Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
![]() | 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[edit]
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[edit]
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[edit]
Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]Format 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...[edit]
Please do not...[edit]
Suggesting updates[edit]There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
[edit]Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives
Sections
[edit]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.
June 27
[edit]
June 27, 2025
(Friday)
Disasters and accidents
|
RD: Takahiro Shiraishi
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Nominated by BabbaQ (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.
BabbaQ (talk) 06:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
June 26
[edit]
June 26, 2025
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Lalo Schifrin
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:
- Nominated by Ollieisanerd (talk · give credit)
- Created by Khanartist (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 2600:4040:22AC:9C00:8AE:EBA3:D424:B73F (talk · give credit) and NathanielTheBold (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: Argentine-American composer. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 21:57, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Some of the biographical section matches the Hollywood Walk of Fame website word-for-word. This wording has been on the Walk of Fame website since at least 2011 [2] and was added to the article in 2005 [3] so I'm not sure who copied who. Vladimir.copic (talk) 00:10, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- That's what happens when you have a project full of people incessantly babbling away on project and talk pages because they don't give a shit about content. Sure not interested in hearing reactionary bulldada about it now. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 02:17, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Not sure why this barb is directed at me. I was specifically trying to improve the content in this instance. Vladimir.copic (talk) 06:11, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- That's what happens when you have a project full of people incessantly babbling away on project and talk pages because they don't give a shit about content. Sure not interested in hearing reactionary bulldada about it now. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 02:17, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Needs work The section about the Collaboration with Rod Schejtman reads like a puff piece. Note that the subject is WP:VITAL as they were responsible for many memorable works such as the Mission Impossible theme. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:52, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
RD: Bill Moyers
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by ElijahPepe (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.
elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:07, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Not yet ready There are multiple CN tags. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:58, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
RD: Takutai Tarsh Kemp
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 1 News
Credits:
- Nominated by Schwede66 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by idiosyncritic (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: The reference says that Te Pāti Māori MP Takutai Tarsh Kemp has died, 1News understands
, but it has a Tweet from the leader of the opposition who is passing on his condolences. Schwede66 21:31, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- The source above has been updated with confirmation of the death from the deceased member's party. Additional reporting indicates that the Speaker of the House has been officially notified. —idiosyncritic 22:56, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - no issues. Sourced and ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 08:01, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
June 25
[edit]
June 25, 2025
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: John Casani
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NASA
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Hawkeye7 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Astros2013 (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: Space explorer; project manager of the Voyager, Galileo and Cassini projects. Article is in fine shape, fully referenced. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Jusdafax (talk) 04:35, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - sourced. And ready.BabbaQ (talk) 08:06, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 08:17, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Richard Gerald Jordan
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV News
Credits:
- Nominated by Bloxzge 025 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Larry Hockett (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: Longest-serving man on death row in Mississippi Bloxzge 025 ツ 8:10 PM, 25 June 2025 (EDT)
- The second-last paragraph requires a citation. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Done Jahaza (talk) 22:41, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support A good article about a bad person. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:55, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support I see no issues here. Sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 07:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 08:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
Kenyan protests
[edit]Blurb: In Kenya, nationwide anti-government protests against president William Ruto leave at least sixteen people dead and over 400 others injured. (Post)
News source(s): CTV News The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by ElijahPepe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Bloxzge 025 (talk · give credit)
elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:01, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait/Weak Support on Notability. Very short article at the moment, however considering that there is 16 fatalities now, I would definitely strongly support once the article is better. 24.77.127.72 (talk) 19:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose for now Stub. ArionStar (talk) 19:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait to see if protests have far-reaching consequences and/or get more media coverage. –DMartin 22:10, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Like the idea but oppose this should get on ITN... eventually... but right now it is in bad shape. Scuba 00:06, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability as the amount of casualties is huge but oppose on quality as the article is a stub and needs to be improved. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 00:40, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality per above. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 02:44, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality per above. Notable event but the article is as barebones as it gets. The Kip (contribs) 07:25, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose ITN didn't post June 2025 Los Angeles protests or the No Kings protests even though those articles are much more substantial. There are always protests happening somewhere about something so we need a fairly high bar per WP:SOAP. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:55, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Ridiculous comparision, 16 people have been killed here. Talk about "substantial". Gotitbro (talk) 10:56, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Exactly; these were violent protests, the ones in the US were first the most part peaceful with some minor flareups (unless you were watching FOX news, which made it look like a warzone), but no one died. Masem (t) 12:13, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- 16 is not unusual for Kenya where extrajudicial killings by police are commonplace. See Amnesty, AFP or IJM, for example. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:34, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:CONTEXTMATTERS. This is during a protest we are not listing a litany of killings in an year or so. Gotitbro (talk) 07:47, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- The Amnesty report I cited provides lots of analysis and context. For example, on the cover it has "IMLU documents 67 cases of extrajudicial executions following brutality meted on protesters by police in a demonstration of impunity". That report was in 2023. This incident took place on the anniversary of similar protests in 2024 which were worse. This is regular and has been going on for years. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- We would obviously post a protest article in which 60 people were killed if it would be nominated here, so I am not sure what you are arguing for here. Your original contention was based on a dubious comparison with the peaceful anti-Trump protests. If we go by your rationale and a mass shooting happened at one of these we wouldn't be posting because it would be "not unusual" and "regular". Time to move on from fallacious WP:OTHERSTUFF rationales. Kenya is not a war zone and despite human rights abuses by security forces, we can judge a nomination for a standalone protest. Gotitbro (talk) 09:35, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- The Amnesty report I cited provides lots of analysis and context. For example, on the cover it has "IMLU documents 67 cases of extrajudicial executions following brutality meted on protesters by police in a demonstration of impunity". That report was in 2023. This incident took place on the anniversary of similar protests in 2024 which were worse. This is regular and has been going on for years. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:CONTEXTMATTERS. This is during a protest we are not listing a litany of killings in an year or so. Gotitbro (talk) 07:47, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Ridiculous comparision, 16 people have been killed here. Talk about "substantial". Gotitbro (talk) 10:56, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Would support, protests against a country's head of state which have resulted in significant deaths, but the article's barely a stub. Gotitbro (talk) 10:58, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I’ll see if I can touch upon this article later today, and if I do manage to revamp it, I’ll add in a support. No promises, though. PrimalMustelid (talk) 15:15, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Armenian coup attempt
[edit]Blurb: Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan who led the 2024 Armenian protests was arrested for plotting a coup against the government of Nikol Pashinyan (Post)
News source(s): Reuters Associated Press al Jazeera
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Scu ba (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Foiled coup is still notable, we reported on the 2024 protests, feel like if that qualifies this qualifies too Scuba 20:30, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Undecided on notability at this time (situation still unfolding/evolving), but I do not think the current blurb is NPOV. Both our article and most of the reliable sources refer to it as an “alleged” coup attempt. Other reliable sources don’t even refer to it as a coup and instead call what has happened an authoritarian “crackdown” on the opposition: 1. The blurb probably should not call it a coup in active voice. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 21:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose There's a political conflict between the church and government which is resulting in a variety of wild allegations:
- The competing claims don't seem very reliable and they don't seem more significant than the internal politics of other countries. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:32, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
June 24
[edit]
June 24, 2025
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Clark Olofsson
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by BabbaQ (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.
BabbaQ (talk) 10:30, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
RD: Bobby Sherman
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LA Times AP News Washingtonpost TOI The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:49B4:EF4D:80DD:3651 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ItsShandog (talk · give credit) and Spworld2 (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 pop singer and actor. 240F:7A:6253:1:49B4:EF4D:80DD:3651 (talk) 04:41, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Needs a lot more sourcing. Natg 19 (talk) 06:22, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Remove ongoing: Iran–Israel war
[edit]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.
Nominator's comments: The article has been changed to the past tense, so I felt that it would be an appropriate time now to nominate for removal. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 18:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose - Lmao?? This is 100% still underway; the past-tense is completely wrong. — EF5 18:54, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose israel and iran are still launching airstrikes Ion.want.uu (talk) 18:53, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait It seems possible that the ceasefire will hold, but it is too early to say if this war is definitively over or not. I have changed the article to use more present tense. Natg 19 (talk) 19:18, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose the article still stated as "is", not "was". As long as the war is written in present tense, this article cannot be removed from "ongoing". Ceasefire may be fragile as well. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 19:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait at least a day or two to see if the ceasefire holds. The Kip (contribs) 21:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait - I agree that it is too early to say the ceasefire will continue. I’d give it a week or so. Jusdafax (talk) 22:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait, currently the conflict is de-escalating, however it's still not over, I'd also say to give it around a week V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 22:48, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose It's too early to say the war is ending—Israel and Iran are still carrying out airstrikes. HurricaneEdgar 22:53, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose but allow for renaming to "Isreal-Iran conflict" as that's the more common name. Given both regimes tendency to lie and murder, I'd think that more time was needed; it's certainly very much in-the-news. Nfitz (talk) 00:08, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: While I am not convinced yet that this should be removed, I do think that some of those opposed should review their comments, specifically EF5, Ion.want.uu, and HurricaneEdgar. It will note that the situation was different when they made their comments and that they were right to say that the ceasefire wasn't working, but at the present time I am seeing reliable sourcing that says it is working. New York Times: A cease-fire between Israel and Iran appeared to be holding on Tuesday, as Israel’s military lifted emergency restrictions imposed during the conflict and Iran’s president hailed “the end of a 12-day war that was imposed on the Iranian people.” Per NYT again, it says that The absence of details regarding the deal, confusing wording in Mr. Trump’s initial announcement on social media and differences in time zones may have contributed to the ambiguity over the precise timing of the cease-fire. I do think that whatever issues there were have been resolved and that at the present time the main issue would be a side intentionally breaking the ceasefire. --Super Goku V (talk) 00:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose for now: while reliable sources are clear that the ceasefire is holding, as far as I can tell this conflict is still above the (now mostly metaphorical) fold around the world. Ongoing exists to "maintain a link to a continuously updated Wikipedia article about a story which is itself also frequently in the news", and this article is still ticking each of those boxes. Perhaps a better place to look for space in ongoing is Sudanese civil war (2023–present), which hasn't had a substantive update since (as far as I can tell) June 16th. Ed [talk] [OMT] 04:22, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: Ongoing in this case doesn't necessarily mean that guns are firing and bombs are dropping (though whether that is still ongoing is dubious), but that the topic is receiving credible amounts of press coverage and the article is still being updated, which it arguably is. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 04:28, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose/wait per Aydoh8. Seems a little WP:CRYSTAL to remove this now when the level of media coverage indicates it to essentially be an ongoing affair. it is unclear that the ceasefire will hold/the situation remains at a boil. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 02:54, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - For now. I say, give it a week. I feel like we could be back re-nominating it for ongoing soon.BabbaQ (talk) 11:12, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
June 23
[edit]
June 23, 2025
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
(Ready) RD: Gérard Lefranc
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LavoixdunordLa Voix du Nord (archived)
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Spworld2 (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.
BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:04, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Start class. Sourced. Looks ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 07:55, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
RD: Mick Ralphs
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Guardian The New York Times Variety
Credits:
- Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:98C9:2766:23C2:57ED (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit) and Egghead06 (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: Founding member of the Mott the Hoople and Bad Company. His death announced on 23 June. 240F:7A:6253:1:98C9:2766:23C2:57ED (talk) 22:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support, it's in depth, and seems of decent quality, aside from a number of unreferenced claims, which should be cleaned up V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 23:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Not yet ready The discography is unreferenced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:10, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Very familiar territory here. Most of the albums have their own articles, but this seems to count for nothing. Is Discography large enough to be moved to a separate article? Not sure what the rules are on that. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:34, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- The "Guitars" section also needs more sources. Otherwise I would Support as well sourced. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:19, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 Iranian strikes on US military bases
[edit]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: Iran launches missile strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq and Qatar in retaliation for American attacks on its nuclear sites. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, Reuters, The Telegraph
Credits:
- Nominated by Jolielover (talk · give credit)
- Created by Rafi Chazon (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Viceskeeni2 (talk · give credit)
- If there is consensus to post this, should it be merged and combined into the existing blurb? Left guide (talk) 19:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose should not be a separate article from the US strikes since this has been said to be retaliation for those. No opposition to adjusting current blurb on the US strikes to add this. Masem (t) 19:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose not every beat in this conflict needs to be documented on INT, especially given that this particular set of strikes appears to be a nothingburger. — Czello (music) 19:09, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, speedy close, and a WP:TROUT for User:Jolielover. Adding a couple more words to the blurb is reasonable enough (but can be discussed at WP:In_the_news/Candidates#(Posted)_U.S._bombs_three_nuclear_sites_in_Iran without starting this discussion. But between the blurb and the ongoing, another bump is overboard. No prejudice in relisting if any side uses nukes in the next round. Nfitz (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose as per Czello and others. The Ongoing link is meant to capture less relevant military events such as this one. Khuft (talk) 21:08, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) Vera C. Rubin Observatory releases first light images
[edit]Blurb: The Vera C. Rubin Observatory (pictured) releases the first light images from its new 8.4 m or 28 ft telescope. (Post)
News source(s): BBC; CNN; NPR; Space
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Created by Simesa (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: The BBC describes this as a "revolutionary telescope" while CNN says it's "the largest camera ever built". It has been years in the making and today is its official first light. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:32, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support Nice ITN material of high encyclopaedic value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support, important event and important new telescope. Artem.G (talk) 09:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support, a chance to offer readers a look at a prominent scientific achievement. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong support; high-quality article with no outstanding citation issues. A certainly remarkable scientific achievement nonetheless, and one definitely worth putting on ITN. - pivotman319 (📫) 10:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Request, can someone edit in the full name of the telescope Large Synoptic Survey Telescope in the infobox caption, it's one of those off-site "edit on Wikidata" boxes and I can't find where the edit would go at its link. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I did it. The Wikidata interface wasn't especially difficult but the data structure wasn't obvious. I supposed that the infobox was taking the first entry from the long list of aliases there so I deleted LSST initially and then added it back at the bottom of the list. That made the alias you prefer the first one. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The current updated content seems sparse per WP:ITNUPDATE:
—Bagumba (talk) 10:40, 23 June 2025 (UTC)The decision as to when an article is updated enough is subjective, but a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable.
- I have expanded the paragraph about today's release so that it's six sentences and six separate citations. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:08, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Great. Agree with Masem (below) re: unsourced portions.—Bagumba (talk) 12:41, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I have expanded the paragraph about today's release so that it's six sentences and six separate citations. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:08, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality Handful of unsourced paragraphs or final sentences introducing new ideas without any source. Support otherwise on significance. Masem (t) 12:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- FYI The first images were teasers for the main ceremonial presentation which is going to be streamed soon. It would be nice to post this now so our readers get a chance to watch it live. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 12:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- There is still unsourced material, this needs to be pulled until it's fixed. Masem (t) 13:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I suspect it might be OK now, Andrew has worked on fixing some of them up, I can only see one obvious citation needed now. What do you think, Masem? — Amakuru (talk) 14:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- There's still a couple unsourced statements higher up like the polishing of the m3 mirror Masem (t) 14:12, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Let me add that there have been improvement ts since my comment about being pulled so at this point, I don't think it needs to be pulled, but this is yet another recent case of rushing to post amid unaddressed quality concerns (which I raised before it was posted) Masem (t) 14:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem: You opposed over a "handful of unsourced paragraphs", and I presume the closer gave that little weight because it contravened ITNQUALITY. ("Articles should be well referenced; one or two "citation needed" tags may not hold up an article, but any contentious statements must have a source, and having entire sections without any sources is unacceptable.") This was a good post by Schwede66. Ed [talk] [OMT] 15:54, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Having multiple entire unsourced paragraphs is well below the acceptable quality for main page content, per longstanding practice across the different sections. The guideline you mention allows for one or two citations needed across the whole article but not more than that. I won't speak for Schwede66 but I had rather assumed this was an oversight on his part rather than a deliberate decision to ignore the two objections on quality raised above, generally Schwede is aligned with community expectation in this regard. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 16:29, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: I'm just going off ITNQUALITY as we all wait for someone to codify "longstanding practice[s]". In the meantime, on main page customs I'd invite you to review Pierre de Coubertin, Air India Flight 182, and even June 23, which are all currently bolded and linked in OTD. :-) On balance, this 4k+ word ITN was well referenced. The percentage of unreferenced content was not a real problem. Ed [talk] [OMT] 16:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Well, I've just pulled those first two from OTD and replaced them with Featured Articles. Unfortunate that no-one pointed it out earlier. Black Kite (talk) 19:54, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Black Kite: Interestingly, both articles easily met the guidelines set out at WP:OTDRULES #4. One could argue that your removal was out of process. So, once again, we're all waiting for someone to find consensus for and codify these longstanding practices. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:41, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Missing citations, even if they aren't tagged, would seem to violate the intent of #4, in that OTD items should represent good quality, though are not required to be GA or FA. Masem (t) 23:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem: Our B-class criteria does not say 'all content must have an attached citation.' It actually says It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited." Quite frankly, I don't know how you can read the plain text of OTD #4 and come away with the interpretation you gave above. Ed [talk] [OMT] 01:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Where is it said that "b-class" is considered good quality? None of OTD, ITN, nor DYK make this claim that b-class is equivalent to good content. OTD and DYK do spell out that that any content likely to be challenged must be sourced, so like here, that would read to me that a couple unsourced statements are understandable. But when I first commented on this, there were around 7 or 8 such statements, and that's just far too many to consider "good quality" for posting to ITN. Masem (t) 03:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem: Our B-class criteria does not say 'all content must have an attached citation.' It actually says It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited." Quite frankly, I don't know how you can read the plain text of OTD #4 and come away with the interpretation you gave above. Ed [talk] [OMT] 01:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Missing citations, even if they aren't tagged, would seem to violate the intent of #4, in that OTD items should represent good quality, though are not required to be GA or FA. Masem (t) 23:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Black Kite: Interestingly, both articles easily met the guidelines set out at WP:OTDRULES #4. One could argue that your removal was out of process. So, once again, we're all waiting for someone to find consensus for and codify these longstanding practices. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:41, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I guess it would have been good if I had documented my rationale with the "Posted" note. For a very long article, a couple of unreferenced sections isn't a dealbreaker in my view. Sorry for that. Schwede66 22:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah that is incorrect. While ITNQUALITY allows for "one or two" citation needed templates, full unreferenced paragraphs are always a deal breaker for ITN/OTD/DYK entries. The quality concerns always need to be addressed or at least agreed by consensus to be moot before the item is posted. Thankfully this was sorted out quite quickly afterwards. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 23:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: I can only reiterate that I would love to see that codified. I'm not a fan of unwritten customs. Ed [talk] [OMT] 01:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- WP:ITNQUALITY says
one or two 'citation needed' tags may not hold up an article
, while Masem opposed forHandful of unsourced paragraphs or final sentences ...
, which I also seconded. While we can discuss enhancements and clarifications, ITNQUALITY as written didn't exactly green light a pass of the "handful". —Bagumba (talk) 04:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)- As this discussion is about general principles, I've started a follow-up section at Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news#Quality. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- WP:ITNQUALITY says
- @Amakuru: I can only reiterate that I would love to see that codified. I'm not a fan of unwritten customs. Ed [talk] [OMT] 01:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah that is incorrect. While ITNQUALITY allows for "one or two" citation needed templates, full unreferenced paragraphs are always a deal breaker for ITN/OTD/DYK entries. The quality concerns always need to be addressed or at least agreed by consensus to be moot before the item is posted. Thankfully this was sorted out quite quickly afterwards. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 23:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Well, I've just pulled those first two from OTD and replaced them with Featured Articles. Unfortunate that no-one pointed it out earlier. Black Kite (talk) 19:54, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: I'm just going off ITNQUALITY as we all wait for someone to codify "longstanding practice[s]". In the meantime, on main page customs I'd invite you to review Pierre de Coubertin, Air India Flight 182, and even June 23, which are all currently bolded and linked in OTD. :-) On balance, this 4k+ word ITN was well referenced. The percentage of unreferenced content was not a real problem. Ed [talk] [OMT] 16:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Having multiple entire unsourced paragraphs is well below the acceptable quality for main page content, per longstanding practice across the different sections. The guideline you mention allows for one or two citations needed across the whole article but not more than that. I won't speak for Schwede66 but I had rather assumed this was an oversight on his part rather than a deliberate decision to ignore the two objections on quality raised above, generally Schwede is aligned with community expectation in this regard. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 16:29, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Masem: You opposed over a "handful of unsourced paragraphs", and I presume the closer gave that little weight because it contravened ITNQUALITY. ("Articles should be well referenced; one or two "citation needed" tags may not hold up an article, but any contentious statements must have a source, and having entire sections without any sources is unacceptable.") This was a good post by Schwede66. Ed [talk] [OMT] 15:54, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Let me add that there have been improvement ts since my comment about being pulled so at this point, I don't think it needs to be pulled, but this is yet another recent case of rushing to post amid unaddressed quality concerns (which I raised before it was posted) Masem (t) 14:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- There's still a couple unsourced statements higher up like the polishing of the m3 mirror Masem (t) 14:12, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I suspect it might be OK now, Andrew has worked on fixing some of them up, I can only see one obvious citation needed now. What do you think, Masem? — Amakuru (talk) 14:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- What about posting File:Trifid and Lagoon nebulae.jpg as the main image? Bremps... 05:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- This has been done. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:31, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- There is still unsourced material, this needs to be pulled until it's fixed. Masem (t) 13:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Fascinating. Grimes2 18:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support with a note, the blurb should state the observatory is in Chile. --Bedivere (talk) 05:50, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Concur on that point and have added it to the blurb. - Fuzheado | Talk 09:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Much appreciated. Bedivere (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Concur on that point and have added it to the blurb. - Fuzheado | Talk 09:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support ArionStar (talk) 23:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support I’ve reviewed the diffs, and I think the article was good enough to be posted at the time it was elevated to the main page (and it remains so). FlipandFlopped ㋡ 13:22, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
June 22
[edit]
June 22, 2025
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Franco Testa
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): RepubblicaSky TG24
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Spworld2 (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: Olympic gold medalist. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:24, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Sourced. And looks ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 07:54, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 08:12, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 NBA Finals
[edit]Blurb: In basketball, the Oklahoma City Thunder defeat the Indiana Pacers to win the NBA Finals (MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander pictured). (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times, One Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by Moraljaya67 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Zzyzx11 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Iafca09 (talk · give credit)
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.
𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗷𝗮𝘆𝗮𝟲𝟳 (talk). 02:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support ITNR Scuba 11:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support: ITNR event that meets WP:ITNQUALITY with a large amount of referenced prose. Left guide (talk) 03:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support Sufficient quality and breadth.—Bagumba (talk) 05:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support meets WP:ITNQUALITY. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted -- tariqabjotu 16:56, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) Damascus church attack
[edit]Blurb: An Islamist terrorist attack on a Greek Orthodox church in Damascus, Syria, kills at least 25 people. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Ad Orientem (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: IS suicide bombing of a Greek Orthodox church in Syria. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support Another one. ArionStar (talk) 23:34, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support first major ISIS attack since 2024, mass casualty event. Scuba 11:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support. First suicide bombing in Damascus since the fall of the Assad regime in 2024 and one of the deadliest attacks in years. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Extremely short without the "Responses" filler. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:55, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think this is a valid concern. Isn't there more that can be recorded about the event? What's there is good, but it's not very much. Schwede66 00:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I added a 2-paragraph background section. I don't think there are more details to put in the attack section. 174.138.212.166 (talk) 07:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you. Much better! Schwede66 19:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I added a 2-paragraph background section. I don't think there are more details to put in the attack section. 174.138.212.166 (talk) 07:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think this is a valid concern. Isn't there more that can be recorded about the event? What's there is good, but it's not very much. Schwede66 00:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support due to article quality & death toll. A567Z (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support per above. Eminently notable and newsworthy. schetm (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support per above V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Significant and blurb-worthy. Jusdafax (talk) 23:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support significant event, article is good enough. @Admins willing to post ITN: anyone kind enough to post please before it goes stale? Abcmaxx (talk) 16:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Notable event for reasons stated above. Red Phoenician (talk) 20:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 21:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Suggested change (@Ad Orientem) it would be better if the "Greek Orthodox" in the blurb piped to Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch, which is the jurisdiction of the Church in question, rather than Greek Orthodox, which is the article about the term in general. I made this change yesterday in Mar Elias Church attack itself and no one has objected so far. Jahaza (talk) 17:05, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- My original blurb just referred to it as an Orthodox Christian church. I don't think the specific jurisdiction is all that important. Someone apparently disagreed and changed it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Raymond Laflamme
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Nationalpost University of Waterloo
Credits:
- Nominated by Connor Behan (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ErktheBerserker (talk · give credit) and Spworld2 (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: Leading researcher responsible for many breakthroughs in quantum computing. Connor Behan (talk) 13:38, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support, well sourced and in depth V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 22:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support looks good to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 08:00, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) U.S. bombs three nuclear sites in Iran
[edit]Blurb: U.S. B-2 bombers attack three nuclear sites in Iran including Fordow. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The United States carries out airstrikes on three nuclear facilities in Iran.
