Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
![]() | Editing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled until August 7, 2025 at 22:14 UTC, to prevent sock puppets of blocked or banned users from editing it. See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can submit an edit request, discuss changes on the talk page, request unprotection, log in, or create an account. |
![]() | Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
![]() |
---|
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
Headers
Voicing an opinion on an itemFormat your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated. Please do...
Please do not...
Suggesting updatesThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives
Sections
This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.
August 4
August 4, 2025
(Monday)
|
August 3
August 3, 2025
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
RD: Loni Anderson
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by Abebenjoe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mohamad Darilin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Famous American TV star of the 1970s and 1980s known for her character Jennifer Marlowe in the TV show WKRP In Cincinnati. Abebenjoe (talk) 23:25, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Tour de France Femmes
Blurb: In cycling, Pauline Ferrand-Prévot wins the Tour de France Femmes. (Post)
News source(s): AFP, Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Turini2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Micnl (talk · give credit), Simonellatyphi23 (talk · give credit), Alibene567 (talk · give credit), Tomrtn (talk · give credit) and Martijnvdam97 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Turini2 (talk) 17:59, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Now been updated. Turini2 (talk) 19:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Comment The update does not cite any sources. Kingsif (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- The lead? The results and the final mountain stages section are sourced. Turini2 (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- The results section, at the time I wrote the comment. Kingsif (talk) 20:57, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ah right, I think I was editing literally at the time you were writing it! Turini2 (talk) 21:05, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- The results section, at the time I wrote the comment. Kingsif (talk) 20:57, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- The lead? The results and the final mountain stages section are sourced. Turini2 (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Bolded target article. I think the blurb should feature an image like the Tour de France blurb did from last week. Edit: Rephrasing. 5.57.243.123 (talk) 21:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- It should have a route map... but map workshop hasn't yet responded. (and the person who makes the excellent Tour de France maps has never made Tour de France Femmes maps... despite several requests...) Turini2 (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
August 2
August 2, 2025
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
2025 Copa América Femenina
Blurb: In women's association football, the 2025 Copa América Femenina concludes with Brazil (Player of the Tournament Marta pictured) defeating Colombia in the final. (Post)
News source(s): Copa America
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: 2024 Copa América final was posted. ArionStar (talk) 00:21, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Note, 2024 Copa América final was ITNR, this is not. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- This may be a discussion for the talk page, but if we have a men's tournament that is ITNR, and there is an equivalent women's tourney (though here, at different times) we really should consider ITNR for the womens' tourney. Masem (t) 15:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- I agree. ArionStar (talk) 22:00, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- This may be a discussion for the talk page, but if we have a men's tournament that is ITNR, and there is an equivalent women's tourney (though here, at different times) we really should consider ITNR for the womens' tourney. Masem (t) 15:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support based on precedent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:FEC0:9CC1:F669:AA74:EB0:5D50 (talk) 02:03, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Needs a match summary. 𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗷𝗮𝘆𝗮𝟲𝟳 (talk). 03:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Moraljaya67: the content is better now. ArionStar (talk) 09:15, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: not every single sports competition needs to be ITN. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 07:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Just because it's South American? ArionStar (talk) 09:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- No, not just because “it’s South American”. EF5 15:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Just because it's South American? ArionStar (talk) 09:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Oppose No prose match summary.Have we posted this before, incidentally? Black Kite (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2025 (UTC)- Question What is "prose match summary"? ArionStar (talk) 15:22, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- A description of the final in prose (a match report, if you like). Just the result is not sufficient per a lot of precedence here. For an example, see the women's Euro 2025 final article. Black Kite (talk) 15:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Well yes, but in better English ("the ball came back to shirt 18 who finished near the small box" - WTF?). Black Kite (talk) 18:32, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose a la match summary. EF5 15:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability (i.e. feel free to take this as support if the summary is expanded, without needing to ping me) but still oppose on quality for now. A match summary has been added, but it is brief. In my opinion, too brief for an eight-goal match that went to penalties. I can try to expand it myself but no promises. Kingsif (talk) 16:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- match summary looks good now, but it sort of needs an post-match section, doesn't need to be too long given it happened yesterday Kowal2701 (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I would also question the tables in the route to the final section. I think it's previously been agreed that these are not accessible e.g. for screen-readers, and so should be changed before an article is posted to the MP? Kingsif (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Everything's ok on my phone. ArionStar (talk) 21:01, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- I mean, I edited it, but screen reader =/= mobile? Kingsif (talk) 00:26, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Do u mean "screen reader"? ArionStar (talk) 01:12, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- I mean, I edited it, but screen reader =/= mobile? Kingsif (talk) 00:26, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Everything's ok on my phone. ArionStar (talk) 21:01, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I would also question the tables in the route to the final section. I think it's previously been agreed that these are not accessible e.g. for screen-readers, and so should be changed before an article is posted to the MP? Kingsif (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- match summary looks good now, but it sort of needs an post-match section, doesn't need to be too long given it happened yesterday Kowal2701 (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Support The profile of women's football has grown to the point that it would be untenable to consider a premier men's competition worthy, but not the equivalent women's competition. Gronk's Fortune (talk) 17:02, 3 August 2025 (UTC)- SOCKSTRIKE. Izno (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Info Summary added. ArionStar (talk) 17:50, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I've re-written the match report to remove the odd wording which probably came from the source. Black Kite (talk) 18:43, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thank u so much. ArionStar (talk) 20:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I've re-written the match report to remove the odd wording which probably came from the source. Black Kite (talk) 18:43, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
British & Irish Lions tour to Australia
Blurb: In rugby union, the British & Irish Lions win the test series against Australia's Wallabies 2-1 (Player of the Series Award winner Finn Russell pictured). (Post)
News source(s): The Independent, BBC, Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: We posted 2017 series, but not 2021 series. UCinternational (talk) 13:17, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is barely in the news even in Australia, much less internationally. It's not important enough for ITN. Steelkamp (talk) 15:45, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. The blue riband events in international rugger are the Rugby World Cup, Six Nations and The Rugby Championship. Lions tours are a bit of fun in the summer every four years, but as Steelkampbnotes, not of sufficient importance to post, even in their own countries let alone the world as a whole. — Amakuru (talk) 15:55, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above & the fact that this isn't ITN/R. TwistedAxe [contact] 04:04, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Having read the ITN discussion from four years ago, I'm amazed it got posted then. Neither the news coverage nor the impact is sufficient for blurbing. (As an aside, and I say this as a fan of the sport, there's already so much rugby union on ITN/R.) -- Kicking222 (talk) 12:46, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability While this tour has had more attention than some others, it's still getting less coverage than the women's World Cup set to start in a few weeks (which I assume will be posted). But this has too little impact in a sport that does have ample club and international events. Also, oppose on quality. While you can't expect every match in the tour to have a decent prose summary, it would be ideal if the tests did, but I still would've accepted quality if there was a sufficient reaction/aftermatch section, i.e. a post-event prose update, that would fulfill update requirements to have the article actually indicate the event has concluded and how. But the only non-list-y prose is in the 'schedule' section, which wouldn't be sufficient in the first place and also hasn't been updated so is still talking about the tour as happening in future. Kingsif (talk) 16:43, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
August 1
August 1, 2025
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
International relations
Law and crime
|
(Posted) RD: Jeannie Seely
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://people.com/jeannie-seely-dead-age-85-country-singer-grand-ole-opry-staple-8693403
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American country singer. Article needs some cleanup Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:33, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:33, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article in good shape. What a voice! so sad to hear of her death RIP. Josey Wales Parley 20:57, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support article is in good shape for ITN. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 21:19, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support per above supports. Well-referenced and comprehensive article. Jusdafax (talk) 00:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support: the article looks good, it's Ready to add on RD. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:08, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 15:20, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
July 31
July 31, 2025
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and environment
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Flaco Jiménez
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NPR
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:C169:FDC8:8126:DD5B (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Connormah (talk · give credit), Gurkubondinn (talk · give credit) and MyGosh789 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American tejano singer-songwriter and accordionist. 240F:7A:6253:1:C169:FDC8:8126:DD5B (talk) 18:17, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Just to explain my edit from earlier today; I regularly check Category:Pages using Template:Infobox musical artist with unknown parameters (and some other
Category:
pages for pages using Infoboxes with incorrect parameters). I did notice that Flaco Jiménez had passed away very recently, and the only changes that I made related to him having passed away was replacing thecurrent_member_of
parameter in the infobox with thepast_member_of
parameter. Since he'd very recently passed away, it didn't feel pertient for me to make any real changes in the tone of the article or look for language in present tense (I also didn't attempt to verify any sources used to cite he'd passed away). Gurkubondinn (talk) 18:57, 1 August 2025 (UTC) - Not yet ready The discography is unsourced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: The Discography have a unsourced notice. Need to be address. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:02, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
RD: Allan Ahlberg
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Ollieisanerd (talk · give credit)
- Created by Skittle (talk · give credit)
- Updated by SamH29 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: English children's book author. Date death announced. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 22:10, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
RD: Syed Tanveer-ul-Hassan Gillani
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): APP
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Ainty Painty (talk) 07:45, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Leads makes several claims that are not backed up nor elaborated on in the article, no specified birth date, article was very recently made (likely the cause of most of these quality issues). Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 10:51, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose As per @Fakescientist8000 above. Also: the name of RD's cousin (former president Yusuf Raza Gilani) is spelled 'Gilani' not 'Gillani' (as per article nominated) - a cursory search and a couple of the references suggest the same discrepancy - is the article/name spelled correctly? Montezuma69 (talk) 22:10, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Ongoing: 2025 Cambodia–Thailand border conflict
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Thairath EAC
Credits:
- Nominated by NotKringe (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: The ceasefire doesn't hold and fighting still continues. Since there are regular updates on both sides, I think this could fit better in the ongoing section. NotKringe (talk) 09:03, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support, clashes are still ongoing here, would just be easier to put this in ongoing
- Personisinsterest (talk) 19:18, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support ArionStar (talk) 20:36, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Wait a few days – Both countries are at least nominally committed to the ceasefire. While violations sometimes happen in the following days (like in the 2025 India–Pakistan conflict), it isn't clear yet if they're going to progressively calm down or flare up again. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:20, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I can't see anything in the second source that says the ceasefire has failed. And the first is a Thai-language video. Is there a written source? Everything I'm finding says it's mostly holding, with some minor arms fire about 48 hours ago on Wednesday morning. Nfitz (talk) 01:13, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - I thought we learned our lesson with the Iran-Israel conflict; I doubt this escalates. Also per Nfitz. — EF5 07:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Nfitz and EF5. Khuft (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose unless this actually escalates into a bigger conflict. Ceasefire seems stable for now. TwistedAxe [contact] 04:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
July 30
July 30, 2025
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Science and technology
|
RD: Linda McGill
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/tokyo-olympian-and-english-channel-conqueror-linda-mcgill-dies-on-the-gold-coast-at-79/
Credits:
- Nominated by HiLo48 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Australian champion swimmer who swam the English Channel topless HiLo48 (talk) 08:00, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
RD: David Argue
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1], [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ozzieboy (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Happily888 (talk) 15:12, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, far too short. History6042😊 (Contact me) 01:48, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
RD: George Nigh
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Credits:
- Nominated by Engineerchange (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TulsaPoliticsFan (talk · give credit) and Connormah (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
--Engineerchange (talk) 20:55, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
RD: Laura Dahlmeier
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [4]
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
--BlackEyedLion (talk) 13:33, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Not ready Still needs a couple of sources, but then I would say it's good to go. Zwerg Nase (talk) 07:49, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose article needs more sources, and prose could probably be improved- as most of it is just stating which medals she won. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:03, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support article has many sources, and it doesn't only focus on her biathlon career. (Correct date is 28 July) Marbe166 (talk) 07:16, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support: looks good now. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:04, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support Good enough. I don't have access to the source for the biathlon results. Grimes2 16:56, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 Kamchatka Peninsula earthquake
Blurb: An earthquake with a magnitude of Mw 8.8 strikes off the coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia, triggering tsunami warnings across the Pacific Ocean. (Post)
Alternative blurb: An earthquake with a magnitude of Mw 8.8, the sixth-most powerful in recorded history, strikes off the coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia, triggering tsunami warnings across the Pacific Ocean
Alternative blurb II: A Mw 8.8 earthquake strikes off the coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia, triggering tsunami warnings across the Pacific Ocean.
News source(s): [5]…
Credits:
- Nominated by 2A02:C6C1:E:206:0:0:0:2 (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Magnitude 8.7 earthquake, making it the 7th (correction: 8th) most powerful earthquake in the recorded history. No reports of fatalities yet, but probably because too early to tell. Tsunami warning has been issued as well as far as western Canada --2A02:C6C1:E:206:0:0:0:2 (talk) 00:45, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Wait - this could seriously be devastating, but simply being strong doesn’t merit a blurb on it’s own. EF5 00:52, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
Waituntil impacts are known. According to this USGS source, eighth largest since... ever, but based on impacts, the sparsely populated Kamchatka region has significantly less population density than many places struck by previous earthquakes of this magnitude and I think we ought to at least see what impacts come about from this before putting it on the main page. Based on the shear intensity (assuming 0 deaths and little damage) I'm leaning oppose, but I'm not holding my breath for the parenthetical WP:CRYSTAL part. Departure– (talk) 00:55, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- FYI, a “destructive tsunami” is expected to hit the entirety of Hawaii in around four hours and the entire west coast is threatened. Earthquakes of this magnitude over water tend to produce large tsunamis, and this one could be destructive. EF5 01:00, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I don't doubt that the tsunami is the thing to watch for determining impacts from this event. I heard most recently they're expecting about 1 meter tall in Japan (which, to be fair, is nothing to sneeze at, but if I recall the last time a tsunami scare happened the tsunami was only about 2 inches). Here's something you don't see every day: tsunami watch in effect for the Bay Area and more for Southern California. Departure– (talk) 01:04, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Even rarer is the fact that Ecuador was mentioned as a threatened area with a tsunami of >3m. EF5 01:14, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I don't doubt that the tsunami is the thing to watch for determining impacts from this event. I heard most recently they're expecting about 1 meter tall in Japan (which, to be fair, is nothing to sneeze at, but if I recall the last time a tsunami scare happened the tsunami was only about 2 inches). Here's something you don't see every day: tsunami watch in effect for the Bay Area and more for Southern California. Departure– (talk) 01:04, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Kamchatcka may be sparsely populated, but of course with nature's luck it struck very close to the province's only city, just 80 miles or so from Petropavlosk. Curbon7 (talk) 01:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Regional minister Sergei Lebedev (who I don't think is the same as this Sergey Lebedev) said only one building sustained damage and no injuries have been reported; then again, it's been less than an hour, and it's also Russia. Departure– (talk) 01:14, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- FYI, a “destructive tsunami” is expected to hit the entirety of Hawaii in around four hours and the entire west coast is threatened. Earthquakes of this magnitude over water tend to produce large tsunamis, and this one could be destructive. EF5 01:00, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Wait - red PAGER means it's probably gonna be bad, but that's kinda WP:CRYSTAL. Impacts unknown so far.
- Wait - this definitely has potential with the tsunami warning for Hawaii being issued, but nothing major yet. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 01:16, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Wait for more information. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support eighth-largest earthquake globally since 1900 RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support As one of the strongest earthquakes ever recorded, I believe it's notable even if there's no impact, so no need to wait. Johndavies837 (talk) 03:01, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- A quake like this with no major damage would likely be better as a DYK, highlighting it as the eighteth-largest recorded earthquake. However, we should wait to confirm that no damage or significant death toll has occurred (including from any tsunami events) Masem (t) 03:40, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support most powerful earthquake since 2011. Even if there are no deaths (hopefully), it is certainly ITN-worthy. Juxlos (talk) 03:53, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Most powerful earthquake of the decade, that alone should be worthy enough. --MaximumMangoCloset (talk) 03:58, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose/Wait. As things stand, this is more a piece of trivia than anything else. Is it spectacular and interesting? Sure. Is it impactful? To this point, not really. We may see reports on fatalities later on, but to this point there have been none. Pretty decent DYK hook candidate, to the level that an intense hurricane that doesn't make landfall might be. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:07, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Support Blurb, Alt blurb, Alt blurb II this is the most powerful earthquake since 2011 per Juxlos. ITN worthy at all. ROY is WAR Talk! 04:09, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support I think it is independently blurbworthy even at this point, given that it is the most powerful quake in almost 15 years. As a practical matter, though, the blurb will likely need to be continuously updated as damage totals and casualties across various areas unfold (Eastern Russia, Japan, Taiwan, Hawaii, Guam, West Coast Canada/USA, etc). FlipandFlopped ㋡ 04:15, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- doubt there's gonna be a lot of those, especially in places like Taiwan or mainland US, but we'll see. From what it looks like rn there was few if any casualties in Russia (sparse population plus historically prone to earthquakes so buildings were built to accoutn for that), so that really only leaves Hawaii as a possible source of deaths/damage. It will be there in 40-50 minutes 2A02:C6C1:E:206:0:0:0:2 (talk) 04:34, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support Major quake even if there are few or no casualties at the moment. Thriley (talk) 04:18, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Posted ALT2. Schwede66 04:32, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Schwede66, FYI there is a formatting error with the hyperlink to 2025 Kamchatka Peninsula earthquake. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 04:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Schwede66 and Flipandflopped: I made a quick edit to address it. I'm not really sure what the root cause was, although I might guess that it was the use of the magnitude template. It appeared fine to me when viewing T:ITN, so I'm not surprised Schwede didn't catch it, but on the main page it rendered as
[[2025 Kamchatka Peninsula earthquake|A Mw 8.8 earthquake]]
in bold. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:40, 30 July 2025 (UTC)- Thanks! And sorry for that. Schwede66 04:48, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Not on you. Like I said, T:ITN showed the link as intended. You wouldn't have seen this when previewing before saving! Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- We've typically blurbed with "magnitude",[6] so I've updated it accordingly. —Bagumba (talk) 05:32, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! And sorry for that. Schwede66 04:48, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Schwede66 and Flipandflopped: I made a quick edit to address it. I'm not really sure what the root cause was, although I might guess that it was the use of the magnitude template. It appeared fine to me when viewing T:ITN, so I'm not surprised Schwede didn't catch it, but on the main page it rendered as
- There was no immediate consensus to post, with several "waits" in place to see what type of damage may have occurred. There was zero need to post this soon. Masem (t) 04:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- As always with ITN, there were a diversity of opinions and "waits" are not necessarily weighted any more heavily than supports. I'd endorse Schwede's reading of finding adequate consensus to post. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- isnt the main criterion for this place for something to literally be, you know, in the news? Like you may not like it, but this earthquake is the top news worldwide rn so why not post it based on that alone ? 2A02:C6C1:E:206:0:0:0:2 (talk) 04:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Because we knew it happened, but we does not know how much of an actual impact it have yet? Imo, I think we should have waited for news of the tangible impact aside from typical tsunami warnings, just in case it ended up being a nothingburger. NotKringe (talk) 05:08, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- We don't need to wait to post the sixth-most powerful earthquake in recorded history. Thriley (talk) 05:10, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- ITN is not suited for the posting of superlatives (like the Nth largest earthquake) if that's the only thing that can be said. If it were the Nth largest quake which killed dozens of people or demolished a large number of buildings, that's an appropriate ITN item. Absent that, then DYK is a far better place (given that the article would meet the DYK requirements) Masem (t) 12:23, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- For example, we had the third-most-powerful tornado in recorded history last year, but I seriously doubt it would have been posted as only 5 people died. This was wrongfully posted and I have no idea why it isn’t being pulled. EF5 12:29, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- ITN is not suited for the posting of superlatives (like the Nth largest earthquake) if that's the only thing that can be said. If it were the Nth largest quake which killed dozens of people or demolished a large number of buildings, that's an appropriate ITN item. Absent that, then DYK is a far better place (given that the article would meet the DYK requirements) Masem (t) 12:23, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- We don't need to wait to post the sixth-most powerful earthquake in recorded history. Thriley (talk) 05:10, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Because we knew it happened, but we does not know how much of an actual impact it have yet? Imo, I think we should have waited for news of the tangible impact aside from typical tsunami warnings, just in case it ended up being a nothingburger. NotKringe (talk) 05:08, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- isnt the main criterion for this place for something to literally be, you know, in the news? Like you may not like it, but this earthquake is the top news worldwide rn so why not post it based on that alone ? 2A02:C6C1:E:206:0:0:0:2 (talk) 04:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- As always with ITN, there were a diversity of opinions and "waits" are not necessarily weighted any more heavily than supports. I'd endorse Schwede's reading of finding adequate consensus to post. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- 7 Supports and 6 Waits passes as consensus within 4 hours of a discussion starting these days? DarkSide830 (talk) 05:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Given ITN has unique time constraints relative to elsewhere within the encyclopedia, there is something to be said for consensus decisions being made more quickly here, especially once the conceivable arguments for or against are more or less made out (which was the case here: there was a case for waiting for damage and a case for posting the earthquake in its own right). When discussions are allowed to boil on and on just for the sake of increasing the !vote tally, we end up with a stale mess like the Hulk Hogan nomination. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 05:50, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- There is still no need to rush any posting at ITN until a clear consensus has emerged, and in particular, posting four hours after an event when a good half of the readership of WP is asleep (EU in this case) is not great. Certainly was not a SNOW condition here, so it could have easily waited for more input after 12-some hours as well as to assess if there was any death or damage toll to be included (a common step we have done for most other disaster related articles, even if numbers go up after the fact). Masem (t) 12:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- The way I saw it, it was five waits, followed mostly by supports. There's also something for the order in which editors give their opinion here. Schwede66 05:55, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Given ITN has unique time constraints relative to elsewhere within the encyclopedia, there is something to be said for consensus decisions being made more quickly here, especially once the conceivable arguments for or against are more or less made out (which was the case here: there was a case for waiting for damage and a case for posting the earthquake in its own right). When discussions are allowed to boil on and on just for the sake of increasing the !vote tally, we end up with a stale mess like the Hulk Hogan nomination. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 05:50, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- 7 Supports and 6 Waits passes as consensus within 4 hours of a discussion starting these days? DarkSide830 (talk) 05:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for not waiting on this. Earthquakes are momentary/minutes long and damage can be assessed after, but tsunamis can last for hours/a day or so and there is sometimes time to prepare. For this kind of natural disaster, we can amplify warnings and get the word out. -TenorTwelve (talk) 05:44, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- That’s not the point of ITN. EF5 12:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- ITN, nor WP at large, is meant to be used to give timely alerts about immediate events, whether disaster, medical, or other aspect. That's against our disclaimers. Masem (t) 12:21, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support clearly notable with this magnitude and the article is in pretty good shape for the information coming out. orangesclub 🍊 06:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Pull and wait. There was a clear absence of consensus for this with many voices saying wait above. It's a large earthquake, sure, and widely reported in the ticker press, but we're not a ticker and thankfully the impact looks to be not large at present. If that changes then we would reevaluate then. Posting this was premature IMHO. — Amakuru (talk) 06:44, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose pull The article has lots of good technical detail and so readers will not be disappointed. The topic is in the news -- the NYT has several lead articles about it, for example. Let's just go with the flow... Andrew🐉(talk) 07:01, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose pull and update when we know more This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support The earthquake is significant and widely reported in the media, and the article documents it in a way that clearly demonstrates significance.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:49, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support It's quite possible that this event will have few casualties, but that doesn't matter. Rather, this has been a huge story that has been by definition wholly international, occupying the entire international news space. The lack of casualties would be a testament to modern alert & communication systems... Which means that on many facets, this is a subject of intense encyclopedic interest. Nottheking (talk) 08:28, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support meets WP:ITNSIGNIF as the front page news in a number of countries. And article clearly meets WP:ITNQUALITY. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:47, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Where is it front page news @Joseph2302? It's on page A4 here, next to an article about a Limo driver being charged with impaired driving, and Alberta separation. It didn't even make the other newspaper I get in print. Nfitz (talk) 10:42, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Literally take your pick. BBC. AP. Aljazeera. Fox. CNN. Dozens of others. Not sure about “print” but use the computer you’re currently on to search any news website and I’m guessing it’ll be on the front page. Nubzor (T | C) 13:27, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Epstein has been in the headlines for weeks, but it isn’t like we’d post that. EF5 13:32, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- I said nothing of Epstein. But thanks for the comparison. Nubzor (T | C) 13:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- My point is that simply being in the news doesn’t merit posting; one death in an earthquake is barely anything (we’ve had multiple tornadoes this year kill more than that and not even be brought up for posting). And we can civilly have a discussion, y’know… EF5 13:37, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- I understand. I was merely pointing out that it is indeed on the front page of every news site I took 60 seconds to search. So the other user should have no problem finding one too. Nubzor (T | C) 13:45, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- My point is that simply being in the news doesn’t merit posting; one death in an earthquake is barely anything (we’ve had multiple tornadoes this year kill more than that and not even be brought up for posting). And we can civilly have a discussion, y’know… EF5 13:37, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- I said nothing of Epstein. But thanks for the comparison. Nubzor (T | C) 13:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hundreds if not thousands of topics can be found at online websites. And with today's algorithms, front-page is often generated for each user. You don't see the same BBC headlines if you are in the UK compared to the USA - where obviously stay off the beach warnings were almost warranted in some locations - even if the Tsunami never happened. I see as many mentions of the 2026 World Cup at Al Jazeera as the Tsunami (and no news of the Tsunami - it just features in the list of popular articles). I'm not familiar with AP (https://americanpress.com/ ?) but I don't even see a mention of the quake. This false alarm had it's 15 minutes. I can't even see a mention of any injuries, let alone hospitalizations and deaths! With very minimal damage. The only surprise I see, is that there's actually a city of near 150,000 in Kamchatka! Nfitz (talk) 21:53, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Epstein has been in the headlines for weeks, but it isn’t like we’d post that. EF5 13:32, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Literally take your pick. BBC. AP. Aljazeera. Fox. CNN. Dozens of others. Not sure about “print” but use the computer you’re currently on to search any news website and I’m guessing it’ll be on the front page. Nubzor (T | C) 13:27, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Where is it front page news @Joseph2302? It's on page A4 here, next to an article about a Limo driver being charged with impaired driving, and Alberta separation. It didn't even make the other newspaper I get in print. Nfitz (talk) 10:42, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Pull and wait per Amakuru.:5.57.243.123 (talk) 09:42, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support - Good and timely posting of a major international news event. Highly disruptive yet refreshing lack of causalities. Fine article quality is praiseworthy evidence of collaborative editing. Opposers, waiters and pullers are utterly unconvincing in my view. Bravo to all involved in placing this blurb! Jusdafax (talk) 10:12, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Pull and Wait. How was this posted, I see little consensus. The "tsunami" appears to be little more than a rogue wave, other than at right next to the quake location. We have zero information about injuries, and very little evidence of physical damage, given how large the quake is. Nfitz (talk) 10:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Pull and wait One more. Now creating the "FASTPOSTING" tag. ArionStar (talk) 11:33, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Pull and wait - seriously? We’re posting after four hours now? EF5 12:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Per Nottheking and Joseph2302. Can’t be ITN without bickering about how many hours it’s been or minimum deaths. Significant newsworthy event with an appropriate article. Nubzor (T | C) 13:33, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Pull Posted after four hours with just as many Wait/Oppose !votes as Support ones - we shouldn't still be doing this after the recent ones that had to be pulled. Black Kite (talk) 13:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Good post. Being the sixth-strongest earthquake ever recorded, and the strongest in 15 years, should be enough to post it. ITN has no death minimum. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 13:57, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support per Joseph2032 and others. A notable event despite a lack of injuries and damage. ITN does not need to be a "damage" or "disaster" ticker. Additional , I hate the back and forth yo-yoing of pulling from the main page. Natg 19 (talk) 15:48, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Do we have an update on the tsunami? It's been sixteen hours and the current blurb wording suggests the tsunami warnings are the most recent thing to go down, and despite the tsunami being the real news story here, the article doesn't have any impacts written on it for anywhere outside of Russia (other parts of the world where the tsunami struck just have warnings issued, warnings cancelled, and how tall the tsunami was). I'm honestly going to say
strong pullif the blurb isn't revised and/or the article lacks serious detail about the impacts of the tsunami for much longer.
- Also, a quick note on a few of the above points. ITN doesn't necessarily need to post the strongest of anything; last year had Hurricane Milton, the fourth strongest hurricane on record, posted due to its extreme intensity, but then again, the Greenfield tornado a few months earlier wasn't even nominated even though it was the third strongest tornado ever objectively recorded. I am of the opinion that ITN should be very hesitant posting the sixth strongest of anything on the merit of being the sixth strongest, especially when such little damage is known and brought up in the article.
- An earthquake that causes tsunami warnings is not ITN-worthy. I'm glad we're giving a more scientific showcase of the article (the geologic aspect of which has been lovingly brought to quality by members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Earthquakes no doubt), but all that's detailed is tsunami warnings and a big wave, and a few injuries. Departure– (talk) 16:12, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- None of the tsunamis caused severe infrastructure damage iirc. EF5 16:18, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- The high waves that were create did hit the US thus morning but thats all they were, high waves, not damaging in any regard. Masem (t) 16:19, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Despite the lack of any major effects or impact, I think the severity of the earthquake (one of the highest ever recorded?) is enough to warrant a blurb. I like seeing scientific ITN blurbs without death in them, and I think this one fits right in. Hungry403 (talk) 16:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Pull: this was posted too soon. Even though the earthquake was very strong, it caused minimal damage. This was posted before the tsunami made any significant landfall. It was only in the news because there was a large tsunami warning, but just because there is a warning doesn't mean there will actually be significant impact. And in this case, there wasn't. Less than 24 hours after the earthquake and in the NYTimes this article is buried underneath articles about Trump tariffs/foreign policy, Brazil & Lula, US economy, something about the IRS, the Manhattan shooting, a rollercoaster guide, DC plane crash hearings, Jason Momoa, US Senate, and the Middle East & Gaza. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 16:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- What's the fascination with the NY Times tho? Howard the Duck (talk) 17:11, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- No reason in particular. I only brought it up because someone above said that this was front page all over the world. NYTimes is just my go to newspaper of record. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 17:18, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- What's the fascination with the NY Times tho? Howard the Duck (talk) 17:11, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support I'm surprised about the pull comments (including by an Admin who, if I'm not mistaken, posted the recent Dhaka fighter plane crash within 4 hours after just two Supports). As others have stated, ITN is not a death chronicle. We frequently post natural events with few or no deaths, including solar eclipses. 8.8 magnitude earthquakes are rarer than solar eclipses, there were news updates in the media the whole day, and a volcano in Kamchatka just erupted because of it. If this is not ITN, I don't know what is. Khuft (talk) 17:02, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sure, ITN isn't just about deaths, but equally we routinely don't post many natural disasters events that do have death tolls as well as economic damage, while this happily appears to have very little of either. I can understand that this morning this seemed to have very devastating potential, but that hasn't materialised and the whole point of the calls to "wait" was so we could know whether it really was of the calibre we'd post. As it transpires, it clearly isn't, at least per past precedence. IMHO the posting really should have been held off until that was clear because there's no deadline on this. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 17:16, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- The volcano has been going for a week; that’s just the media being the media. EF5 17:33, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support Fourth-most powerful earthquake of the 21st century; the only more powerful earthquakes were Fukushima and the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake/tsunami. Despite the lack of damage, the power of the earthquake alone is enough to be notable. Anything above 8.0 should be posted on power alone (even above 7.0 should be considered), never mind casualties. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:11, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Why is power alone notable for ITN? Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 17:17, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Why not? A) ITN is about featuring events that take place in the news, and this event is clearly in the news; B) Wikipedia is about featuring encyclopedic content, and strong earthquakes are clearly encyclopedic-style content. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:36, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Why is power alone notable for ITN? Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 17:17, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support - it's in the news, it's objectively significant (one of the top 10 earthquakes ever recorded), article quality sufficient. As WP:ITN says,
The "In the news" (ITN) section on the Main Page serves to direct readers to articles that have been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest.
This article counts, it's worldwide news. The "wait" votes that were based on nobody dying were properly discounted because there is no minimum body count requirement (and it's macabre that some editors seem to insist on one). It never ceases to surprise me how stingy some editors are about what to post: ITN should not be limited to sports, elections, and death. Levivich (talk) 17:17, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support. An unusually powerful earthquake, and it is definitely in the news. Nsk92 (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Alright, alright; let me give a bit more into my !vote:
- The article currently lacks any in-depth mention of "devastation" or damage in the impact except in Russia.
- It seems inappropriate to give a casualty count. WP:MINIMUMDEATHS isn't a thing but at the same time other events of similar scope have been shot down from being posted due to having few total impacts (of which casualties is a big part), and one person driving off a cliff evacuating is by no means enough for me to count as an impact.
- The current blurb mentions "tsunami warnings" instead of "a tsunami" (as something that's already happened).
- A lot of the wait !votes, including my own, mentioned that we need to wait for impacts before posting.
- Such impacts have not materialized.
- As I brought up earlier, the sixth strongest of anything is not ITN-worthy by itself without accompanying imminent or materialized impacts (such as Hurricane Milton or the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami).
- The evacuations and tsunami warnings themselves0 seem to be the real story here, and even then, warnings don't mean anything if a tsunami doesn't happen (unless something happens during the evacuation itself).
- As of now, make my !vote (see my other two above - will strike shortly) a strong pull on quality. The article is dreadfully sparse with details of how this event is notable - the impacts of this event outside of Russia's Far East are limited to wave heights, warnings being issued, and injuries evacuating in Japan.
- ITN does not have any set-in-stone minimum as to the intensity of an event for it to be posted. God knows how many Category 5 hurricanes we've completely skipped over for not doing anything except causing waves out at sea. This wasn't the strongest ever, it was the sixth-strongest recorded and the strongest in 14 years - and it struck a sparsely populated area and had little impact.
- I wouldn't be so strong in my opposition if the Tri Brata rock formation collapsed (as the article reported earlier), but it didn't. Barring a consensus to pull, I really don't know if I see a consensus to keep this article up. Departure– (talk) 17:48, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support. It is very much still in the news, currently on the BBC News home page here. Sahaib (talk) 21:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- You linked directly to the article, @Sahaib, of course it's there. As is the report about the Queen dying this morning and numerous stories about 2019 flooding in the West Midlands. Should we blurb those as well? Besides, the front-page of BBC is tailored individually. The very first article I see is about Canada/Palestine relations - but I bet that's not what you see. Nfitz (talk) 21:58, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- That is what I see. It's not tailored individually, at least not for logged out visitors, although the UK (bbc.co.uk) and international (bbc.com) are different. Btw, AP is Associated Press (apnews.com). Levivich (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- This story led NBC Nightly News tonight, for what that's worth. And the BBC's logged out homepage does has that story about Canada/Palestine, but it also has a story about the earthquake right next to it (in the top right corner). Ed [talk] [OMT] 01:39, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- That is what I see. It's not tailored individually, at least not for logged out visitors, although the UK (bbc.co.uk) and international (bbc.com) are different. Btw, AP is Associated Press (apnews.com). Levivich (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- You linked directly to the article, @Sahaib, of course it's there. As is the report about the Queen dying this morning and numerous stories about 2019 flooding in the West Midlands. Should we blurb those as well? Besides, the front-page of BBC is tailored individually. The very first article I see is about Canada/Palestine relations - but I bet that's not what you see. Nfitz (talk) 21:58, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment So many !votes are citing a lack of casualties or damage as the basis to pull. But where does policy require this in order for something to be "in the news"? If it's on the front page of every major publication across all seven continents, caused millions to evacuate their homes, drew statements from world leaders, why is that not enough? It is like we are collectively imagining a "buildings need to have tumbled and people need to have died" requirement for noteworthiness when none exists. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 23:51, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- [W]here does policy require this in order for something to be "in the news"? - per WP:ITNCRIT: It is highly subjective whether an event is considered significant enough, and ultimately each event should be discussed on its own merits and a lack of casualies or damage seem like a fair reason not to support having such content posted. Departure– (talk) 23:58, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Once again, ITN has no real policies or real guidelines governing significance besides "try to form consensus". Natg 19 (talk) 00:25, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Your excerpt accentuates my point:
ultimately each event should be discussed on its own merits
. An oppose !vote solely on the basis that there must be casualties or damages for an event to be notable is a rigid and formulaic rule, as opposed to an individualized assessment on the event's own merits. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 04:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)- Eh, not really. To me, things have to be impactful to be notable, and that’s my interpretation of ITNCRIT. EF5 12:00, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- An oppose !vote solely on the basis that there must be casualties or damages for an event to be notable is a rule that some follow and goes hand in hand with an individualized assessment on the event's own merits - if an event doesn't have the "merit" of causing significant loss of life, then those that see loss of life as a defining factor for an event such as this will oppose posting it. Departure– (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment "...triggering tsunami warnings across the Pacific Ocean" should be updated as it's been 28 hours since the event. I would propose removing mention of the tsunami if the tsunami's human toll remains limited and indirect. Replacing the tsunami part with the earthquake's superlatives (e.g. strongest since since 2011 or 6th strongest) may be a good idea as that seems to be the main argument of post-posting supporters. 93 (talk) 04:51, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment That's literally a tsunami of post-posting comments. Schwede66 05:20, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I assumed that has to do with the blurb giving the event far more exposure than it should've been. I've noticed that after people noticed that the "tsunami" is nowhere near as threatening at one feared, the news faded as quick as it came. So, in hindsight, I would've opposed this blurb. NotKringe (talk) 08:45, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Well yeah; there was no time to weigh in before posting. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:56, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Well "The tsunami that wasn't" doesn't make for an entire news cycle now does it. An encyclopedia should never let the hypewagon drive its content. Gotitbro (talk) 20:41, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Note: I've added an orange {{expand section}} to the Aftermath section and it's been up for a few hours. The section only has one sentence and if this is going to be on the main page I at least want to see more than one sentence there. Departure– (talk) 16:06, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think a fundamental lesson here is that if we have a news item that will have some imminent direct result (here, word of damage from the quake or the tsunami), we should not consider posting until the article can address those immediate effects or the known lack of them. Note that this is different from rising death tolls in the wake of an event, once it's established that a large number of deaths occurred - additional death numbers don't change that initial impact. Whether this should have then been posted about being one the strongest known quakes, but now with the article acknowledging that it had little net impact, is an open question, but at least at that stage we can judge the quality of the complete event. Masem (t) 20:51, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- In this case, the immediate effects were the tsunami warnings and Klyuchevskaya Sopka's eruption, and the article had already addressed them before this was posted. The problem is that 'Tsunami' is a separate section even though it ideally fits as a sub-section of 'Aftermath', so the article leaves impression that the aftermath is poorly documented.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Tsunami warnings are not immediate effects. Whether or not the tsunamis actually caused significant damage when they hit the various coasts is what are the immediate effects that should have been present in the article before it was posted. Similarly, with the eruption, there was no impact from that, but the posting should have waited until that was confirmed. Masem (t) 02:44, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
- In this case, the immediate effects were the tsunami warnings and Klyuchevskaya Sopka's eruption, and the article had already addressed them before this was posted. The problem is that 'Tsunami' is a separate section even though it ideally fits as a sub-section of 'Aftermath', so the article leaves impression that the aftermath is poorly documented.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
July 29
July 29, 2025
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: David Tartakover
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of Israel
Credits:
- Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: A few citations needed Mooonswimmer 15:34, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- Multiple footnote-deficient paragraphs. Please add more REFs. And, the intro has only a single sentence, so {{lead too short}} applies. --PFHLai (talk) 01:55, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
RD: Morton Mintz
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mwinog2777 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Pioneering consumer affairs journalist. Death reported 29 July. Thriley (talk) 03:57, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
- The career section currently has zero footnotes. None of her books listed in the string of bullet-points after the prose has a source. Please add more REFs and ISBNs. --PFHLai (talk) 01:26, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
RD: Doris Gercke
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stern
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by S Marshall (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German author, representing working class and women in novels, children's books and poetry, whose thrillers about a woman investigator inspired a popular tv series running for decades - there was a decent short article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:02, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support Satis. Her books all have an ISBN. Grimes2 16:59, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
RD: Paul Mario Day
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NME
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:D95F:1A6C:F1CF:F2C3 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ohconfucius (talk · give credit) and SirZPthundergod9001 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former lead vocalist of Iron Maiden. 240F:7A:6253:1:D95F:1A6C:F1CF:F2C3 (talk) 08:17, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support Needs expansion, but sufficient quality for front page. –DMartin 23:34, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- With barely 300+ words of prose, this wikibio seems a bit too stubby. Anything more to write about this guy? There is no section on his early life/education/upbringing/music training... etc. That's where in the main prose the date and place of birth should appear with a footnote. Also missing is the place of death with a footnote that should be in the death section. And, the intro has only a single sentence, so {{lead too short}} applies. --PFHLai (talk) 13:43, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Michael Hill
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Ruru, Karanama (2025-07-29), "Jeweller Sir Michael Hill dies", Stuff, retrieved 2025-07-29
Credits:
- Nominated by Cloventt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dmartin969 (talk · give credit) and MtPenguinMonster (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 01:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Weak oppose 2, maybe 3 unsourced statements remain throughout the article. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 02:15, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support I removed a couple of unsourced or less-than-neutral statements. Article is in good shape.–DMartin 00:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Posted AGF on the offline source for DoB. Thanks for your work, all! Curbon7 (talk) 11:40, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
July 28
July 28, 2025
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Herbert Brandl
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Standard
Credits:
- Created by Thief-River-Faller (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Internationally known Austrian artist who created large mountain "landscapes", but had no article --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:43, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support 2138 characters (359 words) "readable prose size". This is enough. Sourced. Thanks to the creator. Grimes2 08:58, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Support looks good to go. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:35, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 15:13, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
(NEEDS ATTENTION) RD: Amelia Freedman
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph, The Times
Credits:
- Created by Sfjohna (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Sfjohna (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Artistic director of the Nash Ensemble for over sixty years. --05:44, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Alejandra Oliveras
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kelisi (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Popular boxer, first Argentine woman to win a world title outside her country. I've been updating her article and may be ready. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:45, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:09, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:52, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
(NEEDS ATTENTION) RD: Wallis Annenberg
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LA Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Thriley (talk) 15:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- A few {CN} tags remaining. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 18:42, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Or Tor Kor Market shooting
Blurb: Six people are killed in a mass shooting at the Or Tor Kor Market in Thailand's capital Bangkok. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC…
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: 2018 Strasbourg attack was posted. ArionStar (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Info Worldwide coverage (reports from Brazil: [7]). ArionStar (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - Six deaths in a shooting is tragic, but not enough to be blurbed. EF5 14:28, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support Considering this happened in a country where shooting incidents aren't very common and there's global media coverage, it's significant enough for inclusion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:36, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- The linked article does not back up this opinion - the "Background" section says "Thailand also has the second-highest number of gun homicides in Southeast Asia. While Thailand has fairly restrictive laws on gun ownership, gun violence is not unusual and the nation has experienced several deadly mass shootings in recent years". — Amakuru (talk) 14:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Second-highest number in a region of 11 countries where Thailand is one of the most populous isn’t a good indication (cf. Australia has the highest number of gun homicides in Oceania). If it were second-highest in Asia or globally, then it’d be a different story. Furthermore, several deadly mass shootings in recent years is comparable to European countries of the same size, such as the UK and France, but is far below countries like the United States and Afghanistan.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Somehow it seems country population varying over 100,000,000% would matter more than differences in percent of each country who is evil & relative ease or hardness to get a gun (get a gun, not legally get a gun the latter doesn't matter for mass murder) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:50, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Look, it's technically irrelevant what share of the population owns guns and how difficult is to acquire one. For someone planning to commit a mass shooting, the illegal acquisition is the least thing to care about. Moreover, there are countries with high gun homicide rates due to domestic violence, not because there are a mass shootings regularly, so those statistics in the "Background" section aren't as trustworthy as the frequency of similar incidents. For instance, Serbia has the third-highest gun ownership per capita after the United States and Yemen, but mass shootings are relatively uncommon with less than a dozen of such incidents since World War II. Nonetheless, there were two such instances in two consecutive days (see Belgrade school shooting and Mladenovac and Smederevo shootings) that appeared in the front-page headlines two years ago.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:38, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Right but country where shooting incidents aren't very common doesn't make sense as countries have up to 1,500,000,000 humans and others have under 11,999 residents even under 999. The small archipelago country would have to have over 10,000,000% more "shooting incidents per person" than the 1,500,000,000 residents countries before they get out of the "country where shooting incidents isn't very common zone". Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:07, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- I took into account the size when commenting it even though it's not as simple as a mathematical calculation. If you take a look at List of massacres in Thailand, it's the sixth and deadliest such incident this year, which is comparable to the five similar incidents in France.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Very well but "aren't very common" will make some assume count, others assume per capita & the rest won't know which you mean. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:54, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- I took into account the size when commenting it even though it's not as simple as a mathematical calculation. If you take a look at List of massacres in Thailand, it's the sixth and deadliest such incident this year, which is comparable to the five similar incidents in France.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Right but country where shooting incidents aren't very common doesn't make sense as countries have up to 1,500,000,000 humans and others have under 11,999 residents even under 999. The small archipelago country would have to have over 10,000,000% more "shooting incidents per person" than the 1,500,000,000 residents countries before they get out of the "country where shooting incidents isn't very common zone". Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:07, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Look, it's technically irrelevant what share of the population owns guns and how difficult is to acquire one. For someone planning to commit a mass shooting, the illegal acquisition is the least thing to care about. Moreover, there are countries with high gun homicide rates due to domestic violence, not because there are a mass shootings regularly, so those statistics in the "Background" section aren't as trustworthy as the frequency of similar incidents. For instance, Serbia has the third-highest gun ownership per capita after the United States and Yemen, but mass shootings are relatively uncommon with less than a dozen of such incidents since World War II. Nonetheless, there were two such instances in two consecutive days (see Belgrade school shooting and Mladenovac and Smederevo shootings) that appeared in the front-page headlines two years ago.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:38, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- The linked article does not back up this opinion - the "Background" section says "Thailand also has the second-highest number of gun homicides in Southeast Asia. While Thailand has fairly restrictive laws on gun ownership, gun violence is not unusual and the nation has experienced several deadly mass shootings in recent years". — Amakuru (talk) 14:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose here This is the English Wikipedia, and this is unlikely to be big news in the anglosphere. –DMartin 20:13, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- That this is Wikipedia in English is irrelevant _-_Alsor (talk) 23:05, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- What??? There is no such criteria @Dmartin969. Why are you gaslighting the discussion? Nfitz (talk) 00:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz:First of all, please don't cast aspersions. A difference of opinion is not "gaslighting". There isn't a written policy on it at the moment, but it is precedent. –DMartin 00:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- This isn't a difference of opinion. It's inventing policy. If I'm wrong, @Dmartin969 can you point to the basis of this? Nfitz (talk) 00:45, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- I mean, ITN doesn't really operate within all the standard policies. That said, this is a standard WP:ITNATA that will be disregarded by an admin when finding consensus in the discussion. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- This isn't a difference of opinion. It's inventing policy. If I'm wrong, @Dmartin969 can you point to the basis of this? Nfitz (talk) 00:45, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz:First of all, please don't cast aspersions. A difference of opinion is not "gaslighting". There isn't a written policy on it at the moment, but it is precedent. –DMartin 00:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Tragic, of course, but insufficiently notable in both scope and impact. -- Kicking222 (talk) 23:59, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Considering this happened in a country where shooting incidents are common, it's not significant enough for inclusion. Nfitz (talk) 00:24, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Nfitz: You forgot the part on the media coverage. Please be more attentive next time and don’t forget such important details.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:10, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Media coverage does not equal ITN. Besides, turning to the main national news website (CBC) here - I don't see anything. Let's look at the printed Friday editions of the two biggest newspapers in this country, that I just picked up off my porch.
- Heat, US aggression, immigration, art, King Charles, CNE, Trudeau&Kate Perry, heat, drug bust, referendum, quake+tsumani, election results, convoy trials, fires, Israel, Israel, fishing violations, moose, Thailand-Cambodia, Israel, Ukraine, heat ... ah here it is, there's a brief mention at the bottom of A9 of the local paper.
- Palestine, foreign investment, university admissions, Chuck E. Cheese arrested in Florida (?), Bill 21, South Asian attacks in Edmonton, Banned Sri Lankan, PP By-election, USAID cuts, Mexico/USA trade, butchers in BC, Safe consumption sites, Booker Prize, Gaza, Ukraine, London Hockey rape trial, Freedom convoy, green energy in China, medical ethics, Thousand Islands tourism, rental cars in Italy, Netflix KPop, Maxwell willing to testify about rapists ... and here we are, gunmen with CTE targeting NFL - just before Trudeau&Kate Perry, buried on A15 of the national paper.
- So yes @Kiril Simeonovski, there are some brief mentions, buried deep in the newspapers. Should we also blurb stories that are equally or more prominent, such as the Chuck E. Cheese arrest in the States and that Trudeau and Kate Perry are dating? 10:19, 30 July 2025 (UTC) Nfitz (talk) 10:19, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Great, you could've extended your comment to something like
Considering this happened in a country where shooting incidents are common and the limited media coverage, it's not significant enough for inclusion.
. Sorry Nfitz, but your vote doesn't fully reflect what you're writing here.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)- I'm not sure your point. My point is that it's a non-story. If this was somewhere where there weren't frequent shootings, and no one had been shot in 20 years, then it might be of note. But it isn't. Maybe I should go through Tuesday's papers? I'm not sure when this broke. Nfitz (talk) 10:36, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Considering we have a history of posting incidents of similar scale in European countries with comparable frequency, such as France and Germany, and sometimes we post shootings in the United States where these happen on a daily basis, it's very relative what 'common' means in this regard. Furthermore, if we're waiting for the first shooting in 20 years, no shooting will ever get posted, which is definitely not the case. So, either your bar is set very high or double standards apply to third-world countries.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:53, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- The murder rate in Thailand is horrific, User:Kiril Simeonovski, significantly higher than normal countries like France, Germany, or Indonesia. About quadruple of France, and quintuple of Germany. It's almost as high as the USA! The only higher countries in Asia area are Iraq, Yemen, and Mongolia (I have no idea what's going on in Mongolia). As far I can see, you are the one who wants double-standards for third-world countries like Thailand, and the USA. Nfitz (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Considering we have a history of posting incidents of similar scale in European countries with comparable frequency, such as France and Germany, and sometimes we post shootings in the United States where these happen on a daily basis, it's very relative what 'common' means in this regard. Furthermore, if we're waiting for the first shooting in 20 years, no shooting will ever get posted, which is definitely not the case. So, either your bar is set very high or double standards apply to third-world countries.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:53, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure your point. My point is that it's a non-story. If this was somewhere where there weren't frequent shootings, and no one had been shot in 20 years, then it might be of note. But it isn't. Maybe I should go through Tuesday's papers? I'm not sure when this broke. Nfitz (talk) 10:36, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Great, you could've extended your comment to something like
- Media coverage does not equal ITN. Besides, turning to the main national news website (CBC) here - I don't see anything. Let's look at the printed Friday editions of the two biggest newspapers in this country, that I just picked up off my porch.
- @Nfitz: You forgot the part on the media coverage. Please be more attentive next time and don’t forget such important details.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:10, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. Target article violates WP:N and WP:PRIMARY. Also, can we do something about the !votes of newbies here who are citing location or death count as if they were policy-based factors? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:31, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Which newbies? I have seen all of the above editors in the last few months at ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 03:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- I don't consider ITN experience to be indicative of one's understanding of policy. The opposite is more accurate. Regardless, I think you'd be hard-pressed to say that counting deaths or other arbitrary factors like that is something that would come from an editor experienced in policy matters. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 03:39, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Whether location and death count are policy-based factors or not, both are routinely at the heart of most ITN consensus decisions when it comes to mass casualty events. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 04:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Which is why I assume that the people casting these !votes are newbies to non-ITN Wikipedia. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 05:21, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Which newbies? I have seen all of the above editors in the last few months at ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 03:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I do see some evidence of global (as opposed to only regional) coverage, which is good. However, there is mostly only initial news reports of the shooting. I'm not seeing evidence of enduring coverage or impact beyond these news reports, which would be necessary to justify a blurb. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 06:12, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ryne Sandberg
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Harrington, Adam (2025-07-29), "Ryne Sandberg, Chicago Cubs legend and Hall of Famer, dies at 65", CBS News, retrieved 2025-07-29; "Cubs Hall of Famer Sandberg dies at age 65", ESPN News Services, 2025-07-29, retrieved 2025-07-29
Credits:
- Nominated by RPH (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Buttons to Push Buttons (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Hall of Fame baseball player, former Chicago Cub RPH (talk) 01:46, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality; article could use some extra citations. RIP Ryno. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:48, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Support provided the above and below concerns are addressed, he is definitely notable. But I'm a Cubs fan so I think I'm a little biased. RIP to a legend, he will be sorely missed. Article does need to be cleaned up though, per others' comments above and below. Gommeh 🎮 01:49, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- I've added some more sources, particularly about his playing career. I've trimmed information I could not find sources for. Gommeh 🎮 14:51, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality, multiple unsourced paragraphs at the time of writing. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 01:50, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Not ready Several sections have none or few citations. 5.57.243.123 (talk) 16:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think we're pretty much there now? Dealt with all the ref issues that were explicitly flagged (and plenty others besides), and some NPOV concerns I had. There may still be gaps, but I'm close enough to the article now that I'm feeling a bit blind to any issues..! Anyone willing to cast their eyes over it in its new state would be much appreciated. Thanks! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 16:55, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Good work. Curbon7 (talk) 01:41, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 New York City shooting
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by 2600:6C40:4000:FF6A:45D1:CF75:DDEC:C8A4 (talk · give credit)
- Speedy Close - this doesn't meet RD criteria, as none of the dead, as far as we know, had or qualify for a stand-alone article. Nfitz (talk) 02:39, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Converted to normal nom - I assume the IP user meant this as a "blurb nomination", though I would also oppose that. Natg 19 (talk) 02:46, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose a blurb because despite being a tragic crime this is not a particularly notable event when compared with the roughly 60 other mass shootings that have happened in the US so far this month. Also oppose RD because the victims are not known to be notable. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 02:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment user Nfitz was wrong as now there are atleast five people killed. I will only conditional support in a few hours when all the known information are confirmed, because the shooting itself in New York City is still very significant SymphonyWizard72 (talk) 02:53, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Can you expand, User:SymphonyWizard72 how I'm wrong about this not being appropriate for a RD? Nfitz (talk) 02:55, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- You immediately jumped to the fact no one died
- How does this shooting not qualify for a standalone article when it does sound very notable for a lone gunmen to walk into the middle of NYC and kill 5 people with what is, sorry If i got the gun terminology wrong, an automatic rifle?
- SymphonyWizard72 (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- This was nominated as a RD, and you objected to my claim it didn't meet RD criteria. Where did I mention no one died? And what did my comment above have to do with standalone articles? I have no idea why you, @SymphonyWizard72, are objecting to what I wrote above. Nfitz (talk) 03:04, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- SymphonyWizard72 a RD nomination is different than a "blurb" nomination. RD is specifically for the "recent deaths" line on the bottom of the In the News box where we list people with a Wikipedia article who have recently died. I reformatted
yourthe nomination , as this is not eligible for that. The shooting can still be posted on the main page if consensus forms for that. Though shootings in the USA usually do not get posted unless there is a extremely high number of casualties. Natg 19 (talk) 03:18, 29 July 2025 (UTC)- Why, @Natg 19, are you still maintaining that this was SW72's nomination, given they said they weren't even sure if they support it? Nfitz (talk) 03:29, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was a misreading of the comments. But it was confusion over the original nomination as a RD, which was incorrect. Natg 19 (talk) 05:08, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Why, @Natg 19, are you still maintaining that this was SW72's nomination, given they said they weren't even sure if they support it? Nfitz (talk) 03:29, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- SymphonyWizard72 a RD nomination is different than a "blurb" nomination. RD is specifically for the "recent deaths" line on the bottom of the In the News box where we list people with a Wikipedia article who have recently died. I reformatted
- This was nominated as a RD, and you objected to my claim it didn't meet RD criteria. Where did I mention no one died? And what did my comment above have to do with standalone articles? I have no idea why you, @SymphonyWizard72, are objecting to what I wrote above. Nfitz (talk) 03:04, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Also this is sad on why people keep trivializing shootings and violence in the USA to the point they would it felt like users here would only consider it notable if someone like Leonardo diCaprio was shot or a nuclear bomb wiped off lower Manhattan SymphonyWizard72 (talk) 02:55, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Can you expand, User:SymphonyWizard72 how I'm wrong about this not being appropriate for a RD? Nfitz (talk) 02:55, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Speedy Oppose I'm not sure it's appropriate to completely change someone else's nomination after discussion has begun. Especially as I don't think anyone is ignorant enough to actually nominate such a relatively trivial event. Surely User:Natg 19 you are making the OP look bad. Nfitz (talk) 02:55, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
Especially as I don't think anyone is ignorant enough to actually nominate such a relatively trivial event.
WP:BITE. Plenty of "trivial events" get nominated here. I doubt that newer editors know how ITN works, what gets normally posted or what the difference is between an RD and a regular blurb. The IP user (same as SymphonyWizard72?) just wants to see this on the main page. Natg 19 (talk) 03:09, 29 July 2025 (UTC)- I didn't bite anyone. The OP hadn't nominated it for a blurb, and the person who had changed it to a blurb nomination opposed it. I did however get caught in an edit conflict, as SymphonyWizard21 (who hasn't actually voted one way or another) hadn't made their comment at the time I wrote that. I assume, @Natg 19, that it's NOT the same person given that they said they haven't decided yet, and would vote later. Can you convert this back to an RD? I don't think you should be making such big changes. Nfitz (talk) 03:17, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose hardly notable. We get a bit too many of these a year and this particular one's likely to be forgotten soon. Nothing new for the USA. Departure– (talk) 03:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. United States United Statesing. RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:50, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose nothing new for the states, otherwise the article is short right now and these shootings are common. Hungry403 (talk) 05:09, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
RD: Habib Ur Rehman Tanoli
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DAWN
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs expansion. Ainty Painty (talk) 08:50, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Still only 177 words. Time is running out soon for this stubby wikibio to expand while this nom is eligible. --PFHLai (talk) 12:10, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
2025 Philippine monsoon floods (Ongoing)
Blurb: In the 2025 Philippine monsoon floods, 30 people died from severe flooding in the northern part of the Philippines. (Post)
News source(s): GMA News Online
Credits:
- Nominated by TheNuggeteer (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Nominating again, the section when this storm was made was deleted, so I'm putting it on the top because it's ongoing. The article is notable enough and looks good. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")
03:47, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- Flooding in SE Asia at this time of year is extremely common, so its hard to justify this as being any more significant than other flooding disasters in that region. Masem (t) 04:07, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, there are many floods, but barely any of them match up to 30 deaths. The only disaster in SEA with more than this amount is Tropical Storm Wipha, that's why I think this disaster is significant.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")
04:18, 28 July 2025 (UTC)- We had floods kill over 140 people in Texas earlier this month, so that's not completely accurate. EF5 13:30, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, there are many floods, but barely any of them match up to 30 deaths. The only disaster in SEA with more than this amount is Tropical Storm Wipha, that's why I think this disaster is significant.
- Comment. Flooding in the Philippines are very common during rainy season (usually May/June to December/January). 𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗷𝗮𝘆𝗮𝟲𝟳 (talk). 04:22, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose the article doesn't demonstrate this is an ongoing event with enough frequent updates for ongoing. The latest date mentioned is 22 July, 6 days ago- and the whole article appears to be related to floods between 18 and 20 July, which therefore doesn't satisfy
In order to be posted to ongoing, the article needs to be regularly updated with new, pertinent information
. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:12, 28 July 2025 (UTC)- This is an ongoing event according to the PAGASA website. The latest date was from July 26 about the 30 deaths. Maybe you want an update?
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")
10:37, 28 July 2025 (UTC)- Given the source on the article lists the death toll in a "final report", that suggests to me that they consider it over. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:16, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think the monsoon is already lessening, that's why no recent reports are there. PAGASA still classifies one province (Benguet) with significant rainfall to close classes (source here) which is why I consider this storm to be current. The "final report" is probably because of no reported deaths after, yet the storm is still in effect. Thanks,
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")
12:08, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think the monsoon is already lessening, that's why no recent reports are there. PAGASA still classifies one province (Benguet) with significant rainfall to close classes (source here) which is why I consider this storm to be current. The "final report" is probably because of no reported deaths after, yet the storm is still in effect. Thanks,
- Given the source on the article lists the death toll in a "final report", that suggests to me that they consider it over. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:16, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- This is an ongoing event according to the PAGASA website. The latest date was from July 26 about the 30 deaths. Maybe you want an update?
- Oppose - ITNC has demonstrated that 30 deaths from flooding isn't significant enough to blurb. EF5 13:30, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think the article has significant coverage from national (and maybe international) news sources. 1 million affected citizens is probably significant enough for ITN, maybe the blurb should be changed to that. There are hundreds of unique articles about the topic from national newspapers (The Philippine Star, GMA News Online, etc.) Thanks,
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")
04:07, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think the article has significant coverage from national (and maybe international) news sources. 1 million affected citizens is probably significant enough for ITN, maybe the blurb should be changed to that. There are hundreds of unique articles about the topic from national newspapers (The Philippine Star, GMA News Online, etc.) Thanks,
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com]
rather than using <ref></ref>
tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref>
tags are being used, here are their contents: