RD requirements. Gotitbro (talk) 19:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per Gotitbro. Article is ready.~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:39, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Can an Admin take a look at this one? Seems to have been waiting for some time now. Tagging . Ktin (talk) 14:06, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Trying a new tagging mechanism to see if this notification works. This article continues to remain ready. Ktin (talk) 00:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , fwiw, it did work -- I just wasn't around! —valereee (talk) 12:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted Stephen 00:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Afghanistan Floods

 * Oppose for now Article needs substantial work.  I Need Support  😷 01:48, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support in principle, but oppose on quality. Devastating natural disaster for a country that already loses 100+ civilians monthly at the hands of the Taliban.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 04:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on Quality The article really needs to be expanded. Currently only a lead and a see also section. Stub-class at most. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Though would like to see this on ITN, the article barely passes as a stub. Gotitbro (talk) 19:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per stubby article.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 13:44, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * this one needs to be closed. No consensus to post. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 21:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Online Chess Olympiad

 * Oppose - While interesting in real life, I fail to see how an interesting and detailed article could be made about this. "First online x" is not a rarity in these times and I've not seen this In The News where I live Mkwia (talk) 15:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I would Support this if it had a good article, but it doesn't have one at all, so Oppose. Black Kite (talk) 15:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose even if there were an article. Best-of-three Rapid games per team match is still nowhere the level of competitive intensity (to mention nothing of the logistics of bringing 100+ federation teams together in person) provided by the one Classical game per round in the over-the-board competitions. Neutral after PM Modi tweeted on the shared victory. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 17:24, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment It should be clear this is not the usual Chess Olympiad; there is an ITNR one normally on even years, but that was pushed to next year due to COVID. This is an interim event and not of the usual format. So it should be judged independently of the ITNR one. --M asem (t) 15:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose no substantial update to Chess Olympiad, and Online Chess Olympiad is a 3-sentence stub. Also per Masem this probably shouldn't count as ITNR. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 17:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose not the usual Chess Olympiad, and there is only 2-3 sentences. Albertaont (talk) 17:56, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I actually think that if FIDE has recognized this event as an Olympiad and the participation has been at a similar scale (~150+ countries), this event should be considered WP:ITNR as a part of the Chess Olympiad nomination. That said, the event specific article 2020 Online Chess Olympiad is very elementary at this stage, and would require significant work to bring up to home-page level. Ktin (talk) 18:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I've been regularly working on the articles related to the Chess Olympiads since 2010 and helped to promote those on the last two editions — the 42nd Chess Olympiad and the 43rd Chess Olympiad — to the status of GA, so I feel qualified and even committed to share my thoughts on this nomination. Although this event was organised by FIDE and set up by Chess.com, it has nothing to do with the usual Chess Olympiads for multiple reasons. Firstly, the time control was 15 minutes for the entire game with five seconds increment per move, making it sort of a rapid chess tournament. As a result, participating players were listed with their online ratings and played for gaining points in that ranking category. Secondly, participating nations were divided into four divisions, which meant that those placed in the top division had initial advantage. Thirdly, many games throughout the tournament were won by walkover or loss on time due to disconnection. It has to be noted that both Russia and India were jointly declared winners after two Indian players lost on time due to loss of Internet connection in the final. All in all, this was an interesting one-off event by FIDE to give many players a chance to stay in form while not playing at tournaments amidst the COVID-19 but this was definitely not what a Chess Olympiad really is. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Thin. Mostly tables and flag salad. Negligible significance. – Sca (talk) 20:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose irrespective of this item's substantial lack of "in the news"-ness, the article is just tables. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:56, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Antoinette Spaak

 * Oppose for now the article needs a lot of work on improving the sources, it's a bit of a mess. Although her notability is more than evident.Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:08, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you be more specific? The sources are all major Belgian newspapers and I'm not sure how, in structural terms, an article consisting of four paragraphs can be a "mess". Unfortunately her career was in the rather dead period which pre-dates the internet but is also not yet the subject of much scholarly research so obituaries are about all that is available. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I have reorganized by segments. I think some amount of content streamlining and this should be good for RD. Ktin (talk) 16:39, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks! —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:40, 30 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Good enough for RD. Gotitbro (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 03:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Montenegrin parliamentary election

 * Support The article is in a solid shape. This part of the world does not get much attention on Wiki and this is some interesting new developments with a great RS used.  Sadkσ  (talk is cheap)  00:57, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Very nice article. Prose results, campaign issues and impact of election clearly demonstrated. There is some contentious stuff in the second para of Background which I have to assume is contained in one of the two references (cannot read Serp), but very pleased to see a concise and finalized election nom.130.233.2.170 (talk) 05:48, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Added Alt2 for conciseness whilst still capturing the superlative130.233.2.170 (talk) 05:51, 1 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Support in principle, but none of the blurbs are very thrilling. —Brigade Piron (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * added alt-blurb 3. Dan the Animator 20:18, 1 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment. I think this is a good article, no doubt, by all measures of hygiene. But, one thing that the article should do (in the lede section) is try to distill what this means from an outcome standpoint. This, imo, directly translates to the blurbs not being pointed. E.g. Is there a new party (or a coalition) that is going to be forming the Government? Is there a new head of state? Has the current head of state stepped down? etc. Ktin (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Opposition parties have an agreement on forming a government. The prime minister is the head of the executive power in Montenegro, and for the first time in 30 years, it will not be from the DPS.--WEBDuB (talk) 18:57, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I understand. By no means I am arguing about significance. My point is the article needs to drive towards an outcome / next steps within the lede section. The same will flow to the blurb as well. i.e. What next?
 * E.g. some outcomes would be:
 * A steps down as head of state, after losing majority in election.
 * Party B stakes claim to form the Government, after winning the elections.
 * C designated as the next head of state after party d wins the elections. Ktin (talk) 19:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Party B stakes claim to form the Government, after winning the elections.
 * C designated as the next head of state after party d wins the elections. Ktin (talk) 19:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Support ITNR and historic. Dan the Animator 20:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 03:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jürgen Schadeberg

 * Support: No major issues. Have made a few minor edits. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – Looks good. (Copy-edited.) Interesting bio. – Sca (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Well enough for an RD, but can we at least have an image, commons or otherwise, on an article about a photographer? Gotitbro (talk) 20:06, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's ask GRuban, but I doubt it. His work is certainly under copyright, under to show the photos of others of his subjects would be misleading, no? Plenty of photos in the sources, though, including the iconic handstand - Mandela - Makeba. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's go ahead and POST it. If a representative photo were found, it could be added to the article later. – Sca (talk) 22:23, 31 August 2020 (UTC)


 * We may be in luck! German photographs lose copyright 70 years after the photographer dies, which would be in 2090 or even 2091 for this person, I believe. However, South African photographs expire 50 years after publication! So if we can find a photograph of his that was definitely published in South Africa before December 31, 1969, we should be able to upload it and mark it https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-South-Africa. From the article, it seems many of his most famous works were published in South Africa in the 1950s, correct? That should work! Now, by we, I of course mean mostly you. . I'm willing to help with actual uploading, tagging, etc, if need be, if you point me to specific images on the Internet, but I think Gerda would be the expert for finding the best photographs here. --GRuban (talk) 23:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – This ready nom. has been hanging fire for TWO DAYS now. Why? – Sca (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably because there's ongoing discussion about adding an image?-- P-K3 (talk) 16:07, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a backlog in RD nominations at the moment. I do not see how the inclusion of an image, especially an as-yet hypothetical one, is a relevant factor in an otherwise approved nomination. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Admins will look to see if all the concerns have been addressed. One of the supporters did say, "can we at least have an image."-- P-K3 (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Returning from day out: I don't believe it. The addition of an image was only for the article, and shouldn't hold up anything here. I replied, explaining that it's unlikely to even have a free image, and Sca explained the same in other words. Would have been nice to have had him on today's Main page, with the TFA by me, and a DYK also ;) - but seriously, mostly because he was a great person. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Offensichtlich!. – Sca (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Posting. --Tone 18:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Clifford Robinson

 * Not yet ready article is currently heavily-edited (and gaining references) but the Survivor section is currently entirely unreferenced. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 21:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * the Survivor section has been referenced. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 21:20, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support Would like to see a little more content in some of the other teams he played for, but meets minimum standards.  Spencer T• C 22:11, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted. Concerns in the Oppose have been addressed, and otherwise there is no evidence that quality is lacking here. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:04, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Looks good but the lead can be expanded. Gotitbro (talk) 05:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted RD) RD/Blurb: Chadwick Boseman
Not the biggest name actor in the world, but he has starred in some of the highest grossing movies of all-time and his death is certainly unexpected. -- Calidum 02:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment, preliminary support Certainly popular on-Wiki, given that three noms were made in five minutes. Article is mostly sourced from what I see. Which nom are we going with? This one is the oldest, from what I see (by three minutes, mind). -- a lad insane  (channel two)  02:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ETA: Weak oppose blurb since this wasn't a blurb nom when I commented. -- a lad insane  (channel two)  06:41, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb doesn't quite cross the threshold for a blurb regarding a death IMO. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * He was in lead in the #2 grossing film worldwide in 2018 and a major part in the #1 grossing films worldwide of 2016, 2018 and 2019. If he doesn't meet the criteria then, frankly, the criteria is wrong and I imagine that criteria would, in practice, exclude the death of any film actor. -86.173.152.248 (talk) 03:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The criteria for a death blurb is top in their field and majorly influential, not just popular.  Nixinova   T   C   04:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, so what actors deaths over the past 10 years would qualify using that criteria? I literally cannot think of any, suggesting it's an unreasonably high criteria. Grosses also aren't a hugely unreasonable and objective way of defiing 'top of their field' and 'majorly influential'. -2A00:23C6:FA5:9D00:10B5:76CE:2BAD:18DB (talk) 04:58, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Robin Williams. —Cryptic 05:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Robin Williams was far from the top of his field when he died. -05:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C6:FA5:9D00:10B5:76CE:2BAD:18DB (talk)
 * Weak oppose RD filmography section has some spotty referencing.  PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, Oppose Blurb Fine for an RD, but not up to standard for a blurb This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, oppose blurb not exactly field-changing, unfortunately. Juxlos (talk) 03:06, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, oppose blurb: well referenced but doesn't meet the standard for blurbing. NB: I have merged the two nominations.  Nixinova   T   C   03:07, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose RD & Oppose blurb. Very sad news but the subject is not on a level justifying a blurb. The article is not in bad shape, but there are some gaps in referencing within the tables that need to be filled before this can be posted to RD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on quality: filmography refs, and there's repetition about his death in the Personal and Death sections. Will listen to blurb arguments; T'Challa was unarguably an important role in the move to better race equality in popular film, but there's a lot of opposes here for reasons I can agree with. Kingsif (talk) 03:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, may support blurb. Kingsif (talk) 04:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Filmography and awards now fully sourced, except for one TV episode that I can't locate. Ackatsis (talk) 04:23, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Added one for that; added alt blurb above. Kingsif (talk) 04:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Supporting RD nom.-- PA TH  SL OP U  04:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD only, article is well sourced. Morgan695 (talk) 04:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support ITN and RD as secondary If playing a lead black superhero in a multi-billion is not significant for RD, it certainly is for ITN. Right now, it is THE headline story in BBC, CBC, and CNN. Albertaont (talk) 04:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note that notability doesn't apply to RD.  Nixinova  <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  06:01, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD only this article is in good shape, but I don't think this can be posted as blurb. Grammar and quality problems is a issue that prevent this to be posted in Blurb. 110.137.170.63 (talk) 05:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The writing is fine enough for blurb, your comment has more grammar issues than the article. Kingsif (talk) 05:41, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support blurb per 86.173.152.248 and Albertaont. Oppose the alt blurb - no need to specify cause of death. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥ ) 05:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also worth adding, from the WaPo article cited above: "Boseman was the face of a film that changed the entertainment industry". Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥ ) 05:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * support blurb--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support primary blurb or RD. Significant, well-sourced, and dominating the news. Alt blurb is too detailed; put this on RD first, though, if we cannot get consensus on a blurb. I care mostly that this is on the main page. -B RAINULATOR 9 (TALK) 05:06, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support blurb or RD - starred in some of the biggest films of the 2010s. First choice is the primary blurb with RD as second pref. <b style="font-family:Papyrus"> Anarchyte </b> ( talk &#8226;  work ) 05:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb This is what the Recent Deaths section is for - a third-tier actor who did not win a swag of top-tier awards. Chrisclear (talk) 06:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Ready for RD, may as well put it there while the blurb discussion is ongoing. <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  06:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support + blurb contemporary impact is not restricted to the films, people. ——  Serial  06:04, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb Nowhere near Vera Lynn or Olivia de Havilland, much less Christopher Lee or Orson Welles. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 06:07, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, Oppose Blurb Article is ready to go for quality purposes. While the death was a "surprise", the fact he had cancer for four years and kept that news private made it less a shocking death, in addition that this was not like a top-of-the-field actor --M asem (t) 06:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support RD, Oppose Blurb - The article seems fine for a RD. I can't see any major flaw in sourcing. Although his passing is sad and shocking (at least to me) I oppose blurb, because blurbs are reserved only for those who, really, had a major impact in their field and that's not the case here.-- SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 06:35, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * RD only. No consensus for blurb.—Bagumba (talk) 06:55, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Tragic death though probably not blurb apt, can definitely be considered for a DYK. Gotitbro (talk) 11:30, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Either you don't understand DYK or are trying to be insulting with this comment. Kingsif (talk) 14:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support RD, Oppose Blurb - Per Masem, SirEdimon. Below the notability threshold. – Sca (talk) 12:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb tragic but simply not notable enough for a blurb. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 12:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment No comments on the merit of posting, but I have to say some of the oppose blurb comments are downright insulting. "Third-tier" actor? The connotations of that are unsavory. WaltCip- (talk)  14:01, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose blurb while it is saddening to see such a promising career cut short. In comparison, the deaths of Kobe Bryant and Micheal Jackson literally crashed the internet across the world. We are not seeing the same level of notable reaction to this death. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 14:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Is that a metric we're really using? And how do we measure crashing the internet, anyway? Kingsif (talk) 15:22, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Response on your talk page. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 18:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Manuel Valdés

 * Comment - NoonIcarus, sorry, but you're wrong. Who portrayed "Don Ramón" was his brother Ramón Valdés.-- SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 20:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, you're right. I must have misread a reference; I have struck this comment and made the clarification. Many thanks for letting me know! --NoonIcarus (talk) 00:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. In addition, this article is currently a stub-class article. This would need to be expanded to at least a start-class to be published on ITN/RD. Also, has an orange box that would need to be worked. Ktin (talk) 20:11, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Nowhere near RD ready half the the things in the infobox aren't even in the article which is already mostly just a few tables. Gotitbro (talk) 05:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: H. Vasanthakumar

 * Weak oppose Political career is mostly a list of election results. Also not sure what "with over 2,50,000 margin" means (250,000? 2,500?).  Spencer T• C 02:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's 250,000. See Indian_numbering_system. P-K3 (talk) 02:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Correct. It is the Indian numbering system, seems right for this article. But, if there is a WP:MOS guideline for this one, we should be able to make that edit. Ktin (talk) 02:41, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * MOS:NUMERAL says Group digits in Western thousands-based style, so it should be changed. P-K3 (talk) 02:48, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. Also, rewrote the Political career section to make it less about a listing of election results. With this, I think this is good for RD. Ktin (talk) 04:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Improved; "He was the working President and earlier the Vice-President of the Tamil Nadu Congress Committee and also the Chairman of the TNCC Traders wing" could use some copyediting and dates added for each of his 3 positions there. Besides the list of election results, I see a campaign promise but not much about what he did in his roles.  Spencer T• C 22:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Done with the copy-edit. Flows better now. Found the dates for the most recent position, the former two are proving to be harder than I expected. Ktin (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Short but adequate and decently referenced. No issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not notable on an Indian national level, I just did a search on both the homepages of Times of India and Hindustan Times and he does not appear as an article. To prove an unrelated point, Chadwick Bosman is in headlines on both papers. Albertaont (talk) 05:07, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * AFD is thataway. Otherwise, relevance? —Cryptic 05:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hindustan Times, Times of India, NDTV, The Indian Express, The New Indian Express, Economic Times, Livemint, The Hindu. Ktin (talk) 05:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just before seeing your comment, I searched Google for his name and came across the Times of India article that you have linked. However, the article about his death does not appear anywhere on the Times of India's front page, even though there are so many articles linked from that front page. Only if you scroll to the footer at the very bottom, in very small text, "H Vasanthakumar Death" appears as a link in the Trending Topics section. I think that if his death was this significant, the article about his death would be linked somewhere on the main section of the front page. – numbermaniac  05:28, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter. Notability is relevant to the recent deaths section only if it so lacking that the person does not (or, very very rarely, does but should not) have a biography here.  WP:ITNRD. —Cryptic 05:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I don't think ITN nor RD should be judged by Times of India's front page news selection criteria. I don't think we have used that criteria for any of the other RDs. Ktin (talk) 05:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Passes RD for refs and bio though would be nice to see more on the business career. Gotitbro (talk) 11:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article and references are sufficient. P-K3 (talk) 16:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Shinzo Abe resigns
*Oppose Seems to still be in the air, we don't post rumors. Gotitbro (talk) 08:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC) :Though the resignation has been confirmed I am updating to Wait for now until this is actually official. Gotitbro (talk) 08:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait, but Support I think I is waiting a further information about his resignation by Japanese PM because it is interesting that Japan would hosting postponed Olympics in one year later that will be opened by Abe himself. I can't see whether Abe is resigning or not but it is worthy to posted because it is the leader of world's third largest economy. 110.137.166.230 (talk) 06:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support when it's ready. Surely ITN worth. This is the "leader" of one of the biggest economies in the word. Also, Abe is a major political figure and longest-serving Prime Minister in Japan's history.-- SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 06:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support if and only if made official - Infobox on his page says he is still serving. Blurb should also be fixed for grammar issues, as "for reasons of health" makes little sense. 45.251.33.33 (talk) 07:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting support Reading through reports, the resignation is every bit official except on record with a replacement prime-minister. [Though we are likely to post the new prime minister as well, and I am undecided whether both could've been noted in a single ITN?] Gotitbro (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support, but wait The importance is obvious. NHK has confirmed that this is not a rumor and Abe has made a statement (ulcerative colitis, apparently). However wait until he has officially resigned, not "about to resign". Juxlos (talk) 08:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support CNN just reported that he resigned, so it's now official. The article is in good shape (I was going to nominate before you beat me), and the fact that he was the longest-serving Prime Minister in a country notorious for its revolving-door PMs make this notable enough. Mount Patagonia (talk) 08:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note Abe said he isn't resigning immediately, he's going to stay in office until a successor is chosen. The blurb should be updated to say he announced his intention to resign. Source Johndavies837 (talk) 08:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait until the successor is chosen. --Tone 08:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, but use alt blurb Abe made clear during his press conference that he is remaining in office until his party elects a successor. It should still be included, but need to make sure it's clear that he announced his intention to resign, not that he has resigned. Basil the Bat Lord (talk) 09:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Abe has already confirmed his resignation, but he will still remain in office until his successor is named. This is clearly a major news headline. The alt blurb should be used, but resignation should be used instead of intention to resign. A separate blurb could be posted if and when his successor is named. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 09:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Major development in Japanese politics. Alt blurb is fine. Mjroots (talk) 11:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Alt blurb. Per above. MSN12102001 (talk) 11:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Alt blurb. Important national and international figure and leading world news where I am. Mkwia (talk) 12:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – Alt2 – as it includes longest-serving PM. – Sca (talk) 12:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support altblurb II no comment about this, but it is very significant development in Japanese political history as he is a longest serving PM ever. 36.77.93.87 (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Dan the Animator 15:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment why hssn't this been posted?? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 15:07, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted.  Spencer T• C 16:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Question did we 1) post an "intention to resign" when historically we post only when the person actually resigns, and 2) post an article with very notable accusations (in particular corruption allegations) missing? Banedon (talk) 23:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Did a quick search of the archives and seems like we have posted intentions to resign in the past. Link here. Ktin (talk) 23:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That was also inconsistent, compare . Banedon (talk) 02:13, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I see. I will step back and let folks who have been here from around that time weigh in. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 04:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ehh, I don't think its unreasonable. If nothing else, Abe is the longest serving Prime Minister in Japanese history. This has more weight than most intention to resign. The Ukrainian example isn't a direct comparison either; in a semi-Presidential system the Prime Minister is not the most important political figure. --RaiderAspect (talk) 06:12, 29 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Pull The article doesn't even mention the latest corruption scandals and other issues which are almost certainly one of the main reasons behind his decision to step down. Black Kite (talk) 15:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Courtesy ping nominator . --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 18:49, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Siah Armajani

 * Comment: there are plenty of non-WP:RS cited here, including twitter and a press release. This would need to be addressed before it becomes postable. —Brigade Piron (talk) 13:13, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Updated. Thank you. Reassessed as C class. -SusanLesch (talk) 21:27, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 03:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Bob Armstrong

 * Oppose mostly unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 15:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per TRM. SirEdimon  Dimmi!!! 23:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per both above. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:51, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 03:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Cao Chunan

 * Oppose barely a stub, awards not referenced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 15:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose, it does not deal with his academic career at all beyond his job description. —Brigade Piron (talk) 13:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 03:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Lute Olson

 * Oppose multiple unreferenced paragraphs. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 15:36, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 03:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Vejaynand Ramlakan

 * Oppose multiple missing citations. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 15:36, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * citations added. Dan the Animator 16:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose Insufficient depth of coverage: article mentions a possibly career-ending "Nkandla report" without stating what it is and how Ramlakan was involved ; article doesn't cover how Ramlakan was the personal doctor for Nelson Mandela for 10+ years and published a book about it (Mandela’s Last Years) that was later recalled .  Spencer T• C 01:07, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 03:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Hurricane Laura redux

 * Wait for reports on its impacts as a hurricane so we can include those in the blurb. The impacts are newsworthy, not the existence of the hurricane. At that point I’ll likely support, but we can’t be 100% certain about what will happen.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 04:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support again - the hurricane has already made impacts in 25 deaths in the Caribbean. We can update for further impacts as it goes inland in LA, if there are more. It is silly to dust off those 25 deaths as trivial here and with the article in good shape otherwise. --M asem (t) 04:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It was not a hurricane at that time, so the impact was (sadly) routine for tropical storms in the Caribbean, which are too frequent to warrant posting all of them. That said, I do support mentioning Caribbean impacts in the eventual blurb we do post.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 05:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Tropical stormy or hurricane, it was a deadly weather situation that killed a non-trivial number of people already. That's ITN-worthy and always has been. Never has been "oh but it might do more after landfall". If it was only 2 or 3 deaths before, maybe, but 25 is far too many to be passing off. --M asem (t) 12:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait A hurricane news making landfall at this intensity is a newsworthy event, but I think it would be worth waiting a little bit for early damage reports so we have a little more substance to include. It's better to report on actual catastrophic damage than expected catastrophic damage. TornadoLGS (talk) 05:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Unquestionable Support – A hurricane whose name will almost certainly be retired, Laura is a historic storm. Category 4 (near Category 5) landfalls aren't an everyday occurrence. This blurb definitely deserves an ITN spot, even if you decide to wait a bit for more news reports to come out. Master of Time   ( talk ) 07:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait like with all the other storms in this geographic region nommed recently, please at least wait until they've done more than exist near to the U.S. to nominate. (Yes, at least this one has already had an impact in the Caribbean, but let the storm finish its path of destruction) Kingsif (talk) 11:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose no international significance --LaserLegs (talk) 11:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * For the last time -- STOP with the WP:POINT.--WaltCip- (talk)  12:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ITN consistently rejects articles about weather events with well written prose updates backed by high quality reliable sources when those articles are not focused on "global significance". For the last time, there is nothing pointed about my opposition I'm just tired of being on the wrong side of these discussions. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , have you read the guideline? That’s exactly what WP:POINT asks users not to do.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 22:29, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're bordering on ABF ... I've come to realize that I've been wrong for many years in how I assess articles for ITN. It's ok to be wrong. Lets not clutter this nom, if you'd like to continue, lets move User_talk:LaserLegs. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * (ec) Sadly it looks like is heading into full tilt territory which follows the basic pattern seen with their previous accounts.  To oppose an article based on the number of headings is a perfect example of WP:POINT, just as this absurd and direct contravention of recommendations at ITNC is.  I suppose if it continues much longer we'll need to seek a TBAN.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support – The article is in good shape. I prefer the Alt. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 12:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. It’s absurd that this hasn’t been posted already. -- Calidum  12:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support alt. This deserves to be in ITN, C4 landfalls are fairly rare.  Java Hurricane  12:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support alt blurb. Article is in good shape, topic is a major news story receiving extensive coverage in major reliable sources.  No reason to object.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 12:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – Per Jay. Now a Cat 2 H, seems to be blowing itself out on land absent the "catastrophic" results forecasters hyped Wednesday. But further details may emerge. – Sca (talk) 12:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm going to explicitly oppose the first blurb, since it implies it killed 27 after it made landfall in the US. Aside from that, it seems pretty awful not to have posted this after it killed 25 in Haiti and the Dominican Republic, but only after it impacts the US. —Cryptic 13:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posting alt. Someone please add the pic. --Tone 13:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Image tossed to be processed in protection queue. Need time for bots to do their thing. --M asem (t) 13:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And done. --M asem (t) 13:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Can anyone do the ITN recognition for each of the users above in the nomination box? Thanks. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You are able to if you so choose. 331dot (talk) 08:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Christchurch mosque shootings

 * Oppose same reason as the Manchester Arena bombing sentence nominated on August 20. Banedon (talk) 06:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We didn't post the conviction in March, and the unprecedented sentence is certainly something. —Cryptic 06:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support due to the nature of the sentence, a first for New Zealand. 331dot (talk) 07:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment If the superlative is the reason for posting, then the bold link should be the court which handed down the sentence, or perhaps section link to Crime in New Zealand. If the story is actually about the case (again), then I don't think we usually post sentencing.130.233.2.170 (talk) 08:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've added a new blurb linking to Life imprisonment in New Zealand which is more directly relevant and in much better shape.- gadfium 19:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Neutral Given this is a sentencing first for New Zealand consider this leaning to a weak support. I do agree with the ip that if this is the focus it should be bolded. Note that the Crime article still needs to be updated (currently says such a sentence has never been handed out) and is a mess of orange tags. AIR<b style="color: green;">corn</b> (talk) 09:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose This isn't a petty 'my blurb didn't get posted so yours shouldn't', but the unprecedented sentence for the Manchester Arena terror attack was quickly shot down and this is the same but Kiwi, so I genuinely can't see how one can get posted after the other already failed. Kingsif (talk) 11:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I agree with Prime Minister Ardern, we should not give the perpetrator notoriety, attention or platform. While the sentence is unprecedented and important to NZ, it was not surprising or unexpected after the guilty plea. Mkwia (talk) 11:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on that we should have posted the conviction, so this is stale. I will note that we at WP have zero reason to hide the name of the convicted, RIGHTGREATWRONGS and all that, if we were posting this, the name is widely published in the rest of the world beyond NZ and there's no court order against the name being published compared to some other trials, though its a moot point here. --M asem (t) 12:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Throw away the key. A seemingly inevitable outcome, a footnote to the NZ mosque shootings story. – Sca (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: Verbs in wrong tense again. – Sca (talk) 12:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I've changed the tense in the blurb I wrote.- gadfium 19:42, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Masem  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 17:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support historic. Dan the Animator 17:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose we post convictions, not sentences. Also, if on the off chance we do post this, do not anonymize the name, per Masem. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per our general convention of not posting sentencing stories. P-K3 (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per 331dot This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 18:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose it's a long sentence, but meh, no surprise. It's back in the news because of the seriousness of the crime, not the length of the sentence.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - unprecedented in NZ (both the enormity of the crime and the severity of the sentence). Neutralitytalk 23:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Joe Ruby

 * Comment At present it is well referenced but only has 355 words of prose and is marked as stub, will change to support if/when expanded a small bit JW 1961   Talk  13:12, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Changing to Support as now expanded and ready for RD, thanks for the good work Bloom JW 1961   Talk  21:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. Was already over the 1,500 character DYK standard to not be classified as a stub, but I've added more info re personal life. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

*Oppose for now per JW 1961. Dan the Animator 15:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support thanks for the update Bloom. Dan the Animator 21:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:08, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * —Bagumba (talk) 07:18, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Gerald Carr

 * Support good article. Dan the Animator 00:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - I can't see any refs issue.-- SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 01:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Keri Kaa

 * Support fairly short but what is in there is well cited JW 1961   Talk  18:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support No issues. P-K3 (talk) 21:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support it's not a blinder of an article but what's there is satis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 00:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Dirk Mudge

 * Support satis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 02:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(Stale) RD: Ørnulf Tofte

 * Weak oppose it really doesn't cover his personal involvement in the significant cases. I mean, to "arrest" them, so what?  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Article has limited info about his career. Not much has been done since it had been nominated. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this is stale. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Arnold Spielberg

 * All good here, posting. --Tone 10:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Nancy Guptill

 * Support: Reasonable article. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose As with many other politician articles nominated at RD, want to see more about what was done in their political positions, beyond the subject's "resolve to create jobs" or "sense of fairness" while on the job. What specifically did the subject do in her roles?  Spencer T• C 14:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support per Brigade Piron. I agree the article isn't great but it should be satisfactory for RD. No issues with citations by the looks of it either. Dan the Animator 18:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Short but sufficient and decently referenced JW 1961   Talk  19:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 23:58, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Ongoing: 2020 Bulgarian protests

 * Support per nom.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:39, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support the article only has 74 section headings, which is less than I would like for an OG nom, but looking at the last several days I see non-specific accounts of protests without numbers, POV weasel wording them as "demonstrators" or "activists" even when setting up illegal barricades, lengthy accounts of public officials and agitators calling for this and that (but not actually protesting) and proseline. Obviously of global significance. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Again with the pointedness. Why are you doing this? <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  22:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nothing pointed at all. Article meets all the quality benchmarks for previous OG postings, seems just as good as the one which is already in the box and the CAA protests that were there for months. 100% posting this for the reasons given. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmm, you sure it's not pointed? Because it's very hard to read that as not being sarcasm... <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  23:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "the article only has 74 section headings, which is less than I would like for an OG nom" absolute POINT. Pathetic.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're right TRM, sorry. I checked the CAA Protests article which sat in the box for 4 or 5 months and it only has 68 headings so I guess I was being a little unrealistic. Stricken. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose There is no mention in global news... but the article sure is suspiciously voluminous. "On the 48th day of protests, a few thousand protesters unloaded piles of dead fish in front of the Council of Ministers." So many days yet so few people shot, just like HK. Maybe if person started shootin' or people started lootin' it would be more ITN. Albertaont (talk) 00:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe not in Ontario news, but it has made headline news across Europe. Kingsif (talk) 00:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have to disagree. I haven't seen this at all, neither during the last 6 weeks (the supposed duration of these) nor today, when I could not find it on the front pages of several news outlets (Monde, Spiegel, Paìs, YLE).130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I would like to further add...it hasn't even made Albertan news! But seriously, I havn't seen it on BBC or France24.Albertaont (talk) 03:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * are you sure? BBC / France24. I will concede tho, these are old and if you're arguing it's not ITN anymore, than I might agree with you. Dan the Animator 18:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Did these make the front pages though? Again, I think I saw an article on this maybe early August, but nothing that has made front page news recently. We aren't here to right great wrongs.Albertaont (talk) 00:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support per nomination This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support I do not know why the protests in Bulgaria are not as heavily covered as the protests in Belarus. Despite that, it is still of international significance, as a failing government can cause internal instability and will cause problems for neighboring countries. The article itself looks good, but the table of contents (particularly the timeline) is too long, and more photos of the protests need to be placed there. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 05:02, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Far too granular article of routine Balkan domestic drama. It goes unreported because such stuff happens all the time. Changes in government, widespread police response or the like should be the bar for posting stories like this, and then as blurbs.130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose not in the news. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 08:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose A lot of protests have taken place since the pandemic with only a few of them sustaining and even fewer being continuously in the news. This doesn't appear to be major enough for ongoing, at least for now. Gotitbro (talk) 08:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support it seems pretty major, but news coverage is surprisingly weak. Banedon (talk) 14:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - not yet sufficiently large-scale/significant to warrant posing. Neutralitytalk 23:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Kenosha protests

 * Oppose for the moment We took the George Floyd protests off the Ongoing box, and these seem like largely the same thing. If they evolve into George Floyd round 2, then maybe. But for now, I think notThis post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There are now videos on social media of multiple gunmen and multiple gunshot casualties. This will likely be global news by tomorrow morning. Albertaont (talk) 05:57, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Same as with any shooting incident in the US, that aspect will be overlooked unless it's mass murder of 10-15 people or more. ITN/C is numb to gun violence in the US, sadly, and there is a rough fatality threshold. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 06:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, it's all over the US news, but not all over global news. Gun violence and killings happen in big city metro areas all the time. Day after day, several people die in NYC and Chicago due to gun violence. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 20:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support ongoing Even as a "mere" flare-up of the George Floyd protests, I think these are notable enough for ongoing. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support ongoing per John. Either that or some Black Lives Matter 2020 protests article? Kingsif (talk) 05:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support ongoing There will also be a large protest this weekend in DC -- Rockstone  [Send me a message!]  06:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Add a blurb, or don't add a blurb, but we shouldn't be considering ongoing until it's ready to roll off of the template. A spot in the ongoing line is not a second-place prize for a story we'd reject as not important enough for a blurb, nor for our own crystal ballery about whether an event will still be happening a week (or two weeks, or two days) from now when it'd roll off. —Cryptic 06:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You know ongoing noms are also a thing, right? They can and do go up without blurb roll-offs... Kingsif (talk) 06:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I know, and I know that most are improper second-place prize attempts. —Cryptic 06:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Huh, and here I thought ongoing was the more 'prestigious' position. Kingsif (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose — localized civil unrest. If protests/riots spread nationwide again we can revisit this imo. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 06:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Cyclonebiskit with possibility of changing to support if this becomes nationwide again.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 06:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer having a blurb first and then ongoing if the riots persist as the previous ones. I am not sure if a blurb is needed at the moment, though. --Tone 07:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Those of you that want this in Ongoing should make a nomination so we can have a clear vote. The shooting article is a woeful he-said-she-said at the moment with nearly half of it directly quoted from primary sources, and a dash of COATRACK in the Background and Protests sections. The riot article might be suitable for Ongoing if events turn that way.130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait, we can't park an article in ongoing for months that relies heavily on eyewitness claims of torture and is deliberately slanted towards the POV of one side? Uh oh! --LaserLegs (talk) 10:39, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose ongoing, support blurb I think that article might be get well becomes a blurb because what happened in Kenosha received international attention to the city. It can be ongoing if the protest spreading nationwide. 180.245.102.250 (talk) 08:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose domestic issue, not internationally significant. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:39, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per LaserLegs and Cyclonebiskit.Alsoriano97 (talk)
 * Oppose it appears that 2020's mass shootings are now mass riots. A seemingly never-ending stream of them.  Certainly don't see why this is any more significant than any of the dozens of others.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 11:08, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for substantially the reasons already cited. This is not only a localised story currently but a hyperlocalised one in a town that is not even in the top 300 in the US - about the size of the mighty metropoleis of Tourcoing or Salzgitter and with far lower relative importance! —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * To be fair, Kenosha is widely considered part of the Chicago metropolitan area, the third largest metro area in the US, and is also within the media market for Milwaukee, a major city itself. Not that the population should matter, anyway, as the story is getting attention throughout the US and beyond. Zagal e jo^^^ 13:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Population should not be determinative, but is a valid indication of the likely importance of an event occurring in it. Rioting in Moscow is always going to be more notable than rioting in Beryozovsky. The same applies to the US. —Brigade Piron (talk) 07:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per TheRamblingMan, Cyclonebiskit, Laserlegs, and Brigade Piron. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Part of the larger George Floyd/Black Lives Matter story. – Sca (talk) 13:04, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Very much “in the news”. Easy to find international coverage, as well. Zagal e jo^^^ 13:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. The article is in good shape and the story is in the news. -- Tavix ( talk ) 13:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose at the present time. It has not "exploded" in the way the Floyd riots did or other past events that were related to protests from police brutality. It still has potential to become something greater but I think now is too small a scale to post. --M asem (t) 13:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just commenting that right now, there is a likely chance that the NBA teams are walking away from the finals because they refuse to play due events around this shooting (no games were played today). This is making this more likely to be posted, but I think waiting to make sure we have the right blurb is necessary here, because its not the violence that's the news, but attention to yet another police brutality event and responses to it. --M asem  (t) 04:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support this is dominating the headlines and it hasn't slowed down for a 4th day. Juno (talk) 14:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not disappointed an equivalent of "Americans riot all the time" is here. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:11, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually it was more subtle than that, but once again, your input here is outstanding. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 17:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * More like Americans who have nothing to do riot all the time. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:58, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I sincerely, sincerely hope you're not insinuating that they're rioting because they are ordinarily lazy. WaltCip- (talk)  22:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose standalone Kenosha is at best a distant satellite city in Chicagoland and is barely larger in population than the Gary, Indiana metropolitan division. If riots somehow spread to Chicago city limits itself, can reconsider. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 16:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Dan the Animator 18:37, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support blurb only I think it isn't Kenosha riot that only localised, but for me, Kenosha giving international attention since shooting of Jacob Blake. Many people around the world dont known about Kenosha until it's riots happened, and the article is a very good shape at now. 110.137.166.230 (talk) 20:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – The "riot" article is an utter mess and not fit for the Main Page. The shooting article is better but by itself is not enough for ITN. ---  C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 22:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – The article is in better shape now. The killing of two protesters and the spread of the civil unrest to other cities indicates this is ITN-worthy. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 05:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Entirely agree with you. Shootings literally happen everyday in the US, but this one seems to have gathered the attention of the world. Just posting the shooting isn’t enough.~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Riots occur all over the world on a near daily basis. While this is getting a lot of attention, due I suspect in no small part to various biases, it doesn't rise to the level we normally look for at ITN. We would never post this sort of thing if instead of Kenosha we were talking about some smallish city in the Middle East. Yes, the US gets more attention around here, and some of that is unavoidable. And then there are times when it is avoidable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:01, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment if you thaught that Kenosha is a small city please think again, the city now gain international attentions because the riots and shooting of Jacob Blake. Before then, nobody know what is the city. Second, if you think that it being posted if unrest happens or spreads to large US cities is partially false. Minneapolis riots happens in a small city with a population less than 500,000 and only spread to nearby large cities after it was spread to LA, NYC. For opposers, are you want to posted it as blurb if the unrest only happens or spreads to large US cities? I guarantee it is not and this only posted if it spread to worldwide cities like London, which far more well known than any other US cities. 110.137.166.230 (talk) 00:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Could you translate this into English? (Seriously, what is this trying to say?) Kingsif (talk) 00:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please do not bite the newcomers. This is an Indonesian IP for whom English is likely not a first language. The grammar may be poor but I was able to understand it.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 01:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose right now because the article about the demonstrations is a bloody dumpster fire.--WaltCip- (talk)  12:14, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We now have the national government (Trump) calling for violence against his political opponents, certain partisans following those orders, and local government (the chief of police) condoning those acts specifically because the dead were engaging in political speech contrary to his views. I know this can appear to be hyperbole - we're certainly not Syria. But a slide into totalitarianism must be noted, and it can be tricky to pick the precise moments to take note of (much like the PRC crackdown in HK).   GreatCaesarsGhost   13:15, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support blurb it looks like it'll be in the news for a while. Banedon (talk) 14:32, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support blurb In addition to the protests, further events such as cancellation of games in national sporting leagues adds to the notability of the events.  Spencer T• C 15:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support: The riots are big enough to halt play of some of the world's largest sports leagues. p  b  p  17:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment perhaps we need a "riots in the US" ticker as this (a) police kill black person/people (b) people riot (c) things get cancelled (d) repeat, seems to be a theme for 2020. It seems that no one affront to BLM is any more or less significant than any other, so an Ongoing "riots in the US" would seem appropriate here.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as written. It has been pointed out that the sports strikes are notable developments in the aftermath of the shooting, but these are not mentioned in the Kenosha riot article at all. Neither, for that matter, does that article cover other significant developments beyond the comparatively picayune episode of unrest in the city. If we had an article generally covering the aftermath of the shooting, including the highly notable sports strikes, that would be a candidate for the front page, but the only article covering that thus far is shooting of Jacob Blake itself. BD2412  T 23:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: Something like, In the aftermath of the shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, numerous professional sports teams cancel games in protest would reflect the noteworthy developments. BD2412  T 23:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it is tone deaf to blurb the cancellation of sports events instead of the killing of 2 protesters. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 05:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The blurb as currently proposed doesn't mention that, either. BD2412  T 06:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * My point was that if we are going to add to blurb, it should not be that we can't watch NBA and MLB sports. We should add that the protests have expanded to other cities and that 2 people have been killed in Kenosha. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 15:16, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I can't support a causal connection between what's going on in Wisconsin and the shooting in the proposed blurb. Either this is about the shooting (a weak case) or this is about the riots. Chicago "protested" last night over the precieved "shooting" of a black man, who was actually being pursued for murder and took his own life. And by "protest" I mean shops were ransacked. Again. I would strongly support putting up a general "Riots in the US" to Ongoing, seeing as these events are getting editor attention, but I can't support any of these blurbs. It's textbook editorializing.130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:33, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: There is definitely some international coverage about this story. A couple of days ago it was the 3rd story on the BBC World News TV bulletin, and here in Australia Channel 9 covered the story on their local 6pm news broadcasts. – numbermaniac  15:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment There is a really really bad bias comparing what's being said here verses the nom just above for the Bulgarian protests. Yes, they are different reasons but the "size" is relatively the same (contrast to the Belarusian protests which are much larger than either). Let's keep stuff like this in perspective, it doesn't make sense to post one of these and not the other. --M asem (t) 15:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Impeachment articles drawn up on Ohio Governor Mike DeWine

 * Oppose Not encyclopedically newsworthy. It happened in a state, not a country, which isn't at all notable. If Trump is impeached again, then that's newsworthy. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you for your good faith nomination, but as a general rule ITN never posts developments in local politics.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah. I didn't know that.  Thanks for that information.  Man I forgot so much since that 3 month break.Elijahandskip (talk) 23:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's OK. Suggest SNOW close. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Maybe if he's removed from office, we would post this. The existence of articles of impeachment that may not even get voted on won't. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose If he was impeached and convicted, it would be ITN worthy. But as I would expect that Ohio's constitution follows the same process as federal in that the House of Representatives there have to vote to approve the articles at which point the gov'r is consdered impeached, and then the senate would vote to prosecute. As this is not federal, we'd only post likely on the Senate's confirmation. --M asem (t) 23:14, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's politically interesting in that it is being propelled by legislators within his own party, but it is little more than a stunt at this point, and not front-page news. BD2412  T 23:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Wild polio eliminated from Africa

 * Support; was going to nominate this myself too after updating the article. Sceptre (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , are you still able to update the article? Was about to do it myself but would be happy to leave it to you instead.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've updated the polio eradication article, and I believe the poliovirus article has been updated too. Sceptre (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but updates typically need to be around five sentences with a minimum three references to be posted per WP:ITN.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment We posted this for the South-East Asia Region in 2014. We also posted the elimination of rubella from the WHO Region of the Americas in 2015, but it doesn't seem like we posted the elimination of measles from the same region in September 2016. I also think that the proper term for this is "elimination" and not "eradication" (as I understand it, it's elimination when it's regional and eradication when it's global). TompaDompa (talk) 20:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the correction, that makes sense. I've updated the blurb. Seems like the measles story wasn't posted because it wasn't nominated, and I think this is a bigger story than either of those were anyway.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 20:50, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support as per Bzweebl, and the fact that we've posted similar events in the past. Truly a momentous achievement This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:58, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Seems rather a medical footnote. – Sca (talk) 22:23, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Progress happens gradually, especially when it’s on a large scale. This may be a mere formality, but it’s a formality that represents the culmination of decades of intense international medical efforts. If we didn’t post things like this, we would never post any positive developments at ITN.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 22:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - Per nom. SirEdimon  Dimmi!!! 22:34, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Yes! Someone else did the nom so I didnt have to fumble the template. This was actually foreseen by the medical community, and it is huge progress to be able to certify Africa as Polio free. Only two more countries left to go. Albertaont (talk) 22:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Good news sometimes isn't no news. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 04:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * After-the-fact support. This is a milestone in human history. BD2412  T 04:13, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Can it not just say WHO, as most news sources and previous blurbs, or add WHO to the blurb? Gotitbro (talk) 11:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Ongoing: COVID-19 pandemic

 * Oppose this request maybe already set in banner box section, so it is not necessary to add it into Ongoing section because the article is extremely viewed. 110.137.186.235 (talk) 13:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I'd rather suggest removal of the linked articles that are not updated or lack sufficient quality and repost them once improvements are made. However, it should be clearly noted which articles are of sub-optimal quality because none of the linked are tagged or unreferenced enough.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:00, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Timeline is a list of lists of proseline for example -- I said "not great" -- and I don't see why we need this huge banner when a link to the main article in "On Going" will do --LaserLegs (talk) 14:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Is this suggestion to remove the Covid banner?, the request should make this more clear. If you're not suggesting removal of the box, then this is redundant. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:10, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * yes this is a suggestion to remove the banner and link the main article in ongoing --LaserLegs (talk) 14:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose flatly.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  14:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I think the banner is the optimal way to display this. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 14:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Covid is still a significant worldwide event in the news, and the banner is still the best approach. ZettaComposer (talk) 14:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Let's assume the banner stays (per the SNOW), but I agree at this stage the number of links may not be as critical as it was back in the March/April when there was a lot of disinformation or lack of information to the world, that having all the links we have now was appropriate. Now, I think some of those links are far less helpful or pertinent to the front page of WP, particularly "Timeline", "By location" and "Notable death" (Given these are all one click down from the main COVID page). It may be possible to reduce this banner to ~1.25 line (still boxed) rather than its current ~2.5 if we can cut 3 or so links from it. --M asem (t) 15:03, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Lets move that to the talk page. I kicked this off because of a discussion at errors about only having 3 blurbs. If we can save a line of text, maybe we can go back to 4 blurbs. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I would be willing to see some discussion over redesigning the banner to be less obtrusive and to have more relevant links. Removing it completely is unneeded, but if the concern is the amount of space it is taking up, perhaps a discussion at WT:ITN or somewhere similar where we can look at redesigning the banner in a collaborative way.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 15:34, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ITN talk page discussion opened on this redesign. --M asem (t) 16:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose for reasons above. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Wolfgang Uhlmann

 * Weak Oppose Not in dreadful shape, but it needs a few references. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I referenced the German Youth Champion and IM / GM years of awarding. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 18:44, 27 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Referencing looks fine to me. Note that although he died on the 24th the death doesn't appear to have been announced until the 26th. P-K3 (talk) 21:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The Legacy sections needs references, and one of the existing refs is a link back to the French defence article. Stephen
 * That section has now been referenced. The ref which links to the French Defence is also sourced to the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings (ECO). P-K3 (talk) 04:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted Stephen 05:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Tariq Garden collapse

 * Comment This place is not in Mumbai. It is 170 km away. 2405:201:7000:A004:4421:C33A:6C0F:BCD2 (talk) 12:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * My bad, the Reuters report was filed in Mumbai but the article did say "South of Mumbai". Fixed blurb. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:25, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Thankfully, the death toll is low. Too low, in fact, to be posted at ITN. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 12:54, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. There might be a reason to post something related to the significant monsoon flooding(which seems to be heavy this year even for India) but I don't think this is it. 331dot (talk) 13:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per others above. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Tragic, but only a minor one in the national context.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment death toll updated to 12. FYI if you want to reconsider (if not that's ok too) --LaserLegs (talk) 20:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Barely on the front page of The Hindu, which is my go-to Indian news source.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 20:54, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I maintain my view on this. 331dot (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Still not over global news, death toll still too low, even lower than the stampede. Just not very notable. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose on notability grounds per Destroyeraaa This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait for further developments; it looks as though that death toll could rise further. NorthernFalcon (talk) 15:57, 26 August 2020 (UTC) Change to support in principle, oppose on quality, primarily because the blurb's claim of 200 missing is not in the article, and none of the article's death counts are up to date. NorthernFalcon (talk) 03:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support 200+ people are missing! *Comment Updated the blurb to reflect this. Dan the Animator 18:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment pinging, , , , and per update. Dan the Animator 18:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Still Oppose. 200 people missing does not mean 200 people dead. In hurricanes, hundreds of people go missing, eventually some got found still alive, while some are found dead. Does not reflect the number of people dead. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The death toll is now up to 16 which is more than the stampede and the bombing we posted but I guess it doesn't meet the WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. I figured a build collapsing in India would be a guaranteed post. Oh well. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Jolo bombings

 * Support Major attack, and article checks the boxes. We will learn more undoubtedly through the next few days. I expect at least a few of the wounded will also become fatalities, as per usual with these attacks. Albertaont (talk) 01:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Major attack per Albertaont. 14+fatalities, 75 injured in 2 attacks. Definitely notable and disastrous enough to be posted. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 01:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support obviously. Background, barely a paragraph on the attacks, reactions, map, infobox and "international importance" this is another easy support for posting to the box. Good to go. --LaserLegs (talk) 02:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You say you want it posted, but you're clearly being sarcastic. In which specific way(s) do you think the article should be improved? Or are you saying that the bombings don't warrant inclusion on ITN no matter how good the article on them? Jim Michael (talk) 10:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No sarcasm at all. Article follows the standard disaster stub template, and is getting international coverage. Good to go. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It seems you're being quite pointy with these responses, however. <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  22:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Excellent ITN candidate. Put it in the box This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:43, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Detailed coverage in major news sources, article meets basic requirements.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 05:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Per above comments. Jim Michael (talk) 10:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Per above. MSN12102001 (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support on notability but the proposed blub is not good at providing context. At minimum, there should be a link to Moro conflict. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted. I've used the nominated blurb for now. I can't include any reference to the Moro conflict, because the article doesn't provide any and it isn't cited as such. The infobox says it's "Part of the Moro conflict", and there's a navbox, but the prose does not mention it at all. If that situation changes, then we can amend the blurb. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Hurricane Laura

 * Wait – Developing. – Sca (talk) 13:59, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support posting the deaths from Laura at this point, with the expectation that as we see what develops from Marco, that can be added. (which might come while we debate). Laura as a tropical storm and having turned to make landfall is likely not going to cause more, and the 13 deaths already accounted for are directly from that. Marco is toying on the coastline and only has one death so still has potential to be worse and if it does, then we can add it to the blurb. So I added the altblurb just covering Laura for now. --M asem  (t) 14:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The altblurb looks great! The 13 deaths are indeed tragic, and more death reports may be incoming because the true number of deaths from landslides and flooding would not be determined until storm cleanup gets underway. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Laura at least. Storm during storm season does storm things is always a post. Article has most of the disaster stub parts (won't get aftermath till it dissipates) but both Haiti and DR had fatalities which explicitly call out the deaths of children and that's of encyclopedic importance. Would also support ongoing until it dissipates then a blurb itemizing the death toll. Added alt-blurb 2. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:33, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We don't call out children specifically. That's special pleading and non-neutral. --M asem (t) 15:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The fact that 2 children died is tragic, but not that notable and special pleading. In previous storms, children died too. It happens.~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I admire your phlegmatic callousness.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  16:28, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Would normally support Laura, as it caused some of the worst damage to PR, DR, and Haiti since Hurricane Maria in 2017, but the news stories are still developing. Laura is expected to become a strong hurricane and make landfall in Louisiana. More people would (probably) be killed. What do we do about that, as there will be more ITN candidates posted and Laura may be outdated or out of the ITN box by then. Any suggestions? ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * if it gets posted today and later causes extensive damage in the US it would get a new blurb and be bumped to the top pending another discussion on ITN/C. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 16:53, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Marco but Weak Support Laura — Marco caused a single fatality in Mexico far removed from where Laura's greatest impacts have been so they would be separate stories. Marco has all but dissipated at this point so no further deaths from it are likely. Laura's article is rather messy and scant with details, but I suppose it's sufficient for ITN. Only weak support for Laura as Hispaniola is notorious for deadly hurricanes and nine deaths in Haiti is not unusual. I'm ignoring the potential for future damage with Laura for the purposes of this nomination. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 16:53, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose/wait — Rescinding my support after looking into impacts more and expanding the article. As I initially thought this isn't a terribly unusual storm impact-wise thus far. It has caused fewer deaths and less disruption overall than Isaias two weeks ago which ITN/C declined to post (disclaimer: I was the one who closed the discussion). Barring dramatic developments of damage in Cuba/Hispaniola it's probably not worth posting for now. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 21:58, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – The proposed blurbs are in the wrong tense. Bleve the correct tense is called present passive. – Sca (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait for Laura, oppose Marco (unless we want to blurb two hurricanes passing through at once) Two hurricanes at once seems significant, and Laura might do a number on Louisiana, but for now they're just (and Marco is just) storms doing storm things, so not ITN-worthy. Support Laura – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:32, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There's no reason to wait on Laura; it has done damage that could only get worst if it does more in Louisiana. (Those are people too in the Caribbean). It doesn't make sense to wait. If it was only one or two deaths, yes, I'd agree. --M asem (t) 19:04, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Arguably even Barbados isn't Caribbean, Cuba yes, Gulf states no. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment The major one's that caused considerable damage should be noted. Otherwise this ITN will be filled with a numerous stuffing of irrelevant names. Gotitbro (talk) 18:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I have removed Marco from the blurb, as there is a consensus against it. Marco is dissipating, and it caused minimal damage and only 1 death (thankfully). ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Laura and perhaps some mention of Marco. Marco is not a notable storm in and of itself, but the coincidence of two tropical cyclones threatening the same stretch of coastline in a short period of time is notable. We wouldn't even have to mention it by name but say something like "the second tropical system in three days to impact the Gulf Coast" Though perhaps probably wait until any Gulf Coast impact actually happens. I do, however, oppose the inclusion of "including at least 2 children." While the deaths of children are tragic, and at the risk of sounding callous, any disaster that causes multiple fatalities like this is likely to have children among the victims. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Tropical storms are too frequent and don’t do enough damage to warrant posting, better to only post major hurricanes which are still at least annual. LaserLegs’ support is clearly sarcastic and most others are from accounts primarily devoted to covering storms on Wikipedia, which is of course perfectly fine but should be considered by admins.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 21:13, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I know that there might be a bias here, as me and several other supports are Hurricane-related article editors. However, the storm in question, Laura, caused considerable damage and 13+ deaths and is going to hit Louisiana as a major hurricane. Waiting until it hits Louisiana will make the current info- 13 deaths and 1.1 million power outages-stale. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 21:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * How many tropical storms of this magnitude occur every year? Presumably at least 5 or 6, right? Doesn’t that seem like too many to post at ITN?  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 21:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * the Atlantic sees an average of 10-15 tropical storms a year; however, many don't result in widespread/severe impact. Globally there are 60+ each year and from my experience with ITN/C each storm is evaluated based on the region it impacts. i.e. a storm causing 20 deaths in India is not unusual whereas 20 deaths in Australia is highly unusual. I think around 15-20 are nominated at ITN/C each year, and not all are posted. WP:WPTC has seen an influx of new editors in the last year so there are several users unfamiliar with what is generally considered ITN-worthy. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 21:58, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with what you said above, though it is to note that Laura already caused millions in damage, however, posting it now based on damage is not ok IMO. Your last sentence there probably is indirectly referring to me, as I see, to be the only person at WPTC nominating storms. I did not ask for Laura to be nominated, I probably would’ve waited until it made landfall as a hurricane or caused 1 billion in damage or caused 20 deaths. Isaias’s nomination was justified as it caused 18 deaths, spawned the largest tropical-storm related tornado outbreak in years, and caused $4.2 billion (in the nomination, it said more than 1 million) in damage. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * monetary damage is a tricky metric to use at ITN/C for tropical cyclones. We generally don't get reliable damage estimates until well-after the posting window has passed (nominations are considered stale after a week). Generally "millions" in damage is assumed for the vast majority of significant land impacts. We've had at least 6 in the Atlantic alone this year. Damage totals are also heavily skewed with more developed countries; US$1 billion isn't that unusual for the United States and China but only two storms have ever caused that much damage in the Philippines. Tornado outbreaks are very common in the United States, the meteorological origins of them are irrelevant for ITN/C. When compared to outbreaks we've posted, the one from Isaias was well-below the notability bar. For ITN/C you have to separate the meteorological aspects from the impact to determine notability. The only instance of a storm being posted for meteorological reasons that I'm aware of was Hurricane Patricia. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Laura a few hours away from landfall. It’s already killed 27 people and broken records. Should we post now, or wait? When do you think we should post? ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment – Still developing. Laura is expected to cross the the Gulf of Mexico today and "approach" the northwestern coast of the Gulf Wednesday night. – Sca (talk) 13:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've dealt with the page move issues now that I see Laura's been confirmed upgraded to a hurricane --M asem (t) 14:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Neutral per Bzweebl. AFAIK hurricanes are routine and expected at this time of year and while all deaths are obviously tragic, this doesn't sound like a particularly major one on a global scale. The truly major events like Irma, Maria, Katrina etc are the ones that we would obviously post. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just wait, it’ll be a major hurricane soon enough. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, let's wait and see what happens then. I did worry for a moment there that I'd broken my own WP:WORLDWIDE rules and determined that hurricanes are only "major" if they hit the US, but based on the conversation above I think probably the impact on the islands has nonetheless not been enormous, despite the sad deaths of the 24 people. Changing to neutral because I don't really know. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 04:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait - death toll and destruction remains too low to be notable -- Rockstone  [Send me a message!]  21:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We posted a stampede that killed only 14, while this one killed 25. More than all recent disasters, excluding the one when Beirut blows up. 25 deaths is more than enough, but if you don’t think so, more deaths and destruction is on the way. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't think the stampede should have been posted either. -- Rockstone  [Send me a message!]  01:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait Until after it hits Texas/Louisiana. <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#009200 0.3em 0.4em 1.0em,#009200 -0.2em -0.2em 1.0em;color:#009200">Noah Talk 21:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update – Half a million Gulf Coast residents told to evacuate. – Sca (talk) 22:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update – Forecast to strengthen into a potentially "catastrophic" Category 4 hurricane on Wednesday. – Sca (talk) 13:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Already a Cat 4 now per Hurricane Hunters, Possible Cat 5 before landfall. I think this is ready to be posted, it’s already the strongest since Dorian in the Atlantic. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 16:23, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Update - Death toll has risen to 26, now a major Category 3 hurricane. Expected to make landfall as a Category 4, with impacts similar to Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Rita. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Per this verified meteorologist, storm surge of 20 ft is historic for the Gulf Coast (presumably west of the New Orleans metropolitan area), in the territory of the devastating 2008 Hurricane Ike and the catastrophic 1900 Galveston hurricane. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 16:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support per NOAA & NWS report on becoming Category 4 NicoARicoA (talk) 17:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  'Nother update – Several RS reports   quote officials of the National Hurricane Center warning that Laura may create "unsurvivable" conditions. – Sca (talk) 21:31, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, winds have increased to 145 mph, NHC says somewhere in their latest discussion that surge can continue up to 40 miles inland with wave heights up to 20 feet. Incredible yet extremely deadly. Let’s post this soon. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment We should wait for it to actually make landfall as a hurricane, rather than post based on speculation that it will be "unsurvivable." The fact that it was upgraded to a hurricane is not what's notable, the impact that it will have as a hurricane is.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Lori Nelson

 * Support: Article well sourced and updated. TomCat4680 (talk) 18:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - It seems ok to me. SirEdimon  Dimmi!!! 23:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 18:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Gerald D. Hines
*Comment - One cn tag, but seems easy to fix. SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 23:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. SirEdimon  Dimmi!!! 01:47, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 18:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: John H. Hager

 * Support - It seems ok to me. SirEdimon  Dimmi!!! 23:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose "Memberships" section looks like a lot of bloat; "career" section is generally a list of positions but not much information about what was done in those positions.  Spencer T• C 03:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Memberships section addressed; career section is still quite sparse as to what specifically the subject accomplished, and the quote tbh doesn't add much. Example of info that's out there that could be added:  Spencer T• C 17:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:40, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 03:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Indianapolis 500

 * Oppose The article is of poor quality. It's written for fans rather than the general public, being full of unexplained jargon.  It's not even well-explained that it's an automobile race and the page doesn't have a single photo of one of the cars.  The prose is also poor, being ungrammatical and with incorrect tenses.  And, as the British GP was recently snubbed, it's not clear why this event should get preference and priority as it doesn't seem to have been so interesting or eventful. The blurb is awful too, just telling us that somebody won something. That's usually what happens at routine sporting events but WP:NOTNEWS explains that "routine news reporting of announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia". Andrew🐉(talk) 12:01, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The Indy 500 is ITNR, while the British GP is not from what I can see. If you feel that it should be, or that the Indy 500 should not be, please start the appropriate discussion. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Normally a race article is full of pictures of cars, but there's a rather good reason this year's version is not, that being that there was no audience due to COVID. So all race images would be non-free and thus we can't use. Absolutely understandable. --M asem  (t) 12:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've complained about another US motorsport article before – 2012 Budweiser Shootout. That didn't have any pictures of cars and still doesn't.  It was actually shown as a Featured Article so I was amazed that such a bad article could pass for quality.  Nothing much has changed. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:04, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Cars would be nice to have, but stationary pictures (The easiest we can get free) isn't great, and unless we have WPians or people that are will to make free-licensed photos at the event taking photos, those won't happen. I mean, take any other sport ITNR like the Super Bowl or the Olympics and while we'll have pictures of athletes, most of those will not be from that event for the same reason. But we can get drivers - the actual people that win a racing sport - at various times during their career, and that's more interesting to the encyclopedia. --M asem (t) 13:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support exactly the sort of story our readers will be looking for and expecting to see, quality is higher than usual for this kind of article, and more than adequate to satisfy the requirements for ITNR. Good to go. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 12:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:ITN/R, and the article is well-sourced. Unnamelessness (talk) 12:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ITNR nominations do not require support on the merits or "per ITNR". 331dot (talk) 12:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support exeplemary work prior to and following up on a planned ITNR event. --M asem (t) 12:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Added Altblurb. Ktin (talk) 13:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks fine for an ITNR. Also notable as Sato's second win in the Indy can be noted in the blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 18:45, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I understand that its ITNR but at the same time there is ZERO front page coverage in the major news channels, maybe ESPN? What is actually ITN is stuff like Wisconsin police shooting, covid-reinfection in HK, 2 hurricanes. Albertaont (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support Not the greatest article ever (it introduces, for example, "Last Row Shootout" without ever explaining what that is) but adequate given ITN/R. Black Kite (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Last Row Shootout was moot; because there were only 33 entries. 33 are the max that can contest the race, given the size of the track. 205.132.171.177 (talk) 20:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not really the point - the article talks about it without explaining what it is. Black Kite (talk) 21:59, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks fine. P-K3 (talk) 01:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted  Spencer T• C 03:44, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) 2020 Women's British Open

 * Oppose More unexplained bogeys and birdies. This is just another routine sporting event contrary to WP:NOTNEWS.  The blurb is marginally better than the Indy500 one but the article doesn't say anything about the unexpected victory -- nothing about the winner's technique or strategy.  Presumably she was just better on the day in putting yet another ball into yet another hole.  How exactly is this supposed to be significant?  Andrew🐉(talk) 12:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing your ignorance and dislike golf again, not to mention WP policy. Most helpful. As always, it is not necessary or desirable to explain technicalities in individual tournament articles. wjematherplease leave a message... 13:33, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose seems not an ITNR, and the quality of the article is fairly poor -- lots of contents are unsourced. Unnamelessness (talk) 12:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Unnamelessness - Events are not required to be ITN/R to be posted to ITN.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  13:27, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , this is not a normal event. It is a recurring sports event. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter. ITN/R is not a requirement. Individual sporting events can be notable on their own merits.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  14:38, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As far as sport goes, especially golf, ITN/R focuses almost entirely on men's competitions, which is unfortunate. Also, the content (or at least the vast majority of it) is sourced. wjematherplease leave a message... 13:38, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , then I suggest starting a proposal first. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:52, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not being listed at ITN/R explicitly does not (or at least, should not) preclude inclusion, and is not a sound basis for opposition. wjematherplease leave a message... 13:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose as the article is in very poor shape and thus not ready to appear on the main page. I also oppose 's bludgeoning of the opposition here. Cheers! 2A02:C7F:BE17:2D00:1C3D:1FC6:6853:AD7 (talk) 13:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Meager prose; mostly tables. – Sca (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Justin Townes Earle

 * Support - Seem fine to me. Well referenced. SirEdimon  Dimmi!!! 03:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support satis. I read a cause of death, but not in an RS I can find, so seems acceptable without one. Kingsif (talk) 08:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Changed to "not immediately announced" (past tense). – Sca (talk) 14:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 17:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 UEFA Champions League Final
Support if article is updated with match summary.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 21:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Per Bzweebl, the article needs a prose summary of the match to be considered updated for the purpose of ITN. I also think we don't need to include "FC" at the start of Bayern Munich, particularly as we haven't done so for PSG. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:15, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment This is WP:ITN/R. I have updated the template to reflect this. TompaDompa (talk) 21:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support Sure, why not This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose the match summary is pitiful, but provides a basis for a few more sentences of expansion, upon which I'd be happy to support. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No more pitiful than the match itself.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand your emotion, but there was more to the match than just three or four sentences. It needs expansion before it's a good summary of a pitiful game. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:11, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Meant that in jest, should have used small font.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:04, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I've started the match summary, should be in better condition now. S.A. Julio (talk) 23:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The post-game riots in Paris seem worth a mention. —Cryptic 00:00, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks fine, also agree with Cryptic in adding something about the post match "riots" with relevant context. Gotitbro (talk) 03:27, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note There is an unsourced sentence in the Ambassador section, and the previous finals table is also uncited. The summary could use more sources, as the two existing ones probably don't cover all the events mentioned.  Sounder Bruce  05:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posting. Looks good now. --Tone 10:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but looks like you missed the period.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 11:04, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Added Altblurb. Ktin (talk) 13:29, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't it be "wins" instead of "win" as Bayern Munich is a single group? 45.251.33.147 (talk) 17:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, in British English the usage is "win", because it is a team of eleven people which won the trophy, not an individual. I'm aware that usage elsewhere is different though, so I've reworded it to avoid this issue as we have done in previous years. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Could someone, please, "give me the credits?" SirEdimon  Dimmi!!! 23:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) 2020 Juba An-26 crash

 * Oppose (for now) per stub tag. --AlphaBeta135 (talk) 15:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Removed the stub tag (clearly not a stub) I missed that while expanding --LaserLegs (talk) 16:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – At 170 words it is a stub. Unsee coverage on major Eng.-lang. RS sites, so far. Of the three sources cited, all say seven (7) killed, not 17. (RT is not considered a RS.) – Sca (talk) 17:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC) (UTC)
 * it said seven (VII) (0111)' when I wrote the blurb, but I guess you knew that... --LaserLegs (talk) 18:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment If anyone knows the map template, AFP reported the crash site more specifically but I can't get the map to update. The coordinates are in the infobox now. Anyway, thanks. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose not another prematurely nominated and meaningless disaster stub? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I added a reactions section so I think we're all set. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on notability. A small-scale crash by an aging aircraft owned by a short-lived airline in a famously dodgy airport is always going to struggle in this regard and could probably be dealt with better in Juba International Airport. There is also something mildly distasteful and distorted in our priorities if we post a story about a dozen people killed in a civil aviation incident in a country in the midst of a de facto civil war which killed 800 people in January-May alone. In addition, the proposed blurb is misleading in view of the claim in the article that "[b]etween 7 and 17 people were reported killed". —Brigade Piron (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strongly agree with your second point. Sometimes it seems like Wikipedia cares more about planes and trains than we care about people. And developing world conflicts are especially ignored.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 08:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There were people on that plane too. If there is an article about the civil war you want posted, nominate it. Also WP:RGW --LaserLegs (talk) 10:25, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't deny that the crash is a human tragedy, but I strongly agree with that its world-historical significance is minimal. The trouble with WP:ITN is that the article quality requirement favours the posting of simple, self-contained events over more complex, substantial ones. The case in point is the recent 2020 Belarusian protests nomination which  charmingly suggested should not be posted because the article was "unbelievably bad" and, in fact, "dog shit". Whether or not this is true, the fact remains that it will still have far more readers in five years' time...—Brigade Piron (talk) 11:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not just "dog shit" but in fact a deliberate effort to push an anti-Lukashenko POV. If you have a problem with how ITN operates, head over to WT:ITN and propose a change. I saw this story in the CE portal, expanded the article and nominated it for ITN. That's it. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, well there's nothing we can do if an article is in a "dog shit" state - it doesn't matter how notable the story is. Donald Trump could be abducted by aliens and taken to Mars to work as a slave in a used-car dealership, which would be a pretty major story, but if the article wasn't up to scratch we wouldn't be able to post. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Commercial transport disasters are very different things from lengthy civil wars. The accidents undergo evaluation and reported worldwide so that other airlines, airports and aircraft manufacturers may be able to avoid similar disasters and thus tend to have that larger interest. --M asem (t) 12:59, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That makes sense in other contexts, but I fear it's a bit late for the makers of the antique aircraft involved and not of much interest to the dodgy airlines which service Juba International Airport which appear to be no strangers to regular crashes... —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Doesn't seem major enough for an airplane crash, especially in light of the recent ones that have been posted. Gotitbro (talk) 18:50, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Los Olivos stampede

 * Support death toll, infobox, map, background, reactions and "international" ticks all the boxes good to go. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:49, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , can you refrain from these types of comments in the future? They don't positively contribute to the project and only hurt your cause.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 01:10, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * For quality I check that it adheres to the standard disaster stub (background, event, reactions, infobox, map) and for significance I check that there is a death toll and that the story is of "international significance". Article is basically the same as other stampedes we've posted  . I 100% support posting this item for the reasons given. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * User:LaserLegs/Disasterstub is linked on your userpage; we all know you're being facetious. Starting a respectful community discussion with proposals for concrete reform is much easier than making your point by trying to flood the box with the kinds of stories you don't like, and would make others more willing to seriously engage with your views on ITN. Please give it a shot.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 11:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The story is either in the news or it isn't. The article is either updated or it isn't. I 100% support posting this for the reasons given. If you want to discuss me as an individual I'd suggest either my talk page (since you're familiar) or WP:ANI. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Short but the article seems to cover all the bases that would be known by this point. --M asem (t) 17:22, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose Doesn't appear anywhere near the top of any news site I can access without a paywall. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You can't access BBC world news? Kingsif (talk) 01:19, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose -- doesn't seem notable enough for ITN, it's not even on the BBC world news -- Rockstone  [Send me a message!]  06:32, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you sure?  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 10:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment:    Sources are updated above in the nomination box.--WMrapids (talk) 20:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted. Moderate consensus, but the only comments in opposition referenced lack of press coverage which seems to have been demonstrated in the nomination.  Spencer T• C 03:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Fredie Blom

 * Oppose I was going to nominate this until I noticed there was no article for him, and, moreover, that there are no list articles for unverified world's oldest people - and that from the list of the world's verified oldest people, only a few have their own article, because rarely are they all that notable. I don't think Blom meets notability requirements. As another reason, the article seems to have some copyvio? Or, at least, I read the AFP coverage a few hours ago and the article seems to be using similar enough phrasings that I could identify parts. Kingsif (talk) 09:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I ran Earwigs copyvio tool, it says unlikely 3.8% JW 1961   Talk  10:16, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oddly the check hasn't brought up the AFP report. I'd have to find it again and run a comparison check, probably. It may be unintentional if it isn't used as a source, but this should still be cleared up. Kingsif (talk) 11:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * An article does exist now. Unless it is deleted for some reason, I think this nomination is eligible for RD. The fact that this wasn't one of the Guiness verified oldest people is not relevant to RD eligibility, we are not considering a blurb ITN nomination here. Nsk92 (talk) 22:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose some citations needed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support There are no CNs at present, and after spot checking sources everything seems to be in order.130.233.2.170 (talk) 08:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Yes, I fixed up the cn tags and added some references. I think the article is in reasonable enough shape for RD now. Nsk92 (talk) 10:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD Referencing issues have been resolved.  Spencer T• C 03:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Herbert Tabor

 * Posted. Updated, referenced, described his research contributions.  Spencer T• C 18:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Ken Robinson

 * Oppose too many citations missing. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 23:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jack Sherman

 * Comment – All orange tags have been removed, now that they have been addressed by the updates. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:56, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The article says he died on August 18, but I'm not seeing a source for this at first glance. Nohomersryan (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * just added source verifying date of death as August 18. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:56, 22 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Short but now pretty well referenced JW 1961   Talk  21:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Would be good to get some information written about his life outside of RHCP. But, is good to go to RD. Ktin (talk) 22:41, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Undue weight given to exclusion from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame relative the size of the rest of the article. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 22:46, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, I put a tag on that section earlier today, which has apparently been removed, and although it has been renamed and some more detail added to the career section since then, it still seems disproportionate particularly for a relatively minor aspect of the career of a successful musician. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:31, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , -- I have take a shot at changing this section to remain proportional to the overall career. Have a look. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 14:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Seems fine for an RD nom. Gotitbro (talk) 09:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support satis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted. My concerns above have been satisfactorily dealt with, and solid consensus otherwise. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Frankie Banali

 * Oppose A whole lot of citation fixing/additional cites needed and no cites in the discography section at all. Gotitbro (talk) 00:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose doesn't appear much progress has been made. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:01, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 23:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Hasil Bizenjo

 * Weak Support A bit short, but adequately sourced. Could elaborate on his political career a bit. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support per above. Would strongly recommend adding more info on his early life and pre and post political career. Dan the Animator 17:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Insufficient depth of coverage of subject; minimal information about what was achieved in his different political posts.  Spencer T• C 19:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose along Spencer's lines. No real analytical detail in there, just a CV in prose format.  But what's there is fine. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:00, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 23:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Frank Cullotta

 * Oppose missing in-text refs and most of the Life after crime is uncited. Dan the Animator 20:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose citations needed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 19:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Sad that the two murders receive less coverage than his subsequent tour-guiding career? —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 23:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Chi Chi DeVayne

 * Support Well-referenced, all over the news. Pronouns issue seems fixed. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose missing 1 in-text ref and the discography section has no sources. Dan the Animator 00:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , done. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 01:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support thanks Coffeeandcrumbs for adding the sources. Not a big issue but there's still 1 missing in-text ref in the end of the Career section. Dan the Animator 01:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that. Got it now. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 01:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Can someone add a few news sources to gauge the context? Gotitbro (talk) 07:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - every single news article I've read on this subject seems to refer to DeVayne as "she", so it came as a surprise to me to see us using "he" in the article. (Although some seem to rather deftly avoid using any pronouns at all). The matter was challenged on the talk page, but was countered with a "convention we tend to use at the Drag Race WikiProject". But WikiProject conventions shouldn't ever override MOS:GENDERID, so could someone explain in clearer terms why we are going against reliable sources in this instance? Are we following the subject's own explicitly stated preference? I'm reluctant to post this to ITN unless a coherent policy-based strategy is being used for this. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - the distinction comes between Chi Chi Devayne a drag persona who took. she/her pronouns and Zavion Davenport the person underneath the makeup who took he/him pronouns. This is fairly standard for cis-men who are drag queens. Because more people were familiar with Chi Chi, it's common to refer to her as "she" all of the time, but if if we're being accurate, "he" is more appropriate for out of drag content. JaAlDo (talk) 11:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted - thanks for the clarification, and I can see how that makes sense so I'm withdrawing my objection. As all else seems in order and there's consensus here, I've posted it.  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Manchester Arena bombing sentence

 * Oppose I assume we posted the attack and the sentencing seems like a mere formality. I don't remember us posting the conviction of any perpetrators of single terrorist attacks like Tsarnaev or others, but feel free to correct me if that is wrong.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 20:36, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ITN generally posts conviction/sentencing, yes (you'll see lots of "trial begins" noms get shot down with a 'wait for conviction'). Kingsif (talk) 20:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose foetid criminal responsible for the death of many people, including children, gets sent down. Good news story but not ITN. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:40, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Technically, stale. We post the convictions, not sentencing, and he was convicted in March. "Abedi was found guilty by a jury in March of 22 counts of murder, attempted murder - encompassing the remaining injured - and conspiring to cause explosions." --M asem (t) 20:56, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the point is that this particular sentence is notable for its length. Plus we did post Larry Nasser's sentencing in the USA Gymnastics sex abuse scandal.-- P-K3 (talk) 21:03, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Those typse of "factoids" tend to not to make good ITN reasons. I looked back at the Nassar story and he had pled guilty so it was a matter of determining the sentencing (in the court), so it was decided at ITN that the sentencing was the key part there. Here, the guy pled not guilty, so the trial found him guilty in March, that's when we should have posted. --M asem (t) 21:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Can I argue that we didn't, and this is more interesting? Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose – An inevitable outcome and almost a footnote to the Manchester Arena story. (Odd that we have no separate article article on Hashem Abedi.) – Sca (talk) 21:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Per BLPCRIME, we try not to create articles on the perpetrators of crimes unless they were already notable, or after sentencing they become notable (they become the subject of study by crime psychologists or the like). --M asem (t) 21:19, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Based on it being the conclusion of the "largest murder case in English legal history", which led to the longest ever determinate prison term being handed down. --DSQ (talk) 21:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose He was already convicted. Given that capital punishment was not an option, there was never a doubt that he was going down for the maximum prison sentence allowed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not the maximum sentence. They set a new record for length because a life sentence wasn't an option either, so they picked a high number without parole. Kingsif (talk) 21:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support per being the longest fixed sentence ever given in the UK. Dan the Animator 01:06, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose The conviction itself would have been a more ITN than this. Is the length of this sentence something that can still be appealed? Apologies as my understanding is very severe sentences in certain countries get automatically appealed. Albertaont (talk) 01:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I am leaning support based on superlatives, but would like some clarifications. Longest fixed sentence: does fixed here merely mean the time specified at sentencing, or do sentences come in several categories in the UK? Are there un-fixed sentences current or past which might be longer? Might we just do away with fixed if yes, no and no. Largest murder investigation: does largest here mean number of victims? Might we just do away with investigation if yes?130.233.2.170 (talk) 06:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Life sentences are indeterminate - not fixed, because a judge cannot predict when someone will die. So this sentence is the greatest number of fixed years in prison someone has ever been given in the UK, and is minimum and without parole. The "largest murder investigation" won't be number of victims, because 7/7, so it may be time and resources. Kingsif (talk) 08:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose if we post this on the grounds that it is the longest fixed sentence ever given in the UK, then we would have to post longest fixed sentences for the remaining ~200 countries in the world. Banedon (talk) 07:16, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Only if they are nominated, and have a suitable and updated article, and there is editor interest in writing & evaluating it. In other words, what's the problem?130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Procedural; attack was posted, this is barely ITN. Gotitbro (talk) 07:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Attack was posted, this is just peripheral to that. – Ammarpad (talk) 11:33, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Dounreay site available for reuse in the year 2333

 * Comment. Greetings, did you miss the nominating comment? I am not able to see the rationale for this nomination in the above box. Ktin (talk) 20:07, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think comments are required if can you see enough information in the blurb, article, and source. Kingsif (talk) 20:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Clearly, I didn't. Hence asked. But, I am glad others are able to see the rationale. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose nuclear power station sites remain radioactive for a long time. This is not news. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:40, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I'd say wait, but 2333? Kingsif (talk) 20:44, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Best guess by scientists. by 2333 is definitely CRYSTALBALL territory for us. --M asem (t) 20:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Alexei Navalny

 * Comment While significant in the local context, not sure if this meets ITN especially since the person is still hospitalized/alive. Gotitbro (talk) 16:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Local? Russia is one of the largest countries in the world and unquestionably of global importance.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 20:32, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait until poisoning is officially confirmed. This has been a notorious perennial issue in Russia, with most recent incidents generating a large fuss (Skripal, Litvinenko, etc, etc). Brandmeistertalk  16:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment See here. Count Iblis (talk) 17:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support this is the equivalent of Biden being poisoned/suspected poisoning by the FBI/CIA. Dan the Animator 17:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Whatever we may suspect (and I'm guessing 99% of us are on the same page there) nothing has been proven and he hasn't died. Right now we have someone who has fallen seriously ill, some publicly stated suspicions, and that's about it. We can't post that. See also WP:UNDUE, WP:CRYSTAL and WP:RGW. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note that this is Russia, which is not known for justice or transparency in government and where leaders of opposition to the government have a habit of dying. We aren't going to get a fair impartial judgement or proof, leaving us with what RS say. 331dot (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, you're right, he's not dead and there's only suspicions. However, consider that Navalny is the biggest opposition to Putin (just as Biden is to Trump). Now if Biden fell into a coma, that would be posted into ITN. So what is the difference between Navalny and Biden? Dan the Animator 20:34, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Biden is the only credible opponent in a presidential election year. Navalny is not the only opposition leader and it is not an election year in Russia. But that aside, I would also oppose any similar post dealing with Biden. This is an encyclopedia, not a news site, tabloid or otherwise. We deal in facts not speculation. Right now we don't have enough to post anything that would not smack of sensationalism or trying to right great wrongs. I stand by my Oppose. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're probably right. If this is a poison attack the Russians are unlikely to admit it. But that's neither here nor there. It's not our job to take over the role of public authority and declare this a de-facto assassination attempt or give credence to such claims sans hard evidence in reliable secondary sources. The guidelines I sighted above still apply. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Navalny is the main opposition leader in one of the world's three great powers. Like the Skripal case, there will never be a better time to post this.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 20:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That was a very different affair. People died, there was never any doubt that it was murder, and multiple governments publicly accused the Russian secret intelligence services of the crime. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah you're right, this is very different.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 21:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC) After reading more I’ve changed my mind again. This is a huge story, and while still developing, there will not be any better time to post this. We can address the uncertain circumstances with a carefully worded blurb  just referring to “suspected poisoning” as reliable sources are doing the same.  B zw ee bl   (talk • contribs) 00:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support per Dan and Bz's rationale. Plus all the news reports of police coming in and preventing family access and medical records is begging for a blurb. Kingsif (talk) 20:38, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, it's not. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:52, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose suspected poisoning by suspected members of the Putin administration. If something concrete transpires from all these "suspicions", let us know. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose/Wait per TRM. Easily the type of news that one prone to believe Russian gov't underhandness at play, but we can't work with that. --M asem (t) 21:07, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If reliable sources are universally giving it that level of treatment, I think we can with a blurb that refers to “suspected poisoning.”  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:16, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait – Until more solid info is available – if ever. (Heavily covered.) – Sca (talk) 21:09, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose and Wait A whole bunch of allegations but I see nothing that says the government is behind this. Nom is pre-mature and wikipedia is not a tabloid. This can wait. Albertaont (talk) 21:27, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All major reliable sources are giving this significant coverage. This is not tabloid news.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. Whatever doubts about the nature of the poisoning there are can be mitigated by the careful and conditional wording of the blurb. The story itself is easily the most significant political story from Russia now, particularly in conjunction with the events in Belarus, bigger than the Khabarovsk protests and the arrest of Sergei Furgal (which I think we did not post either, not sure if that was even nominated). Somehow, when it comes to Russia, the time is never "right" and we are always supposed to "wait". I remember it was the same with the Russia doping scandal in the run-up to the 2016 Olympics, the McLaren Report and Russia's ban from Rio. It was "wait", "wait", "wait" and eventually nothing ever got posted. Funny how this kind of thing seems to happen when it comes to critical stories about Russia and Putin. Nsk92 (talk) 21:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support per Nsk92 This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Oppose If the poisoning is confirmed and he dies as a result, then we might post it in a similar way as Boris Nemtsov's assassination; if he dies but the poisoning is not the cause of death, this will probably qualify for RD given article's quality. Otherwise, there is nothing that merits posting and news relying on suspicions doesn't have its place in the ITN section. I also see POV-pushing overstatements above in support of this nomination that he is the leader of the opposition in Russia, which is clearly incorrect as he has never run in a presidential election to see how popular he really is nor has his political party ever won any seats in any of the houses.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:05, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * He tried running for president but clearly was seen as too much of a threat to be allowed to do so. Who else would you describe as the leader of the opposition? And saying that "he has never run in a presidential election to see how popular he really is nor has his political party ever won any seats in any of the houses" is applying some pretty irrelevant metrics for an opposition leader in an authoritarian country.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 07:41, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is another POV-pushing interpretation. Opposition leader in most countries is the leader of the largest opposition political party and that's why that metric is relevant in order to give legitimacy to that claim. And even if it's an authoritarian country, the international media are not the authority that identifies an opposition leader but the international community. There is no evidence that most of the leaders and governments of other countries consider him as such.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don’t think you have any grounds to accuse me of POV-pushing when you want to judge opposition figures in authoritarian countries by how they fare in rigged elections.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 09:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't accuse you personally but rather characterised your view. Sorry if you've got offended from it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:02, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Distinction without a difference. Anyway, no offense taken.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 10:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. I didn't say this outright before, but I support this. No one is trying to right a wrong here, only tell what RS are saying. Since we are dealing with Russia we aren't going to get a fair, honest judgement of what happened to him from the very government that tried to eliminate this man, and has eliminated others opposed to it(including doctors treating COVID who have a habit of accidentally falling out of windows).  I do not accept that the only way we can post something like this is to wait for Putin to say "yes, I tried to have him poisoned" and since that isn't going to happen that ITN is permanently foreclosed to stories from Russia. 331dot (talk) 07:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't entirely agree with you. While it's true that suspicions over poisoning appear in most reliable sources, we don't have the capacity of a news outlet to right wrongs if the opposite is revealed to be true.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree. If a suspected poisoning is the story that RS are reporting, then that's what we would post. No more, and no less, because that is the story here.  We would be posting this if it were Joe Biden or Keir Starmer, leaving aside that there would at least be a chance of a fair judgment or opinion in such (hypothetical) cases.  We are never going to get anything more than that in this case which mean we can never post anything related to the Russian government except Putin's rigged elections. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We would be posting this if it were Joe Biden or Keir Starmer probably because these two personalities are legitimate leaders of the opposition in their countries (even though I would still oppose posting suspicions), while Alexei Navalny is not, at least, according to the international community (see my response to Bzweebl above). And why ITN is permanently foreclosed for stories from Russia is because of the lack of reliable reporting of facts but that doesn't mean that we should regress to posting suspicions just to say that we cover them.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:02, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're applying democratic metrics to an authoritarian country. The opposition in Russia is not allowed by Putin to run for president and has lower elections rigged against them, so there is nothing for other countries to technically "recognize" if that's the standard(which is also debatable).  At least in Venezuela Guaido held an office.  We'll just have to disagree on this, I guess. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Doctors have found 'no traces' of poisonous substances in Navalny's blood (Sources: BBC, Deutsche Welle, Al Jazeera and Euronews).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but many poisons (or radioactive substances) could have degraded by the time of the test. Apparently there is a cause known, but undisclosed. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment – On Friday the top story on main RS sites    .  Russian doctors say he's too ill to be moved while supporters, and the EU, plead with Russia to let him go to Germany for treatment. Under the circumstances it may still be best to wait, but we could consider Ongoing. – Sca (talk) 12:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article is in good shape, reliable sources are covering this in sufficient depth. I can find no reason to object.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 14:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Alt 1 – Yeah, perhaps it's best at this pt. to confine ourselves to "is hospitalized" ("in a coma" – ??) while waiting to see if he ever gets out of the hospital alive. – Sca (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I added a more neutral alt-blurb that has less speculation. Dan the Animator 17:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Slight variation offered above as Alt2 – Sca (talk) 18:12, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Worldwide coverage and reliable sources say suspected poisoning. I don't see a reason to wait.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:38, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 19:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support either Alt or Alt II seem more appropriate JW 1961   Talk  19:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as the poisoning is a high-profile case of political violence, and Navalny's article is apparently well-fledged. The alternative blurbs seem best for this. NovumChase (talk) 19:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update – Russia to allow air transport of Navalny to Germany for treatment.     – Sca (talk) 21:52, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted with ALT2 blurb. Does someone want to suggest an new blurb for the update that Sca mentions above? &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:57, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * What a lot of work just to get the snooker championship outta the box. – Sca (talk) 22:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Alt3 offered above. – Sca (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Added alt-blurb 4 Dan the Animator 22:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Blurb amended. Thanks Sca and Dan, I've gone with a bit of a hybrid of the existing hook and those suggestions: "In Russia, doctors allow opposition leader Alexei Navalny to be airlifted from Omsk to Germany for treatment, after he falls into a coma. If anything is wrong with that, let me know. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment- Pretty much every reliable source mentions a "suspected poisoning," as does Navalny's article. I think it's important to keep that in the blurb to demonstrate the notability of the event.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 22:34, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but we have to tread very carefully with sensitive issues like this on a BLP, and there was serious concern above about mentioning anything about poisoning. Ultimately, we are not a news ticker, and there is an expectation that readers will already have heard about this story. The purpose of the entry is to get the article linked, and they can read the story in more detail, with all its nuances, as presented in the article. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:41, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see any BLP-issues with including it, as it does not imply that specific people are behind it. Can you elaborate what BLP-issues you see? ― Hebsen (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment finding a lot of broken refs on this. Should I bother tagging them or are we ok with a potential BLP vio hanging out on the main page? --LaserLegs (talk) 22:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with Amakuru re "suspected poisoning." In all the RS coverage there's no mention of solid evidence that Navalny actually was poisoned – only suspicion and speculation. Consequently, as an online encyclopedia, we should avoid echoing this aspect on the Main Page. One supposes that German medical tests might yield evidence of poisoning, in which case we could update as appropriate. – Sca (talk) 16:17, 22 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Include "Suspected poisoning" in blurb. All major reliable sources say this, and "suspected" does imply that it is not certain. This is in the news not because Navalny fell ill, but because of the suspected poisoning. The current blurb is a half story, akin to us writing "In Mali, President Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta resigns and dissolves the government". I propose the following new blurb: Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny (pictured) is airlifted from Omsk to Germany while in coma, after falling ill in a suspected poisoning. ― Hebsen (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Quite a few sources have been applying the adj. comatose to Navalny. This has the advantage of not stating how or why he came to be in a coma, which AFAIK hasn't been conclusively reported. – Sca (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Include "Suspected poisoning" in blurb, per Hebsen. This claim is hardly WP:FRINGE. —Brigade Piron (talk) 07:53, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Include suspected poisoning. The German hospital where he is now says he was poisoned. 331dot (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Include "suspected poisoning" in the blurb, per Hebsen. And stop repeating the Kremlin propaganda here. Navalny did not slip on a banana peel. The German hospital now confirmed that he was poisoned by some kind of a nerve agent, and all the major news sources have reported on that, e.g. CNN, WaPo, BBC, France24, EuroNews, Deuche Welle, etc. Ignoring this point in the blurb looks ridiculous. Nsk92 (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Include "suspected poisoning" in the blurb, per Hebsen, and perhaps even simply "poisoning"; it is no longer "suspected", as major outlets (NPR, CNN, &c.) are confirming that the doctors reported poison in the bloodstream. NovumChase (talk) 17:34, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update blurb I understand that we want to be careful to avoid bias, but the hospital has now announced that Navalny has been poisoned, and Navalny being attacked as opposed to merely being sick is the primary reason why this is international news.  I would suggest a neutrally-worded blurb such as "After being airlifted to Germany for treatment, doctors announce that Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny was poisoned."  This shifts the burden of the claim from Wikipedia onto the doctors at the hospital, and should be safe for us to use. NorthernFalcon (talk) 18:53, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Sōta Fujii

 * Comment. Firstly,, thanks for this submission. Is there a nomination rationale that you can add? Just reading the blurb, the rationale doesn't seem to jump out. Also, I might be wrong, but, we have never carried a news item about Shogi as a game. While that should not be a reason to not carry one now -- explaining the rationale will only help us understand why you think this is a news item for the homepage. Cheers.Ktin (talk) 05:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean by a nomination rationale, but I guess it would be that Fujii has been setting new records ever since he became the youngest person ever to be awarded full professional status in October 2016 at the age of 14. He started out by winning his first 29 games which set a new record for consecutive victories. He then became the youngest person to win a major professional shogi tournament, the youngest and fastest ever to reach 50 wins and then 100 wins, the youngest player to win 60 games in a single season, the youngest person and the first junior high school student to be promoted to the rank of 5-dan, the youngest person to be promoted to the rank of 6-dan, 7-dan and now 8-dan, the youngest person to ever become the challenger for a major shogi title, the youngest person to ever win a major shogi title, and now the youngest person to ever simultaneously hold two major shogi titles. He also the first person to have a winning percetage of .800 or higher for three consecutive seasons. In 2017, the Japan Shogi Association estimated that the economic benefit it received from Fujii's winning streak was about 18.5 billion yen which is roughly USD 175 million in today's dollars; that's the financial impact for winning 29 games played over a roughly six-month period. Anyway, I just thought I'd nominate this for ITN, if it's not normally the type of thing that get accepted or if its scoop is too limited, then no big deal. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:04, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks. This is a lot of impressive information. Personally, I have been a big fan of increasing some of the news items / topics that we showcase on the homepage. However, my sense is that this topic might be too niche for the ITN homepage news. But, I would be curious to hear others' opinions. In parallel, irrespective of this nomination, I would suggest you consider posting this on Portal:Current_events. Cheers.
 * PS: Also, you can just use the 'nom_cmt' attribute of the template to add your nomination comment / rationale. Perfect, I see that you have now updated the nom_cmt. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 06:19, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment As Ktin said, thank you for contributing this unconventional nomination and for your explanatory nomination comment. I have a few questions that will help me decide whether or not to support. First, is there a Shogi World Championship or equivalent most prestigious tournament that would be more worthy of posting instead? For example, it seems from my very quick research that the Meijin (shogi) is the most prestigious title, but the story here is that Fujii won the less prestigious, albeit major, Ōi (shogi) title. Is there some sort of special significance to holding two titles simultaneously that makes this a bigger deal than just winning the Meijin? Second, to my untrained eye, these youngest ever records seem somewhat arbitrary. For example, the altblurb says that he is the youngest player to reach 8-dan, but it seems that the highest rank is actually 9-dan. Is there any evidence that the two records you have chosen to emphasize in your blurb suggestions are records that received significant coverage prior to Fujii's achievements, or are they arbitrary records that the Japanese/Shogi media is only now focusing on to highlight his prowess?  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 06:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There are currently eight major shogi titles and they are short of like Grand Slam (tennis) in tournaments in the sense that they are also considered equal (by the fact they are major titles), but they all have their individual characteristics (different sponsors, different formats, different prize funds, different histories, etc.) so that they aren't all identical in that sense. Winning even one is quite an achievement, but some titles have a longer history, so there might be a bit more of subjective prestige attached to winning one of them. Like tennis, some players perform better with respect to certain formats; some title match games are played over a two-day period whereas others are played in a single day. Some might all up to eight hours per player per game whereas one even has games which are played at one hour per player. Some are best-of-seven while others are best-of-five. The Meijin is the oldest of the major title matches and offers the second highest prize to the winner. The Meijin is slightly different from the others in the sense that it's not a true open tournament, but rather a league tournament. There are five leagues and you need to start at the bottom league. If you keep winning your league, you're promoted to the next higher league. If you win the top league, you challenge for the Meijin title. League play lasts a year, so it takes a minimum of five years before you can challenge for the Meijin title. Fujii has participated in Meijin league play for four years and his record so far is 32-1. Only the top two players (three players for the lowest league) players are promoted to the next higher league, with the tie breaker being lead seeding. Fujii's only loss came in 2018-2019 league play. It caused him to finish in a tie with three other players; he wasn't promoted because of his lower seed. Fujii is currently two leagues from the top league, which means it will take him at least 2 years before he can challenge for the Meijin title. Fujii is still 18 years old and the record for youngest Meijin is 21 years 2 months; so, many believe he will break that records as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Seems like a DYK nom to me, and we don't usually post shogi updates to ITN (at least that I am ware of) or unusual chess records for that matter. This also seems precipitated on the age would have supported if it was a record regardless and don't see significant coverage about this outside Japan. Gotitbro (talk) 07:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I did nominate this for DYK about a month ago after he won his first major title and became the youngest player ever to do so, but withdrew the nomination because it seemed impossible to 5-times expand the article at that time to meet the DYK criteria. I only nominated it for ITN after seeing a ITN notification template for something else on another user's talk page. After reading the ITN page, I thought this might apply. If it's "out-of-scope" for ITN at this time, then that's OK. The comments received here so far have been quite helpful in pointing out some things which needed work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment we've posted other arbitrary sports milestones  I see no reason to rule this one out. The 29 game streak table is missing refs for many of the games. I think maybe the streak was the time to post this, but I don't know enough about shogi to weigh the significance of the current achievement. Except for the match list, the target article is fine. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:02, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The opponents Fujii beat during his streak are sourced; the source is located in the intro section immediately above (Sōta Fujii). BAsed upon comments made below, however, I've added the source to the table as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Sorry, I have to oppose. Though I am a chess player and I participate in WP:WikiProject Chess, I am not aware of shogi championships being posted on ITN, nor that FIDE World Chess Championships get posted either. First, unlike the snooker championship and the 5000 meters championships, this seems restricted to Japan, no the world. In the article, it says that he won both titles during the JUly-August period. Is there a specific date that he won the second title? I don't see much rational in this good-faith post, as Ktin said, please elaborate on your rational for this post. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 14:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, also. I don't see this in the news. Unlike other sports posts, the news for this seems restricted to Japan. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 14:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We do post the FIDE World Championship and you can look at the article dates to find out when this happened.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 15:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As a chess player, I'm glad to hear that. The FIDE world championship gets posted b/c its a world championship and on ITN/R, like the snooker championship. This is neither ITN/R nor is it news over the news. My vote is still Oppose. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Absolutely nothing in ITN prevents a sports article from being posted if it only relates to one country. Also, an item not being featured on ITN/R is not a valid rationale to oppose.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  15:41, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * My point is that it isn't exactly newsworthy, and the article and blurb isn't clear as to when he won the second award. It only says July-August. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 16:37, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * He won the second title on August 20, hence the nomination on that date.-- P-K3 (talk) 16:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Still have to oppose, not exactly newsworthy. Zip the USCF championship posted? ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:06, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If it's outside the scope of ITN, then that's fine. Most of the current coverage is Japanese (or based in Japan); however, news stories like this often take a few days to perculate and be picked upon by other media sources. When Fujii won his first major title on July 16; most of the immediate coverage was by Japanese based media. L'Express did cover it here though about a week later. I don't understand French; so, I didn't add it to the article. No non-Japanese person has ever been awarded regular professional status as a shogi player. (Women's professional shogi is considered to be a separate system. Although one non-Japanese has become a Women's professional shogi player; no woman (Japanese or otherwise) has ever qualified for regular professional status.) So, shogi is not nearly as international as Go (game), Chess or other board games, and it's all based in Japan (except for some exhibitions or the occasional major title games); in that sense, it's like Sumo. There is a sort of "World Championship", but that is for amateur shogi and most of the participants are non-Japanese amateurs from countries other than Japan or Japanese amateurs living outside of Japan for work or family reasons, etc. So, there are no professional shogi players who are non-Japanese or who are based outside of Japan, and all of the major tournaments are based in Japan. Anyway, as I posted above, I've got no problem if this nomination is declined because it's not within the scope of ITN, and I appreciate all of the comments received so far. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If it's outside the scope of ITN, then that's fine. Most of the current coverage is Japanese (or based in Japan); however, news stories like this often take a few days to perculate and be picked upon by other media sources. When Fujii won his first major title on July 16; most of the immediate coverage was by Japanese based media. L'Express did cover it here though about a week later. I don't understand French; so, I didn't add it to the article. No non-Japanese person has ever been awarded regular professional status as a shogi player. (Women's professional shogi is considered to be a separate system. Although one non-Japanese has become a Women's professional shogi player; no woman (Japanese or otherwise) has ever qualified for regular professional status.) So, shogi is not nearly as international as Go (game), Chess or other board games, and it's all based in Japan (except for some exhibitions or the occasional major title games); in that sense, it's like Sumo. There is a sort of "World Championship", but that is for amateur shogi and most of the participants are non-Japanese amateurs from countries other than Japan or Japanese amateurs living outside of Japan for work or family reasons, etc. So, there are no professional shogi players who are non-Japanese or who are based outside of Japan, and all of the major tournaments are based in Japan. Anyway, as I posted above, I've got no problem if this nomination is declined because it's not within the scope of ITN, and I appreciate all of the comments received so far. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support I'm fairly sure that the only reason we haven't posted a shogi story is that it's never been nominated before. Article is a little WP:PROSELINE but is well sourced, and this is getting a lot of coverage in the Japanese press.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The PROSELINE comment is quite helpful regardless of the outcome of this nomination. I was kind of aware of that and my intent was to further go back on work on that at some point. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:15, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose the specific item nominated, with no comment on shogi in general. Among current title holders, there is one who holds 3 titles and another who is younger than Fujii . I can think of no other sport/game where the convergence of these two factors would itself be seen as especially noteworthy.   GreatCaesarsGhost   17:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fujii isn't the first professional shogi player to ever simultaneously hold two titles; he is the youngest to achieve the feat. Yoshiharu Habu actually held seven major titles simultaneously back in 1995-96 (there were only seven major titles back then), and others have held more than one title at the same time. The coverage of Fujii has primarily to do with his doing so at such a young age and his breaking Habu's record of being the youngest by more than 3 years (Fujii did it at 18 years 1 month; Habu did it at 21 years 11 months). The other part of your post seems to be a mistake, there is no major title holder currently younger than Fujii and has never been a major title holder younger than Fujii. He is the youngest to have ever won even one major title. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I misread Toyoshima age of professional status as his current age. Separately then, wouldn't achieving that first title be more significant than the second?  GreatCaesarsGhost   14:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fujii winning his first major title is certainly quite significant and did receive quite a bit of coverage as well. Both are quite significant as individual accomplishments, but winning two in the same season seems a little more significant. As for why, I didn’t nominate the article at that time; I simply wasn’t aware of ITN at that time and instead tried for DYN. Anyway, as I posted above, I thought this might be more in line with ITN than DYK; if it’s too out-of-scope even for ITN, however, then that’s fine. — Marchjuly (talk) 17:35, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now Opponents section is missing sources, Other championships sub-section is completely unsourced, 45th Annual Shogi Awards in Annual Shogi Awards is missing source, and Other awards is missing source. Dan the Animator 17:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The "Other championships" section is sourced. There are various sources for individual results cited in the "Shogi professional" section and a more general citation cited in the "Titles and other championships" section (Sōta Fujii). The "45th Shogi Awards" is also sourced above in the "Awards and honors" (Sōta Fujii). The "Opponents" section is also sourced; it's located in the "29-game winning streak" section (Sōta Fujii). The "Other awards" section is sourced; it's located in the "Awards and honors" section immediately above (Sōta Fujii, etc.) -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * no they're not. For the "Other championships" section, the source you linked is in the above prose, NOT in the table. The source being cited needs to be on the table. The same goes with the "45th Shogi Awards" which should have an in-text ref too. There needs to be in-text/table refs for each tournament or award. Dan the Animator 22:18, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The tables/lists were added just to present the content mentioned immediately above in the level-2 sections in a different way and since they were located so closely together it didn't seem necessary. However, thank you for pointing this problem out. It was fixed by using WP:REFNAME. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per GCG. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Shogi looks too me like a variation of chess which is only played in Japan, similar to how there are also variations only played in China and Korea. I didn't find wide coverage even in english-japanese news sites. Albertaont (talk) 21:02, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Shogi is played internationally; it's just not played internationally at the professional level. There are amateur organizations (national organizations) worldwide and there are international tournaments for amateurs. As for it being a variant of chess, I believe chess itself is a variant of another game: so, maybe it's better to say that shogi and chess come from the same family of games. There aren't many English-Japanese news sites that probably would be considered WP:RS, but I believe most of them have covered Fujii. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose it sounds like an item only for Shogi fans, the same way records such as "Bayern became the first team ever to finish a Champions League campaign with a flawless record, meaning they won every single game they played in the competition" are only for football fans. Banedon (talk) 23:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Allan Fotheringham

 * Support it looks good to go. My only suggestion is to rework the Fotheringhamisms section, which feels a bit unencyclopedic. Dan the Animator 17:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support some of the latter sections smack of trivia but what's there is sourced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support though I agree with Dan and The Rambling Man re the trivial Fotheringhamisms section, maybe it should be moved to the talk page for the duration of its time on RD JW 1961   Talk  21:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 03:58, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Trinidad and Tobago general election

 * Support in principle, but as usual the results section needs a prose summary and sourcing issues need to be addressed first.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 04:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Elections are ITN/R and it's ITN on the French Wikipedia as well. Article needs some revision per Bzweebl, but once someone more competent in that area addresses it, excellent ITN topic This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's appearance on the French, or any other, Wikipedia is of zero relevance here.Stephen 05:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

*Oppose On article quality, will support once the issues raised above are fixed; and please bold the main article in the blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 10:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. In addition, I recommend the original blurb. Keeps it simple. Ktin (talk) 05:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Still no prose results, Candidates by constituency still orange tagged.130.233.2.170 (talk) 10:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Prose results added, and candidate source added.Joofjoof (talk) 14:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now until sourcing is improved. Orange tags in article Support now fixed, good work  JW 1961   Talk  10:43, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Orange tag resolved.Joofjoof (talk) 14:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting support The issues were addressed, should've struck the oppose before the posting. Gotitbro (talk) 12:36, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Blurb edited.Joofjoof (talk) 14:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. ITNR. Dan the Animator 14:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as its ITN/R. Article needs some grammar revisions though...but it's being taken care of. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ready Quality issues mentioned above have been resolved.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 20:27, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sourcing has been addressed. Can someone check this? Joofjoof (talk) 07:03, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose did I miss something crucial here? Tables in "Campaign slogans and songs" and "Parties and candidates" are all basically unsourced? Stray unreferenced statements throughout the article? A single paragraph of prose for the results section? It is ok if I'm wrong. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're right. Don't know how I missed that, thanks for pointing it out.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 22:50, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Looks ready to me now. Thanks for your efforts.  B zw ee bl   (talk • contribs) 07:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posting, lookd good now. --Tone 10:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting Comment. If it is not too late, I would want to recommend a picture for this post. Adding one. Updated Altblurb2. Ktin (talk) 19:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support picture Thanks for adding the photo. Hopefully it's not too late. Dan the Animator 20:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Todd Nance

 * Lots of dead links. Also, need to replace the Discogs ref, and maybe better ref on the birthdate?  GreatCaesarsGhost   02:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Done – all replaced. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support G2G.  GreatCaesarsGhost   11:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support now that the problems with the article have been addressed. All looks good to me. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Sourcing is complete and thorough. A solid BLP.130.233.2.170 (talk) 06:34, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support As article fixed by Bloom JW 1961   Talk  10:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Dan the Animator 15:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 04:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Ongoing: California Wildfires

 * Oppose for now but monitor the situation. California wildfires are frequent enough that a wildfire in California is no longer newsworthy in and of itself.  However, if the destruction caused by this wildfire increases, my position would change. NorthernFalcon (talk) 03:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not right now but if it gets as bad as the firs have been in previous years then it would be ITN material. For now though, let's wait and see. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:16, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Not as tragic as the 2019 California wildfires or even close to the 2018 California wildfires yet, but if they continue to get widespread coverage for a full week then I'd consider supporting.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 05:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait as well as the Bay area, there's a couple fires threatening Santa Clarita, but nothing (besides 'annual wildfires burn') has happened yet. Kingsif (talk) 06:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose come back if something notable actually happens. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: One of the fires is threatening the Lick Observatory (see ). Obviously hopefully it doesn't happen, but would its destruction be ITN-worthy? 2A02:C7D:118C:2600:CF2:983C:C6F0:AEAE (talk) 08:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ask that if it happens. Kingsif (talk) 09:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose America --LaserLegs (talk) 10:03, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Will you cut that out?--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  12:29, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just because something happens in America doesn't mean that it isn't ITN-worthy. Stop your Anti-American bias. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 14:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I agree with you and WaltCip, I'm also an American, but that doesn't mean this is ITN worthy (at least for now). Dan the Animator 14:57, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I agree that this isn't ITN-worthy, as wildfires happen in California all the time. However, I don't like LaserLeg's attitude towards American topics. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * oh in that case sorry for bothering you. A week ago I was trying to combat British/UK centrism so I definitely understand your complaint. Dan the Animator 15:09, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose for now many other natural ongoing events are happening that are much worse than this. This is nothing unique for the region and so far has only 1 death. Consider looking at the Current Events Portal's "Ongoing events" sidebar, which has a lot of natural disasters. Dan the Animator 14:55, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now, as wildfires happen every year in California, and this years isn't that bad yet, certainly not comparable to 2018 or 2019. Wait until more things get destroyed; then we can post it to ITN. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ben Cross

 * Comment. Folks, I understand that the article requires a lot of work, but, is someone up for it? Seems like we should make an attempt. I can get started. Ktin (talk) 06:20, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I put a good-sized dent in the filmography. Overall, not really that much further to go.  GreatCaesarsGhost   13:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I added missing in-text ref templates. I'm not that familiar with editing bio pages but if you tell me what needs to be done I'll try my best to do it. Dan the Animator 15:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks Dan. Last night, I cleaned up the front end and the tail end of the article. The big things I see are --
 * 1. Check the image and confirm copyright. Seems odd to say fair-use, but, I may be wrong.
 * 2. Citations are required across the board in the career section, and I see some of them have been marked with missing-refs. Thanks for that.
 * 3. There is a section in between (in the middle of the career section), where it borrows very heavily from one AP interview, and goes on into his views. While this can stay, this should be proportional. Overall, I think this section can do with some amount of precis writing.
 * 4. Anything about what he was doing between 2012 and 2020. I have learnt that this is good to round the narrative.
 * PS: I seek pardon. This message probably belongs in the talk page rather than WP:ITNC. But, I ended up writing it here. Thanks again. Ktin (talk) 15:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: I seek pardon. This message probably belongs in the talk page rather than WP:ITNC. But, I ended up writing it here. Thanks again. Ktin (talk) 15:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait, is Rotten Tomatoes a valid source to use for filmography? Dan the Animator 15:48, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I would personally use a different source for filmography, if possible. However, I did a search on WP:RSN and it seems like there has been some discussion. Link to RSN search. Let's take this conversation to the article talk page rather than bother folks here. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 15:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Per the discussion here just this month, it's fine to use Rotten Tomatoes for filmography sourcing. —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks. Btw, Bloom - can you look at the image's copyright status? That one is literally staring at my face (pun, slightly intended). Ktin (talk) 17:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it's fine, so long as it's used only in this article and nowhere else (since it's fair-use). —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose still some outstanding unreferenced claims. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:54, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks good now.  GreatCaesarsGhost   21:36, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Actions that we set out to achieve have been completed. I think this is good enough to go to RD. There is one other thing that I would want to complete, but, that can happen in parallel. Good to go. Great partnership and . Ktin (talk) 22:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update: Completed a few additional cleanup actions. This one is ready to go to RD! Go well, Mr Cross. Just the video (and music) of the title track of your Chariots of Fire, continues to evoke goosebumps everytime I watch it! I did, last evening, again! RIP. Ktin (talk) 00:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support ready for RD. Dan the Animator 00:49, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 04:02, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Malian coup d'etat

 * Wait for details, but seems obvious to post something if a coup d'etat or attempted coup d'etat actually happens. NorthernFalcon (talk) 21:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait – Sketchy, and reliable info out of Mali may be slow in coming. Suggest we not try to pad this one with flag salad, as is currently being done. – Sca (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Conditionally support wait until more developments about the coup or attempted coup detailed because there are more new information regarding the incident. 180.245.110.227 (talk) 22:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Change to Support new information now updated. Keita has resigned. 180.245.110.227 (talk) 01:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Question is Keïta "good" or "bad"? I believe per WP:Guaido when the government is "bad" we brand a coup d'etat is an "uprising" --LaserLegs (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keïta is neither good nor bad and the same goes with Maduro. Some people may label Maduro as "bad" while others may label him as "good". The coup is still ongoing so it would be premature to call it anything else than a coup. Also, consider that the Coup of 18 Brumaire is called a coup even though Napoleon is seen as a hero to many French people. Dan the Animator 23:14, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait until successful or resulting in something significant. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:50, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support now that Keita has resigned. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Small coups happen all the time in African countries, especially those with corrupt leaders and mass military action. Just the coup itself isn't that notable- wait until it is successful/unsuccessful and aftermath. Update:Keita resigned and got arrested, so the coup was successful. Change my vote to support. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 23:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , elections happen all the time. That does not mean they are not important or influential on national, regional, and global politics. In the same way, a coup has long-lasting effects on a region. Just as it is not a good argument to say elections are commonplace and not worthy of posting at ITN, I do not think it is a good argument to say coups are commonplace. They represent a change in government. IMO, there is nothing more worthy of posting at ITN than a change in government, violent or not. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 00:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You are also incorrect, the last successful coup being in Zimbabwe in 2017, and successful ones happening only once to thrice a decade, hardly an everyday occurrence to be ITN ineligible. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Change to support per others, as Keita resigned. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 01:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Keita has announced his resignation. Probably under duress, but that's the point of a coup. Juxlos (talk) 00:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as Keita has resigned, which in fact makes this ITN/R. Davey2116 (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support seems pretty obvious. Banedon (talk) 01:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment it seems that aftermath of the coup become more centrally focused story than just coup attempt so I suggest to add a new blurb that indicates that Malian president was resigned. I hope nominator of original blurb can address this new information. 182.1.231.222 (talk) 01:13, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on quality but support in principle. The article needs work before posting. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 01:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support per John M Wolfson. Comment Will this be a repeat of what happened after the start of the Syrian civil war? If so, we may need to consider the possibility of posting multiple updates on Ansar al-Dine and Boko Haram. Dan the Animator 01:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know if we can say for certain what will happen yet but probably wouldn't hurt to update those articles anyway This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Update It's now on ITN on the French Wikipedia as well. All the more reason to post IMO This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support seems to be all wrapped up with no government... but now we know what the blurb can say Kingsif (talk) 03:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support The article has gotten better as more news got out today. I'm sure we will continue to learn more even after this gets posted to ITN. Albertaont (talk) 03:12, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support altblurb, article is fine and will certainly grow in the coming days which is acceptable to post per WP:ITN.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 05:48, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 06:42, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Was wondering how long till the coup was over with, that was fast since the first reports rolled in. Also, the "CTV News" link seems to be unrelated/incorrect here. Gotitbro (talk) 07:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Dale Hawerchuk

 * Oppose This is going to need a lot of work. Severely under-referenced.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per P-K3. Referencing is indeed dreadful. I was actually tempted to soft close the nomination pending dramatic improvement. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as sadly, still poorly referenced a day later JW 1961   Talk  22:27, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Cesare Romiti

 * Support Well sourced. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks good to me JW 1961   Talk  22:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Career section is mostly a list of positions and years without much about what he did in those positions (I see one vague sentence about returning a company to profitability without much about what he did to achieve that).  Spencer T• C 22:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * just added an entire paragraph about his activities at Fiat. And how he returned Fiat to profitability. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. Made a few edits to the article across the sections. I think this is looking ready for RD! and  please feel free to give it a look for any other changes. Else, this is ready. Ktin (talk) 04:56, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 15:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Madhav Prasad Ghimire

 * Support once the article is ready. Shocking news!  CAPTAIN MEDUSA   talk  14:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * He was 100 years old.  GreatCaesarsGhost   15:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Once he wrote about him dreaming about his death; which was later turned into a tragedy song by Narayan Gopal.  CAPTAIN MEDUSA   talk  12:09, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Not much info about what the subject did in his career as a poet. Seems also to be a huge gap in coverage between 1953 and 2019. Also, is it usual to use Vikram Samvat dating in articles? I'm a little rusty on what the MOS indicates, but the article seems to have a mix of styles being used.  Spencer T• C 22:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Much improved, marking "ready".  Spencer T• C 15:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. I have built out the intermediate segments, moved to an unified calendar, added details about his life, including some missing years, as well as honors and awards. I will continue to make incremental updates, but, I think this is ready to go to RD. Please have a look.Ktin (talk) 00:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update. Done with the incremental edits as well. I think this is ready to go to RD! Go well, Mr Ghimire! That your last epic Rithambara (Sanskrit: Upholder of truth) remains unfinished is a bit of a sad note. But, I think yours is a life well lived! RIP. Ktin (talk) 05:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted Stephen 03:07, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Syria and Hezbollah acquitted of assassination of Rafik al-Hariri

 * Oppose Not really encyclopedically newsworthy. Article has multiple problems. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 16:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Even assuming it was newsworthy, the articles are all far below postable quality. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose We don't (generally, IIRC) post acquittals, only convictions. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. We also have a specific article on Assassination of Rafic Hariri, but that has received no updates whatsoever. Maybe this would have been worth considering if someone was convicted, but ruling out some options is not, even before we consider the poor quality of the articles. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 17:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: it appears one otherwise non-notable person (Salim Ayyash) was convicted in absentia, but hasn't been seen for years. BBC <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 17:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose A member of Hezbollah has been found guilty in abstentia (per BBC report above) JW 1961   Talk  17:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose Certainly more notable than some of the sports stuff in ITN at the moment, but per Modest Genius, still not something we normally would post since there's not been a conviction This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 18:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Zara Alvarez

 * Comment – At the rate it is going, this article should be renamed Killing of Zara Alvarez. Please focus more on her career and life before her death. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 17:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Lacks any detail about her life outside of her profession. Her name appears only 3 times in prose, while "Duterte" appears 4 times.130.233.2.170 (talk) 06:38, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support It's short and per above has limited info on the majority of her life but it should be satis. Dan the Animator 15:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Angela Buxton
*Oppose for now missing in-text refs (I added the templates). Dan the Animator 15:03, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article is fully sourced. Yoninah (talk) 00:25, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support looks good now. Thanks P-K3 for adding the refs. Dan the Animator 00:47, 21 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I've fixed those.-- P-K3 (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 04:44, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Claire Shulman

 * Support satis from Bloom again Kingsif (talk) 04:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - article is sourced and thorough. TJMSmith (talk) 04:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support looks good to me.  PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 05:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - unfortunately this suffers from an issue we've mentioned before here - too much space dedicated to a negative incident (the "Unlawful lobbying" section) in comparison to the rest of her career. Her obit in the NY Times mentions this in one paragraph, so certainly it should be in the article, but not occupying a section longer than the entire rest of her career. I suggest having this somewhat reduced in length, in a "later life" section detailing other things she did later on, and expanding more details of her career as leader of Queen's, which is what she's primarily noted for. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 08:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's an improvement and makes the criticism of the lobbying incident look a little less out of whack. There's still a bit of a lack of detail in the "Career" section though. She spent sixteen years as Borough President, which as far as I can tell was the most significant role she had in her life, yet the article actually doesn't say anything whatsoever about what she did during that time except for her re-elections. The NY Times obit above mentions a few - a 1987 rezoning dispute in which she was influential, advocacy on the subject of airports, economic and environmental issues and healthcare. The article doesn't have to be tip-top perfect, but it should at least have a little detail on the most important part. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 09:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait per Aakuru. This is the newest nomination, no need to rush it.  GreatCaesarsGhost   11:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ready 20 hours later, with consensus in favour of posting. —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 20:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * wait, what? My concerns above have not been addressed satisfactorily. There is still no detail on her career as borough president which means the "controversy" is disproportionate. Please pull until they are dealt with. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I see no "unlawful lobbying" section and it appeared balanced to me. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I explicitly said that the updates were not sufficient to make the article balanced, and that there was no detail on her career at all. If the concerns raised are unaddressed, and there's no consensus that my objections were invalid (indeed GreatCaesarsGhost agreed with them) then it should not have gone up. Anyway, the matter is now moot as the OP has added some new material after it was posted, such that I can now withdraw my oppose and all is good with the world. But really this shouldn't have gone up while quality concerns were outstanding. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Lack of info about one aspect ≠ disproportionate coverage about another. Also, consensus cannot be vetoed.  GreatCaesarsGhost merely stated "wait" (reasonable given that it was the newest nom at the time), not "oppose". —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * actually that's not correct. "Disproportionate" means exactly that. If we had 6 paragraphs on her career, and 1 on the controversy, then that's fine. But with just 1 paragraph of career and 1 of controversy, now that's a lack of proportion, because it's 50/50. On the process issue, the "consensus" you mention was formed exclusively from support !votes prior to me raising an objection. And while your updates helped to bring some balance by reducing the lobbying section, that paragraph at the time still remained of equal length to the entire "Career" section, which means the article was clealry unbalanced. Instead of ignoring my concerns and pinging other admins to try to get this posted while concerns were outstanding, you could have just made the updates as I had suggested. I can't speak for what GCG was thinking when they said "Wait", but given that they said "per Amakuru" I assumed the implication was that it should wait until such time as the article concerns were addressed. Anyway, notwithstanding all that I do thank you for making your most recent updates, and all's well that end's well! &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're right, I could have just made the updates. But I'm frankly fed up with how my noms are constantly being held to a higher standard than others that get posted (e.g. Manuel Moroun).  Just as that nom could not be passed despite the support of one veteran ITN admin (Spencer), so this nom cannot be failed by one either.  Both noms demonstrate perfectly how consensus is consensus and cannot be vetoed – timing of votes is irrelevant. —Bloom6132 (talk) 22:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Amakuru read my intent correctly. If someone has lead such a life that they qualify for a BLP here, we should note why. Again, this does not need to be overly thorough, but if we're pointing to the article we should have a story to tell. I oppose the posting, but I don't find any great travesty in it.   GreatCaesarsGhost   00:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Consensus cannot be vetoed"? WP:CONSENSUS is not a vote count. Amakuru opposed with a concern; Muboshgu read that comment, reviewed the article and found the content satisfactory. 100 supports or opposes which ignore the guidelines or glaring issues with the content would be rightly ignored. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you actually read what I have written, nowhere did I say it was a vote count. I am, however, concerned about giving a single editor override power to stop a nom from being posted.  You're oversimplifying when you say he merely "opposed with a concern".  He went on to question the decision to post, and requested that it be pulled.  Sounds like a veto to me … —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Ongoing: Belarus Protests

 * Support These are clearly still ongoing, quiet large, still in the news, and article still being updated. No need to add yet to ongoing until the current blurb needs to kicked down. --M asem (t) 23:27, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Protests are still very large and in the news. I don't care if there's a new sentence added every day or not, that's not how Wikipedia articles are meant to be written.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * After all the COVID articles, we need a larger policy/guidance on handling what someone coined as "hyper-reporting" which is basically "(proseline)^2" (literal day by day updated with no attempts to smooth out as a summary with appropriate updates), but that's a problem for another page elsewhere to be discussed and not something yet to worry about at ITN. --M asem (t) 23:58, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd be interested in that discussion. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd also be interested in that, ping me if you start it. Kingsif (talk) 04:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support and we're already late. Alsoriano97 (talk) 23:51, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support This protest is still very active at this moment in time.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 23:52, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Front page of the Wall St Journal and New York Times today, very much in the news. P-K3 (talk) 23:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Oppose  the last update about a protest I see is on August 6th when 5000 people took to the streets. The rest of it is the usual moaning and whining from the losing party. If you want it to go into ongoing in it's current state, the target needs to be Complaining about Alexander Lukashenko. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I found the update. Neutral until I'm done analyzing the article for updates. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose there is a LOT of filler in this article, a lot. In terms of actual protests, there is a one liner about protests on the 16th numbering between 100000-200000. One line, with a broken ref. Then a bit of proseline from the 14th claiming 16000 but you read the source and the BBC was citing a banner carried by the protesters that there were 16000 supporters. Before that some more filler including a 5 year old being injured (sad but so what). There are certainly protests going on, but the article is a gigantic WP:PROSELINE WP:COATRACK and a week from now when I try to crowbar it out of the box it won't be any better and I'll be drowned out in cries of "it's in the news" or "look at all the edits". --LaserLegs (talk) 01:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The article is unbelievably bad at this point, that whole "crimes against humanity" section is an unsubstantiated mess, there are outrageous POV section headings calling out "censorship", "repression" and "crimes against humanity", the filler now includes a hit-and-run with "no medically significant injury" and the whole thing is propped up by random eye witness accounts. The article, in short, is utter dog shit, and yet we're going to park this mess on the main page indefinitely. #sad. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose on quality; though I don't worry as much about the 'filler' as LL, there are at least 7 cn tags, and much more text that should have such tags. If we're putting a current politics article on the main page until further notice, verifiability should be a concern. Kingsif (talk) 04:00, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * CN tags are now resolved. Feel free to identify further uncited material and I'd be happy to address it, but I think the article appears to have more uncited material than it actually does because the "torture and violence" section includes one paragraph for each source. Having just read that section (and I encourage others to do the same), I think Wikipedia is morally obliged not to censor those graphic details.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 05:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTCENSORED is the relevant statute, but you should review WP:RGW before opining on WP's "moral obligation". That section of the article is a farce, "torture" is a loaded POV term and every paragraph is an account from a "victim" in some cases anonymous and is about as far from WP:RS as possible. Wow, the article has gotten worse over night. --LaserLegs (talk) 09:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I am familiar with those guidelines and see no problem with the sourcing in that section.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 21:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support very much in the news, and looks like it will be in the news for a while longer. Banedon (talk) 06:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * By the way I think those that oppose this on quality should do more than oppose ongoing, they should angle to get the blurb removed from the box. Banedon (talk) 00:50, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

"*Comment - Oh yeah, thanks for indirectly mentioning me in the nominator's comments. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per LL, and I'll note the Supports have not weighed in on quality. The "week 1" section in particular is disjointed and unreadable.  GreatCaesarsGhost   11:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no comment on the quality, as the article is already bold linked on the Main Page. My support is purely a procedural one, to move it to Ongoing once the next blurb goes up. P-K3 (talk) 12:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak S support – Widely covered on a daily basis. (See sources added above.) Weak because article seems overly weighted with background. – Sca (talk) 13:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Widely ongoing in Belarus and surrounding countries. We posted the Hong Kong and George Floyd protests to the ongoing section. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, per P-K3. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now, two orange-level tags in the "Human rights issues" session need resolution. Orange tags are a "no go" for posting on the main page.  Otherwise, the article is of sufficient quality.  If the orange-level tags are resolved, consider this a full support.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 16:52, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support Posts about the protests continuing are all over social media, clearly one of the most important events in Europe. Plus Lithuanian Seimas rejecting Lukashenko. If it were up to me I'd maintain the blurb line, but a move to ongoing is also fine This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 18:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as evidently high-notability ongoing news, so long as the orange tags are fixed. <b style="color:Teal;">Flip</b><sup style="color:purple">and <b style="color:lime">Flopped</b> <b style="color:grey"> ツ</b> 19:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above and would also Support an ongoing nomination for a new wikipage titled "Aftermath of 2020 Belarusian Election". Dan the Animator 23:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 00:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support The protests have already become a major news headline. Another issue with the article is that the gallery contains clearly relevant images, but several of those images do not have captions to accompany them. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 03:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I was about to post this under ongoing, but there's currently a copyvio tag in one of the sections. Please fix that first. --Tone 07:33, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose The perhaps-overworked and mis-named Crimes against humanity section is red tagged for copypaste. Cannot possibly go up in this state. Talk page is going over votes on how to rename this section, but to play it safe I don't think using Wikipedia's voice to declare crimes against humanity when other, very-motivated other sources are not doing so.130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – Agree with previous post. In terms of significance, it's absurd that Belarus     is absent from the box, while frivolous (Snooker) and stale (UAE-Israel) items consume space. Bush league. – Sca (talk) 12:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you had wanted it to be posted, you could have fixed the article instead of complaining. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 15:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not well-versed enough in Belarussian matters for that, but I could see what was dominating the news, and provided links to relevant RS articles. – Sca (talk) 21:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There's no more orange tags. Check it yourself. Article looks likes its good to go. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:49, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted Thanks to Destroyeraa and anyone else that did the hard work of getting the article quality up to main page standards. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 16:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – Ditto. – Sca (talk) 21:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment there has been more back and forth editing in the last few days about a flag than new content about actual protests. Prying this one of of the box is going to be tough. See y'all next week I guess. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:06, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you have concerns about the article, WP:ERRORS or Talk:2020 Belarusian protests are the correct place to raise them. This discussion is unlikely to be noticed enough at this point to enact any changes you'd like to see.  Additionally, if you think the article has gone stale and new information is not being added often enough to qualify for ongoing, please start a new discussion to have it removed.    -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 13:31, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jayron32, and you're right. The talk page was a rats nest, I'll put it up for removal next week if it's not improved. Cheers and enjoy your weekend. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:51, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD:Jasraj

 * Support Looks well referenced.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:27, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Article still has some red links - I can head there and de-link them. Ktin (talk) 14:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * These have just been deleted, but I am not sure why as they are plausible titles for new articles, per WP:REDDEAL. They weren't challenged at the recent GA review. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Got it. I was the one who reverted the red links. But, if you think they can be there in the article page when featured on RD, please do revert my edit. Thanks for letting me know. Ktin (talk) 15:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Article is decently long and referenced. Good to go. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 20:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Highest temperature ever reliably recorded on Earth in Death Valley

 * Oppose incremental change from 2016, also oppose due to the dubious nature of this "record", also oppose as not even updated. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 10:29, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose A search for "highest" in the article yields several "highest" temperatures, some of which are higher and others lower than the one in the blurb. Even if the article were updated, I feel that "highest reliably measured surface temperature" is getting a little pigeon holed.130.233.2.40 (talk) 10:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Several record-breaking temps across the globe over the last several years, this no different. --M asem (t) 14:01, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Meteorological trivia. – Sca (talk) 14:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose - For now, but paying attention. (For one thing, that heat wave is not over.) So far, this still falls technically under a regional "hottest here on this day" type of record, as noted in previous comments: in part because the all-time, everywhere, under-standard-measuring-conditions record (which btw is also in Death Valley) is disputed. If the disputed number is dropped, the current making-the-news temperature would indeed be the highest-ever ATEUSMC temperature -- but I don't think it is appropriate to do that at WP ITN so long as the WMO still acknowledges it.
 * However, IF the cited temperature at the automated weather station at Furnace Creek were to exceed 56.7°C/134.1°F (not all that much hotter than right now), my vote would immediately change to "support", on the basis of this no longer being trivia but an absolute change in the range of standard-condition recorded temperatures during recorded history, exceeding even the disputed 1913 number. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 15:01, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose not notable enough at this time. Will change to support per Tenebris. Dan the Animator 17:40, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose As a pending new monthly record anywhere in the U.S., it has to be confirmed by the NCEI. Even if confirmed, it would only be a global August record. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 17:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per most of the above. Side note: The US still uses Fahrenheit for temperature, so the blurb should reflect that, while perhaps putting the celsius in next to it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:14, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support I think scientific reliability matters. Consider the case of the oldest living person: the oldest person who has ever lived is Jeanne Calment, if we limit it to reliable or verifiable numbers; and she is widely recognized as the oldest person.  But there's a long list of unverified claims at Longevity claims, many of which are rather dubious, and we would never post a new entry on that list as "the oldest person ever."  Yet if we demanded that a verified age pass all of the dubious claims on top of the verified entries before we could post about them in ITN as the oldest person ever, then we'd never post about it.  Now look at the temperature article: the dubious claims should really be split off into their own article.  There are a number of claims in the 70s and one in the 80s; you will never see a scientifically reliable number that high in your lifetime.  We should not demand that a new temperature record has to pass all of these dubious claims before it is newsworthy, and a new temperature record is absolutely newsworthy--it's also headline news all around the world. NorthernFalcon (talk) 18:53, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Until verified, should not be prepared to accept this as any "more accurate" than other hottest day records which also seem to be under dispute. Albertaont (talk) 19:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Among the less important temperature records that have been broken in the last several years.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support It is an update to "hottest ever temperature on Earth", in practical terms - the need to add 'reliable' is to not get complaints about some wild claims and should not be held against the record. Kingsif (talk) 21:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – If similarly high temps were recorded in Death Valley for several days, that might be worth posting. I checked the location, Furnace Creek, Calif., at 21:30 and it was 124F (51C), but it was only 2:30 p.m. there at that time, so it might get up to 130F (54C) by late afternoon, I guess. – Sca (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: A more significant aspect of the heat in California may be its effects on people there. – Sca (talk) 22:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

(Stale) RD: Aisultan Nazarbayev

 * Comment Illegal activities should probably be merged with Personal life. The sources for his various FC memberships should probably be checked. A better reference for Chelsea is probably needed, because the current one really does say "two to three" months.130.233.2.40 (talk) 08:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Article as a whole looks a little disjointed and it's a little hard to follow the connections between sections; lede states that he was a businessman but not seeing much info about that in the body.  Spencer T• C 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose article is still not in a condition to be posted - and are there no better sources for death? In any case, this is stale now. Kingsif (talk) 06:29, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 World Snooker Championship

 * Comment Were past snooker championships (such as 2019 World Snooker Championship) posted? Is this part of ITN/R? ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:53, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is. That's indicated on the bottom of the nomination box.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:55, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Change to Support, we posted the PGA championship, right? ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:56, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, we did post it as another ITN/R item.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support per ITN/R. The article looks great as it seem that a bunch of users have been working on it throughout the last two weeks.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:53, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose We already have one sports-related blurb when there are vastly more important things happening. I guess if you replace the 5000m world record, maybe This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 19:00, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If this gets posted, it will probably replace the Belarusian protests, which will get moved to the Currently ongoing section. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support I don’t agree with this being ITN/R but this isn’t the place to discuss that, and Wikipedia’s snooker coverage is reliably excellent so I have no problem posting articles like this anyway.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I see some questions raised immediately above that need to be answered. Firstly, this is an ITN/R item, which means that a good-shape article with a quality update is the only condition for posting. Those who don't agree that this event merits an ITN/R status can start a discussion to revisit it on the ITN/R's talk page. Secondly, the posting of this event would not necessarily archive one of the already posted items but, in case it does, that would be the earliest posted one on the bottom of the section. Thirdly, this is not the place to discuss if the ITN section is off-kilter and which blurbs should be replaced with what in order to fix that. Thank you.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:16, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support article is ITNR and the update is typically excellent from . Opposition to this is dealt with neatly by Kiril's comment above.  Good to go. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 19:34, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I actually think it needs a bit of TLC to get it perfect, but that's outside ITN! Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:35, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I said excellent, not perfect...! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 19:56, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted This is ITN/R and the quality is obviously more than sufficient. I have dropped File:Ronnie O’Sullivan at Snooker German Masters (DerHexer) 2015-02-06 07.jpg and File:Stephen Maguire, Ronnie O’Sullivan, and Michaela Tabb at German Masters Snooker Final (DerHexer) 2012-02-05 05 cropped.jpg at WP:CMP so that they may be added later. Black Kite (talk) 19:37, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stick it inside someplace. – Sca (talk) 14:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Robert Trump

 * Comment Robert Trump currently redirects to Family of Donald Trump. TompaDompa (talk) 02:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as a redirect. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:30, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Still oppose per AfD tag. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:31, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Apparently he was not sufficiently notable for his own stand alone article and what's at the redirect target is a single paragraph. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Boldly reopening as the article now exists. --212.74.201.229 (talk) 12:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Would he even merit an article if he wasn't Donald's brother? 331dot (talk) 12:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, has head of the Trump organization he'd merit an article like any other head of a large business. Media attention means additional WP:RS but doesn't diminish WP:N --LaserLegs (talk) 12:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not a reason for notability, per both WP:BIO and WP:NORG. Notability is also not inherited just by being associated with Trump. This failed a standalone article test. --M asem (t) 13:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment article is stubby even by our standards. Paragraphs of prose please, not lines of it --LaserLegs (talk) 12:15, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Being related to the famous doesn't automatically make a person notable. – Sca (talk) 13:09, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you feel the subject fails WP:N head on over to WP:AFD else you've been here long enough to know that we threw the "notability" requirement for ITN/RD into the trash eons ago --LaserLegs (talk) 14:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I momentarily forgot. Hope the Afd works. Running something like this is almost insulting to the deceased. ("Now that I'm dead you're going to publicize me?") – Sca (talk) 14:58, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Masem has already done that so this should probably be closed (again) pending the outcome of the AfD. P-K3 (talk) 14:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * When an article is created on a person's death (particularly after the ITN was first posted), it is 100% fair to question if the person was notable before their death, so the automatic RD assumption does not work here in this case. There are rare cases where it was clear the person should have had an article, but what's been shown here for Robert is that he was simply Donald's brother (not a notability factor) and a businessman (not a notability factor) so there's nothing here to push him over the line. --M asem (t) 15:07, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I generally oppose on articles that were created after the person's death, except for a few that reasonably may not have existed per WP:CSB; the brother of a Western country's leader does not fall under that. Black Kite (talk) 14:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per AfD tag. --AlphaBeta135 (talk) 15:22, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ready article survived the AfD. Career section is orange tagged for expansion which hasn't been a deal breaker before and what's there is good enough. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:27, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have removed the 'Ready' tag as there is not yet a consensus to post this, although that may develop. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * What "consensus" is needed? It survived an AfD, concerns over WP:N are satisfied, Kamal Rani Varun and Trini Lopez went up with 1 support !vote. It's time to go up. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:40, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Meeting WP:N does not necessarily mean being of sufficient quality to put on the main page. You know this already; it is the entire reason we need to nominate recent deaths in the first place, rather than simply posting them immediately – to assess the quality. WP:ITNRD states this explicitly: An individual human, animal or other biological organism that has recently died may have an entry in the recent deaths section if it has a biographical Wikipedia article that is [...] Of sufficient quality to be posted on the main page, as determined by a consensus of commenters. (emphasis mine). TompaDompa (talk) 23:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support orange tag for expansion, but whats there is fine. Time to post --LaserLegs (talk) 22:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose literally tagged. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:42, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Not anymore, *poof* 212.74.201.229 (talk) 22:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per IAR - subject does not meet GNG. The standard for RDs is already so low, I don't see why we need to bend even further. There is nothing in the article that speaks to notability. He invested in a company. His brother did a thing. His sister did a thing. Every source in the article is about someone else. GNG requires that the subject be covered "directly and in detail." 75.188.224.208 (talk) 22:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You should log-in and opine. The standard for RDs isn't "already so low", it's simply that the pre-existence of an article means people who have bona fide Wikipedia articles are entitled to RD, assuming their article is up to snuff.  This isn't the place the debate GNG about an individual, that would be at AFD and ... oh, it didn't get deleted!  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:07, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed I should log in. Apologies for the faux pax.  GreatCaesarsGhost   11:07, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * OpposeHad it not been for the furious pace to create an article on said individual, this would have been SNOW closed. Had this person been notable, a decent article would have already long existed. Albertaont (talk) 23:19, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Had this person been notable, a decent article would have already long existed." statement is false. We've posted other posthumous RD noms and the article easily survived an AfD. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:14, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support the article has survive AfD, so is worthly to be posted. For opposer, please do not oppose it just because it is not a president, high level officials, etc. 114.125.244.30 (talk) 01:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Survived AfD, well referenced, what's the issue. <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  01:40, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Robert's death has made top headlines throughout the US, UK, Canada, and several other countries. If you say he isn't notable, we have posted way less notable people RDs in ITN before. Survived AfD by a landslide of Keeps, well-referenced, decently long. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 01:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 03:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm no fan of Trump, as my signature would indicate, but the resistance to having Robert Trump's article on Wikipedia because of people who believe he's notable only because of the President is really patent horseshit. That's not up to us to decide. WP:GNG is very clear and politics shouldn't get in the way of that whatsoever.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  12:14, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I empathize with the opposes for sure, but we post a lot of mediocre articles about a lot of people with dubious notability it's not often one gets this kind of reaction. Still the process was followed and it worked so that's #winning --LaserLegs (talk) 17:05, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I never really got involved in that debate, and it was over before it started, but the issue isn't really WP:GNG (which is obviously met), as much as WP:NOPAGE. There are numerous people who have vast reams of coverage about them - Malia Obama, Romeo Beckham to name a couple - such that they obviously meet GNG and we'd never delete the redirect or the remove brief coverage of them at the redirected page. But equally we don't cover them because they don't have a claim to fame that's really separate from that of their more famous family member. As far as I can tell Robert Trump is the same, and I think the "keep" votes at the AFD were actually very weak. But is it worth fighting? Probably not now. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:51, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you; this is what I was getting at. Accusations that politics had anything to do with the opposition is unfounded.  GreatCaesarsGhost   18:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We post probably a dozen stories a year that belong on "List of terrorist attacks in country" and fail WP:NOPAGE but they go up in the box with little fanfare or controversy (I've even given up opposing them). Is Robert Trump of border line notability? Sure, so is a lot of what ITN posts. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:24, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Linda Manz

 * Comment Superficially good, but sourcing problems in the 'ography. Neither of the section sources support the Faery Tale Theatre role, however the book reference in the previous section might. Her role is named in Longshot but not supported in the references. There's no reference that I could find for the German film. Her role in Wanderers is uncredited in the article, but credited in the sources as "PeeWee". The film sources credit her for a role in the not-exactly-recent Buddy Boy, but it's unmentioned in the article or 'ography.130.233.2.40 (talk) 11:37, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All done – reused the book ref for Faery Tale Theatre. Added ref for Longshot.  Added BFI source for German film.  Wanderers is already credited in the article (line 3 in "Cinema" subsection).  Mentioned role in Buddy Boy. —Bloom6132 (talk) 11:51, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - looks good. Marking as ready. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 15:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 16:23, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Chilla Porter

 * Support Article is a bit short. Unlike DYK, size doesn't matter. But is fully referenced.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  05:45, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose While referenced, too brief to have sufficient depth of coverage of the subject.  Spencer T• C 15:25, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Striking weak oppose, but still feel like the article is just too brief. Working on adding information myself to add to the article from Google Books.  Spencer T• C 16:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support. With some searching, I found more info about the Olympics appearance as well as his post-athletic career (i.e. what he was doing in the 70s, 80s and 90s-- turns out he was director of a fundraising firm). Will give a couple hours for another admin to assess, otherwise will post.  Spencer T• C 16:45, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. At 1278 bytes, it's still at stub length. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 15:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please show me the rule that demands an article be of a certain length to qualify. HiLo48 (talk) 23:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Per WP:ITN under article quality criterion: "Stub articles are never appropriate for the main page."--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  00:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * FWIW, looking at Talk:Chilla_Porter, this article seems to be tagged as "start-class", and not as a stub. Ktin (talk) 00:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That may need to change.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  00:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. Article passes basic hygiene checks. RIP. Ktin (talk) 23:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose borderline but there isn't really any narrative - just a few factoids stitched together. If he got a silver medal in the '56 Olympics was there nothing else of note in his entire athletic career? No details about his performance like how high he jumped, etc? No little medals table? Did he do literally nothing between 1962 and 1995? He passes WP:NSPORT but the article is just really thin. --LaserLegs (talk) 02:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Alright folks, I updated the article to a good extent. I don't know if I am counting right, but, the article is at 7,753 bytes. There is still a gap between 1962 and 1995, but, I think this is good for RD. Ktin (talk) 06:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Definitely significantly improved; no longer a stub.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  12:06, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think this is ready., would you mind giving this a look?--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  15:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support now article has been expanded. and, there is a rule that stubs are not posted to ITN, which this was prior to expansion.-- P-K3 (talk) 16:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Pawnkingthree - When I nominated the article, it wasn't marked as a stub. I have seen smaller articles quickly posted over the years when it obviously suited those doing the posting to do so, usually accompanied by comments like "Posting this will bring more attention and get more material added".  HiLo48 (talk) 21:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * When I came to the article after hearing of his death on the radio, it had already been expanded somewhat, and re-assessed as Start class, so I removed the Stub tags from the article. Since then, the article has been expanded further, and Porter now easily clears the DYK bar of 1,500 bytes of prose.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD. More info added about athletic career and post-athletics life.  Spencer T• C 20:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Thanks Mr Porter. I didn't know of you until this thread. But, just editing and writing up sections of your article last night, made me feel good. I for sure will be looking for videos of that 1956 olympics final that everyone is talking about, and relive that portion of your life. RIP. Ktin (talk) 20:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) MV Wakashio Breaks Apart

 * Support. Might have to get some additional details before posting. But, we should post. I have added an Alternate Blurb (Altblurb). Please feel free to tone it down. Ktin (talk) 22:29, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * added minor link to Mauritius and bulk carrier for people that are interested -> don't want to confuse people with a tanker which would be even worse. Albertaont (talk) 23:01, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. altblurb preferred because have massive cost for years. 180.245.101.217 (talk) 22:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait The big impact was the initial grounding. Most of the oil has been pumped out, what is left is the fuel and their rushing to pump that out, so how much of an effect that will have is unknown, so the stories are all speculative of the impact here. --M asem (t) 22:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment, I tell you that the impact of the spill takes months and years to assess, not only how much effect in environment, but also in society, economy, and many more, that is relevant given Mauritius was badly impacted by COVID-19 as the economy heavily relies on tourism. 180.245.101.217 (talk) 23:17, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In contrast to when this ran aground, when there was an affirmed estimate of how many gallons of oil that spilled into the waters, here, the oil has been removed, all that's left is fuel, and they aren't sure if thats' leaking, and compared to the oil, there's a far less finite supply of that. Yes, if it all spilled, it would be a problem. They will be able to estimate how much of that fuel spilled within a day or so, which would be sufficient if it was significant quantities. But right now, the story is the fear that this fuel could spill, and thus could cause problems. That's speculation, which we don't post. --M asem (t) 04:38, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak support background, reactions, infobox, map, not America -- checks the boxes. The accident section is light on details about the accident, instead it's all environmental damage (which has it's own section). Would be nice to know the events which led to the grounding. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:57, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Initial revelations are shocking: birthday party and quest for wifi. (Spash 247) Albertaont (talk) 23:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as stale: the incident happened weeks ago and starting spilling oil straight away. It was still July when it was named the worst environmental disaster in Mauritius. Kingsif (talk) 23:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Washington Post reports thats oil didn't start leaking until 6 August. Albertaont (talk) 23:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Which was still over a week ago... Kingsif (talk) 07:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Yes it would have been better to post this earlier when it first happened or first started leaking oil, but breaking in half is definitely a new development in this major ongoing story. Let’s rectify our oversight by posting this now. Would also be open to supporting an ongoing link.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 01:05, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support The ship broke up within the last 24hrs. As that is what is being reported, this is not stale. And the scope of the disaster is more than ITN worthy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:22, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong support This is the worst environmental disaster in Mauritius history and a ship that breaks apart is unprecedented for the country. Altblurb I or II preferred. 182.1.235.99 (talk) 01:51, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment If this gets posted, I strongly prefer Altburb I or II, you guys definitely improved it. Albertaont (talk) 02:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Conditional Support. Interesting and important but we should keep the Lebanese government resigning and the Belarussian protests. If we replace something other than those, by all means go ahead. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Blurbs are added and removed based entirely on the date of the event. We don't give preference to certain blurbs over others in terms of how long they stay up. Sometimes blurbs can linger for weeks when ITN is slow. And sometimes they come and go in days. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and remove the most important thing happening in Europe right now. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:42, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The most important thing happening in Europe right now is happening in Minsk.    – Sca (talk) 13:20, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * The proposed image is of unclear permission (aka appears unlikely...) The Wicked Twisted Road (talk) 03:45, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Took it straight from the wiki article, and didn't have a speedy deletion attached or anything attached, but we can drop it. Albertaont (talk) 03:57, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Can't have fair use images on the MP, needs to be free. --LaserLegs (talk) 09:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as stale per Kingsif. Sorry, we can't just post a minor update to the story just because nobody nominated it at the time the news broke. The ship breaking in two is only covered by a small paragraph, which says that 166 tonnes of oil were on board at that time, a small percentage of the overall spill total. I don't see the break up as very important in the overall story. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:58, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The wreck breaking up is not a minor update, it will significantly complicate cleanup and wreck removal efforts --LaserLegs (talk) 09:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Per Masem, Kingsif, Amakuru. Breaking up of the wreck was inevitable. The real story was when Wakashio ran aground and started leaking oil. – Sca (talk) 13:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. P-K3 (talk) 14:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong support per above. Historic and of monumental effects to the region. Dan the Animator 16:51, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Potential effects. They haven't happened yet, and we don't post speculative effects. --M asem (t) 17:36, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * According to the page "by 10 August, about 1,000 metric tons of fuel had spilled" and "Mauritius requested compensation for the spill from Wakashio owner Nagashiki Shipping." I think each of these constitute physical and economic effects respectively and both have already occurred as per the article so there's no speculation. Dan the Animator 18:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Those 1000 tons were waaaay back in July per Reuters, not from this new event. We're looking at the est. 166 tonnes still left and its fate which is not yet reported if this is to be ITN. --M asem (t) 18:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And to put into perspective, keep in mind that major oil spills like the Exxon Valdez were on the scale of 37,000 tonnes. Yes, this was a problem for the area in July, but it is not the same scope that major oil spills hav. --M asem (t) 18:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * check the Current events portal. The 2nd event listed for today is about Mauritius announcing that they will seek damages. Here's the source they used too. Cheers, Dan the Animator 20:55, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as stale per above. "Rectifying" such a mistake is RGW. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:50, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As the person who used that word, I don’t see anything in the linked guideline that relates to my argument. My point was simply now that we have another opportunity to post this significant story let’s do so instead of letting it slip by again. No attempt to right great wrongs involved.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 18:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait as per Masem. But it does look like an impending ecological catastrophe has now become an actual ecological catastrophe. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:26, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Oppose - stale It had been leaking oil for several weeks, it breaking apart isn't the part that's notable, it's the spill that's notable. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 18:58, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Tend to agree with you. But there's not going be an agreed "percentage of wildlife killed threshold" before this can be deemed notable, is there? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:53, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I would have said support, because this spill seems to have really affected Mauritius. However, the discussion is stale and late, as the spill happened in late July. The boat breaking apart isn't that notable - old and damaged boats do often tend to break apart. Full damage surveys come out in a few weeks. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 01:49, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think we should close this one, discussion getting stale. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support the break-up of the vessel specifically was front page news on BBC and also reported on CNN and CBC. We shouldn't need to wait for the actual ecological impact assessment, otherwise we wouldn't post any oil spills. I would be a challenge at this point to honestly say there will NOT be an significant ecological impact.2604:3D09:682:B00:E92A:F623:8D2A:51BA (talk) 20:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait, per Destroyeraa. —Brigade Piron (talk) 20:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong support whilst it is stale or not for the incident, this ship that breaks it half is unprecendented in the country, as well as historic that would never take place in Mauritius before. 36.77.135.116 (talk) 21:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * On a scale of 1-10, just how strong is your support? – Sca (talk) 14:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's very important to know just how strong it is. This story seems to have piqued the interest of first-edit IP posters - this is the third one in the candidacy, and the second to express strong support on the grounds that it's "unprecedented in the country"... &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 16:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I suggest that new IPs first get used to editing on Wikipedia (such as editing actual articles) before taking part in discussions. If you don't have much experience in ITN discussions and Wikipedia discussions as a whole, saying Strong Support isn't saying much. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 16:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * My point was, "strong support" doesn't count more or carry any more weight than just "support," no matter who's voting. – Sca (talk) 21:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak support while Mauritius is a small country, as far as I can tell this is the second-largest oil tanker spill of the past ten years, second only to the Sanchi sinking. And while the Sanchi incident was significantly more notable than this as there was also a high death toll, Sanchi was also the sixth-largest oil tanker spill of all time and the worst in over 25 years, so I don't think an oil tanker spill has to live up to Sanchi in order to be notable. NorthernFalcon (talk) 22:04, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Added altblurb3 as news is pivoting towards fact that Mauritius is seeking compensation. Current size of spill is 27km according to satellite imagery. Albertaont (talk) 23:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note to patrolling admin All three of the Supports from IPs are not only from the same country, but also from the same ISP. You may wish to consider this when divining consensus. Black Kite (talk) 18:39, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Agree with timing concerns noted, with a caveat. I would allow investiture of the significance of the larger event to a lesser step along the way, but this particular step is too minor to note.  GreatCaesarsGhost   19:34, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Didn't know you were interested in investiture. – Sca (talk) 21:57, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not the right word at all, is it? I have no idea what I was even going for there.  GreatCaesarsGhost   01:27, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I read it aloud when you posted, and thought it made sense! A bit convoluted, but made sense. :) Ktin (talk) 03:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose The staleness of this makes the proposed blurbs very awkward. Wording like "portends", "last month", "Grounded (past tense)" make the blurb sound like an incremental update to something larger. I'm not sure the original grounding would have been suitable, either. The article appears to be in good shape, however. As a way forward, I suggest we wait for a declaration from some RS group giving some superlative, "largest spill since X", or similar.130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:33, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Murtaja Baseer

 * Support. Article looks clean for RD as well. RIP. Ktin (talk) 18:40, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Insufficient depth of coverage about his career as a painter. Article at present has more info about things that he wrote rather than painted.  Spencer T• C 04:07, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support: Article is adequate for an under-covered subject. —Brigade Piron (talk) 21:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Can a few others chime in here and help decide the next steps? I think Spencer's point is important. But, the article is what it is - unless someone is on standby to edit the article and make those changes. An alternate view is perhaps there is a paucity of available content re: his paintings, while the information is more about the awards that he received as a painter. I have not seen the sources, so, I don't know. Either ways, will be good to get some additional views, before recommending next steps here. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 23:33, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ready (if I may say so). Thanks to Spencer. I read some secondary sources, and wow - there is a lot of good content about his paintings. I have created a new section on paintings and the article now seems to be rightly representative of his work! With this, I think we should be good to publish! Tagging to see if this rewrite works well. Happy to make any additional updates. Ktin (talk) 05:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 05:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting comment. Go well, Mr Murtaja. I didn't know of you before this thread. But, just editing your article and writing up a section on your paintings, last night, made me feel good. I learnt about 'abstract realism' as a theme thanks to your article. Thanks to for forcing us to do that. RIP. Ktin (talk) 20:17, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the improvements; article does a much better job of highlighting the subject's life and work.  Spencer T• C 20:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) MS Dhoni

 * Snow close we have routinely rejected retirements from ITN. --M asem (t) 15:22, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * With the notable exception of Sachin Tendulkar. I don't know if Dhoni's status in India is comparable. P-K3 (talk) 15:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And Alex Ferguson IIRC. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 15:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Agree w. Snow close But, will add that he was a good captain of the Indian Cricket Team and will be missed. Ktin (talk) 15:26, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose and suggest SNOW close doesn't belong at ITN.  PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:09, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for multiple reasons, including, but not limited to: lots of orange tags in the article, multiple unsourced statements, the second half of the article is really terrible, and he's still going to play cricket. But apart from that...  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 16:41, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) New 5000 metres world record

 * Support in principle, but article needs work with pre-IAAF citations and some increase in prose size. the first "Career" paragraph not having a terminal citation and an uncited table. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:54, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment source the competitions table in the Cheptegei and bold it in the blurb and I'll support. Why not? --LaserLegs (talk) 22:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Makes sense as the athlete's article seems to be the only place where a sensible prose update can be made.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:14, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support I’m surprised that the main track world records aren’t ITN/R. Breaking one of those records is the biggest event in athletics after the Olympics.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:25, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support WP:BLUELINKs for the International competitions section is good enough for me. Decent bio. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above; Cheptegei smashed the record. Kingsif (talk) 23:30, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support amazing feat. Agree with LaserLegs' suggestion on format and glad it was implemented.      <b style="font-family: Verdana; color: #6633FF;">StarM</b> 23:41, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose incremental change in extant world record is trivially fascinating, but not encyclopedically newsworthy. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am not too knowledgeable about this topic, but, is this a significant barrier that has been broken, e.g. the four minute mile, when it was broken? I understand that this particular record was not broken for the last 16 years, but, is there something very specific about this one? PS: I am not implying that I am supportive of only the four-minute-mile kind of records. Just trying to understand this one better. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 00:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you look at Athletics events there are the standard lengths for sprint/race events, so basically each of those in the "track" section all have time records for mens and womens that have been improved over and over through the years. Why those lengths, I'm sure there's a history to that, they're not arbitrary but those are the lengths that we deal with in these records. It's not like tomorrow, someone's going to submit the record for a 7500m sprint, as that's simply not a "standard" track event length. --M asem (t) 00:32, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks. My question was not if there would be 7500m next, but, if this was a significant barrier being breached. However, I do get the drift, now, of what is being spoken here. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 02:12, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support Though the guy smashed the record with an amazing feat, it still isn't the most notable or newsworthy entry. However, changing to support because of the longevity of previous record. Make sure to include this in the blurb.~ Destroyeraa 🌀 00:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is just the opposite bad argument of "nothing's happening in the news right now, so let's post this non-notable story" IMO. Not to get OTHERSTUFFy, we posted Kipchoge's sub-2 hour marathon, as well as other Marathon records being broken so I believe running records being broken are ITN material notwithstanding what else may be in the box. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:48, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There are far too many athletic events to post every time a record is past in any of them. If there was some consensus around some of these being the "premiere" events, I could support that.  GreatCaesarsGhost   01:04, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, just wait until the Olympics in 2021. We'll post every record for every athletic events in the Olympics, and WP:ITN/C will be WP:ITN/Athlete-ticker. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 01:11, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Barely Support A full two seconds would be "smashing", but one-ninety-nine counts as dashing. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hulk, isn't one-ninety-nine equal to two-thirty-nine in this world? :) Ktin (talk) 04:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Humour I sense, but from whence forty cents? InedibleHulk (talk) 05:31, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, oh, oh! Almost two minutes and five thousand metres. That's much longer! InedibleHulk (talk) 22:08, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , lol, I see we are breaching the space-time continuum here :) Ktin (talk) 22:12, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article has no quality issues and the story is covered by reliable sources. Checks all the boxes.-- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 02:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support no quality issues regarding the article whilst grammar also improved. 114.125.231.93 (talk) 04:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. The record had stood for 16 years, so this wasn't a regular occurrence. ITN can't be all doom and gloom. -- Calidum  04:40, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Broken records don't have to be ITNR, we can still discuss them individually, but given the longevity of the previous record this seems notable enough to me. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Interesting news for ITN. Gotitbro (talk) 06:26, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, looks ready JW 1961   Talk  14:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Definitely for ITN.BabbaQ (talk) 14:47, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per all above. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Another awesome Lugnuts creation.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 17:09, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posting. --Tone 17:57, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting minor blurb edit request -- Please can we consider changing the blurb from "Ugandan athlete Joshua Cheptegei sets a new world record in the 5000 metres." to "Ugandan athlete Joshua Cheptegei sets a new world record in the 5000 metres track event." or maybe even say "...track event in Monaco.". Alternately, please consider a concise form "Ugandan athlete Joshua Cheptegei (pictured) sets a new 5000 metres world record." Currently, the sentence seems to end abruptly "...in the 5000 metres". I have updated the Altblurb and the more concise Altblurb2 as well.
 * PS: Apologies for this after-fact request. Ktin (talk) 18:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Post-posting Question What happened with the image? Most if not all of the supports mention nothing about the image so shouldn't the image be posted? I'll notify just in case this is a mistake. Dan the Animator 19:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Image would be good to include, along with the minor tweak to the ending of the blurb. thanks! Ktin (talk) 19:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Image added. Protection at Commons doesn't happen automatically, so there can sometimes be a delay in posting the image after adding it to Main Page/Commons media protection.  Spencer T• C 19:40, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks. Please can you also see the blurb. Currently, it is hanging abruptly, "...in the 5000 metres". Ktin (talk) 19:48, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Fixed blurb. Thanks for the pic update. --Tone 19:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Julian Bream

 * Support This article seems great.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 16:38, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it actually needs a few sources adding. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:44, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Sourcing needs improvement.—Bagumba (talk) 16:46, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Please review. Grimes2 (talk) 15:47, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose sourcing is very spotty, as there are many paragraphs that are unsourced. I've added citation needed tags to said paragraphs.  PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose it's almost there, just a few more in-text refs needed. Dan the Animator 19:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per Martinevans123 Dan the Animator 20:17, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. No citation needed tags seem to remain, thanks to the laudable efforts of Grimes2. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posting, nice work with fixing the refs! --Tone 20:35, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Luchita Hurtado

 * Support If the article is expanded and improved, then I will change my vote to support. Changing to support. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 22:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment It appears that further details and sources have been included. --NoonIcarus (talk) 12:26, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support looks fine to me.  PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Oppose  Lead needs to summarize her life beyond one sentence.—Bagumba (talk) 17:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed now. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:56, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support as the problem Bagumba noted has been fixed, look ok for RD now JW 1961   Talk  10:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * —Bagumba (talk) 11:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Borisov pledges to resign

 * Wait the change over will be ITN/R --LaserLegs (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Conditionally support wait until he was actually resigned. per, I will be in ITN/R. 114.125.230.158 (talk) 20:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. A change in PM is not ITNR unless as part of general election results. 331dot (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait This is a definitely wait. If all conditions come to pass, its ITNR, but a pledge based on an expectation isn't newsworthy at this point. --M asem (t) 22:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait until he actually resigned. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 00:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, but not right now. Absolutely worth posting especially since we seem to be into Prime Ministers resigning lately, but I'd wait till he actually leaves office. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait Per above, till it actually happens. Gotitbro (talk) 06:28, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait until he resigns. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:19, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Lithuania rejects Lukashenko

 * Oppose the protests are in the box, this is incremental and inconsequential. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Agree with LL. We can't post every step in this process. 331dot (talk) 19:03, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Per 331dot and LL. Will be Belarus-ticking if we post every step of the process.~ Destroyeraa 🌀 19:38, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment maybe the posted Belarusian event should be edited to reflect this change? I'm not sure how editing posted noms works so I'm not sure if this is possible. Dan the Animator 19:40, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it would be undue to elevate the rejection from a single nation to ITN. Perhaps if a few more nations follow suit. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 20:03, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with . Only one country rejected the government isn't that noteworthy. Wait until more information comes out. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 20:12, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It might be notable if Russia announced they no longer recognized the incumbent president, though that seems unlikely. 331dot (talk) 20:36, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose this is only a minor detail in the overall story. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 20:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Rejects Hezbollah as well today, so Beirut's also "by the way". InedibleHulk (talk) 21:56, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Israel–United Arab Emirates peace agreement

 *  Support until more information comes out. Currently only 1 sentence in the entire article about this. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:46, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Will change to Support if there is more information on the article than a few sentences. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I changed the target article. It is a decently long article. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 17:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Changed to Support per others. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 20:15, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - Note as per BBC: The agreement marks only the third Israel-Arab peace deal since Israel's declaration of independence in 1948. Egypt signed a deal in 1979, and Jordan in 1994.Sherenk1 (talk) 15:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * and also the 3rd Arab country to establish diplomatic relations/official recognition or Israel. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 16:52, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment – Unlike any other Trump-related announcement, this seems very significant. I think the article needs further development. The 2020 Agreement section needs a bit more expansion and there is one uncited paragraph. There is also a new article Israel–United Arab Emirates peace treaty to consider. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 15:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support This is a historic deal. The third peace agreement between Israel and an Arab state. CMD (talk) 15:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support on principle per all. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:56, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Historic. Israel–United Arab Emirates peace treaty should be the target. 212.74.201.229 (talk) 16:10, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * They haven't signed a treaty yet, even if they intend to. 331dot (talk) 16:13, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support very historic, I'd even say another 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for breathing might be in the works for people although this one might be deserved for a peace deal between two nations. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:20, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait until its signed, which should be RSN. This should give time to get the details and articles up to speed. But this seems to have clear merit if this is true, since it has Israel agreeing not to touch the West Bank. --M asem (t) 16:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * no, Israel is agreeing to delay/pause/freeze any territorial acquisitions/annexation of the West bank (namely the Jordan Valley). The accord does not mean Israel won't annex Jordan Valley, it just means it will be delayed until further notice. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 17:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait. This could be worth posting if/when it happens, but an announcement by Trump is not a reliable indication that anything will actually happen. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 16:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait Needs more information, not enough text at ANY Wikipedia article about it to assess for quality, needs more details at Wikipedia. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 16:35, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support in principle but Wait per Masem JW 1961   Talk  16:37, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support and proposing alt blurb. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥ ) 16:41, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Very Strong Support Thank you Sherenk1 for posting this, I was considering to post it until I saw that you already did. This has got to be one of the biggest improvements for peace in months not only in the Middle East, but for the world. If this holds, the UAE is the 3rd Arab country to officially have diplomatic relations with Israeli. שלום בבית שלום בעולם. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 16:48, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait per Masem above; support once signed. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 17:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait These "peace treaties" have a history of falling apart at the last minute. Lets wait till the formal signing. We need more than just an annoucement from US administration. Albertaont (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , do you mean the joint statement from Israel and the UAE? Sir Joseph (talk) 17:39, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support as the agreement is just one step away from signing this peace treaty.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support it's only the 3rd Arab League country to sign a peace treaty with Israel, previous ones being in 1979 and 1994. 2601:602:9200:1310:C32:F8B2:ACB9:6FF9 (talk) 18:36, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support since the agreement and formal anouncement was made, a retaraction of the deal is highly unlikely and therefore I believe this news should be displayed now. Additionaly, it is verified to be true as it was mentioned by the Israeli prime minister and the UAE ruler, both crediting President Trump. As mentioned by others, this is historic. Chessedit (talk) 19:08, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support As they user who firstly updated the article I can say that it is an historic deal than is obviously worth inclusion in the news. Idan (talk) 20:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support mostly because there's a newly created article in decent shape. Per WP:ITN, "an editor may write an in-depth update on a topic normally considered marginal, thus convincing commenters that it is deserving of inclusion."  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 21:43, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as historic event, information now supported by several credible sources, and with a good article on this event shaping up. --Chefallen (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I see 5 Waits and 13 Supports. There is 0 Opposition. I think this has the consensus to be posted. This is ready. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 22:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support Interesting and certainly more relevant than the Indian plane crash. I say put it up but only if it replaces that, the rest of the things in the box are more important This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it may be possible to put all of them up at the same time; no removing necessary. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 23:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * } If that's possible it would be good; you could also get rid of the golf line. I've only ever seen 4 articles at a time on ITN though so IDK. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I would imagine that the reason the admins don't post more than 4 usually is for lack of space but considering that 1 of the events, the PGA win, is only 1 line long, I think that may make just enough extra space for 1 extra 1-line event. You're probably right though, they're probably going to remove 1 of the events (preferably the PGA win, in my opinion). Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 01:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support altblurb2 Very significant development in IR. Gotitbro (talk) 01:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't it be "The United Arab Emirates" not "United Arab Emirates"? This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, good catch . Fixed it just now. Dan the Animator 02:09, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Now that I think about it, altblurb2 was indeed sensationalist as noted below. Significant nonetheless. Gotitbro (talk) 06:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose – All the current suggested blurbs. No treaty has been signed yet. Alt2 is also a little too similar to how a newspaper would sensationalize this story. We are an encyclopedia. Just state the facts similar to Alt1, but without saying it has been signed: "... agree to a peace accord to normalize ..." --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 02:57, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 03:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , the article does not say the agreement has been signed. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 03:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Post-posting Edit to Blurb Required. Hey folks. They have not signed a treaty as of yet. Can we edit the blurb, please. Ktin (talk) 03:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 03:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Minor Edit - "Israel and the United Arab Emirates strike a peace agreement to normalize relations." can we change this to "Israel and the United Arab Emirates agree to a peace deal to normalize relations. Alternately, substitute 'deal' with 'accord' as  suggests. I have updated AltBlurb3 as well. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 03:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Blurb edit request: The current blurb has a grammar mistake in it. It currently reads "Israel and the United Arab Emirates agree a peace deal to normalize relations." but it should be "Israel and the United Arab Emirates agree to a peace deal to normalize relations." (emphasis added) --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 05:52, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagging to assist. Ktin (talk) 06:09, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * A corresponding error report has also been posted at WP:ERRORS. TribunalMan (talk) 05:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. As I noted at ERRORS, "agree a peace deal" seems like valid grammar to me - perhaps it's an ENGVAR thing. Anyway, "agree to" works just as well, so I've amended it to that. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's an ENGVAR issue all right. "Agree" without the "to" is British English. – Sca (talk) 13:38, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * per the discussion at WP:ERRORS and the RM at the article talk page, please could we remove the word "peace" from the current blurb? Onceinawhile (talk) 19:49, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Mac Jack

 * Support Short but basically adequate and decently referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:11, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support short article but sourcing seems good. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 05:15, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Not a name a lot of households could put a face to, but one all English-speaking people might reasonably enjoy reading and find intriguing. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:37, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose lots of facts in the infobox not referenced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 06:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, lay back with the flack attack and cut Mac Jack some slack, brother! If you say they're a lot of facts, isn't that proof enough? I believe you, anyway. Any you're doubtful about to some problematic degree? I'll try to sniff out the truth, no promises though. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:13, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Many of the dates of office and preceding/followed by are not mentioned in the prose at all and are hence unverifiable. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I hadn't realized things had gotten that bad, I'm out! InedibleHulk (talk) 07:42, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - decent enough for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 08:17, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Go take a look now. You could've just looked in the sources.  Lefcentreright  Discuss   14:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Similar to many politicians nominated at RD, a lot of positions listed, with limited if any description of what was done or accomplished in those positions ("resume in prose format"). Otherwise decently referenced.  Spencer T• C 16:09, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Should be satisfactory for RD. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 17:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Article looks good. RIP. Ktin (talk) 17:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - I've fixed up refs for most of the dates and predecessors/successors in the infobox. I think the others are in the prose. Marking as ready, unless anyone can spot any other errors. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support and while I "could've just looked in the sources", that's not really the point. Good to go. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:24, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is ready I'm counting 7 Supports and 1 Oppose. This should be ready for posting then. Dan the Animator 02:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Stonehaven derailment

 * Support dead people, trains, Europe: it ticks all the notability boxes. Infobox, background, aftermath/reactions section: ticks all the quality boxes. Don't delay, post today! --LaserLegs (talk) 16:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh and we snow closed in just 4 hours a story from the United States ... I mean, if that doesn't elevate this to speedy post I can't think of what will. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As much as I appreciate supports for articles I nominate, that smacks heavily of sarcasm and is not constructive. We can manage without that sort of thing. Mjroots (talk) 16:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Many people comment here without having their remarks stricken, and I would appreciate the same consideration. 100% support posting this item for the reasons given. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:26, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You have made your point; I suggest that you drop the stick. 331dot (talk) 16:54, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support First fatal UK derailment for 13 years, deadliest for 16 years, so certainly notable enough, appears to be internationally covered. Article is fine. Black Kite (talk) 16:23, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose death toll is too low. My Afghan nom even had a higher death toll (when including Taliban) and it was flat-out rejected. Personally wouldn't be surprised if all the British Wikipedians vote this in in the next few hours. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 17:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Or maybe just the Jocks? But that's not how ITN/RD works, is it. (?) Martinevans123 (talk) 17:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, for a very good reason. Mjroots (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * So you're opposing this because your nomination was rejected? People's nominations get rejected all the time; "mine didn't get posted so this one shouldn't" isn't a particularly good look. Black Kite (talk) 19:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak support: A fatal rail accident in the UK is incredibly rare since Ladbroke Grove (1999), you can count the fatal incidents on your fingers, and the ones involving infrastructure failure on one hand. International coverage seems to bear that out; it's on the top few lines of cnn.com, for example. OTOH, three deaths is a bit too low. We put Croydon in ITN, but that had double the death toll. Sceptre (talk) 17:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is pretty notable in context. Three fatalities doesn't sound like many and this would have been normally a busy train. But there were only 6 passengers in total? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:43, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * give me a good explanation of how this is notable. So far, it seems the main reason people support this is because: British people died in a train accident (first since 1999 for the UK). Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I was suggesting it might be more notable as half the passengers were killed. I'm not sure the article tells us their nationalities. But I'm sorry, your suggestion might give offence to some editors Martinevans123 (talk) 18:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * But just for complete clarity: "The train was carrying six three crew and six passengers. Three people died including the driver and a conductor."
 * Sorry if I sounded like that. I am not trying to offend anyone at all and was trying to prove my point. Maybe it might be notable for that reason but the accident itself relies more on more casualties or larger reach of impact of which, it fulfills neither. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how a rail crash is going to have "larger reach of impact". In the context of UK rail safety, this one seems to be quite notable. But I guess headlines across the work rely more on death-count. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:16, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - This sort of accident simply doesn't happen very often, and contextually for that reason, it is notable and in the news.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  17:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * maybe in the UK, no, but in other places in the world, yes. I'm looking at my (American) news and don't see it. Maybe I should try looking at Chinese news (probably won't see it either) or Indian news (highly unlikely). Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 17:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also an oil spill happening in Mauritius (the worst in the country's history).
 * It's all Greek to me? Or Russian? ... Blackburn anyone? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * When beggars die, there are no comets seen, and no ITN nominations either. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Still trying to fathom that comment. Do hope it's not about cheese-eating surrender monkeys, etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You have to go below the surface for that one. – Sca (talk) 22:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * p.s. very surprised no-one has nominated MV Wakashio oil spill. An ecological catastrophe. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed. We definitely let that one slip by.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 01:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm really sorry for not nominating this one; I was planning, along with some the Koure shooting and others, to nominate it but didn't have the will to do it. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 01:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The death toll was low, and ultimately this was a weather event more than a railway one, as I understand it arose because of flooding in the area. If we don't post deaths and destruction from hurricanes, then we also shouldn't for floods. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:50, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, we don't know this yet. The fact the rear locomotive stayed on the rails suggests it might not have been weather-related. Black Kite (talk) 19:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - This is now more deadly than Grayrigg (linked above) and is the deadliest rail accident in the UK since the Ladbrook Grove Rail Crash in 1999. It is major-UK news, and should be recognized by Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it seems some users are opposing it as a matter of sour-grapes because their nominations have previously been declined. AimeeSunflower (talk) 18:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * this has nothing to do with my previous nom (I just brought that up as a comparison). Looking at this alone, this is a domestic accident that will be forgotten by nearly everyone by the next day and has no significance/notability outside the UK. Please take a look at some non-UK news sources, please. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's on the CNN Frontpage, ABC News Frontpage , VoiceOfAmerica Front Page , Bloomberg , AlJazeera , ABC News Australia , France24 . It is Major Global News, it is newsworthy. AimeeSunflower (talk) 18:23, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * for the CNN one, it is in small text and has no image. For ABC news, also small text, no image. For VOA, it is NOT on the front page (at least of their website). For Bloomberg, also not on front page. For Al Jazeera, you have to scroll down a bit and it's relatively smaller than the others. For ABC News (Australia), you are correct, it is the 2nd featured article. For France24, it is also relatively featured. However, for all these news websites, Harris' nomination got the most featured spot, and that won't even be posted probably. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:32, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * it's on the VoA Front Page at https://www.voanews.com/ as part of the Headline section, with the listing as "Passenger Train Derails in Scotland; 'Serious Injuries' Reported". You've also above mentioned that you probably wouldn't see it in Indian or Chinese news, so have a Times of India and South China Morning Press article, to top it off. AimeeSunflower (talk) 18:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I don't know where you're seeing that. I went to the homepage and in the "Headlines" section, it says Australia COVID-19 record, UN support to Beirut, Mali protests, Ethiopia tensions, and 3 dead in India. Maybe your geo-location is being used to create recommended headlines? I honestly don't know. For the India and Chinese (Hong Kong actually) sources, it is not featured/shown on Times of India and is very minor on the South China Morning Press. They obviously have articles, but their not receiving much attention. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:52, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * on VOA's website, it's certainly there for me, you may be right as to geolocation. But with respect, you told me to look at non-UK News Sources, so I did, and provided multiple links. CNN actually covered it on TV with a Live link from a reporter of theirs in Glasgow, it is showing (for me) on the front page of multiple global news sites, it is a fatal rail crash, of significance to the Rail Industry, the UK public, and clearly global news media. The Grayrigg derailment made ITN on the day of the incident. There is precedence for this, it has made Global news, it involves fatalities, again, I emphasize, it is newsworthy and In The News. AimeeSunflower (talk) 19:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah you did, and I appreciate it. Definitely other media sources are covering this (maybe with not as much focus though I would argue). I agree with you, it is important for the Rail Industry and the UK public. For the global news media, I still don't think it's getting the attention it should if it was that important. About Grayrigg, "X made it so Y should too" cannot be used to support this, regardless of the similarities. I have other things to do so I'll just leave it at that and we'll see how the nom plays out. Cheers, Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 19:26, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose doesn't seem to be quite newsworthy enough outside of the UK. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 18:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support it's been and still is headline news all day today in the UK, and as above, features prominently around the world. As noted above, fatal rail accidents in the UK are rare as rocking horse poop.  And while the death toll is low here, thankfully, it's worth bearing in mind that it killed a quarter of the people on the train.  Just about the only thing we can be thankful for Covid, that the train was mostly empty.  This is a serious newsworthy incident  which could have been dozens of times worse.  Will be interesting to see what comes of the investigation as there seemed to be an awareness of flooded tracks and the potential for land slippages earlier in the morning.... The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 18:31, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Harris' vice presidential nomination is getting significantly more coverage than this, and will likely not be posted because of alleged US bias. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * - long-standing consensus is that VP noms and Presidential noms do not get posted. As is explained at the current nomination in plain English. Mjroots (talk) 18:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Likely to yet again prove that rail safety in Britain, as opposed to other well developed nations, is achieved more by luck than judgement. A very noteworthy event in the land that invented the railways, a country which is in the process of building a very expensive high speed line that uses a whole bunch of safety critical things that are entirely new to the British rail industry. Jenga Fet (talk) 18:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And if we ever see HS2 North of the border, I'll eat my hat. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * everything you said supports this because it's important in Britain. How is it important/notable OUTSIDE of Britain/UK? Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn't need to be. Read the boilerplate text about  nominations.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 18:58, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Please do not... [...] 2.oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." AimeeSunflower (talk) 19:03, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Not sure this would even make the top 100 worst transportation accidents of the year.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose (At the moment). Article has quality/factual issues - e.g 'Location' discussion in Talk Page. At least wait for reliable sources for the facts? --2A02:C7F:48DA:6F00:8DBC:197E:20A7:348C (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Per good sourcing, per extensive coverage from world media. Per being unusual accident and deaths.BabbaQ (talk) 19:51, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Major accident which would have had a lot more casualties in pre-COVID times.-- P-K3 (talk) 20:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That seems to be effectively the same as “would have been more newsworthy pre-COVID.”  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 20:35, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, what it means it would have had a lot more casualties pre-COVID. Read it again. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:17, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you honestly believe that our difference of opinion is because I didn't read his/her comment carefully enough? Please try to avoid snark, especially because it usually causes the recipient to double down rather than reconsider.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:27, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Whether you read the comment carefully or otherwise, you do appear to have misunderstood it. It means that the number of passengers on the train, and thus the number of deaths, is artificially low because of Covid-19. If significance was judged solely on the number of deaths then the comment could be construed as meaning it would have been more newsworthy had it happened 9 months ago. Of course significance is not judged by bodycount alone so the logic fails. The comment is saying that because Covid-19 and the associated movement restrictions and societal changes, etc. are a thing three deaths is more significant now than three deaths would have been this time last year. Thryduulf (talk) 23:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I actually did understand that. My point was that train accidents are less significant when not many people are riding trains. I guess I should have been more explicit.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:02, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Relatively routine accident, trails derail all the time, local news.  Sandstein   20:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe where you live! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 20:50, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually TRM you're right. This is  over here (the link only shows for NYC, so excluding most of LIRR and other rail services in the state). Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 21:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak support Article looks good. I've read through a lot of the comments above and it seems to me that it is being covered internationally, that the notability stems from fatal train crashes being uncommon not just in the UK but in parts of the world with normally good infrastructure, and that on top of this a very high percentage of those onboard died (due to low ridership, COVID), so it's likely a more fatal incident by death rate (25%!) than most (even in countries-with-many-crashes). Weak support because I'd like to hear more opinions, though preferably not petty ones, to see if there are arguments/angles I haven't considered this from. Usually with this many comments a lot of the metrics for 'train crash' have been weighted, but so far the comments seem to be mostly different debates on UK-centrism; I'm not a train expert, if there's context/mechanics I'm missing, I'd like to hear it. Kingsif (talk) 20:35, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - We posted a bus plunging into a river in China only months ago. HSR derailments are exceedingly rare everywhere, and means something went VERY WRONG. At a minimum, service on the line is cut, and this will likely end up resulting in engineering changes to some portion of the line or train in the future.Albertaont (talk) 20:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not to argue but I remember when a LIRR train derailed last year over here. Nearly no-one in my school mentioned it the next day, it was barely in the (major not local) news, and we all just forgot about it. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 21:10, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "No one injured", you think that have something to do with lack of interest? And LIRR and HST aren't really comparable either.  And fatal train derailments in the UK are extremely rare in the last 20+ years. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops, just realized I linked the wrong one. Sorry about that. This should be the correct one. 3 people died in it. If this is the right one, the day this happened trains got delayed for hours. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 21:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Uh, that's nothing like this. This is a derailment of a high speed train.  That was a slow motion road traffic accident which killed the people in the vehicle  which was stupid enough to try to run the lights at a crossing.  You're not comparing apples with apples. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:27, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, just awaiting a link to another source that says "Nearly no-one in your school mentioned it the next day". Cheers. :) Martinevans123 (talk) 21:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose – 1-2-3 fatalities? Below the radar unless they were terribly important people. – Sca (talk) 21:48, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Missing the point. 3 deaths out of 9 on board. Pre-covid the train would have been packed and there would have been many more deaths and injuries. There has not been a fatal rail accident in the UK for 13 years, and this is making headlines in other countries as well as being major news in the UK. SK2242 (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, completely missing the point. (a) fatal rail accidents in the UK are rare-as.  (b) as noted several times, it was a significant proportion of those travelling onboard who died.  (c) Global news.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:18, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, global indeed – in fact, interplanetary; it's already been in the news on Ceres, I hear. – Sca (talk) 22:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC) )
 * The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:47, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support:--UkrainianCossack (talk) 22:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support for reasons given above. SK2242 (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I've marked this for admin attention because it's clear the discussion is simply devolving into circular repetition.  The basic facts are that a  high-speed train derailed in the UK with fatalities for the first time in a long time, that it killed a significant proportion of those onboard a Covid-impacted train, and that it has ramifications to UK rail safety.  Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:24, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, removed the mark, suggesting that there was active discussion.  There's discussion, but it's not productive.   Never mind, what's yet another timesink in the big scheme of things? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:00, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – We don't post everything that makes major news. When considering disasters, we should consider lasting effect and large impact. IMO, this does not appear to have that. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 22:32, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Major news in the UK - the most significant rail accident in the UK in over 10 years, the most deadly in over 20. As a proportion of people on the train killed/injured this is likely to be the most significant in far, far longer. As for lasting effect, this will be at least as significant as Grayrigg 13 years ago where the lessons learned are still being applied. It's too early to say precisely what those lessons will be, but it doesn't take a crystal ball to say that there most definitely will be some. In terms of major impact, how much more major do you want? [I consider myself to involved with this article to post it myself]. Thryduulf (talk) 22:35, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. A train with only 9 people on board, 3 killed, too small of an accident despite various tortured explanatious to the contrary above. Nsk92 (talk) 00:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose — pushing this reeks of UK-bias. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 00:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Agreed; we are getting into bizarre levels of UK bias here. Never before have I seen it suggested that the PROPORTION of passengers killed makes an event noteworthy. We post things because they are significant, not because they might be significant under different circumstances.  GreatCaesarsGhost   01:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I counted 13 Supports and 10 Opposes. I think if 1 or 2 more people vote on this, we could either post/close. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 01:09, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Does not seem a homepage news article. Also, agree with some of the folks here that Proportion seems the wrong metric. In the recent aircraft incident, this metric was at less than 10pc. One would wish it was 0pc though. Anyways, not the right metric.Ktin (talk) 01:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update - While it need not be the definitive reason, I just went to bbc.com, and this news doesn't even figure in the homepage. Ktin (talk) 02:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak Oppose Conceding it's the first fatal rail accident in the UK in a while, we are still only talking about three deaths. That's just not enough for me. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose if this event's only claim to notability is its three deaths, it's so very, very minor in a world where thousands of people die every day from Covid. Banedon (talk) 03:17, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * By that logic we would never be able to post anything ever. <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  03:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose: the rarity of the event gives it some notability but this seems minor overall. <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b>  03:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * COMMENT - I've marked this as "admin attention required". IMvHO, it should be posted. Many of the opposes are based on the event happening in the UK, which is against the guidance as quoted by AimeeSunflower at 19:03 yesterday. It is really time this one was decided on one way or another. If it is decided that it won't get posted, then I'm big enough to accept that. It's nice to get an ITN, but these are bonuses. We have a decent article which will improve further as time goes on. My thanks to all editors who have worked to improve the article. Mjroots (talk) 05:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Why was the train running with so few people on board? Yes, it was an accident, but the impact is not that significant. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 05:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Suppose there was no train, just mass hypnosis again, see? InedibleHulk (talk) 05:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Are people really opposing/supporting this for the sake of it? Anyway, this isn't significant enough even for a derailment (we have already rejected quire a few disasters with significantly higher destruction and deaths not sure why this would be any special). Gotitbro (talk) 07:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Vectaerovenator inopinatus

 * Comment . Oppose. I am always positively inclined toward science (and related) news items. However, here we seem to be linking to an article titled List of informally named dinosaurs. I am wondering if the question is going to be - is this newsworthy enough, if the discovery does not warrant (or at least has not warranted) a new article page by itself? Ktin (talk) 18:06, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose This article contains just one short section about this dino species.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 18:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now this taxon is going to be formally named (and therefore get its own article) within this week according to the lead author, the press releases were simply sent out too early by accident. IJReid { {T - C - D - R} } 20:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Close no consensus and way too early. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 00:57, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Classifying old fossils is not discovering new species. Paleontologists might have us believe it's as exciting. But it isn't. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * IANA paleontologist, but I'm pretty sure that is precisely how we discover new species. 75.188.224.208 (talk) 12:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Furthermore The Isle of Wight was still a living piece of the mainland when this species actually did stuff, and framing it like this may give some members of the public another misconception about thunder lizards. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Zero impact on anyone and everyone. – Sca (talk) 13:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose and close. Linking to a list, not over the global news, not that notable. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:10, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Russell A. Kirsch

 * Support short but decently sourced. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 05:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Passes RD requirements. Gotitbro (talk) 07:32, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Notable for his work. Though short, but decently sourced and other RD nominees that passed had even shorter articles. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 13:42, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 16:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Sixto Brillantes

 * Support short but well sourced. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 05:09, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Quote in Tagalog should be translated to English for the article, but otherwise, looks good to go. Marking ready.  Spencer T• C 16:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Still ready 15 hours later... The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:07, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) 2020 Democratic vice presidential candidate
*Oppose for now per above but will Support if Carmont derailment is posted per same reason. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose this seems a tad too US-centric; posting the result of the election in November is ITN/R but this, while hyped in the media in the U.S., doesn't seem appropriate to ITN to me. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 18:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Additional comment Tim Kaine wasn't posted in July 2016, and the discussion there mentions that Mike Pence wasn't posted either., who closed that discussion, gave the following rationale: ITN doesn't give the results of the US presidential nominations race for the two major parties, so the name of a running mate isn't the stuff of ITN either. I think that rationale still holds. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 18:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above.
 * was this vote meant to go in the section below? That seems a little more related to the Carmont derailment. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 18:31, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I now see you've already voted there. Sorry! PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 18:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I dont understand Dan the Animator position, shouldn't all news be evaluated on its own merit?Albertaont (talk) 19:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Thanks for the nomination, but the choosing of a candidate for office will almost never merit posting to ITN.  If they win, that will be posted.  I would gently remind the nominator that this is a global project and not everyone may be familiar with the subject matter. 331dot (talk) 18:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose and snow close per precedence mentioned above and general guideline of only posting the results of U.S. elections at the federal level. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 18:42, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support decent article, in the news, certainly worth posting. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support applying some decent common sense here, and noting that ITN is supposed to be highlighting articles that people are looking for, this is an IAR moment for me. Even in the UK we're quite keen on the Biden/Harris ticket and it's been subject of some discussion here, even though it's US politics.  Of course, the new POTUS will be posted, but that isn't the actual point of this nomination really, is it?  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 18:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per same reasoning as . Furthermore, this is not the election, nor is it even the presidential candidate we have chosen.Albertaont (talk) 19:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose- I could see an argument for posting a primary victory, but selecting a running-mate is obviously much less important and is getting what I'd say is an unusually large amount of coverage in the States largely because electoral politics is a nice diversion from coronavirus.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:05, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * But did we post Joe Biden's victory in the primaries? --212.74.201.229 (talk) 19:16, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Negative. The only U.S. presidential primary-related nomination was a blurb discussion about the Iowa caucuses in February that was not posted. Nothing more, which makes even less of a reason for this to be posted. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 19:27, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * But you agree it's in the news right? Being widely covered in the US and around the world (not required, see above, but a bonus). I mean, should we reach out to major global media outlets and advise them to stop covering the announcement because you don't think it should be in the news? --LaserLegs (talk) 19:48, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I made no mention of whether I personally thought the pick should be reported by newsmedia, but rather just referenced the fact that (a) ITN did not post anything about Biden (or anyone else, for that matter) winning any individual primary or caucus, nor about him securing enough delegates to become the Democratic nominee, and (b) that a vice-presidential pick for one of the parties in a U.S. presidential election seems lesser than that, and in my mind wouldn't merit an ITN blurb either. I doubt we'll add a blurb about Biden officially accepting the nomination next week, so I don't think a vice presidential pick would merit a blurb. Let's keep doing what we've done in the past and stick to the result of the November election, as several other users have said. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 20:41, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not significant, we limit to actual election results. Gotitbro (talk) 19:43, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support Wouldn't normally support a VP nom (Tim Kaine? Yawn) but the historic nature of Harris as the first woman of colour to be on the ticket just tips the balance.-- P-K3 (talk) 20:27, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Mr. Van't Kruijs, Clinton's formal nomination at the Democratic National Convention Jul 2016 (and as the first woman atop a U.S. major party POTUS ticket) was declined here, nor was there even a peep when she had "clinched" enough delegates in the primaries on 7 Jun 2016. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 20:36, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak support. Domestic politics, but making major international news beyond one day.  Sandstein   20:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – She's only a veep candidate. – Sca (talk) 21:54, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – We should wait for the final results as we do with any national election. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 22:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose domestic politics that only involves one party. Quite frankly I'm gobsmacked that this was proposed and hasn't yet been snow-closed. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) 2020 Bangalore riots

 * Oppose at "least 3 people are killed". How is this at all notable enough for ITN? Also, currently we have an India ITN event (and previously had 2 plus 1 Sri Lankan) and there's also 1 other Asian one so if we're going to talk about Geobias, this being nom'd would be the exact opposite of fair coverage (more people died in terrorist attacks everyday in Africa and those are almost always rejected). Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 17:16, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per Dan above, for both death terms and recent geobias (ironically enough Somalia just had a terrorist attack with a higher death toll). Gotitbro (talk) 19:48, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait Apparently if you go back to one of my earlier opposes, the consensus was GEOBIAS is not a valid criteria for consideration even with other ITN in the same area (I don't agree, but it was community consensus).  Having said that, this article is written well and if riots go on for another 1-2 days, maybe better rationale to post. For now, pre-mature.Albertaont (talk) 20:09, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – 1-2-3 fatalities? Below the radar unless they were terribly important people. – Sca (talk) 21:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on quality – The death toll is not the important aspect. Civil unrest often have long-lasting effects on national politics. For that, I would support. However, the language and word choice employed in this articles stinks of POV. It needs work. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 22:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This feels like an extension of the anti-CAA protests which festered in ongoing for 7 or 8 months, and the Ram Temple which we've posted twice. There is obviously religious conflict being fomented in India. Not sure this little outburst fits the bill. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:01, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree. Perhaps, we should wait and see. I do not think, however, this nom should have a quick close. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 23:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No this is not any such extension of Anti-CAA and no one is opposing Ram Temple (as it is order from Supreme Court & Archaeologists have proved that there was Ram temple before Babur destroyed it to build mosque ) hence it is no such protest but a riot planned by sub-groups of banned Popular Front of India alongwith Social Democratic Party of India maybe for political reasons in Karnataka. Branstarx3 (talk) 00:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Sumner Redstone

 * Support looks to be in decent shape. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 17:18, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Has been in decent shape even before the recent demise. Gotitbro (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose "Career" section has quite a few unsourced and sparsely sourced paragraphs.—Bagumba (talk) 11:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Several paragraphs in the Career section with no references. P-K3 (talk) 12:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sourcing has been updated, please take a look. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 15:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice work, still some chunks of the article that could use some referencing. Not sure how much of some of the specific company details belong in Redstone's article versus an article about the company.  Spencer T• C 16:21, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to add more references if you'd let me know where they're needed. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 17:28, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * CN tags added. Some of the things like how a takover made "Viacom one of the top players in modern media" could potentially be removed if there's not a ref for it and it doesn't contribute specifically to the article.  Spencer T• C 19:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * cn tags have been taken care of. Again and  please re-evaluate as well.  PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:07, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , good progress! I've tagged 3 more that I found.—Bagumba (talk) 16:22, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * just took care of those. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 16:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 16:44, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Trini Lopez

 * Support - As far as I can see sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 06:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:23, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C

(Closed) August 2020 Midwest derecho

 * Oppose A large tree fell down and crushed half a Subaru across the street from me (in Chicago) due to this. However, this does seem parochial overall. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm confused how a massive multi-state weather event which left millions with utility outages, spawned five tornadoes, and destroyed roughly 1/3 of the crops on Iowa's agricultural land is "parochial"  Gwen Hope  (talk) (contrib) 23:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's parochial in that it does not appear to have much significance outside of the United States; while that's not fatal to the nomination per the "please do not..." section, there appear to be thankfully zero deaths so far and little long-term impact, so I don't think this suitable for the Main Page. (We also didn't post Hurricane Isaias, another storm doing storm things that was otherwise transitory.) – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , indeed, the deaths are minimal (only two confirmed so far, mass injuries, however). Regardless I think it could be useful additionally considering these storm types are relatively rare, especially ones that last this long and get this big. However it doesn't really fit a WP:DYK type.  Gwen Hope  (talk) (contrib) 23:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The Midwest is 3 times the size of France or Ukraine. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support in the news, decent article. Highly developed countries with strictly enforced building codes have lower death tolls but that doesn't lessen the notability of the event. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * How do we measure the impact of the event if not by its death and destruction?  GreatCaesarsGhost   12:40, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Geographic area, intensity (and frequency of occurrence at that intensity), economic impact, people impacted but not killed, coverage in the news of course and article quality are the most important and that's just what I came up with on short notice. [removed smug racist fuckwittery--Floquenbeam (talk) 20:05, 12 August 2020 (UTC)] Developing countries always have higher death tolls because of weakly enforced or lax building codes along with under developed emergency services so that even a routine weather event results in causalities and we lose our minds and post these stubby, inevitably orphaned articles to the main page.--LaserLegs (talk) 12:58, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support The equivalent of a Category 3 hurricane. Highly unusual event. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 23:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, it only caused 100 mph winds. Category 2-equivilant. Also, you say it was a highly unusual event. Derechos literally happen three times every month between March and September in the US. See List of derecho events if you don't believe me. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Doesn’t seem to be getting front-page coverage on US news websites.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I got smacked by a freak derecho once. It was weird and crappy, I survived in an average house and to this day, I still find myself telling people who weren't there how weird and crappy it was. In other words, local story; maybe a legend in time, but never a blurb. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:18, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That said, this one is weirder and crappier than mine, on account of the dead or missing cornfields. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:25, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose lots of things are going on which "affect" lots of people. This is just American weather. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose in worldwide terms, this does not appear to be a particularly devastating weather event. Power cuts and property damage occur in every big storm. Natural disasters need to be much more significant to justify posting in ITN. The article seems suitable for WP:DYK though. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 11:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Lacks general significance. Parochial. (If it were British weather, it would be nooz, tho.) – Sca (talk) 15:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 17:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose per InedibleHulk. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 18:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for supporting my argument, it was this close to utterly collapsing! Don't jump on my bandwagon, though, it hasn't rolled right since "the storm". House still stands! InedibleHulk (talk) 04:43, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Would have been ITN worthy were there any significant deaths or destruction. Gotitbro (talk) 19:52, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Now, I might be biased because I lived through the event and just got electric service back nearly 60 hours later, but it had a fairly large swathe of destruction (Sioux Falls to Chicago via Des Moines). This was not a typical American weather event.  The fact that it affected mostly corn and not people shouldn't diminish the storm's notability. –Fredddie™ 03:38, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * EDITOR'S NOTE: Iowa is basically a 58,000-square-mile (145,000 square kilometers) cornfield, roughly the size of Bangladesh. – Sca (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That is absolutely a reason to diminish its notability. Similarly large storms occur frequently in Antarctica or the Southern Ocean, but are considered non-notable because only penguins and seabirds are affected. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 14:34, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: I thought a derecho was a lizard. – Sca (talk) 15:00, 13 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose and close Only killed two people, spawned 5 tornadoes, and affected some corn farmers. If you didn't post Hurricane Isaias, which killed 18 people, spawned 37 tornadoes, and caused $4.2 billion in damage, then it will be a joke posting this! ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 15:49, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose The usual power cuts and property damage but thankfully only two deaths, this doesn't meet the significance bar for me.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:46, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Ceres

 * Conditional support If as big as it seems. News still seems fuzzy here. Kingsif (talk) 10:33, 11 August 2020 (UTC) Oppose per MG Kingsif (talk) 14:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Conditional support - I have to agree with Kingsif here.BabbaQ (talk) 11:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Conditional support per all. A cursory glance of the article (via Ctrl-Fing "ocean") doesn't mention it AFAICT, much less explain its significance. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 11:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC) Oppose per MG. I knew it didn't look like an ocean world. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 12:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I'm close to having a CoI here, but will comment anyway. Ceres has long been known to have active geology and subsurface brines, which are responsible for the surface salt deposits and cryovolcanism, both known since 2016. These latest results fill in some of the details, but Ceres having ocean-level amounts of water is not a new discovery. It's also not really an ocean, but a layer of rock which is saturated with brine, so the blurb is misleading (it wasn't a Flyby either). None of the papers were important enough to publish in Nature itself, just three subsidiary journals owned by the same publisher. The source linked to above is from Nature Astronomy, not Nature, and is over-selling the importance because it's advertising work published in the same journal. Finally, the results are so confirmatory that the article itself has received no update whatsoever. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 12:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's really a good thing we have actual scientists here who can let us know when we're falling prey to pop science journalism.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  12:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Modest.  "Vital"  or not, it's not newsworthy.  Next. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 12:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Ditto. Decidedly underwhelming. – Sca (talk) 13:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Doesn't appear to be significant per the above comments, including the nominator. Gotitbro (talk) 14:48, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * History As the timescales for this mission were even longer than Brexit, I was curious to know what ITN said about it over the years:
 * So, no results since Dawn arrived at Ceres. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment since this is probably toast anyway, we should wait until the inners have stripped all the ice from Ceres and the belters riot after Mars destroys the Canterbury --LaserLegs (talk) 15:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's wait until Elon arrives on Ceres. – Sca (talk) 15:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm waiting for The Boat Race on Ceres. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Zero gravity rowing klaxon!!!!!!! --LaserLegs (talk) 15:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Based on how difficult it is to complete 18 to 20 minutes of rowing on the Thames, perhaps "zero gravity" (which of course it wouldn't be zero) is the way ahead.  O';;l suggest it.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Doubtful significance. – Ammarpad (talk) 19:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support According to The Guardian link, this is the first time hydrohalite has been observed outside of Earth. If that's pop science, then colour me a monkey's uncle. Jenga Fet (talk) 19:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Coincidentally, I had a dream about hydrohalite last night. It was terrifying. – Sca (talk) 21:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment suggest this is closed as not newsworthy and with a very strong consensus against a very poorly updated article. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Gam-COVID-Vac

 * Oppose This is definitely covered by the COVID box. (It would also be remiss to post this without mentioning that they allegedly stole it.) Kingsif (talk) 10:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Stole it? It's seems to be a propaganda ploy of the countries with reduced scientific potential. --Александр Мотин (talk) 10:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ...yes, because clearly any country outside the US or UK is incapable of creating vaccines.Albertaont (talk) 14:05, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The country which chose the President for the US people is much more capable of creating vaccines.--Александр Мотин (talk) 16:13, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Holy shit, he actually believes this article! Look at him! Look at him and laugh! --212.74.201.229 (talk) 18:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Posting about any vaccine for this should not even be considered until such a vaccine sees widespread deployment. TompaDompa (talk) 10:49, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Widespread" is how much? You will tell us later? I'm not proposing to write "widespread", I propose to write "first registered" --Александр Мотин (talk) 10:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose we have the COVID box for this. ZettaComposer (talk) 11:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose any news outside of the banner (even a widespread vaccine) except for a definitive "end" to the pandemic, preferably by WHO proclamation. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 11:55, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - at this time. No.BabbaQ (talk) 11:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Please do not...
 * add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.--212.74.201.229 (talk) 18:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose flatly.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  12:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Please do not...
 * add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.--212.74.201.229 (talk) 18:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – There's many a slip. – Sca (talk) 13:24, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Please do not...
 * add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.--212.74.201.229 (talk) 18:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sca gave a reason. You just need to brush up on your proverbs.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Propose - Propose to update the info-box for links to COVID treatments and COVID vaccines - we are now half a year in, and real progress has been made on both fronts and they are becoming popular articles, make sense to link them straight from the front page. -Albertaont (talk) 14:05, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It may be a good idea since there are many other vaccine candidates from other powerful research institutions and after today's event the readers' interest may increase many times.--Александр Мотин (talk) 17:55, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice try mate, but we all know that if there's a vaccine ITN will post, it's the British one. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I like the idea of updating the box on the top with a link to COVID-19 vaccine.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Sensational and redundant to Covid box. – Ammarpad (talk) 19:10, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose This has been described as a "political stunt" and it widely controversial in the scientific community. Natureium (talk) 19:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Konrad Steffen

 * Support Article seems okay.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 21:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale Stephen 05:53, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: P. J. Sheehan

 * Weak Oppose Short article but we're getting there.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 12:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Yes it is a short article but it is pretty well referenced and up to RD standard JW 1961   Talk  20:26, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 23:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

(Bumped) Lebanese government resigns

 * Weak oppose for now. The Hassan Diab article contains only a single sentence that says he resigned, and says nothing about his cabinet.  I'm fine bumping the blurb and adding more information, but as yet the various Wikipedia articles you are highlighting are very light on relevant information and will need some expanding before we tell people they should read them.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 18:08, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Bump This is a continuation of the existing blurb about the explosion. So, just update that blurb and bump it. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:29, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Question Didn't the hyperinflation also impact the decision? – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looks like some of the reason was pre-pandemic protests being renewed. Feel free to suggest alts, but I couldn't find a protests article for a blurb. Kingsif (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * another question. Is the government really the government? I read somewhere that the political leaders just report to some more powerful people behind the scenes, which was the same people before and after the "revolution" last year. Is that true? If so, we should probably nuance the hook accordingly. Apologies, by knowledge of the full situation is incomplete. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Every short-term government overlaps with longer-lasting lobbyists, priests, tribal leaders, bankers, generals, corporate officers and organized crime bosses. But "really" rarely matters here. The titleholders "rule". InedibleHulk (talk) 23:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Conditionally support It needs to update the previous blurb to include the aftermath of the explosion in the government such as resignation, at least bump the previous update and update with this. 36.77.94.89 (talk) 21:11, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Bump Definitely still biggest story in most western news after a week, and the resignation of the government is significant new development.Albertaont (talk) 04:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Major development, the blurb should make the bit about the explosion a bit more clear though. Gotitbro (talk) 05:52, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - time for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong support Bump the previous blurb which posted before with newly update blurbs that includes aftermath of resignation. it is definitely biggest international news on the day. 182.1.26.10 (talk) 07:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support bumping blurb The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 08:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Bumping the blurb. --Tone 08:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-bumping comment the "protests" word needs to wikilinked, because they are already have a article about 2019–2020 Lebanese protests. 114.125.235.207 (talk) 08:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the article - I hadn't included 2019 when I looked! Kingsif (talk) 10:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've now created 2020 Lebanese protests as a redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 PGA Championship

 * Support Updated with sufficient prose summaries.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:28, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Comment  Support. Minor update on blurb --> Altblurb. Looks good. Ktin (talk) 17:14, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article is sufficient. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 18:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support original blurb. Good prose summaries for each round.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:04, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose It's awful – like reading the sports pages in a tabloid newspaper rather than an encyclopedia article. It's clearly written for fans rather than the general reader as it's full of crufty line-scores and other stats.  It assumes that the reader knows all about the rules of the game and the tournament format and it's riddled with jargon like "birdie" and "eagle" which are not explained.  And it seems easy to find factual errors.  For example, the lead says that it "had no spectators in attendance" but it's easy to find coverage which contradicts this: Steph Curry among spectators at PGA Championship in San Francisco. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is more suitable as a complaint about golf tournament pages on Wikipedia in general than against this particular article.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That is not an error. The event was closed to paying spectators. It's clear from reading the link that Stephen Curry was there as a guest of Jordan Spieth. P-K3 (talk) 00:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now on quality. I don't particularly agree with the general objection Andrew makes about the tone of the article - a golfing article would be expected to use golfing terminology. Birdie and Eagle are not jargon because many people such as myself, who don't play golf, nonetheless know what they mean. And the relevant articles are linked, for those who don't know the terminology. Our guidelines suggest targeting articles to those familiar with, but not necessarily expert in, a given subject. But a couple of Andrew's objections are valid. (1) The "Field" section is far too long and detailed, interrupting the flow of the article. It probably belongs in a subpage, with just a brief summary of how the field was chosen, and a few principal players, given here. And (2) the point about spectators clearly is an error, because Curry was a spectator. He wasn't there in any capacity other than to watch the golf. It sounds like that point needs to be nuanced. ITN articles don't have to be GA standard certainly, but they must still conform to basic structural norms. With a bit of tidying up this would be ready to go though. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 04:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That is how all golf tournament articles are written. The place to challenge that practice is probably at WP:GOLF, not here. It shouldn't be valid to oppose this because of an objection to the way golf tournament articles, which have been posted at ITN many times before without objection, are written on Wikipedia. Regarding your second point, reliable sources reported that there were no spectators. Curry was apparently there as a "guest reporter".  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 06:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikiprojects form a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. The wider community here judges whether it's suitable to go on the main page.—Bagumba (talk) 06:34, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In that case, if I don't want to see golf major championships barred from being posted at ITN again, I have to garner consensus for changing how the field sections of tournament articles are written?  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 06:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no intention of challenging anything at WP:GOLF. WikiProjects don't define the basic rules for article structure, that's the job of the MOS, and it applies everywhere. As an aside, I've checked the stats for golf articles and it lists only two articles as FAs (one of which is Wii Sports, only loosely connected to golf) and nine GAs. There are no tournament pages included in those so we have no point of reference. The figures seem astonishly low for such a prominent subject, and suggest the project may not be very active... &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:39, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I wasn't sure what "birdie" and "eagle" mean and so just had to look them up. And I bet if you asked the general public what "bogey" means in golf, you'd get a variety of amusing answers with "don't know" being a strong contender.  A "hole-in-one" might be ok because it is self-explanatory but note that the phrase isn't used in the article even though there was at least one. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:09, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The lead should be accessible, but those terms are in the body. A sports event article should not be expected to teach a newbie about the sport. Linking to common technical terms is generally sufficient.—Bagumba (talk) 11:31, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Switching to support - Following a productive discussion, and new edits by, the Field section has now been rewritten to contain just prose, with the other info in a linked child info. My concerns are therefore now addressed, and I am switching to support on this candidate. Thanks &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:37, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

*Oppose On article quality and prose. Gotitbro (talk) 05:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Appears fine or ITN now. Gotitbro (talk) 22:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, the updated version at the time you wrote this would have been fine, but unfortunately that improvement was reverted so it's now back at the unwieldy poor quality version. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 05:48, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 *  Oppose  The "Field" section is unwieldy, and the bolding with linking is an eyesore. This isn't GA, but it's a large-scale failing of MOS:PSEUDOHEAD: Do not make pseudo-headings by abusing semicolon markup (reserved for description lists) and try to avoid using bold markup. It's screaming to be a table with minutiae moved to footnotes.—Bagumba (talk) 06:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Bagumba. And the summaries for the first three rounds don't really pass muster. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Seems like some here are trying to push the bar too high. The tone and style may be wanting, and the layout may not be ideal, however this meets the basic quality criteria for ITN – "Articles are held to a minimum standard of quality. Articles should be a minimally comprehensive overview of the subject, not omitting any major items." wjematherplease leave a message... 11:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Entirely agree. Not sure why this article has attracted so many pile-on opposes when it's no worse than many other ITN/R sports items we've routinely posted. I thought the standard was sufficiently referenced with prose summaries.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nope. Basic compliance with the MOS is also up there. We're showcasing this on the main page of our project, let's at the very least showcase the way articles are actually structured, rather than some bizarre format developed within one project and seemingly copied every year because nobody can think of anything better to do. As ever on this page, if people just made some basic changes, like those proposed by Bagumba above, this could just go straight up. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 19:45, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We posted both the Masters and the US Open last year which used an identical format. To suddenly declare that what was acceptable before is now unacceptable smacks of moving the goalposts for me. (Sorry, can't think of an equivalent golfing metaphor.) P-K3 (talk) 21:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Seems raising the bar without prior discussion or consensus to do so. I'm struggling to find the passage in the ITN criteria which mentions MOS compliance and to what degree it is necessary. For information, it actually quite closely replicates the format used by the major championships themselves for many years, and is to a degree still used by the USGA & R&A, so attacks on the project in this regard are somewhat unwarranted. wjematherplease leave a message... 22:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I have edited the field section in accordance with the criticisms and suggestions of, , , and above. Let me know if you have any further objections and I would be happy to work on fixing them.  B zw ee bl   (talk • contribs) 22:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Reverted due to making the information much less accessible and also losing several details. Changes in this regard would be better discussed centrally (suggest WT:GOLF), as there are many tournament articles with the same mos/formatting issues (as noted above). wjematherplease leave a message... 22:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've gotten myself involved in enough inane discussions here lately, I'm not interested in starting a new one over formatting at WT:GOLF. I guess this is the end of golf at ITN unless someone else wants to start working on changing this.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 22:24, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't sacrifice content on the alter of MOS. It does no service to the encyclopedia. There are many ways of removing the bolding without losing content and accessibility/readability – your solution (moving most content – some would say the most important details – into footnotes) was not one of them. wjematherplease leave a message... 22:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I reasoned that was what everyone objecting here wanted since Bagumba suggested it and most other opposes were on similar grounds.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:09, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think calling a section on the field "most content" and even "most important" is really a far stretch, I would say most people which would access this article from the front page would be interested in how the tournament actually played out, which is behind 3 full pages of rather trivial information for a non golf enthusiast. This big section actually hurts the readability. Chaosquo (talk) 07:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't need spelling out, but I was obviously referring only to the content of that section. Misuse of footnotes is worse than perceived MOS transgressions. People are welcome to discuss ways of presenting the information better, in collaboration with the editors who do the bulk of the work in this area, but sadly it seems none here are willing (discussion started here). wjematherplease leave a message... 09:17, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The topic under consideration is the 2020 PGA Tournament, and it should be clear by now from the number of objecters here, that the format of that article simply doesn't conform to Wikipedia guidelines on how to structure an article. I am happy to have a conversation about the details of this page, with a view to getting it listed at ITN, since that's the goal here. We can have that by WP:BOLDly trying different layouts on the page (which both and myself have now done), discussing it at the talk page, and coming up with a sensible compromise. But the starting point has to be that the previous format was not of sufficient quality, since multiple experienced editors have now made that same point here on this page. If we come up with a sensible way to present the info, then no doubt WikiProject Golf can incorporate that into their guidelines going forward, but non-members of that project are not bound by any edicts coming from "those who do the bulk of the work in this area", nor are those editors exempt from following the basic MOS guidelines. Cheers  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 09:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The suggestion was only to engage with the golf project; that way when a format is agreed upon, past and future articles will likely follow the same standards (as it is those active project editors who will likely do the bulk of any remedial work). Otherwise we end up with this article and maybe a handful others being "fixed" and the rest not. wjematherplease leave a message... 10:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, sure, engaging with the golf regulars, including yourself, is vital and no doubt they will also have good ideas about how to go forward. The more voices the better. I just think that in the immediate term, we should concentrate on the 2020 PGA as a concrete example that we can work on, hopefully with a view to getting it posted on ITN. If we try to fix everything at once, we won't have time for this one to be featured. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:17, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. There have been numerous heavy changes to the article, but the current version seems fine to me. The information is there, the rounds have brief-but-adequate prose summaries, and referencing appears sufficient. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 11:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I don't feel comfortable thrusting to the main page an article wherein an edit war is taking place.--WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  11:48, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Switch to support Tbe problem I had with the "Field" section is resolved with the spinout of 2020 PGA Championship field. With 100+ field, this is deserved and not a mere fork just to game ITN. Thanks to, and  for carrying out the changes.—Bagumba (talk) 14:55, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Looks like issues have been addressed on the article talk page and consensus is in favor of posting.  Spencer T• C 15:24, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Indian coal mine auction

 * Oppose grossly repetitive stub which, having been created just days ago, gives some indication as to the relative notability of this "virgin" forest. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 08:59, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Notability? The other Indian stories which we are featuring are a hotel fire, a religious photo op and a plane skidding into a ditch.  Which story is really significant?  Andrew🐉(talk) 10:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All red herrings. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 10:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh and I must have missed the featuring of a hotel fire. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 11:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Who needs hotel fires when you've got all that cheap Indian coal? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It was reading the nomination of the 2020 Vijayawada fire below which got me wondering what was really happening in India. That article is better developed than our article about the forest coalfield.  If it bleeds, it leads. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support, if article can be expanded. An interesting and very worrying story that seems to be largely hidden from media view. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:15, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose ...and if my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a bicycle.  GreatCaesarsGhost   14:44, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose meh per TRM, the Amazon's more important. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 10:32, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you mean Jeff Bezos investing 10 billion in fighting climate change or the fact that fires in the rainforest are up 28% on last year? Both these items are in the news but we are ignoring them too.  Andrew🐉(talk) 10:48, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nominate away. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Article is far too sparse and short and stubby for main page highlighting. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 12:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment we have lot of stories from India alone in past few days and let's not forget the 2020 Idukki landslide and 2020 Kerala floods are also mainly covered in google search much higher when compared to the coal mine auction. 2020 Vijayawada fire has now started to lose focus of main headlines. Abishe (talk) 13:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on article quality. Article is in poor shape and falls well short of our customary standards for being linked on the main page. Neutral on the merits of the nomination. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:48, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Per TRM, Wolfson. "Stick it inside someplace." – Sca (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose We generally only post stories that are points of action and/or when it is a point of no return (large # of deaths/loss). That there is some initial call to action is not the type of thing we post to start with regardless of anything else that is behind this nom or the coverage. --M asem (t) 15:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose What is the event here? Were new egregious mining permits issued over the last few days? Seems to be more "Did you know"... vs current event.Albertaont (talk) 16:21, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The auctions for 41 blocks of land are currently running and the bid deadline was August 18. That's why it's in the news now.  But by all means wait until the land is strip-mined and the coal is burnt.  In the meantime, let's play more golf, shall we? Andrew🐉(talk) 20:11, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Article is a stub, and this story doesn't seem to have reached the "significant development" stage that would justify a blurb. "Feel threatened by" is not enough.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:14, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment suggest this is now closed. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

(Protests posted) Belarusian election

 * This has been nominated already below; initially the protests were the focus, but the election results have been added. 331dot (talk) 08:58, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah OK, when I looked I only saw the protests. Smurrayinchester 09:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * First blurb's good InedibleHulk (talk) 09:26, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think that we should shed light on the protests as the main story. There are multiple protests of larger scale with much higher casualties every year that we normally don't post, so there's no strong reason why to consider these as an exception unless they result in a presidential change. Considering how things develop for now, this is probably going to be an ultimate failure.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:04, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose, while I support in principle, the election article is a bit of a mess; there are many uncited claims about living people. All the blurbs so far also need to be toned down for NPOV. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 14:59, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have added Alternative blurb III to address my concern about the blurbs but the article on the election needs a lot of work before posting. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 15:06, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * How about Alt4, offered above? Short & to the pt. – Sca (talk) 15:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment- My preference is for Altblurb3.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 18:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Strong support Alternative blurb III or my blurb V: (Officially) Re-elected Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko orders to disperse (peaceful) protesters who (claims victory of other candidate / accuses him of electoral fraud) or my blurb VI: Protesters against electoral fraud contest re-election of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko (and claim victory of other candidate). TarzanASG (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose the election article is missing vast amounts of citations (amongst other problems) and is in no condition to be posted on the main page. Black Kite (talk) 22:00, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – Too bad, as Svetlana Tikhanovskaya's flight to Lithuania, and her demonstrative video there, have been widely covered.   – Sca (talk) 13:42, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support in principle, with either article bolded and a preference for alt3 blurb, but oppose on quality. This is a major story but both articles are lacking in references. Some of that could be addressed by simply deleting the associated material e.g. most of the infobox on the protest article. We only need to fix one article to post the blurb, just bold that one for now. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 13:48, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted per consensus below, with only the protests bolded. The election article can be bolded whenever it is ready. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 23:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Martin Birch

 * Comment. Generally all fine, but the discography section contains a cite to discogs which, looking at the RS noticeboard archives, is not considered suitable for citations, only external links. Please could you make sure every entry in the list is verifiable by one or more of the non discogs sources? &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:06, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed now, I think. Black Kite (talk) 22:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Practically the whole discography was sourced to AllMusic - I've sourced some that weren't, and removed the remaining few that I couldn't source. Black Kite (talk) 22:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All refs from Discogs have now been replaced. I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:15, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * posted &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:12, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kamala

 * Comment - Is there a policy / convention on using stage names vs real names in the RD section? Seems like this post should be referenced as James Harris. But, is there a precedent in this group to use stage names? Regards. Ktin (talk) 02:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think COMMONNAME applies: use Kamala. Kingsif (talk) 03:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support I've been expecting this day for 28 years, and preparing the bio for eight. It could still use a few small wordiness tweaks, but I think it's ready. I'll spare you rubes my suggested blurb, you're welcome! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is not ready. There are couple of citations needed tags, unsourced awards and even a whole unsourced section. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:22, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Where he worked and with whom those four years is in his Cagematch profile (External links), if anyone's feeling citey. Click the Career or Matches buttons. I can't paste links, or I might. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:37, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * This is not about being "citey" (whatever that means). It's about following one of our most important policies.These cite tags need to be resolved before posting this. I have amended my comment to make it more clear. – Ammarpad (talk) 06:15, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Feeling citey just means "wanting to cite". Cagematch is considered reliable for results. Resolution's pretty easy. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:34, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You literally just made that up. Spman (talk) 12:57, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Only the first part. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I see you added those tags about a minute after I called "ready", so I stand by it; it was ready at the time. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:07, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support I have fixed a few cn tags so I would say this is ready. And a response to the original comment, yes we do use wrestling names in RD. Likewise stage names as we have done for Barry Chuckle in the past.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 06:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The artist known as "Prince" got a blurb in 2016, no formal address, around the time Chyna got RDed. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose dreadful line-by-line article with plenty unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:54, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Update 1988 to 1992 is now verifiable enough, as is his sale by The Wizard to the devious Master Fuji. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:30, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment If only Kendo Nagasaki were still alive.... he'd be spinning in his grave. Oh no sorry, he IS still alive. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You've got the wrong guy, I tell ya! InedibleHulk (talk) 10:31, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Still many unsourced statements.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I see one, about why his WrestleMania match was scrapped. Nobody should care. ITN is rigged against wrestlers. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sheesh... and they don't even carry guns. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll put in some cite tags. Does placing a reference at the end of the paragraph mean it's verifying every sentence within the paragraph? It's not clear.-- P-K3 (talk) 20:18, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I usually never use that trick when trying to get an article rapidly posted at WP:ITN/RD. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not a trick, they cover everything, have for years. Staleness is coming. Hulk is dead! InedibleHulk (talk) 20:30, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * They may well cover everything, but in my experience putting multiple links at the end of a paragraph with nothing on the individual lines, makes it very difficult to actually verify the facts. It's somewhat better than just listing all sources at the end of the article, like the old days of Wikipedia, but it's a step in that direction, and I definitely think it's best to be more specific on individual lines. If all the cites cover all the facts, then scatter them around a bit. If some cover some facts and others others, then that's easy. Just put them against the correct ones. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * (I'm very surprised there is not clear MoS policy on this. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC))
 * Easy if you can highlight, click, drag and all that luxury. Typing for me is like entering a Nintendo password. Nobody who read his article in life complained about clumps. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:19, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Because nobody read his article until he died. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Bobby Eaton, Featured Article See how similarly wide enough the citations are? See the same blending of kayfabe and "reality"? Why's it OK for that Southern gentleman? InedibleHulk (talk) 22:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think a FA from 12 and a half years ago is probably not a good yardstick for what we look for in terms of quality and BLP adherence today. Just sayin'.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Aloha. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Fully referenced. Ready to go. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD Referencing issues resolved.  Spencer T• C 16:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Two Kamalas in one day – merkwürdig. – Sca (talk) 22:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kurt Luedtke

 * Support Great update. Kingsif (talk) 23:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks good. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:03, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support satis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * —Bagumba (talk) 10:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) 2020 Vijayawada fire

 * Comment – Also covered by AP, Reuters. Possibly ITN-level due to Covid19 aspect? – Sca (talk) 17:18, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support has a death toll, is in India, even has background and reaction sections, so it ticks all the necessary boxes. Maybe add a map? Few unreferenced claims. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:56, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I added the map of where this happened.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 18:17, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, looks like the template now. Background section needs a ref. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:20, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Completely un-notable other than the fact that it happened to a COVID-19 facility. Besides, if we add this one to ITN, we kick out Beirut explosions and 3 of 4 articles end up being "bad things in India" which seems  unbalanced... and all 4 ITN articles end up being about the Indian subcontinent. If the death rate were higher, I would be okay with kicking out Beirut to replace but not this instant.Albertaont (talk) 18:27, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As a note, we do not control where the news happens. We've had cases where all the items were in the US, and where they were all in the UK. News happens where it happens, we have no control on that. --M asem (t) 01:11, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Even though I don't think this merits posting, it's important to point out that this oppose does not make sense. Wikipedia is not here to balance bad and good stories between conutries/continents, please read WP:RGW. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:11, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Very much the same as the below nom. Kingsif (talk) 21:30, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment a little context:  --LaserLegs (talk) 00:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Did a quick scan of Indian news sources. Seems like news has not made it, prominently, to the front page on most of them. The news cycles still seem to be on the aircraft incident rescue actions, and the 2020 Idukki landslide which seems to have degenerated from an impact standpoint, unfortunately. Ktin (talk) 02:20, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per similar fire Czech republic fire below. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:17, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) 2020 Bohumín apartment fire

 * Oppose Has already dropped off most news cycles, not notable enough and no international significance. Things nominated to ITN tend to stay up for a week, I can't see this as being newsworthy for a week.Albertaont (talk) 05:33, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on notability per above and also on quality, it's only three small paragraphs. <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b> 06:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Support local authorities are calling it arson, death toll comparable to an airplane skidding off a runway. add a map, background and reactions section to fluff it out and you might get more support. --LaserLegs (talk) 09:50, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose (for now) per stubby article.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 12:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose (for now) still stubby but at least there are more info.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 13:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Tragic, but lacks general significance. Parochial. – Sca (talk) 13:47, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note that I've moved the article (The title was bugging me as it suggested the entire nation was on fire which... no. --M asem (t) 13:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Article looks to be in good shape. One thing that stood out to me was: The incident has been widely regarded as the worst ever fire incident in the history of Czech Republic. -- Tavix ( talk ) 18:06, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I actually went to check the source on that claim (which was pointing to this article ) and it does not at all support that, nor any of the other sources. I can't find where that came from, so I have had to remove that claim. --M asem (t) 18:18, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's the BBC making the claim. -- Tavix ( talk ) 18:24, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not to split hairs on this one -- but, the link above says "...has been described as the...", without any attribution (e.g. described by whom), so, this claim should not be attributed to BBC, at least not based on the above link. Regards. Ktin (talk) 19:09, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment It is an arsony and a mass murder blurb should reflect this. --Jenda H. (talk) 19:06, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment a little context:  --LaserLegs (talk) 00:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Adding altblurb2 given this is now looking like an arson attack. --M asem (t) 01:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also I've moved it again to the more specific location name per BBC and updated the above. --M asem (t) 01:08, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Unfortunately. It's tragic but  no general significance. Much larger disasters are reported everyday around the word. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted to RD) RD: Erich Gruenberg

 * Comment reference 5 says it is a page on The Strad, but the link points to a BBC page with a mirror of our own article on it, which isn't acceptable as a source... Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, BBC fixed, and it's a reference to five Proms concerts, not the bio. I meant to name the others also but had no time yet. Click to each one has the details. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:08, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:57, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support As the concerns of Amakuru has been addressed, seems fine now JW 1961   Talk  20:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - per improvements.BabbaQ (talk) 20:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD. A little on the short side but consensus to post and meets minimum standards.  Spencer T• C 21:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Pere Casaldàliga

 * Support This article seems to be great.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 12:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - looks ready.BabbaQ (talk) 13:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Per above. Albertaont (talk) 19:18, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment this appears to have been ready for 12 hours.  Also worth noting the page appears to have been moved to Pedro Casaldáliga. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 07:57, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * —Bagumba (talk) 10:28, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Belarusian protests
Large scale significant protests in Belarus, ongoing for some time, gaining significant momentum and coverage in recent days.Abcmaxx (talk) 13:18, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - article seems ready. Perhaps add it together with voting results tomorrow.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment The main article is 2020 Belarusian protests, I've added it to the blurb. Brandmeistertalk  14:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support The outcome of the election will be significant for this country, as well as Russia and the rest of Europe. Maybe the result of the election could also have its own blurb once those are announced? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 15:23, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment should this be ongoing, rather than a blurb? Today is a large event but these have been occurring for two months and are expect to occur until the election? --M asem (t) 15:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I support adding this in the blurb on the election results but, for now, the protests solely don't merit one. And while it's clear what happens in the country, POV-pushing words like "regime" are not welcome.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait – I hate to say the W-word again, but it seems only logical to wait until tomorrow's election results are available. (Besides, Saturday is traditionally an off-day news-wise.) – Sca (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support now as a blurb (no sign that it's being continuously updated for ongoing) and when the election is done, if the election article is suitable, merge. Lots of election articles fail to go up due to inadequate updates or referencing issues. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Ongoing to be clear, despite the hysteria the article does not meet the basic requirement of being "continually updated with new, pertinent information" --LaserLegs (talk) 20:53, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support ongoing per notability of the events and the article is ready. (talk) 18:46, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose & Wait The election outcome and the "hook" of this news will depend on results in 24 hours. We can wait till then, no need to post this today and re-litigate it again tomorrow. Albertaont (talk) 18:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nominator comment For those who say wait; I would point out that the elections are really merely academic at this point and so the protests will be ongoing regardless of the already known outcome. Besides, as some have pointed out, the blurb can always be changed accordingly Abcmaxx (talk) 19:18, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I would definitely support adding this to ITN today.BabbaQ (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Good to know your opinion. – Sca (talk) 13:58, 9 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Just drew 60,000, without incident. Big by Belarus standards, maybe. The election will be bigger. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * @InedibleHulk Not without incident; given hundreds have been arrested, more threatened, and most of the opposition leaders and activists have been detained in some form or another, that is hardly an accurate statement. Belarus is a secretive police state, so 60000 open protesters is huge by any comparable standard. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Arrests are normal in police states. Lacks newsworthy incidents. Violence, property crime, clashes like elsewhere; this is a sidebar to an election story. But yeah, good to see a whole 3% of Minsk in the streets. Maybe after tomorrow, a full twentieth will get angry. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:47, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait until the election or post to Ongoing. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:30, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support and possibly post to Ongoing. 3% is very close the the 3.25% for a revolution so this story looks like it might have legs. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:43, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Very Strong Support This is some of the biggest change or attempt at change in Belarus since its inception. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 21:00, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support combined election blurb.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 23:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Widely reported and now the "election" has concluded as well. I proposed an alt-blurb above which combines both events. Regards So  Why  07:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - merged my altblurbs from nominating the election. Smurrayinchester 09:24, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Alt II's nice InedibleHulk (talk) 11:21, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment the election article is not in posting condition. Shouldn't have rushed to merge the two. Oh well. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support altblurb2 Since its both about the election and the subsequent protests. Gotitbro (talk) 13:53, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – See explanation above. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 15:08, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose solely on article quality. The election article is nowhere near ready for linking on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support posting without delay. Both articles in decent condition and items certainly all over the news where I am. Mkwia (talk) 08:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, per above. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:57, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, per above. Election results are themselves newsworthy, so this seems like a clear candidate. EryZ (talk) 23:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted. Currently the protest article is good enough so I've posted it without haste. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 23:39, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Pull bold or not, you can't link the election article in that state on the main page. Update the blurb to exclude the link please. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We link horrible articles on the Main Page all the time. Wikipedia is a work in progress. We just shouldn't highlight them as something we are proud of. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 00:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry but no, the election article has unreferenced claims about individuals being arrested -- a WP:BLP vio. It's gotta come down --LaserLegs (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Adin Steinsaltz

 * Oppose tagged. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 18:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I removed the tag, the page did not need the full tag on the whole page. I see a few spare "when" but nothing that seems too major for such a large article. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose too much uncited material. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 22:51, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I have filled in more than enough to get it at RD. ("Of sufficient quality.") Sir Joseph (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see his death mentioned and cited in the article and, if we don't have a source for his exact date of birth, it should be removed from the lead. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 02:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * OK Folks. Added mentions of his death in the article. Added a few other references. Done. I think the top-of-the-fold section looks reasonably clean. Ktin (talk) 03:30, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – I added two missing refs I noticed. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 17:07, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – Sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 17:28, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support satis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks fine. – Ammarpad (talk) 22:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 05:44, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Air India Express Flight 1344

 * Weak Oppose Disasterous but the article currently has insufficient content. --AlphaBeta135 (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Now that article has a sufficient amount of info.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait – Reportedly two casualties, 30-40 injured. – Sca (talk) 16:49, 7 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support - 15+ dead, article coming together nicely. Mjroots (talk) 17:05, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support hull loss, many dead. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 17:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Strong Support Dozens dead, possibly up to 200 potential deaths and injuries. Eternal Shadow   Talk  17:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Per above notes. Someone knowledgeable about this topic, please feel free to update the blurb if there is a difference between 'crash' and overrunning runway / runway excursion. Also now that we know the number onboard, we perhaps update the nearly 200 onboard to the actual number onboard. Added Altblurb above.Ktin (talk) 17:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , overrun is appropriate.  ❯❯❯  S A H A   17:55, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Causalities will likely climb looking at the wreakage alone. Support characterization as crash instead of runway excursion, since this will be complete hull loss and its well pass the runway in a valley. Albertaont (talk) 18:04, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support It just happened a couple of minutes ago. Plane fell into the valley and 15+ dead. 70.106.212.233 (talk) 18:27, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - seems ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Marked ready. – Ammarpad (talk) 18:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted alt blurb. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 21:07, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Sri Lankan parliamentary election

 * Comment This is ITN/R, so I have edited the nom to reflect that. The results section needs a prose update and the results should also be included in the infobox and lede, which incidentally is overly long and some of its material should be moved to the body.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 02:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, the above was intended as an oppose on quality with the hope that the editors currently working on the article will fix the deficiencies I described, but I didn't think it would be necessary to make that explicit because I assumed succeeding !voters would agree that the article needs improvement.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 03:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Some recent elections have gone stale on ITN, this is not one of them. Thanks again for the work so far, agree with  article needs minor touch-up, but the substance is there.Albertaont (talk) 02:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination, and above points. Blurb looks good too! Ktin (talk) 03:00, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Looks good. Prose is there as well. Sherenk1 (talk) 03:37, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment a few uncited sentences at the end of paragraphs and in the timeline; consider this a support once those are addressed. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks good, with a few fixes needed. Major election in Sri Lanka. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 12:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I hope I fixed those concerns mentioned above but hope the overall shape of the article is okayish. Cheers. Abishe (talk) 13:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks better now. Thanks to and others for their efforts.  B zw ee bl   (talk • contribs) 17:40, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support on the face of it, this looks ready. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 18:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks OK – Ammarpad (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted.  Spencer T• C 02:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Frances E. Allen

 * Comment Looks fairly good, will Support when the CNs are attended to JW 1961   Talk  19:52, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * CNs have been fixed and I've added a couple small things that were implied by the Turing but more explicit in a few weeks. --M asem (t) 20:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks good to me. – Ammarpad (talk) 22:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Looks good to me too.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  23:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support satis. G2G. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 05:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Wayne Fontana

 * Support Reasonably good coverage in article, everything seems to be sourced. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose' there are several singles which aren't showing any chart positions at all which means they are currently unverifiable, unless there's a general source somewhere in there for such flops. And where do I verify all those catalogue numbers? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 09:52, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the cite tags, and found a source for the catalogue numbers, that also lists the non-charting singles. P-K3 (talk) 11:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support good work. G2G. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 12:32, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Um, Um, Um, Um, Um, Um.... will someone post?? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:35, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Frequently deathly slow around here at the weekend. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 18:43, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "chortle, chortle". Martinevans123 (talk) 18:47, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment still ready nine hours later. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 21:59, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "There's no justice!" Martinevans123 (talk) 22:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * —Bagumba (talk) 01:30, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Brent Scowcroft

 * Support Looks like referencing issues have been addressed.  Spencer T• C 02:26, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Looks good enough. cn tags have been removed.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  03:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support decent article, the first three honours appear to be unreferenced, the rest seems satis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 09:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, if anyone has any concerns please specify them and we can see if we can get them addressed. KConWiki (talk) 14:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support looks good to me. PCN02WPS  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 21:51, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * —Bagumba (talk) 01:14, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Ram Mandir, Ayodhya

 * Comment This is not an area I know much about, would the nominator be able to give some context about why starting construction of a building is significant in this case? Kingsif (talk) 04:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Greetings, I have added comments above. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 04:20, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Kingsif (talk) 05:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support in principle. From the links provided above, this is receiving international attention as a prominent and controversial religious matter that has spanned at least the last 30 years just about this temple, let alone the site it's on. Modi's attendance adds to the story. I haven't judged the article, yet, so this !vote could change if it's in poor condition. Kingsif (talk) 05:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * leaning Oppose - we did already post this story, when the supreme Court made the decision to allow the temple last November.  So in effect this is just another development in the same story, much like the spacecraft returning to earth after earlier launching. Unless I'm missing something?  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 07:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * leaning Support with a better blurb. Has shown up on ITN within the last year, but the Ayodhya dispute is an 80+ year saga that's had enormous ramifications on Indian society and politics. Its generally credited with kick-starting the now-dominant Bharatiya Janata Party for one thing. Given the length of time between events it doesn't seem unreasonable to mention again. --RaiderAspect (talk) 08:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Major event in one of the greatest controversies in Indian history and society. I recommend linking to Ayodhya dispute in the blurb to provide context for unfamiliar readers. This is at least equally significant to the court decision we posted last year.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 09:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, per Bzweebl. A better blurb is needed, however.—Brigade Piron (talk) 10:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support and added another blurb. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 10:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Alt III. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 10:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose This seems similar to the Hagia Sophia story which wasn't posted. If this has already been posted once then giving it more exposure again so soon seems premature.  The ceremony in this case seems mainly to have been a photo-op for Modi and doesn't seem to be getting much attention outside India.  Better to wait until the temple is completed and officially opened when there will be an actual building to report. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "Because x didn't get it, y shouldn't too" has been established to be an INVALID arguement. If you are going to oppose this, you're going to have to look at it on its own. Dantheanimator (talk) 15:22, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Amakuru this was posted last fall. The "ground breaking" is ceremonial. Nominate again when it's complete. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - As per above supports. Sherenk1 (talk) 12:20, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The article states that construction has been underway for four months, so this ceremony does seem like a photo op rather than a substantial step. That doesn't seem major enough to post the same story twice. Furthermore, if the dispute over this temple has had widespread impacts, it really isn't obvious from the article. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 12:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks ok. I'm not a Hindu but this seems to have some importance in the faith so in that way it is significant. (Hinduism is 1 of the 5 major religions of the world). Dantheanimator (talk) 15:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose on quality. Neither the article nor any of the blurbs succeed in explaining the event's significance.  Alt0 and Alt2 don't even pretend to. —Cryptic 15:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - with Altblurb 4 that explains the events broader context. It is getting global coverage outside of India. The date chosen seem to have been the anniversary of the revocation of autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir, but that could be a coincidence.Albertaont (talk) 15:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment This is ready to be posted. Dantheanimator (talk) 18:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Went with Alt 3, which IMHO explain significance best. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 18:42, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting comment For those questioning the significance of this, my understanding from past reading on the dispute is that this is THE most important symbolic flashpoint of Hindu-Muslim tensions in India. The section in the bolded article on the ground-breaking ceremony should give a sense on how big a deal it was in the context of the overall controversy. The ceremony was broadcast and celebrated by Hindus all over the world.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 19:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting feedback on blurb: Is it right to say "disputed", once the Supreme court gave its final verdict on this matter in November of 2019? My thinking is that prior to this time, it would be alright to say "disputed", but, post the supreme court verdict, we should not be using the phrase "disputed". Also, in perhaps a minor point, we might want to reconsider starting with "In India". This brings up the systemic geographic bias that was being discussed yesterday, and gives the impression that the center of our universe is somewhere in the western world. E.g. we didn't start the post about the Spanish king by saying, "In Spain, ...". I know getting consensus on a blurb is a challenging one, but, AltBlurb2 remains the most neutral. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As the person who (mainly) wrote the blurb on the page, a) the Supreme Court case did not change that this is still the flashpoint of strained Hindu-Muslim relations, and b) we said that Juan Carlos was the "King of Spain" in the blurb, thereby providing geographical context, and given that most people in the Western world (this is the English Wikipedia, after all) are not privy to this dispute, adding "In India" is a brief yet effective way to provide needed geographic context. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Regarding a), I have added my notes below to 's comment. Regarding b), sure, please do what is best. I agree with you that whatever conveys the message in a succinct manner and with brevity, should be done. But, on a minor point, we should just be aware of our biases when we say "in the Western World (this is the English Wikipedia, after all)" -- ~87% of the Wikipedia traffic from India is to the English Wikipedia (source). So, the western world can not be the only preserve of the English Wikipedia, or vice versa. But, to give you the benefit of doubt, only ~10% of all Wikipedia traffic comes from India. So, maybe that is driving your thinking. Cool either ways. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Per John M Wolfson, the dispute exists whether or not any legal conclusion was reached. The end of the dispute happens when there is no longer a significant dispute from opposition groups.  The groups who were opposed to the temple construction still do, and the dispute is itself what makes this a major news event.  Places of worship are under construction all over the world all the time, what makes this one newsworthy is that this one has been the source of tension in one of the world's largest nations.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 19:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Will let you guys decide the appropriate wording. You might know this better than me. But, "disputed" seems wrong, particularly when the it took the courts 28 years to end the dispute by providing a resolution. Now, will some parties to the dispute be aggrieved at the end of a verdict, perhaps yes, but, the whole reason a verdict was announced was to close a dispute, so to speak. Re: the second point, sure, please do what is best. Cheers.Ktin (talk) 19:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not particularly tied to one word in particular, if you have a word that better encapsulates the controversy without using "dispute", I'm open to changing it. I'm just not smart enough to think of one myself.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 19:51, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, I read this once more - the blurb clearly says building "on disputed land", I don't think the law would allow you to build on disputed land. If somoene were to do that, they would be breaking the law, and we don't want to be implying that the folks who are building are breaking the law. Cheers.Ktin (talk) 19:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I must admit, I am in the same boat as well. Hence my thinking was that using Altblurb2 was the most neutral way to go about this one. Maybe pop in 'Indian' in between to give the geographical context. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 20:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , in the context of the sentence, it can be reasonably inferred that by "dispute" it means "controversial". Also, consider the fact that "disputed land" is linked to the article, so any reader such as you can just click/hover over the link to learn more about the "dispute". You're interpreting "dispute" to politically, this is more of a socio-cultural thing from what I know (similar to the situation of East Jerusalem). If you want more clarification, just send me a ping and I'll be glad to make this clear for you. Dantheanimator (talk) 20:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ktin, you just openly accused people of being racists here. You probably don't want to do that if you really are trying to convince people to help you out.  Furthermore, I asked you for some help in crafting better wording.  Your response was 1) to delete my request for help and 2) to go back to an earlier post of yours and edit it to accuse anyone who doesn't do exactly what you want to be a racist.  Good luck with that.  I'm done trying to be helpful to you.  You can find someone else to do your bidding.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 20:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Please let me admit that I am not accusing anyone of anything. There was a genuine edit conflict. Let me be the first one to apologize, if I gave anyone the impression that I was casting aspersions on them. Specifically,, please accept my apologies, if that was what came out. I will stand down. Thanks everyone. Have a nice day. Ktin (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Horace Clarke

 * Support Looks to be in good shape. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 16:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 02:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Hawa Abdi

 * Comment The DHAF site used as a reference for a couple statements is under construction. Hrodvarsson (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * just added an archive URL of the site from March 2017. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support looks good, should be ready. Dantheanimator (talk) 01:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 02:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Pete Hamill

 * Support pretty decently referenced article JW 1961   Talk  12:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Commment Fails MOS:ROLEBIO, listing everything but the kitchen sink in the lead sentence. —Bagumba (talk) 13:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I got rid of "educator". The rest might arguably be notable enough to stay.—Bagumba (talk) 13:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Well-referenced, looks ready.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 18:34, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Hurricane Isaias

 * Support in the news, thorough article, and storm during storm season does storm things is an established pattern here. Also deaths. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:POINT. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support For me a hurricane that causes significant impact to millions and leads to 10+ deaths is enough to post. Article is already in good shape. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 20:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support in principle  -- Question for folks who might know -- the article is worded "Hurricane Isaias was a category 1 hurricane" -- is that because the worst of the hurricane is behind us now? Also, is there a thumb-rule in this group about a category threshold above which a hurricane is relevant to be posted on ITN? E.g. Category 3 and beyond. I am assuming not. Ktin (talk) 20:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Damage repairs and estimates are still ongoing. For second question: ni, only if it is notable and causes significant damage/kills people.~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 20:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The hurricane itself is done. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks folks and . Hope everyone in the NE is safe. Ktin (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose not even the deadliest storm of this season. Standard weather with a standard outcome.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 20:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Which one is the deadliest storm of this season? We should definitely post that one :) Ktin (talk) 20:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Cristobal. Not even sure it got nominated. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 20:32, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. Seems like we missed it. We should not miss this one. Ktin (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It was missed because it was non-notable, just like this. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 20:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Very Interesting. Is there a numerical threshold to being 'notable'? Ktin (talk) 20:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well history tells us that around 30 to 40 deaths is the usual threshold for such storms to be considered worthwhile posting (I've only gone back as far as 2015 mind you). Setting the bar this low on a hurricane season would literally open the door to monthly postings of regular weather patterns in the US which fade away almost immediately.  Perhaps we could add a new line to ITN during  hurricane season in the  US alone  to publish all the various storms there for our audience.  In the meantime, floods in India  and China with far more impact on much less-developed countries are routinely dismissed as "standard weather for this time  of year".  Double standards anyone?  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 20:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2020 Pacific typhoon season has caused 6 fatalities all year. China hasn't been hard hit by typhoons recently, there only having 1 fatality from that country in 2020.
 * 2020 China floods were posted to ongoing last month for 11 days with no opposition.
 * 2020 Assam floods weren't posted because the article wasn't updated enough. (It still is!) Only IndelibleInk opposed based on importance grounds. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed, and that's just this year. How many over the last five years ridiculed and objected to through systemic bias?  Yet people support this trivial storm, the like of which happens several times per  year in one isolated part of the world?  Amazing.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 21:09, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Howard. This is good to know. So, seems like with all of this, we should go ahead with posting this one. Let's move forward. Also, at the risk of stating the obvious, I do not think we should trivialize the less developed countries and their suffering as "standard time of the year". I am onboard that we should be posting those in a timely manner. Ktin (talk) 21:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep. Typhoon Jebi (2018) killed 17 surely non-Caucasians and was posted. Good work, Wikipedia! Howard the Duck (talk) 21:16, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That is outstanding research. Meantime in 2019 there were something like eight notable  floods in India alone  with  death tolls in excess of 50, none of which were posted, most of which weren't nominated.  Let's just run a US weather ticker under the Covid banner, that's much easier than  all this silly  debate. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 21:19, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Without wishing to get into the debate above about deaths, as not every significant tropical cyclone causes a significant amount of deaths. We are currently trying to examine the way forward with meteorology articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Meteorology and User talk:Jason Rees/Flood articles. Comments are welcome while suggestions are vital.Jason Rees (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with Ktin. Cristobal didnt get posted bc we didnt know it caused 15 deaths till laye July! Always thought it caused only 5. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 20:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. 13 deaths and affected 6 countries of Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Maryland and New York. We post ITNR entries that affect far less than 6 countries. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sadly a relatively trivial number of people killed and infrastructure affected in almost all of those "countries".  More people have been killed in the US by mass shootings in the same amount of time Isaias has been trundling along.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 20:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Those are states, not countries. Affected more than 6 countries - Dominica, Trinidad+Tobago, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, US, Grenada, Britain (territories). ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 20:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry. Those were Easter eggs linking to actual countries affected by this natural disaster. Even the queen's realms (plural!) were affected. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Technically, the United States are 51 sovereign states, hence the name. And only seven people have died in mass shootings this month, from just six counties (encapsulating Mulholland Drive). There was one in a federal district, most recently, everyone lived. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Exactly! 7 is 6 less than 13., you can keep Rambling about how it's not notable and that 13 deaths are nothing. This is notable. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 22:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't follow you at all, but please stop trying to canvass votes. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And sure, mass shootings in August in the US amount to seven dead, but it's only 4 August. More than 60 in July.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * (I clarified here, but it was destroyed, now TRM's pissed, so forget it. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC))
 * Um, if you mean "upset" then no, I'm just saying people killed in mass shootings in August (it's the 4th) nearly equates to the death toll here. And if you meant "drunk" then also no.  I don't think your comment is very helpful at all and I'd urge you to strike it/explain it/apologise for a borderline NPA.  Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:44, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose If death and destruction are what's hot, and the hotter one wasn't, this one's not. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose This was already nominated on Aug 1. Posting it then might have been sensible but it has dissipated now. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If it needs to be backdated, so be it. It's still more recent than the two 7/26 blurbs. -- <b style="color:red">King of ♥</b><b style="color:red"> ♦</b><b style="color:black"> ♣</b><b style="color:black"> ♠</b> 21:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It would make sense if it was a truly notable storm. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 21:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support After all, it did damage a lot of structures (and injure people) in the East Coast.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 21:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If it weren't going on after a whole lot of buildings (and people) were blown right away in Beirut, it'd be impressive; timing matters in the news. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose. While 13 deaths and loss of property etc is certainly tragic, it seems like that is not at the level which it would make sense to post, bearing in mind the frequency of expected events at that level. As an aside, re "Setting the bar this low on a hurricane season would literally open the door to monthly postings", I'm curious where this door is, which will be literally opened if we're not careful? Might be worth putting anotbet padlock on it. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If you don't mind my asking. What is that 'level' where it would make sense to post? Re: your latter question, I am tagging to give you the location of that door. Ktin (talk) 22:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Standard door, it's got "systemic bias" just above the knocker. Cheers Ktin! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * oh, that door. I know it well, and I've seen many people going through it in the past. It has a big red warning sign on it but is still left wide open for all to pass through. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think on this one, I am on the same page as you . However, the way to fix it is not to oppose everything else, but, instead when we see systemic bias denying an action for a under-represented region, we should speak up. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 22:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Just close this discussion bc the consensus is clearly against me. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 22:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment and now the canvassing begins. Honestly.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:21, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as thankfully it was not a devastating hurricane as can be seen by the relatively low number of deaths and people losing power rather than losing everything. P-K3 (talk) 22:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – How much damage is 'signficant,' and how does this hurricane rate on a scale of 1-10 compared to other hurricanes in this regard? (Personally, I find most weather news inherently boring.) – Sca (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's a "3 out of 10" based on my reading of the last six years of this hurricane season thing. This is relatively trivial even in the context of hurricanes, let alone the context of global encyclopedic events (such as Beirut).  Posting this would be a sublime kowtow to systemic bias.  But Donald the Orange would be happy to see the US winning again, while pointing to some graphs he knows literally nothing about!  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose, the article is in good shape, but in the grand scheme of things this is just a low-grade hurricane, which makes notability and systemic bias concerns certainly valid. Tito xd (?!?) 22:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Just look at what else is in the news. Half of the capital city of Lebanon has been destroyed by an explosion. A (former) king goes into exile! That would be huge news two centuries ago. Guyana now has a clear winner, five months after its election. (I really hope that doesn't happen to US's election ._.) And then an $11 billion scandal that took down a prime minister of Malaysia. All of these are major historic events. Isaias was a deadly storm, it spawned several tornadoes, and brought the strongest winds to large parts of the northeastern United States. Perhaps the power outage, as millions of people are without power. In June, Cyclone Nisarga left about 2.5 million people without power (more than Isaias), but it wasn't on ITN (as far as I know). Isaias doesn't seem like the kind of historic storm that the world has gotten used to in the past few decades. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Good analysis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't forgot the literal, actual bus plunge we posted just last month. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, the one where 21 people died in a flash in a under-developed country as opposed to where 13 people died in "the greatest country on earth" from typical weather. Bravo.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well you bot the greatest country on earth bit right anyway --LaserLegs (talk) 22:59, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Certainly the greatest at killing its citizens with an orange leader advocating the use drugs which actively exacerbates Covid-19 deaths?  You're welcome to it!!!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And "you bot"... you couldn't make it up! Like the CIA are trying to convert Wikipedia into their vessel! Brilliant.  I go to bed a happy man, thanks LaseLegs, always up for it! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ha, your country thinks seven o' clock is bedtime! InedibleHulk (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * What the actual fuck are you talking about?! Come back when you have something meaningful (and/or accurate) to say!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Given that it's currently 00:27 in the UK, that seems quite reasonable. What time do you sleep over there in the good 'ol USA? Black Kite (talk) 23:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It was supposed to be a lighthearted time zone joke. I'm Canadian. But fine, I'll kill myself, sheesh (no, not really). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes it is quite a burden having the most powerful, most important country in the world where the inept flailing of our leader demands international attention. There was a time when the inept leader of Great Britain would have demanded international attention but alas, the sun has set on that era. Too bad. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, Trump is literally in a league of his own. And then you have Brazil's Bolsonaro. Our bonkers PM is way down on the list.  Meanwhile the US is "winningest" at dead people from Covid and it's getting much much worse.  "Mask debate" sounds like "masturbate" when y'all say it too.  Brilliant.  My  life is nearly complete! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 23:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I was running against the wind. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment Seems like we are trending toward yet another "Unable to reach consensus" closure. This is not bad in and of itself. Speaks to the vibrancy of our debates. But, sometimes we should remind ourselves that this is "In the news" and not "In the olds" and show some bias to action. After all this section is not a "This day in history!". Cheers folks. Ktin (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice thought, but given this has been nominated twice, it's been tortuous and unnecessary. Probably  worth knowing when a dead duck is a dead duck.  The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!&#33;!&#33;) 22:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I don't see this in any news outside of the US. Doesn't seem like a very deadly or notable storm. Albertaont (talk) 23:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not even close to the biggest story in the US. 160,000 dead from COVID now, is it? Black Kite (talk) 23:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose This actually ended up being less of a story than I was expecting, which I suppose is probably for the better. Pie3141527182 (talk) 00:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose The impact of the storm in the Caribbean was mild enough to not post then, and in the US and Canada... a few COVID-19 testing centers closed (something which couldn't happen at any other time). Basically, it rained heavily for half a day in a few states. Suggest close based on the strong opposes above and the fact it's not a story, it's a minor weather pattern. Storms just exist, only their effects really give notability over other wind, and this had none. Kingsif (talk) 00:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: FBG Duck

 * Oppose for now. Someone mentioned a dead duck in the section above this one, and now, tragically, here's an actual dead duck. Anyway, the article text is 1118 bytes so it's pretty much a stub right now, it'll need to get above 1500 at least. A couple of unreferwnced claims in there too. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose For now also as plenty of unreferenced sentences and the whole discography section JW 1961   Talk  12:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Not only is this a stub, it was only moved to article space after they were killed . They only released one EP and most of the references in the article are about the shooting. I don't think this person passes WP:BLP1E or WP:BAND. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 12:41, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 01:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Daisy Coleman

 * Comment I don't know enough about this tragedy really to pass comment on this nomination other than to question if this individual really surpasses WP:BLP1E. I  note her article used to redirect to the documentary about her and that was changed an hour ago.  An AFD for her article in 2017  suggested her article redirect to Audrie & Daisy and I'm not sure I'm seeing any  compelling evidence about  Coleman in the intervening time to suggest she warrants a standalone article.   The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 21:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair point. Coleman is the subject of her assault, and the aforementioned documentary, plus her untimely death is generating additional significant coverage. I think she meets WP:BASIC. TJMSmith (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support per TJMSmith, there is significant ongoing coverage that predates the documentary. The AFD is uninformative as there was no actual "article" at the time.   GreatCaesarsGhost   11:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above; saw it in the news before coming to this, article as stands is fine and covers her previous activism and the documentary, so meets notability for an article. Kingsif (talk) 22:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 03:47, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 04:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Beirut port explosions

 * Wait till the cause is known. Also needs a map, background and reactions sections. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:53, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Massive explosion heard 250 km away in Cyprus. Count Iblis (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait for more details to emerge. From the videos being reported, this is a very big explosion and certainly seems significant enough to merit an ITN blurb. However there is very little reliable information available yet and the article is very short. Give it a few hours. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 17:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Very clearly the most notable event of the day. --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 17:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Notable, widely covered in reliable sources. Article is being rapidly expanded, but that's to be expected, and it's semi-protected, so vandalism will be mitigated. Ganesha811 (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait a few hours. Article is still a stub and there are few details available yet.-- P-K3 (talk) 17:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Exteremly Important situation, being covered across multiple online sources, along multiple videos of the explosion(s) and continued coverage. –NicoARicoA (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - Sky News showing several buildings have collapsed. Death toll likely to be much higher than 10. Significant event and ITN worthy. Article is fully referenced and will be expanded as info comes to hand. Mjroots (talk) 17:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Sky ITN said that the explosion may have been on board a ship. We may need to consider a blurb with the explosion and ship if that is the case. Mjroots (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Top headline in major news sources, helped by existence of several incendiary videos. Article is a stub only due to lack of available information and will likely see significant expansion throughout the day.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 17:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Might have to word the blurb appropriately or be ready to update the blurb a couple of times as more news comes available. Not sure what the guidelines about that are, in this group. Ktin (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support It will be a long time before cause is established, it doesn't make sense to wait for that. Mvolz (talk) 17:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Support Big boom in Beirut is definitely gonna be in the headlines for days. Eternal Shadow   Talk
 * Support - The blurb will need update(s), but, considering how big the media coverage and how notable the event is, I don't support waiting for more details before sending it to the main page. Ahmadtalk 17:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - The images coming out of Beirut seem to be showing a much bigger magnitude then what offical reports are showing. This is going to dominate headlines for at least two days in the world. Albertkaloo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – in principle, but wait until extent of casualties becomes clearer. (Al Jazeera says 100s wounded.) – Sca (talk) 18:01, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 18:02, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article is detailed enough, well referenced, and the topic is being covered by news sources appropriately. Checks all of the boxes.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 18:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 18:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Premature. ITN isn't a breaking news site. – Sca (talk) 18:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I count 13 "supports" and a "strong support". The three "waits" came when the article was a stub, but it has been expanded since then. We have a quality (enough) article with references and the subject is quite literally "in the news" all over the world. What more do you need? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Extent of casualties, and if available fairly soon something on the cause or perp. (Again, ITN is a fixture of an online encyclopedia, not a news site per se. NYT at 18:30 said "the extent of casualties was unknown.") – Sca (talk) 18:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Aye, where and when are not enough (even that's approximated). InedibleHulk (talk) 18:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Did someone suggest that we shouldn't add that information when it is known? I don't see anyone arguing we shouldn't?  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 18:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Here we go again. That's not the point, and Jay knows it. – Sca (talk) 18:50, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, the point is that other people who are not you thought differently than you, and they had the consensus. That happens sometimes.  Wikipedia does not do things solely on your say.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 19:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * My point on Tuesday was that at the time of posting, insufficient information was available to answer the most salient of the "five W" questions. Thus, posting then was premature. My point had nothing to do with those who expressed support for posting at that time. Honest people may differ. – Sca (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting support - In service to our readers, how could we not point to today's most important story? "ITN isn't a breaking news site" as a rationale for holding back is not rooted in policy. -- Fuzheado &#124; Talk 21:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment no issues with posting this, but the blurb must mention the deaths. That's the headline, not "extensive damage". Mentioning property and buildings but not casualties is a terrible optic IMHO. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 18:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Post-posting support. It is the headline around the world, with countries pledging international aid and EU assembling its emergency workers. The magnitude of this explosion is not your "run of the mill" explosion. <b style="color: #0000FF;">OhanaUnited</b><b style="color: green;">Talk page</b> 16:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Shirley Ann Grau

 * Support Only 2 kb of prose, but references all check out and are diverse, 'ography is complete, and notability is well established.130.233.3.21 (talk) 09:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - looks good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - looks good JW 1961   Talk  19:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Short but satisfactory. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Punjab alcohol poisoning

 * Oppose (for now)  per stubby article.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 18:06, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There's barely any expansion for this article within the past 2–3 hours.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 20:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Already getting stale. – Sca (talk) 18:31, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: A search through the archives show that 2 similar items nominated were not of sufficient quality for posting; the one that was posted: 2016 Irkutsk mass methanol poisoning.  Spencer T• C 19:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Article is too short and does not provide enough information, and is rightly tagged as a stub. Also, it appears the main part of the story, the inquiry and raids that took place, occurred on July 30 and August 1, and even going with the later date, would make this the second oldest blurb and would like roll off too fast to make it worth it.  Given that the article is not good enough, and that the story is stale at this time, I don't think this is worth posting.  If this had been a more extensive article, and had been nominated back on July 30 or August 1 when the most recent events occurred, I would have supported it.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 19:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose but as noted per Jayron32, on its stubiness and staleness. This otherwise would have been an appropriate story (why I'm adding here just in case) for an ITN. --M asem (t) 19:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose We missed the boat on this one. Should have been picked up in the late July news cycle but didn't, so now stale. Albertaont (talk) 20:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Reni Santoni

 * Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 13:18, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support all looks ok to go JW 1961   Talk  19:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Resume in prose format; minimal depth of coverage at present about the subject's acting career besides a list of roles and films.  Spencer T• C 19:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * WO struck. Still a little too "bare bones" for me to support, but I have no reason to oppose either.  Spencer T• C 04:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Thin but fine. I am surprised to find that Rotten Tomatoes is explicitly NOT WP:USERG, when checking the uncredited appearances. Aren't users able to add/remove credits over there?130.233.3.21 (talk) 09:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now if what the IP says is true. Are Rotten Tomatoes filmographies user generated? If so we need to find a better source for his "uncredited" role in The Pawnbroker, it doesn't matter whether WP:USERG explicitly mentions it or not. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, they are not user-generated. Here is what WP:USERG says: "Although review aggregators (such as Rotten Tomatoes) may be reliable, their audience ratings based on the reviews of their users are not."  This article does not use Rotten Tomatoes to verify audience ratings. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Is there anywhere that confirms that the filmography sections on the site are generated by the site's editors and not by users? Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:47, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, their Help Desk says under "Edit requests": "Tell us about missing or incorrect movie or TV information by submitting a request via our Email Form." And even if that wasn't the case, ref 6 (from TV Guide) provides a back up.  I've also added an extra source from Variety for good measure. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted. Good stuff, thanks for the quick turnaround and responses, . All good now. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ralph Barbieri

 * I think this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 13:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: I would say this is almost there, but could use a couple sentences about the The Razor and Mr. T program itself (outside of being about sports, there's no description of the program, which is what the subject is notable for).  Spencer T• C 14:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:50, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Posted to RD.  Spencer T• C 19:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Juan Carlos I of Spain

 * Support Big news, making international headlines. Update to the article is sufficient DUE coverage. Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait This seems like the ongoing saga of the British Royals such as Prince Andrew, Prince Harry, Prince Philip, &c. who have all had to step down in some way recently. There is lots of press coverage of anything connected with royalty so ITN has to be fairly choosy to avoid seeming like Hello magazine. Rather than the Daily Mail, we need to see what serious papers like The Economist are saying about this. Here's their account of the matter. According to them, Juan Carlos fell from grace in 2012 and so the issue now seems to be an ongoing one of the status of the monarchy in Spain. It's what happens to the current King Felipe which seems to matter most so we should perhaps wait for some development at that level. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Interesting reading in the Guardian report and I would say it would by worthy of ITN, but I would suggest it would be best to wait until King Juan Carlos actually does leave Spain. JW 1961   Talk  21:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * per Bzweebl comment, changing to Support JW 1961   Talk  22:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Former sovereign of a major European country leaving in disgraced exile is definitely worthy of ITN. Is highly unusual and of general encyclopedic interest. Albertaont (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support- Unusual to see the exile of a transformative former world leader in a very highly developed country. Re, a spokesperson said he has already left the country.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 22:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – Eighty-two-year-old Spanish ex-monarch chooses exile due to allegations of financial chicanery a decade ago. Fairly widely in the news, but not readily apparent that it's widely significant. – Sca (talk) 22:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak support 39 years or so as monarch of Spain, notable. Article needs a bit more work as a BLP, but otherwise it's alright.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 22:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support I agree with the others. An exile of a former monarch is not something frequently seen. Additionally, it appears to be a headline news in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support A former and once very popular King, who was forced to abdicate and is now going into de-facto exile, is significant news. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have added a possible more specific altblurb. The word "leaves", taken by itself, it too generic and may indicate a temporary trip, which apparently is not the case here. Nsk92 (talk) 00:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support altblurb for brevity and accessibility. BLP is fine, and the one CN is confusing; if it is contesting that Carlos praised Franco then it is absurd on it's face, if it is contesting "positive changes" then it is merely an expression of the editor's opinion of "positive", and not the content or intent of the praise.130.233.3.21 (talk) 07:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - per Kiril Simeonovski. Mjroots (talk) 07:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Article looks fine. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. He has not been head of state for more than half a decade, and has chosen to leave Spain rather than being exiled. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted per the consensus above. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Post-Posting Comment The voluntary exile of a nominal king seems more like a vacation, or at most, a permanent relocation in retirement (if he wants). InedibleHulk (talk) 12:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * A powerless figure head king when the president of the government exercises actual authority over the country --LaserLegs (talk) 12:46, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Even the president only goes so far, off-paper, it takes thousands of people to actually run a country of millions. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * And in Spain, none of those people are called "King" --LaserLegs (talk) 13:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * A few are called "Reyes", though. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, but the real king is his nipper. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Felipe Reyes says hi. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Haha. And he's the Real Madrid Captain. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that this seems rather trivial at first glance, but the universal support makes me thinking I'm missing some nuance. A sitting head of government fleeing prosecution is one thing, but a former royal figurehead moving to avoid mere criticism is another.  GreatCaesarsGhost   17:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: John Hume

 * Support satis. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 10:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support I added the missing ISBN's, looks satisfactory JW 1961   Talk  10:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - SchroCat (talk) 13:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Looks good to go. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 13:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted —valereee (talk) 13:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Iran COVID-19 cover-up

 * Oppose COVID-19 banner is that-a-way. --M asem (t) 04:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also far too early in the coverage of this to call it a "scandal". Just like the reported Chinese geocide, we need authoritative groups to verify and decide what actions are appropriate here, not the press making the call. --M asem (t) 04:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the fact it's been reported in such detail means there's a scandal whatever happens. Kingsif (talk) 04:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Most countries have failed to record or report COVID deaths accurately. Sometimes it's deliberate spin, sometimes it's just down to expedience, sometimes they just don't know.  Picking on Iran for this does not seem fair and we're unlikely to have reliable data about the truth, whatever that is. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose basically per the same reason as Andrew. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Leon Fleisher

 * Support Discography completely referenced and rest of article is well-referenced. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 13:14, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I didn't reference the recordings, so added Grimes2 to updaters, and noticed more helpers. That's great, because when I saw the article today, quotes were unreferenced, and the lead not even saying a word about his teaching. This was an iconic pianist, with the most unusual career, 50 years practically playing only one hand! Why do pop stars get featured articles at age twentysome, and such a great person such a poor thing when he dies?? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * They don't like to be called "pop stars" anymore, they insist we address them as our "influencers". And yeah, who can argue with the Wikipedian results? They're selling something right, even if it takes them six to eight hands to produce a single melody. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment "Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences" needs ref. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 13:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just done. Caradhras Aiguo ( leave language ) 13:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kamal Rani Varun

 * Support Looks fine to me. - Poydoo can talk and edit 17:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Guyanese general election

 * Support in principle the story seems "extraordinary" enough. I haven't looked at the article so cannot vouch for its quality. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 13:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support This is ITNR, even if delayed. The article could use clean up but the prose is there and the sourcing is there. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 13:39, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support altblurb and I agree this qualifies under ITNR anyway (final results). The article is well referenced and seems to explain the very messy situation well enough. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 16:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support This is a rather close election with controversial results. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 17:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support- several of my major news sources of choice had been covering this in the run-up and aftermath as a particularly consequential election, and the article update is sufficient.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 17:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support ITN/R but also an interesting case, with good updates. One cn tag in the whole article that I could see, but not at a key point. Kingsif (talk) 21:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support There was a special story to this one, and also good form to cover results of general elections. Albertaont (talk) 21:57, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. A few cites to fix up, then after that it's good to go. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Resolved.  B zw ee bl  (talk • contribs) 00:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Looks OK now. – Ammarpad (talk) 04:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted Stephen 05:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) British Grand Prix

 * Oppose utterly trivial. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 08:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Suggest speedy closure What on earth are you thinking about? Unnamelessness (talk) 09:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It appears that Unnamelessness is a Ferrari fan. Sebastian Vettel came in 10th place, "Something doesn't stack up." Andrew🐉(talk) 09:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Sure, I am a Ferrari fan, so I have no right to comment here? Because Floyd is black, he has no right to breathe? Wikipedia is not a fandom; neither WP:ITN/R item. Unnamelessness (talk) 10:10, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Lewis Hamilton is black and has been making quite a big deal about BLM and that's part of the coverage now too. For example, Lewis Hamilton says Formula One is not taking racism seriously. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I know, but that doesn't change the fact that this is NOT an ITN/R item. Unnamelessness (talk) 10:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * None of the current blurbs are ITN/R. R does not stand for rigid requirement.  We can and do list other stories too. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , now you are doing it for the sake of it. Other stuff exists is not a reason; it is an excuse. Unnamelessness (talk) 10:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose per TRM. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose not on ITN/R; nice record, but better suited for DYK (especially with the flat tire). – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 09:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm working on something else for that but DYK is over-subscribed currently and so has to rotate every 12 hours to keep up with the volume. That's over a hundred articles every week, whereas ITN has had the same three blurbs for all of the last week.  And the oldest of the three has been there for two weeks now.  ITN is now quite dead. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree with you on those counts, but that is neither an argument against this being appropriate for DYK nor for this being appropriate for ITN. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 10:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * For the fifth time, try making a proposal for change instead of flogging the horse. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 10:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose. We'll post the champion team & driver at the end of the season. Winning a race with a punctured tyre is unusual but hardly important enough for an ITN blurb. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 13:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment suggest this is closed post-haste to stop any more time being wasted. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 22:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Stale) RD: Amar Singh (politician)

 * Comment It has an NPOV tag (from 2004) that should be taken out in the cleanup, will support later when updated to RD standards JW 1961   Talk  09:42, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose A significant number of contentious statements (and possibly BLP violations) are unsourced or poorly sourced. Black Kite (talk) 19:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose Article's a mess. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 09:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - not ready.BabbaQ (talk) 12:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Stale—Bagumba (talk) 00:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Wilford Brimley

 * Oppose per nom. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 21:28, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All sourced now (I think). —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:35, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 10:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 *  Conditionally Support once filmography is referenced. The rest of the article looks ready. Joofjoof (talk) 09:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It's already referenced with refs 38 (TV Guide) and 39 (Rotten Tomatoes) at the very top of the section. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:04, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That works, comment updated.Joofjoof (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Now that article has been improved JW 1961   Talk  10:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 15:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Return of the SpaceX Crew Dragon Capsule from the ISS
Update 1: Parachutes have been deployed, and we are very close to splashdown. Kaisertalk (talk) 18:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 2: Splashdown successful! The astronauts, Bob and Doug, are safe on planet Earth!!! They have landed on the Gulf of Mexico. Kaisertalk (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 3: Recovery vessels are now approaching the capsule, and deploy the rigging equipment to help hoist the astronauts outside of the capsule. This marks the first water splashdown for US Astronauts since 1975. As others have noted below, this is the first US vessel to bring down astronauts from the ISS since the early 2000s. Weather has been extremely cooperative throughout the landing. Approx twenty to thirty minutes for the astronauts to be hoisted out. Kaisertalk (talk) 19:02, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 4: Approximately T+52 minutes post splashdown. The recovery team is currently evaluating levels of NTO before hoisting the astronauts out of the capsule. Kaisertalk (talk) 19:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 5 (last): 'Successful recovery completed. Astronauts make the first successful water landing since 1975!' Kaisertalk (talk) 21:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 6: Elon Musk has sent a self congratulatory tweet --LaserLegs (talk) 23:27, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait until the successful splashdown tomorrow. There's still stuff that can go wrong between now and then, obviously. --M asem (t) 22:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as the end of the first successful manned operation of a commercial space vehicle to-and-from extended travel in orbit/the ISS. --M asem (t) 22:22, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Agree with the approach. Is there merit in writing the news as "...leaves the ISS on their journey back to the earth" today, and then tomorrow, post the splashdown, we change that to "land in earth post over two months at the ISS". Thoughts? Kaisertalk (talk) 22:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak Oppose we posted the launch, and the craft proved it's re-entry during Crew Dragon Demo-1. I'm fine with ITN/R for ISS turnaround flights since they're many months apart. Also the article is orange tagged for quality and is missing refs in the timeline. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment how is this ITNR? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 23:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait Wait until the splashdown. They're still doing this amid Hurricane Isaias, which is pretty daring and a bit dangerous due to strong waves. I hope everything goes well. Anyway, wait until their landing is confirmed tomorrow. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 23:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose while I'm waiting on someone telling me how this is ITNR, I must oppose on quality grounds.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 23:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * See WP:ITN/R. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 23:26, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes? Which clause applies?  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 23:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think we are getting into semantics here now, but, I would state that this covered by the first clause. How, you ask? Crewed mission - Yes. Orbital - Yes, in fact reverse orbital. Spaceflight - Yes. Launch - Yes. You launch off the ISS using microboosters to get away from the ISS and launch towards the earth. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, I think that's reeeally stretching what the ITNR wording means. Perhaps we need a clarification note to reinforce that this was about launches from Earth not not "microboosted" launches from space back to Earth.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 20:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Not ITNR, and not especially significant. We posted the launch, as indeed we should, but we don't post every detail that happens after that including the landing. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Appreciate your inputs, thanks. However, I just want to place on record a call against your note stating this is "not especially significant" and that "we don't post every detail". Launch and Return are the two most significant moments of a manned space mission. Cheers and Good Day. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:44, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, come on, is this ITNR or not? No-one has suggested how it is.  And we don't post every ISS rotation.  Next. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 23:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello . Yes, In_the_news/Recurring_items. Also, in a dispassionate manner, I will maintain that this is not another ISS rotation. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Which clause? I've asked above.  I don't see where the return of astronauts is covered by ITNR.  Please be explicit. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 23:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think we are getting into semantics here now, but, I would state that this covered by the first clause. How, you ask? Crewed mission - Yes. Orbital - Yes, in fact reverse orbital. Spaceflight - Yes. Launch - Yes. You launch off the ISS using microboosters to get away from the ISS and launch towards the earth. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, it's not ITNR as was agreed. I'm out of here, this is corrupted.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 00:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "You launch off the ISS using microboosters". Blimey, that's a stretch... Not what most people would regard as a launch. Do we usually post Soyuz returns to earth? If not, then I don't see a reason to mention this one. Sure, it's the first commercial one, but we already mentioned that in the launch blurb. There's no valid reason to post this, and the fact that items currently in the template are quite old doesn't change that. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Not ITNR, as they are not launching from the ISS. ITNR flag removed. Stephen 00:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait There's still quite a lot of flex in this trip as the de-orbit burn hasn't happened yet and the landing site can change. The article still needs work in several places to update from what was planned to happen to what actually happened and so it's best to wait for splashdown when the events will all be over and done. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait per all. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait per above. Will Support when splashdown occurs per Kaisertalk. This is notable in itself and as notable as the launch (which got posted apparently). I oppose the blurb tho and added blurb 2, which is shorter. Dantheanimator (talk) 01:57, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The landing may well be "as notable as the launch", but the convention at ITN is only to post stories related to a single event once. For example we don't post an election result and then also post the inauguration of the new president, if the latter is significantly later. There's just nothing remarkable about this - once a launch happens with astronauts, it's guaranteed they'll come back to earth at some point (unless there's a tragic mishap, which of course would be a much much stronger story worthy of posting)  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Splashdown We should emphasize the splashdown because news coverage points out that this will be the first one in 45 years. I have suggested another suitable blurb.  We should also get a good picture too, as NASA will make these public domain. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – Re (debatable) significance, BBC notes that a successful splashdown would mean the U.S. "once again has a fully serviceable ... means of getting its own people into orbit and back" – a capability "lost when the country retired its shuttles in 2011." – Sca (talk) 13:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * True, and that's very nice, but we emphasised that point when we blurbed the launch. If this were the first time we were mentioning this mission I'd agree wholeheartedly, but we already posted it and there's nothing surprising about this further development. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, a launch is one thing, but as we've discussed regarding the Mars probes completion is another. A successful splashdown would mean an accomplished fact. Just tossing this out as food for thought.... – Sca (talk) 15:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Reentry is notable per above. <b style="border:1px solid #0800aa"> Nixinova </b> <b style="border:1px solid #006eff"> T </b> <b style="border:1px solid #00a1ff"> C </b> 19:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for labouring this point, but it really isn't notable. We never post Soyuz landings, so why would we post this one? Seems like all missions should be treated the same way. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose – Wait for Crew-1 launch for next posting. --- C &amp; C ( Coffeeandcrumbs ) 20:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – Down and safe. – Sca (talk) 21:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose again as there appears to have been some re-factoring of the blurbs to splashdown rather than a bizarre attempt to claim the "launch" from ISS to be INTR. Would have supported if it hadn't made it back, but as noted, space travel is now humdrum and this test flight is just that, run-of-the-mill.  What goes up must come down, and we posted what went up, no need for the other. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 21:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm genuinely baffled by this one. Often I disagree with something but I can also see why others support it, that's fine. But nobody has offered any explanation as to why we would break our convention and post this same story twice, when we don't for any other space mission. Just lots of WP:ILIKEIT votes and other miscellaneous peculiarities such as the "microlaunch" from the ISS. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * For a moment let's keep the ITNR flag aside. Let's look at why this article might be notable in and of itself. Here are some of my reasons:
 * 1. First return back for human / astronauts from the ISS back on the Dragon Capsule, a capsule that is being built out and evaluated (explains why there is a demo in its name)
 * 2. First private sector vehicle being used for the human mission to the International Space Station
 * 3. First US vehicle to bring back astronauts from the ISS since the early 2000s when the space shuttle program ended
 * 4. First water splashdown return from a space program since 1975.
 * Kaisertalk (talk) 22:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We posted the launch. The return was absolutely inevitable unless it went wrong. This isn't "buy one get one free" time.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 22:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – What do those who said wait have to say now that it's done? – Sca (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Not a real first. WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  22:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose The fact that this has been posted previously on launch and then subject to 5 updates in the nomination alone makes this seem more like a NASA ticker. Same goes with the twice repeated attempt to post ITN for Perseverance. Albertaont (talk) 22:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Greetings . I am the one who kept posting those updates (1 through 5). I seek pardon if that is frowned upon. The reason I posted was to bring attention to the timeliness of the event, i.e. splashdown was in the process of being completed and then eventually completed. Also re: the ITNR, I was the one who marked the flag as yes, based on my (subjective) read of the ITNR guidelines, and specifically the section that spoke about space launches. unmarked the flag based on a call that this is not ITNR, which is perfectly fine. I totally respect your views to oppose, or strongly oppose. My only request of you is to consider the notability of the event independent of any procedural actions from my side. As mentioned, this is my first nomination, and I am sure, I will learn the procedures soon enough. Good Day. Kaisertalk (talk) 22:44, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Greetings Not a problem, don't take it personally from my end. Its just when 5 updates are posted in a row, it makes it more like an unusual attempt to promote an article which naturally invites greater skepticism. I understand your enthusiasm for the event. Albertaont (talk) 01:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose as we already covered the launch so we'd effectively be running the same story again. P-K3 (talk) 01:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. We've already posted this story. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose We have already posted this. No need for chronicling – Ammarpad (talk) 09:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose posting the same story twice, just two months apart. Definitely not a launch; trying to argue this is covered by ITNR is completely bizarre. <b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b> talk 16:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Unsolicited seeds

 * Super Strong Support They come in peace and promise a better world! InedibleHulk (talk) 10:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose a jolly little trivial story which would be much better suited to another section of the main page. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 10:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The bottom blurb in ITN currently is about another scam – what's the difference? And notice that that older story is over two weeks old now.  ITN is so slow and stale now because such negativity and nitpicking is stifling the process. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As noted about four times in the past few days, if you think the process is failing, raise an RFC to amend it. In the meantime, continually browbeating and condemning it is becoming somewhat boring.  Also, what John said below. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 11:10, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose trivial. (Also, that the news cycle is slow is not an argument to make a non-notable story a notable one.) – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 10:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Will support if Trump uses this as another reason to delay the election. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't you get it? They're in control now! Whatever sprouts from Trump's sunlit spout next is just nature's way of saying "you're welcome, America." InedibleHulk (talk) 11:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * We're doomed Count Iblis (talk) 12:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – I planted one in my back yard ystdy and it's already grown into a 90-ft.-tall beanstalk. – Sca (talk) 13:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose is this a joke? Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * What makes you think that? – Sca (talk) 14:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose suggest close Probably one of the least notable news stories of a month that just started today, congratulations. People think businesses might be shipping seed packets at random to make it look like they have more business? I'm not sure trading standards will even care that much. Kingsif (talk) 17:30, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * But a-ha! This happened in July. Lasting impact, these pods. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait until the biological/astronomical origin of the seeds is confirmed. Once confirmed will change to support. Thanks for the reference, a big fan of the film though I don't think were having a Capgras pandemic. Dantheanimator (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Good idea, they may have been fired by one of the Mars probes. – Sca (talk) 18:04, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ...the article shows they tested the seeds, the story is the maybe-a-scam, not the alien origins. Kingsif (talk) 18:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * according to the article, the DEFRA and USDA, both government agencies, tested the seeds. Maybe the aliens are scamming us but the government doesn't want us to know? Dantheanimator (talk) 18:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose not important enough for ITN. <b style="color:#CCCC00">Joseph</b><b style="color:#00FF00">2302</b> (talk) 19:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Hurricane Isaias

 * Oppose Storm causes wind, rain, little damage, two deaths. Not a major hurricane by the looks of it, mostly at sea. The article is also a mess of tagged sections, uncited sensationalist language, with a long lead and gaps in coverage in the body. Kingsif (talk) 01:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Though consensus will be against this at first, impact reports will likely be flooding in later on August 1 or August 2 as the storm makes landfall in Florida. That way, the article will have much more information, not just some poorly formatted info with maintenance tags. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 02:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Then nominate it when it hits Florida if it has an impact. Kingsif (talk) 02:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It will have an impact because it is a high-end Category 1 hurricane. Probably will hit the Carolinas, Delmarva and New Jersey/NYC too. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 02:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Wait until it reaches the East Coast of the US and we'll see how significant it is.-- P-K3 (talk) 02:08, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait per all. Right now it's just a storm doing storm things. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait – Until "Isaias" (EE'-sah-EE'-us) blows over and bows out. – Sca (talk) 13:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose -> "storm brings wind and rain". Just because it happened in Amurica, it doesn't mean it's special.  The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 22:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If it happened somewhere in the far-flung British Empire, it'd be nooz. – Sca (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It hasn't actually made landfall in the US yet. WaltCip- (BLM!Resist The Orange One)  20:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No, noted. This whole nomination is a bit ... pre-emptive perhaps? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!&#33;!&#33;) 22:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now. No indication that this is a big deal or likely to become one. I'm open to reconsidering if that changes, but we can't post every tropical storm. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks like Isaias turned out weaker than expected. Still expected to make landfall in SC as a Cat 1. If it doesn't cause much damage, then close this discussion. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 01:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)