News source(s): AP News New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Jusdafax (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: (Updated) Target article in my blurb rated “Start” class Jusdafax (talk) 00:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - everybody’s bombing everybody, why focus on one single bombing? Plus, not ITNR. EF5 00:30, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- No, the US wasn't bombing or directly attacking Iran until now. Wqwt (talk) 04:21, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, that’s my point. Everyone’s bombing everyone now. I retain my oppose after reading the supports below. EF5 14:51, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- No, the US wasn't bombing or directly attacking Iran until now. Wqwt (talk) 04:21, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Related to the following nomination: Ongoing: Iran–Israel war --Super Goku V (talk) 00:32, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - The blurb should be rephrased, "The US joins Israel's war against Iran by bombing several nuclear sites" or some variant. In addition, the ongoing item Iran-Israel war is going to be added to ongoing soon and this is covered by that. Departure– (talk) 00:34, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Feel free to add an altblurb. Jusdafax (talk) 00:42, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose for current blurb reason and because it's way too soon. It also shouldn't have a new article written just for three strikes - it can be covered in the current Iran-Israel war article. Further, I don't see why this is marked as ITN/R at all. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 00:43, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Major escalation that would justify posting even if there was an ongoing item (which there isn't). Agnostic on whether this should be its own article or merged into the parent article at Iran-Israel war. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:47, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait Until more information is confirmed. Bremps... 00:50, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- The US claims to have taken out Fordow for good, if this is confirmed, absolutely mention in the blurb. Bremps... 00:51, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- I felt Fordow was important enough to add to the blurb, but confirmation of the level of destruction will likely take awhile. Jusdafax (talk) 01:51, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- The US claims to have taken out Fordow for good, if this is confirmed, absolutely mention in the blurb. Bremps... 00:51, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, as this article will be added to ongoing anytime now. Left guide (talk) 00:51, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Front page news on all major news outlets. Important world event. selfwormTalk) 04:26, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - will hopefully be added to ongoing, as these articles will be highly viewed. Angusgtw (talk) 00:53, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait for more update
- Support Major escalation and major news. Even if this was already in ongoing, I’d still support it because the most powerful country bombed another country. Personisinsterest (talk) 00:58, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait in case the Israel-Iran war ongoing item is added. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 01:00, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- List under ongoing as Iran–Israel–United States war. BD2412 T 01:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- At first glance this implies the United States is part of the war as its own separate combatant when it's joining it on Israel's side Dyaquna (talk) 01:23, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) x 3 Wait for more details. This is likely to get posted, but there is no rush. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait, support if escalates. From what I can see in the article, no major damage has been done, there are no casualties and no injuries. I would instantly support otherwise. For now, wait. Thesogra (talk) 01:37, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait per Thesogra, I'm in agreement if there is an escalation. Marks the entry of the US as an active participant in the conflict. Ornithoptera (talk) 01:59, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
@Ornithoptera: Which part of that is your vote? Renerpho (talk) 03:15, 22 June 2025 (UTC)Restored removed parts of Thesogra's comment. Ignore my question. Renerpho (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Support. The USA joining in the war is very significant, and the Iran aspects of this are now off the tracker. Nfitz (talk) 02:04, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- And support alt-blurb. Nfitz (talk) 08:18, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - I think a reasonable read of the situation is that this represents either a finishing blow (if Iran concedes) or a major escalation (if it doesn't). Either would be major news. Tisnec (talk) 02:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- support this is a happening of all time APFSDS-enthusiast (talk) 02:10, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support Major escalation. Thriley (talk) 02:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support This doesn't seem like "business as usual". A president's unilateral and unauthorized entry to a major conflict is highly newsworthy. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:00, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Wait, leaning support Clearly this has the potential to be a big deal and result in major escalation. Watch the situation, and reconsider in a few hours. Renerpho (talk) 03:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- There are air alerts active all over Israel right now.[4] Renerpho (talk) 04:48, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support A major and significant escalation. Even if we do add the Iran/Israel war to ongoing, the United States becoming involved in such a dramatic fashion merits its own blurb. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 03:27, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support per above. This is a major escalation. IDB.S (talk) 03:29, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong Support obviously a massive world development and potentially epochal event. Certainly something people will want to come to wikipedia and read about. Arguments claiming this should be subsumed under Ongoing are meritless as there is currently no Iran conflict link under ongoing. DangOrangatang (talk) 03:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support: this is newsworthy enough to warrant a blurb independent of the Iran-Israel war going in the ongoing section. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 04:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - Tensions between Iran and the US have been continuous since 1979, and finally they have exploded into direct contact. This is a new war in the Middle East, this is a big deal. 2A00:23C8:B00:AD01:8146:C20D:493B:2D86 (talk) 05:36, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose we adding this as ongoing item nomination. Shadow4dark (talk) 06:39, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- And yet we haven't. And that ongoing doesn't even mention USA. Some discussion in that ongoing about blurbing this instead, including withdrawal of support votes. Blurb this now, and worry about ongoing later. Nfitz (talk) 08:07, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Jahaza (talk) 06:42, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- I wonder, User:Jahaza, what criteria you would use to set a bar for the "In the News" section, given that this unprecedented attack doesn't seem to do it for you. Nfitz (talk) 08:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support, potentially wait Definitely a huge deal and deserving of an addition. Personally, an immediate blurb is appropriate considering this will have meaningful implications for the conflict at large, whether it be a decisive end or escalation. A brief period of waiting isn't amiss, however, if the consensus is that a follow-up event as aforementioned is deemed necessary for the blurb. Additionally the Israel-Iran war is not a current ongoing mention, and even so this specific event constitutes enough significance to warrant its own addition. Xanblu (talk) 07:19, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support as it is featured quite prominently in the news. Sahaib (talk) 08:00, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support alternative blurb. It is a major development. TurboSuperA+(connect) 08:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support for posting this but the alternative blurb should be used Periwinklewrinkles (talk) 09:00, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Obvious Support. In what world is "USA bombs nuclear sites in Iran" not notable enough for a blurb? Prefer altblurb to original blurb. Khuft (talk) 09:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Major event. Noon (talk) 09:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support. There is no world where the preeminent global superpower starting airstrikes on another country is not major enough to make ITN. Bluepanther512 (User talk:Bluepanther512) 9:32, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support alternative blurb, potentially linked to Iran–Israel war. Samuelshraga (talk) 09:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Posted. While opposition to posting a blurb is not insignificant, I weigh there being at least a WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS in support of doing so. El_C 10:04, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- @El_C It's missing a full stop at the end of the sentence. TurboSuperA+(connect) 10:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I think only waiting 10 hours was way too short period since it was nominated when the vast majority of Europe was asleep and later posted when people were just waking up. There is absolutely no need to rush to post ITN since we're not a news ticker 83.187.176.82 (talk) 11:12, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- I found that, in this case, there was sufficient input and that enough time has passed relative to it; time zones of prospective participants is not something I factor into such evaluations. El_C 11:48, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- I'm in Europe and did have the possibility to comment. Khuft (talk) 13:12, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- I can't really fathom anyone even considered opposed this posting from a not-quality place. That this was not a snow post ("happens everytime", "not a newspaper") suggests something is wrong here when it comes to America-prominent items. 2001:8F8:172B:3F78:D860:EEB5:8CE4:F879 (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- I'm also from Europe and also commented. Sahaib (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- I first saw this ITN listing early in the morning, and was flabbergasted to find that a not-insignificant number of editors opposed. For me, this is perhaps the most obvious blurb we've ever had. How could it ever possibly not qualify? The U.S. launching airstrikes on a country following a decades-long diplomatic stalemate is as major a development as can be imagined. Kurtis (talk) 16:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- The opposes seem mostly to come from the fact that an ongoing nom is already open below. And while both a blurb and ongoing can co-exist, it isn't unusual for editors to be vary of blurbing items relating an ongoing topic as the purpose of the latter is in most cases then nullified, I for instance have opposed most such blurbs. The problem in this case is that the ongoing topic wasn't live as of this nom and we certainly have to consider the notability of the bombing of nuclear facilities. Gotitbro (talk) 17:06, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- It's a fair argument, but the significance of this singular event supercedes our usual considerations, such as whether it's gratuitous to include it as a blurb alongside an ongoing. The US bombing Iran is a major, major deal. Kurtis (talk) 18:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Welcome to ITN, the show where everything's made up and the points don't matter. </sarcasm> Ed [talk] [OMT] 15:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I wonder what the responses would be if the prompt were, "Things you can say about an ITN nom, but not your girlfriend."
"I guess there is such a thing as 'too much coverage' if it's in all the wrong places."
Kurtis (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)Too Amerocentric
. -insert valid name here- (talk) 01:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- After decades, User:Kurtis? The US did an infinitely more deadlier aerial attack in a civilian area of Baghdad already this decade. I don't think a single oppose wanted nothing. Some were just about wording. Some was that it was already covered by one ongoing or another ongoing that was about to be posted. And after all that, it only took 10 hours to be posted - far quicker than something about countries that aren't as self-obsessed. Meanwhile the blurb is already twice out-of-date with the retaliation and the announcement of the ceasefire. There was nothing exceptional about this - there's been missiles flying in each and every direction during this conflict by at least 10 different countries (between Iran and it's proxies) for almost 2 years! I think you doth protest too much! Nfitz (talk) 23:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- I was thinking more with regards to the prolonged stand-off over Iran's uranium enrichment program, which has been a focal point of global geopolitics since at least the 2000s. Kurtis (talk) 08:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- The opposes seem mostly to come from the fact that an ongoing nom is already open below. And while both a blurb and ongoing can co-exist, it isn't unusual for editors to be vary of blurbing items relating an ongoing topic as the purpose of the latter is in most cases then nullified, I for instance have opposed most such blurbs. The problem in this case is that the ongoing topic wasn't live as of this nom and we certainly have to consider the notability of the bombing of nuclear facilities. Gotitbro (talk) 17:06, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
June 21
[edit]
June 21, 2025
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Frederick W. Smith
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, ESPN, WREG-TV
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Tails Wx (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 business magnate, investor, and aviator. Founder of FedEx, owned shares of NFL teams too. Article looks in good shape and to post. RIP. ~ Tails Wx 20:27, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- support not seeing any problems with this article, also saw a bunch of news outlets mentioning it. Scuba 12:47, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support, well sourced, and in depth V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 22:47, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 00:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
RD: David Boyle (author)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Liberal Democrat Voice
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (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: British author and journalist. Death reported 21 June. Thriley (talk) 15:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose orange-tagged due to insufficient referencing and whilst not a purely quality issue or requirement an infobox would be nice too. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose, very lacking referencing and no early life section V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 22:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose broken citation in other works section too. Secretlondon (talk) 07:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I've added an infobox but whilst doing so the scale of work still needed was evident, there's basic details missing and the article, apart from being under-referenced, probably needs some structural and stylistic changes too as does not read very well at all. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:15, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - ping me if improved.--BabbaQ (talk) 08:08, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) 2025 Santa Catarina hot air balloon crash
[edit]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: A hot air balloon caught fire and crashes in Praia Grande, Santa Catarina, Brazil, killing 8 of the 21 people on board. (Post)
News source(s): DW
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Localised event with no major impacts. Tragic and unfortunate disaster, however events of this nature typically don’t get posted on ITN. IiSmxyzXX (talk) 01:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- The similar 2016 Lockhart hot air balloon crash was posted. ArionStar (talk) 02:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- As was the 2013 Luxor hot air balloon crash. Mjroots (talk) 08:04, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- The similar 2016 Lockhart hot air balloon crash was posted. ArionStar (talk) 02:02, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Iismxy _-_Alsor (talk) 03:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- It is the worst ballooning accident since the aforementioned one, which occurred in 2016. ArionStar (talk) 07:01, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support - the two disaster above had 19 and 21 deaths. Maybe eight doesn't quite reach the bar but it is a fairly severe ballooning accident. Mjroots (talk) 08:35, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose - 8 deaths during a disaster almost never cuts it. The lowest death toll from an accidental disaster/weather event (not an assassination or incident) that we've posted this year was 27, iirc. Both above accidents had twice (or over) the death toll and are not remotely comparable here. Also, this is at AfD and regardless of the outcome shouldn't have been nominated till that was closed. — EF5 18:18, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Med Jets Flight 056 disaster (8 deaths) was posted too. "…shouldn't…" – What's the guideline? ArionStar (talk) 18:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, with a bunch of controversy about the posting. Also, a guideline not existing on something doesn't suddenly make it okay;
though they are best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply
. It's like saying "oh, a gudeline doesn't prohibit me saying this one exact questionable word, so I'll use it just because!". Arguably falls under the "quality" aspect of ITN anyways. — EF5 19:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)- You've also replied to every single oppose voter, so please don't WP:BLUDGEON the discussion. — EF5 19:23, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, with a bunch of controversy about the posting. Also, a guideline not existing on something doesn't suddenly make it okay;
- Med Jets Flight 056 disaster (8 deaths) was posted too. "…shouldn't…" – What's the guideline? ArionStar (talk) 18:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose - 8 deaths during a disaster almost never cuts it. The lowest death toll from an accidental disaster/weather event (not an assassination or incident) that we've posted this year was 27, iirc. Both above accidents had twice (or over) the death toll and are not remotely comparable here. Also, this is at AfD and regardless of the outcome shouldn't have been nominated till that was closed. — EF5 18:18, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose and close. Big in the hot-air balloon space, but not of ITN's global importance. Also, it's at AFD. Departure– (talk) 19:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support a fatal air accident, especially since this is one of the more major ballooning accidents in living memory. Scuba 22:35, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 Super Rugby Pacific final
[edit]Blurb: In rugby union, the Super Rugby Pacific season concludes with the Crusaders (captain David Havili pictured) defeating the Chiefs in the final. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In rugby union, the Crusaders (captain David Havili pictured) defeat the Chiefs to win the Super Rugby Pacific final.
News source(s): RNZ
Credits:
- Nominated by Moraljaya67 (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Not really a fan of rugby union, but I tried my best to add match prose. 𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗷𝗮𝘆𝗮𝟲𝟳 (talk). 14:09, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support once the two cn tags are addressed, good work. Kowal2701 (talk) 22:08, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support: CNs resolved, ITNR event that meets WP:ITNQUALITY with a sufficient amount of referenced prose. Left guide (talk) 02:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Marked ready. Left guide (talk) 15:58, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted the ALT blurb. This event and the United States strikes on Iranian nuclear sites are of the same date, but I couldn't bring myself to post a photo for the rugby game. In the big scheme of things, that seems rather insignificant compared to the US starting a conflict that may well spiral out of control. If nothing newer comes up in the next wee while, we can reconsider that. Schwede66 00:58, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Mikayla Raines
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Independent, CBS News, NBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Soulbust (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 YouTuber and wildlife rehabilitator ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 17:11, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Being aware of her work before, she was not notable before her death (thus article was just created) though the nonprofit SaveAFox is (that was created over a month ago but likely could have been created sooner, I was eying doing it before). Thus her article should be merged to SaveAFox, because otherwise this is a BLP1E. That said as the central figure behind SaveAFox, it would be reasonable to have the RD point to that page if the merge was done, since her death gained national attention.
- Masem (t) 17:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- Definitely should post, I've seen a lot of stuff and people talking about it. BKASEN52 (talk) 04:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support This is a good article and redirecting it would do it a huge disservice, it definitely passes WP:GNG and whilst the death has certainly been what brought this person media attention it isn't fair to call devoting one's entire life to saving foxes as WP:BLP1E. There's nothing wrong with creating an article after one's death or after increased media attention, in fact notability requirememts can be met at any time, as many now very famous classical musicians' biographies' will tell you. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Beyond that there is quite strong and well argued opposition to any merger anyway on the talk page so unlikely to gain consensus for that. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:28, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support - sourcing looks ok. Overall good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 07:51, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
June 20
[edit]
June 20, 2025
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Gertrud Leutenegger
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): FAZ, Blue News
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (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: Swiss writer, especially of novels, written in the first person. There was an article, expanded from obits. She was underrated, - let's change that! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:20, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is long enough and fully sourced. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support great article, very well sourced. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: about to fall off today Abcmaxx (talk) 06:12, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 07:40, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Wreckage of the HMS Endeavour
[edit]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: North American and Australian maritime museums affirm discovery of the wreckage of the HMS Endeavour off the coast of Rhode Island in the United States. (Post)
News source(s): Independent, Ars Technica
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Looks to be stale this is nominated as 20 June, and the oldest blurb on front page is 21 June- thus if 20 June date is correct, this is stale. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:36, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Maria Voce
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Focolare
Credits:
- Nominated by The C of E (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kelisi (talk · give credit) and The C of E (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: Italian lawyer. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:51, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Marita Camacho Quirós
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Longeviquest
Credits:
- Nominated by TheCorriynial (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: Quite a lot can be said, but was First Lady of Costa Rica, oldest known Costa Rican, and supercentenarian. Some sourcing help is needed, but its close. TheCorriynial (talk) 02:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is well-sourced and of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 14:02, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Renerpho (talk) 06:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 10:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
References
[edit]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: