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.
Ismail Haniyeh
The United States, Russia, and their respective allies agree to a prisoner exchange of 26 people.
Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.
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
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our
minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually - a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be
reliable,
support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in
simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
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.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check
WP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because
consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Voicing an opinion on an item
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.
Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
Tell about problems in articles if you see them.
Be bold and
fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.
Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful.
A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as
ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle
conflicts of interest.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
At least 12 people are killed and more than 250 people are declared missing after heavy downpours and flooding in
northern India, with rainfall amounts of up to 183 millimetres (7.2 in) reported in some areas.
(Reuters)
The death toll from the
landslides caused by torrential rains in
Kerala,
India, increases to 296 people, with at least 240 others still missing.
(Onomanorama)
Fourteen protestors are killed, four are injured and at least 31 are arrested, including a journalist, during nationwide protests that turned violent in
Nigeria amid a
cost-of-living crisis, which protestors blame on
PresidentBola Tinubu's new reforms.
(Al Jazeera)
Oppose on notability prisoner exchanges happen frequently and even amongst warring nations, I cannot see why this particular exchange is notable.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
15:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose both on significance and quality. Ignoring the descriptions of the exchanged persons, the article has like two paragraphs of material about the actual process, nowhere close to standards. Biggest the biggest since the Cold War is not how significance should be judged.
Masem (
t)
16:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
What impact does it have on US Russia relations or is this going to impact the situation in Ukraine or with NATO. This reads as a routine type of exchange outside of the number being made at one time. —
Masem (
t)
17:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
There is nothing routine about it. The scale, the preparation, the fact that seven countries participated, amount of prisoners exchanged and their weight and recognisability, connections to Navalny case. There are several people on the list whose getting to prison justified a blurb.
Unprecedented is that a third country takes political prisoners who don't have any connection to it, among other things such as structure of this exchange.
First of all, what it has to do with Ukraine? It didn't participate in the exchange.
Second, why does this item need to depend on events that are WP:CRYSTAL? How one can know what the impact will be? Some people say that this may lead to further negotiations, on a higher level, some say that it inferes thaw in relations, others are convinced in the opposite. But the important thing is that people discuss it and it is focus, it is in the news all over the world
BilboBeggins (
talk)
12:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support. Globally significant (views to the contrary are baffling to me - the biggest prisoner exchange between two nuclear-armed, Permanent Five powers since the Cold War?). It also involves numerous other nations (Turkey was a mediator, some of the prisoners were from Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Norway, at least one prisoner was freed from Belarus). So this is a multilateral thing. Article quality seems there, and improving still.
Neutralitytalk18:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose The nomination presents this as a US initiative when it seems that Germany has the lion's share of the Western end of this.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
20:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The news source given in the nomination presents it as a "Russia-West prisoner swap". The nomination then replaces West with America throughout. It's wrong.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
22:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The fact that the blurb is bad doesn't make this postable or not. Suggest a new blurb if you think it is inaccurate or unacceptable.
Natg 19 (
talk)
21:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Let the record reflect that I comment on ITN most often to note U.S.-centric bias. I incorrectly assumed that the deal was between the U.S. and Russia at first, as well. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him)01:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support on notability, oppose on quality. As others have mentioned, the details on the prisoner exchange itself are lacking in prose. The article should be expanded upon before the blurb is posted.
ArkHyena (
talk)
21:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support on notability In fact, there is precedent to post these types of things; for instance, Brittney Griner's release was
posted. And with this event having many more prisoners being exchanged than that one, this passes the bar of significance in my mind.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
00:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support on notability, oppose all current blurb options. A better blurb may be something along the lines of Russia released western journalists/political prisoners in exchange for releasing criminals held in western countries. Or similar. My wording is crap. There isn't a clear good short wording for this. But I agree with others that the blurb should not place undue emphasis on the US, given that from my reading 7 western countries were involved in the discussions for this exchange. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |
me |
talk to me!04:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. There weren't 26 people released, only 24, other two on the plane being kids whose parents were detained in Slovenia. Regarding the sides of exchange, altblurb3 is the correct one, because seven countries participated. Maybe it makes sense to mention Germany explicitly, because the most important contribution was by Germany and it has received all but three people of those who were sent to the West.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
12:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment The photo should not be posted as it would be pro-US bias . Altblurb 3 is the best one
Support blurb. The biggest prisoner exchange between West abd East since World War 2
[3]. In the news and analysed all over the world, the biggest news currently. The event is by no means trivial, as seven countries participated in swap, with Turkey serving as neutral party, and there were also difficulties in legal justification and abiding by law. This led to debate in Germany and may influence future of the governing coalition (because its members had varying opinions on thr issue). The situation is very complex and for sure there will be consequences, changes for bilateral relations between countries participating in the exchange, and more.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
13:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The article quality has improved considerably and the title has been changed in view of the discussion. I think the consensus has shifted to support? Let me see some more feedback, then ready to post. --Tone15:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't feel the quality concerns raised early have been sufficiently addressed. Take out the background and list of people, and you have almost nothing of substance here and less than what we would normally expect. All the claims how this is that significant should be then easy to source to explain that by those making those claims, not just handwaving that factor. I am not going to ask for it to be pulled, but we have to make sure that what we are posting represent some of WP's best work since we're highlighting it on the main page. --
Masem (
t)
17:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree. The posted blurb still emphasises the United States and treats the other countries involved as insignificant allies, i.e. puppets or stooges comparable with Belarus. This is not accurate or complete, as I understand it. The key prisoner was not Gershkovich, who is currently the primary focus of the article, but Krasikov who was the guy that Russia really wanted as he's a personal acquaintance or colleague of Putin. Krasikov was held by Germany and so their agreement was vital in getting the deal done. The Germans refused previously, holding out for a swap with Navalny and so it was his death that opened things up. The article doesn't explain this well and just seems to be cheer-leading for the US to make Biden and Harris look good. It comes across as blatant US propaganda.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
18:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
If not for Germany, the swap wouldn't have happened. So I agree with you. As I mentioned before, I also have issue with 26 released. If by ghat we mean that they were on planes, then yes. But many may understand this as if all 26 were released from prison, which is not the case.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
18:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The blurb is now in play at
WP:ERRORS so we have a multilateral situation. I just looked at the lead of the article and the only named people are Americans. The lead picture is American showing Americans and an American flag. There's then a section all about a particular American. The negotiations section then starts with a link to VP Harris. It's like the Simpsons when Homer chants USA! USA! But see
WP:NPOV...
Andrew🐉(
talk)
18:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Pull The article is nonsensically lop-sided. There's an entire massive paragraph about Gershkovich (why?), a paragraph about negotiations which should be titled "American negotiations", and the reactions section ... well, you get the picture. Practically nothing about Germany without who this wouldn't have happened at all.
Black Kite (talk)19:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose as stale. The notable thing would be the death of Deif, not the announcement of his death. And, if the announcement is correct, he would have died weeks ago, so this would be stale. Also, as others have said, it is still not fully clear if he really was killed in the strike.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
13:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gödel2200: The timing and staleness of a news story are based on the date when the news was announced, which is not necessarily the date that something happened. Per
ITN's procedural guidelines: "for purposes of determining timing and staleness, the date is considered when the event was first reported in reliable sources."Kurtis(talk)23:33, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
One was the political leader of Hamas and the other its main military leader and so they naturally complement each other. Both events still have some uncertainty about the details but so it goes.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb as worded. "Assassination" is a term used to denote an act of criminal murder and as such would be highly problematic per NPOV. I can't recall any incident where the killing of the military commander of an enemy with whom you are in a formal state of war was labeled as an assassination. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
17:07, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Orbitalbuzzsaw: The timing and staleness of a news story are based on the date when the news was announced, which is not necessarily the date that something happened. Per
ITN's procedural guidelines: "for purposes of determining timing and staleness, the date is considered when the event was first reported in reliable sources."Kurtis(talk)23:35, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I disagree with the closure of this discussion, which I feel was done prematurely and based on erroneous reasoning. First, the news itself is not stale if it was just announced. As ITN's guidelines
very clearly state: "for purposes of determining timing and staleness, the date is considered when the event was first reported in reliable sources." Therefore, Mohammed Deif's death is still breaking news, and still a viable candidate for a blurb. I also feel that the discussion was closed too hastily, as even if we don't approve a separate blurb, we might still incorporate it into the current blurb regarding the death of Ismail Haniyeh like Andrew Davidson suggests (which is what I would support). And although I think it's very helpful to have non-admins closing discussions, NACs should mostly be done in cases where the consensus is completely unambiguous and unlikely to change in the near future. In more complex cases, the closing party should have the full range of options available to them, which includes the ability to post it, or to modify an existing blurb. I'd re-open this discussion myself, but I'll leave the decision to other observers.
Kurtis(talk)23:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
There were conflicting reports on his death as early as the airstrike itself, which was weeks ago - this is just Israel formally staking a claim, which itself isn't entirely clear on veracity.
TheKip(
contribs)16:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Several things to comment. First, Iceland is a parliamentary republic and its head of state has no executive powers. Consequently, it is not ITNR. Secondly, I would wait for the official inauguration. And, thirdly, the presidential election was two months ago, so the main article cannot be the one about the election because it is stale and should be the one about Tómasdóttir.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
10:49, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
thanks! The problem now is that it's a short biography. The articles in Icelandic and Italian have more content with sources. The articles may help to expand on this.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
11:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
No. We didn’t miss the Icelandic election. It was put up as a cannidate. The result of the discussion was to not post it since 1) it’s Iceland and 2) the office of president is ceremonial and 3) we haven’t posted an Icelandic presidential election before.
Scu ba (
talk)
13:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I wasn't aware of the previous discussion but none of those seem like a good reason on their own to oppose: 1. Iceland is a fully sovereign state, and isn't a micronation by any means; its relatively small population should not really be a discriminating factor. 2. It's ceremonial in many states, and the president is still a representative of the nation with political influence 3. That does not mean it cannot ever be posted.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
15:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Don't get me wrong, I agree, Iceland's results should've been included in the news, but it wasn't. We don't include swearing ins so we shouldn't break precedent here.
Scu ba (
talk)
16:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on both quality and notability; the main article is a stub and the office is largely ceremonial, with little impact.
Yakikaki (
talk)
16:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Mali announces that it carried out joint airstrikes with
Burkina Faso on insurgents in and around
Tinzaouaten. The
CSP-PSD says that a Burkinabé drone strike killed dozens of civilians.
(Reuters)
The
Cavite provincial government in the
Philippines declares a "
state of calamity" after an
oil spill from the sunk
MTTerra Nova ship reaches the shores of eight municipalities, requiring implementation of a no-catch zone and relief aid to be given to around 25,000
fishermen.
(GMA Network)
The Mirola 1 oil tanker is discovered to have ran aground near the coast of
Bataan, becoming the third vessel to cause an oil spill in
Manila Bay in the past week.
(GMA Network)
Strong thunderstorms and winds in eastern
Nebraska cause significant destruction, causing widespread power outages in
Lincoln and
Omaha, the two largest cities in the state.
(The New York Times)
The
United States pauses US$95 million in assistance to the country of
Georgia due to its government passing a
law on "foreign agents", which US officials referred to as "anti-democratic" and a "draconian measure to stifle dissent".
(Reuters)
Twenty-six people are arrested by
Spanish police in
Madrid,
Málaga, and
Toledo for operating a
sex trafficking ring that abused over 600 women. 32 women were freed during the operation.
(AP)
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.
Conditional support The really notable thing here is their guilty plea removes the possibility of a death penalty (instead they will serve a life sentence) but also removes the possibility of a trial and the risk of the case being overturned due to 'invalid' evidence This has been in flux for years, and its an important development after a decade+ of legal drama. With that said, there could be a possible 'mini trial' and we could post then (likely next year). Or post now, but after improvements to the article (currently only contains a single sentence about the guilty plea and is not nearly ready for ITN).
Schwinnspeed (
talk)
22:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support, big news. this is the biggest development in this case that has been ongoing for more than 20 years. A guilty plea wasn't expected because there was talk of the government wanting to imprison them for life (or just sentence them to death). President Biden even denied a plea proposal
just last September.
— ThatCopticGuyping me! (
talk) (
contribs)
01:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is really nothing, doesn't cap off anything since they've been incarcerated since. Article is also poor quality, far too much proseline and details and not really a narrative approach of a quality article. --
Masem (
t)
01:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose WTF? This event was 20 years ago. The first thing the article needs to explain is why this is happening at all right now. And a quick glance didn't answer that question for me. A simple explanation for us ignorant masses please, before I can support anything being posted.
HiLo48 (
talk)
01:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
@
HiLo48 - Various leaders of al-Qaeda and their associates have been imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay since the early days of the Bush administration, on charges that they were the planners behind 9/11 alongside bin Laden. The U.S. government has brought up a criminal case against them and has purposely drawn it out so these terrorists have little to no chance of release. The death penalty or life in prison is what they were seeking, and there were also concerns that exculpatory evidence was being withheld. Today, indeed after 20+ years, a deal seems to have been reached where the terrorists have entered a guilty plea. It is the most significant movement in the case against the 9/11 terrorists in years.
— ThatCopticGuyping me! (
talk) (
contribs)
02:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
User:That Coptic Guy Thanks for that explanation. I'd suggest that some of what you've written there needs to be right up front in the article this nomination is based on. This is a global encyclopaedia, and a lot of readers will be like me, quite unaware of that background information.
HiLo48 (
talk)
03:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Currently, the article does not indicate that they have actually pled guilty. Certainly we would not post people only "agreeing" to plead guilty. And even if they do plead guilty, they would still not have been sentenced.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
00:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose on quality, article still needs plenty of work. Among other issues, there is a tag that has been there for almost 10 years asking for an update on the massacre that the former president is responsible for.
— ThatCopticGuyping me! (
talk) (
contribs)
01:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality per above. Will switch to support if/when it’s improved, a former head of state being convicted of crimes against humanity is notable enough.
TheKip(
contribs)02:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait Lets get some more detail and flesh out the article. Right now we don't know much at all. It's also worth noting that today/tonight Israel is believed to have killed a senior military commander of Hezbollah in Beirut. Kind of reminds me of the last 10 minutes of
The Godfather when all of the family's accounts are settled. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
03:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Zero need for a separate death article, unless the actual operation that took him down is well documented. Save for a couple of tags, the main bio article is ready to go. (And this is pending confirmation that seems up in the air right now. And to add once more, if true, clearly notable and ITN appropriate beyond the current ongoings) --
Masem (
t)
04:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong support Confirmed by Iranian sources, which are likely to be biased more towards Haniyeh and in favor of reporting him alive, but that is not the case. Apart from the legitimacy of this assassination, I strongly disagree with Masem in this regard and believe this should have a standalone article aswell as this marks the highest killing of a Hamas official/leader since the Israel-Hamas war started on October 7 and since the killing of Saleh al Arouri in January. Although it's very early right now to say anything about the killing, I believe as more time passes, more information will eventually be revealed as this is a huge event. Worst case scenario, if the killing is so poorly documented, I still believe it should have a standalone section in some article somewhere. Haniyeh has also held numerous positions other than just leading Hamas. TwistedAxe[contact]04:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Unlike
Killing of Osama bin Laden, where there is a great deal of discussion of the specific operation as well as the past attempts to kill him, all that is in the present article is 50% reaction material, 25% background, and the rest speculation as to the actual event. This is not how we write event articles, but we certainly can present the death as part of the biographical article. --
Masem (
t)
12:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Right, but I believe we’re still in the early stages and clearing the fog of war. If the dust settles and the assassination is still poorly documented, I’d say we put it under the Death section definitely. If, however, enough information is presented, I’d say we definitely keep the standalone article. TwistedAxe[contact]14:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
It's not unreasonable to have kept the details in both the bio article as well as at least one of the overarching ongoing articles about this Gaza conflict, particularly the latter because it provides the necessarily context of the larger picture. And then if extensive details of the actual Assassination emerge later then create the standalone. But this reverse way encourages bad splits as the potential of POV forks, as well as poor quality articles in trying to isolate the event from the larger picture without clearly knowing if that split makes sense. This type of approach is contrary to NOTNEWS and doesn't make for high quality ITN material that we are supposed to feature.
Masem (
t)
14:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality: Article still needs a lot more work in order to qualify for ITN. More information is also needed on the assassination. Support once all these issues have been addressed.
Tofusaurus (
talk)
04:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait - article is still developing/too short, and fog of war is still very much in effect w/ regards to exactly what happened (airstrike vs “raid,” official claims of responsibility, etc). Pretty much all that’s clearly confirmed at this moment is that he was assassinated in the first place.
TheKip(
contribs)04:39, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support ITN worthy, but wait until more reporting comes in, then we need to add the cause of death to the blurb because the current one is too short
Afif Brika1 (
talk)
05:06, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong Support Israel-Palestine is arguably the most notable topic in the world right now , Article is good enough . Altblurb is better as it states that he was political leader
AlexBobCharles (
talk)
11:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Post-posting conditional support - Disagree that NPOV issues warrant pulling, but agree with the above discussion that any blurb should specify he led the political bureau for clarity and accuracy. He was not the commander of the militant organization. The leader of the military wing,
Mohammed Deif, is still alive. The average reader could plausibly assume "leader of Hamas" means the leader of the militant group, which is not accurate. An average reader might also assume that him being "the Hamas leader" meant he was the leader of the Gaza Strip, which is also an inaccurate reading as that person is
Yahya Sinwar, who is also still alive. He was the highest ranking Hamas official killed in the war so far, but not important in the ways you might expect just based on his title. I do not support having it posted with the current blurb. Vanilla Wizard 💙19:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
An armed conflict between Israel and Hamas-led Palestinian militant groups has been taking place chiefly in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel since 7 October 2023. This outlier took place in
Tehran, killing a non-militant. That's the way I see it, anyway.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
09:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Post-posting support and comment Article looks good and I firmly believe (as long the article quality is good) assassinations are blurb worthy. @
Stephen: Would it be possible to swap images with a better crop? --
TDKR Chicago 101 (
talk)
19:51, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Israel launches a missile attack on southern
Beirut,
Lebanon, killing at least four civilians and injuring 80 others. Senior
Hezbollah commander
Fuad Shukr is claimed by
Israel to be the main target. He was in the area at the time of the attack, but his status is currently unknown.
(Anadolu Agency)(Al Jazeera)
The
United States carries out an airstrike near
Hillah,
Iraq, killing four members of Iraq's
Popular Mobilization Units. Iraq condemns the strike, saying the
US-led military coalition committed a "heinous crime" by targeting security sites and said the attacks were a serious violation of the coalition's mission and mandate.
(Reuters)
Tesla recalls more than 1.8 million vehicles due to a hood issue that could increase the risk of a crash. An
over-the-air software update for the issue was made available in June.
(Quartz)
The
Taliban suspends relations with 14
Afghan overseas diplomatic missions and announces that they will no longer accept consular documents issued by these missions.
(RFE/RL)
Interpol announces that more than 200 people have been arrested and more than US$1.6 billion of illegal drugs and precursor chemicals seized as part of a two-month operation against narcotics trafficking conducted across
Europe,
North America, and
Africa.
(ABC News)
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.
This should probably be combined with the blurb below, but I think the protests are only becoming larger and larger, and are now international news. Article is making good progress. Libertad!
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
10:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support Perhaps reads more like a chronology, but well updated. And anecdotally, the BBC News report leads with the scale and severity of the protests, only saying "disputed re-election" as context - so I don’t think this needs to be combined with or wait for the election nom (below), it’s sufficiently standalone news.
Kingsif (
talk)
12:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose I know that there are protests going on there, but just listing a bunch of events in a chronological order without anything else that indicates these are all tied together is not a quality article. --
Masem (
t)
12:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Surely we would combine this blurb with the blurb for the election, so this nomination probably can just be replaced by adding an altblurb to the nom for the presidential election.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
14:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I have added an alt blurb. Unfortunately I am not (as of this comment) satisfied with the quality of the main article on the elections. But I do think the situation in Venezuela merits a blurb on the main page. The protest article is adequate for posting. I have included an unbolded link to the article on the elections. Hopefully it will continue to improve. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
15:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Added alt3. It can definitely be improved; death toll taken from the article, which could also be improved, especially after another day.
Kingsif (
talk)
20:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose the blurbs as politically charged, we didn't say it like that for the
Rwandan election, even though it is more likely to have had irregularities, judging from the
results. Also, wait for the protests to unfold further as they clearly been planned well beforehand, and the article is also largely currently only one-sided.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
12:02, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Added alt4. There really is no need to append that the results are disputed - the protests themselves would indicate this. And I'm not sure the usage of "widespread" is needed here. But I do think this is to best, and works as a combined blurb.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
14:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support alt4, as it is more neutral and not politically charged i.e. imply which side the protests are on. Wait on article about the protests, as work needs to be done to ensure the article is not all on the anti-Chavista side.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
23:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose in general; this article is not being developed, is woefully incomplete, the infobox is mostly OR, and I don't see any chance it is going to improve because of lack of effort.
SandyGeorgia (
Talk)
00:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I copied my note on the July 29 listing here. These are some comments I would like to restate:
IMO, I think the only thing in the way of this being posted is the flagrant political bias in both articles. I think I would like to work on this ^ - ^ --
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
04:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Protesters taking part in a march in
Gwadar,
Pakistan, attack security forces deployed to guard them, killing a soldier and injuring 16 others, according to the
Pakistani Army.
(Reuters)
At least two people are killed and as many as 100 others are injured when a passenger train carrying 800 people collides with a
Kamaz truck near
Volgograd,
Russia, and partially derails.
(Al Arabiya)
Panama suspends diplomatic relations with
Venezuela and withdraws its
diplomatic personnel from the country until a full review of the presidential election results is concluded.
(Reuters)
Sakina Muhammad Jan becomes the first person to be jailed under
Australia's
forced marriage laws after ordering her 21-year-old daughter to marry a man who later murdered her.
(BBC News)
French police report multiple sabotage acts targeting telecommunications operators in parts of
the country, affecting 11,000 clients, with the incidents being treated as
vandalism.
(DW)(Politico)
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.
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.
A consensus to post this will not develop. Too niche. Not sure if we posted the last Avengers movie when it broke the overall record. Closing now. --Tone13:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose ITN is not for these types of news. First of all, we do not post News items just because they are the most read one, that goes
here. Second, R-rating is just a US specific rating and a large of readers probably do not know about it and therefore this record holds little value to them. Lastly, it is only the 6th largest opening in the US overall and around 12th biggest worldwide opening for any movie, so hardly a groundbreaking record.
PrinceofPunjabTALK11:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Not the type of business news we post, and to state this yet again, we do not use page views as a metric of whether we should post at ITN in the first place. --
Masem (
t)
11:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Prince of Punjab. This isn't the overall record, which is inevitably broken due to inflation. This is like saying there is a new tallest building in the world...well, the tallest that Americans under 17 can enter with adult supervision.
Unknown Temptation (
talk)
13:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The newly selected UNESCO World Heritage Sites are normally featured in the News here. Example can be left out or swapped, I think it is usually a wonderful addition. --
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
09:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support After a huge emphasis on sports and politics lately, more cultural news are definitely appreciated! And this is certainly the most relevant of the past few weeks.
Venustates (
talk)
09:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Maybe It's interesting, in the news and encyclopedic but there are over a thousand of these sites now and another 24 seems too many to be headlining particular cases. In the UK, it was the
Flow Country which got
attention. How do we decide which to feature?
Andrew🐉(
talk)
10:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: I totally get that, that's why I said the example can of course also be left out, though it is nice to have a picturesque example included. But I wouldn't put much emphasis on that. Greetings,
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
10:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The article looks good, no doubt! Though the Good Article batch is from 2017 already and criteria have become quite a bit more strict. Greetings,
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
13:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment This happens every year and sometimes more than once per year, and we never post them. This time there are more than 20, and overall more than 1000. What we post are removal of the sites because the countries have managed them badly. This comment coming from someone heavily involved with World Heritage lists ;) --Tone13:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Certainly! At the same time, there are several things that happen every year or multiple times a year, like various sports events, or Oscar recipients (yawn ;) that are *always* posted. It's usually in all national news when a country gets a new World Heritage List entry. --
Venustates (
talk)
13:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Actually, I'll add that the list is factually inaccurate. For example, the Moravian Church settlements were listed in 2015 in Denmark. In 2024, the site was extended to include sites in the US, UK, and Germany. And yet, in the list, everything is listed as in 2015, which is incorrect. Oppose on quality, and on no prose. (but yes, I am all for posting good news) --Tone03:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on account more than anything else of not being sure the best way to blurb this. It's a routine event, but unlike an election, prize, or sporting event, there is no "winner". There is no overarching individual story here save the same sort that happens any individual year. Either we're just saying sites are announced (which isn't really news itself because, again, it's a scheduled event), or we're singling out one like in the original blurb, which is putting undue focus on whichever site we select to feature.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
15:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support A wonderful nomination! With regards to pics, we could feature several ones over the course of the days this stays on top. E.g. start with Gedi, then Schwerin, etc. until something else supersedes this. Should this make it, and be supported also in upcoming years, this could even be a regular feature for ITNR?
Khuft (
talk)
15:33, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on article quality. No stand alone article and in the linked page there is no prose, just tables. I'm not opposed on principle. But we need something with meat on it if we are going to be promoting this on the main page. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
15:52, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support in principle, with no comment on article quality as I haven't looked over any of them yet. I've added a second altblurb for consideration.
Kurtis(talk)18:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose I really want to support given coverage of this has raised my spirits amongst everything else, but per The KIP and Ad Orientem we've declined much more urgent and pressing news in the past due to similar article quality and lack of prose.
Schwinnspeed (
talk)
02:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. This seemingly happens every year and there's nothing particularly remarkable about this one, particularly as we're not highlighting any of them in particular. Incremental statistics are rarely good ITN material. Obviously would need to address the lack of prose too to be even considered. —
Amakuru (
talk)
05:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: Would it help to add some prose introduction to the Committee session in the article? Or rather integrate it in the
World Heritage Committee article as an individual section that can be updated for every new session when new entries are publicly announced? :) Greetings,
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
10:04, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Absolutely no article would ever get posted if the only update to it was a table with no prose whatsoever attached, and this should not be an exception. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
13:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per principle, as these kinds of news are nice and kind of rare, but I don't know about the articles though. Wish I had the time to polish them up, but I'll be working on the Venezuela articles foreseeably.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
12:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose I prefer this kind of content for ITN to the usual bleak mirroring of major news outlets' headlines, but the article is quite weak (just a list) and it's essentially something recurring annually by default, so not very strong on the newsworthiness scale, either.
Yakikaki (
talk)
19:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose blurb language used and oppose for citations needed - I caution users to tame their chauvinism. Western media is very obviously biased on this matter. For decades, the West has sought regime change in this nation and election after election we see the West attempt to discredit elections in socialist countries in the Global South. It is frankly disgusting that Wikipedia is joining in this rather than critically assessing our sources for reliability. How many times must we watch as the US manufactures consent for a coup before we realize that we can't trust most US sources on this issue. ---
C&
C (Coffeeandcrumbs)
05:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
With all due respect, it's outrageous to refer to the BBC as a "US source", and it makes you look very bad. Honestly, your entire comment is outrageous and doesn't serve to help the project in any manner. You should consider striking it. --
RockstoneSend me a message!15:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Regardless of the authenticity of the election, these discussion pages are not meant to be used to petty bickering. We will use the source deemed most reliable, and whether or not it fits with your stance on the subject, be it politically or as an external perspective/opinion, is not to be taken into consideration. Let's do our best not to become Reddit, thank you.
Daneellis114 (
talk)
23:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Do you have any independent sources to back up your entire comment? If not, you yourself are guilty of pushing a pro-Maduro POV. Tube·
of·
Light14:06, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose The proposed blurbs don't adequately convey the phony nature of the process. And the article is in a poor state with a lot of rambling, citations needed and tense errors.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
09:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Repeatedly has been shown tht we're not going to try to call out sham elections or their ilk at ITN. We can use language how we say who won that implies that it was not democratic win, like we have done for the last Russian election, but it becomes a NPOV problem to suggest in the ITN blurb if the election is a sham; that's a topic left for the article in question. —
Masem (
t)
11:59, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
That's nonsense because numerous editors have supported the alt blurb as a standard signal to the reader that the election was not free and fair. So, we do regularly call out such sham elections in that way but it's too subtle -- we should be more direct rather than dropping hints.
In any case, there are still the quality issues which are not resolved.
Oppose article has two cn tags, two orange tags, one yellow tag and result section is empty. Therefore, it is no way near ready to be posted. I support the Alt Blurb when it is ready to be psoted.
PrinceofPunjabTALK11:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose those and any blurb that does not acknowledge the denounces of electoral fraud, which are a relevant news topic in themselves.
Cambalachero (
talk)
15:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose There are multiple orange tags, and the endorsements section is missing a lot of citations. Will support the alt when ready.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
20:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait The
National Electoral Council (Venezuela) has
been offline and/or has a DNS problem since at least the last day or so, although some
archived snapshots e.g. 28 July are available. As of the 2010s and 2020s, the electoral results coordinated by any national election commission, except for the internet-poorest countries, are normally published in full detail on the commission's website. Whether the reason for the website non-availability is attacks such as DDOS or tech incompetence or a desire to hide the results, the fact is that by the current standards of a national election, the results in the sense of
open data are not yet published. There is currently only a "believe-us" XXth century style "result" announced by the CNE so far. The heads of many American states, such as
Gabriel Boric, are putting pressure on the CNE to get the full results published. Waiting for a more serious release of the full results would make sense.
Boud (
talk)
21:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait Along the lines of what Boud said, in lay terms, the election result hasn't actually been called, Maduro has just said he's won. The opposition has not conceded, there are no results to show (some apparently have fully gone missing) - the last update from even Maduro's own commission is that vote counts will be coming soon.
Kingsif (
talk)
21:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose For now, as the results themselves are still unavailable in the article. Granted, the results aren't gonna be super shocking.
Dyaquna (
talk)
22:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Reliable sources are essentially unanimous in describing the election as neither free or fair. Therefore, Maduro being declared the winner is about as surprising as "water is wet".
KlayCax (
talk)
00:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait There should be something, however it ought to mention the dispute. This is major news.
Update of blurb needed: While waiting for the
CNE to announce the full results, the
2024 Venezuelan protests (probably not the best name, since there were probably other protests in Venezuela in 2024) are already 11 kb of source text just 5 hours after being created, so should be integrated into the blurb. Things could change fast depending on if/when the CNE publishes the full results or continues to refuse to publish them, so further updates might be needed.
Boud (
talk)
01:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Suggest nominating the protests as their own blurb. If the photo can be confirmed as free, it's also really good to go in the box.
Kingsif (
talk)
02:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose unless the blurb states clearly that it was rigged and that it sparked massive protests. Plus, the article has certain problems. If these are solved, take this one as a support. --
Bedivere (
talk)
06:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support altblurb2. That thing with words like "announced" or "declared" in dubious elections simply doesn't work, and I don't think our readers get the difference that a group of editors here wants to convey. Simply use "re-elected" and let the readers visit the article to find out the details. All winners are "announced" or "declared" no matter if the election was free and fair.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
08:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Most readers don't click through to the article. The main page gets about 5 million views daily but the number of readers that click though ITN links is only about 10K -- a tiny fraction. So, most readers will glance at or skim the main page and will just see the headline and the grinning picture of the tyrant/dictator/president-for-life. So, we should make the headline plain and clear if we run one because that's all most readers will see.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
09:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Why do you think that "announced" or "declared" makes it clear that the winner is a dictator or that the election was not free and fair? Why not extend the blurb to say that "X was re-elected in a dubious election"?--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
09:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree that the protests should be the main story now. My point was that the words "announced" or "declared" wouldn't make any difference. If we post that Maduro was "announced winner", we practically accept the announcement of the National Electoral Council, so we practically side with them and pick Maduro as winner. Note that the opposition rejects outright what the National Electoral Council announced as a result of the election.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
14:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The sources do not currently show which is more notable: the election or the protests, so putting both in bold would be better justified.
Boud (
talk)
13:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with this, but both articles currently are not of sufficient quality. So if one is improved before the other, we could just make that the target to start out.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
14:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose altblurb3, we didn't say that when Trump claimed fraud, or put that into the same blurb. Wait for the protests to unfold further as they CLEARLY have been planned well before the elections took place. And, the article for the protests largely covers only one side.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
12:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
ALT3 does not take a side on the fraud controversy, only points that they are disputed presidential elections... which they are, and it doesn't take a POV to say so
Cambalachero (
talk)
15:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
and the OAS will speak today. Blurb III is best (but both of the Venezuelan articles are in much worse shape than indicted by the tags still on them -- it's very hard to even document all of the cleanup still needed).
SandyGeorgia (
Talk)
16:25, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
And this:
Applebaum, Anne (31 July 2024).
"Venezuela's Dictator Can't Even Lie Well". The Atlantic. Retrieved 31 July 2024. In the hours after the polls closed, much of the international media had refrained from stating the obvious. 'BREAKING:,' the Associated Press tweeted on Monday. 'Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro is declared the winner in the presidential election amid opposition claims of irregularities.' But by Tuesday morning, it was absolutely clear that the election was not merely irregular or tainted or disputed: The election had been stolen.
We are in a new cold war, and as per
Coffeeandcrumbs, the mainstream media of one side will all portray the conflict in a certain way.
See these two articles from an left-wing American media organisation:
Macleod, Alan (30 July 2024).
"Venezuela: While US politicians call fraud, American election observers endorse results". Mintpress News. Retrieved 31 July 2024. I spoke to a person who is voting against Maduro, a professional who studied psychology in San Francisco. She was hopeful for change. But what was very significant was that she thought that the electoral process is free and fair. Overall, our impression of going to the various polling places was that people were very welcoming to us international observers, and were very proud to be out there voting for their country."
"People are happy and welcoming tons of foreigners to look and see what they are doing and explain it patiently, with confidence and real enthusiasm for democracy. Actually, I think that one of the reasons that there is so much cynicism in the United States about democracy is that people don't trust the system. And here, part of their enthusiasm is that they have a lot of confidence in their system, that their voice will be heard".
Well, Mintpress published two articles on their blacklisting on Wikipedia. They and another major leftist news outlet TeleSUR, were blacklisted in 2019-2020 the context of the 2019
Venezuelan presidential crisis. You can read the article if you are curious:
First of all, if anything, Wikipedia has a slight pro-left bias (like much of the internet). Second of all, it does not matter if they are a "leftist" news outlet. It matters if they are reliable or not. And the consensus on Wikipedia is that they are unreliable because they have been shown (with proof) to have routinely published fabricated information. Regardless, that is not even a discussion that needs to be had here - you can review the reasons the community decided it is so unreliable as to deserve deprecation at
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 268 § RfC: MintPress News if you so wish. If you continue to act that source needs to be considered for anything, much less an irrelevant
policy violating commentary about whether the protests are "legitimate" or not, it is not likely to bode well for your continued participation in the topic area/Wikipedia as a whole. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |
me |
talk to me!05:13, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
May I ask who planned the protests? Because they occured suddenly, opposition figures didn't ask for protests, they asked only for verified ballots to make the result of election transparent, because they know what are consequences for them.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
20:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
You mean the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that's run by and subject to the whims of Maduro himself? Of course Maduro is going to try to delegitimize the protests regarding his attempt to falsify election results. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |
me |
talk to me!05:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment IMO, I think the only thing in the way of this being posted is the flagrant political bias in both articles. I think I would like to work on this ^ - ^ --
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
04:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Please
stop using this page as a forum: MintPress is a deprecated source and Tweets from government officials are not secondary independent sources. You cannot bring "articles up to standard" with this kind of misunderstanding of Wikipedia policy and guideline.
SandyGeorgia (
Talk)
12:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support altblurb3 if emphasis is changed. The elections article is mostly cleaned up (one cite check orange tag remains, which I can't fix), while the protests article is quite deficient. Altblurb3 works if the emphasis is changed from the protests article to the main article:
Support altblurb3 due to the ongoing controversy and protests following the election. Highlighting the disputed nature of the election and the subsequent civil unrest is important to convey the full context to readers.
Wilfredor (
talk)
23:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The
National Electoral Council announces that, with 80% of the ballots counted, Maduro's lead of exactly 51.20000% to González' 44.20000% is "striking and irreversible".
(BBC)(Infobae)
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.
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.
Comment I've expanded the article out a bit; I don't think there are any unsourced statements anymore, but it's definitely still on the shorter side. I would add that the "sources" section, which seems to awkwardly combine a bibliography and a reference list, does not seem appropriate for the article in its current form and the bibliography side of it is basically unsourced, as it has no ISBNs or anything of the like.--
Sunshineisles2 (
talk)
14:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
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.
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.
Weak support DoB is cn tagged and also the infobox includes his spouses but it isn't anywhere in the prose nor is it sourced, so that info should be added to prose and sourced or excised from the infobox. Otherwise article looks fine. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror16:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Twelve people, all children, are killed in rocket strikes on the
Druze village of
Majdal Shams in the
Israeli-occupied
Golan Heights. Israel claims that
Hezbollah is responsible for the attack, but Hezbollah denies any involvement.
(Reuters)
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.
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.
Support what the others said. I think the quality is at least as as good as all the others currently listed (and better than some actually). It has also more references than all but one of the others -
Alexander Waugh (27),
John Mayall (54),
Jerzy Artysz (8),
Eugene Sârbu (18),
Randy Kehler (11),
Wolfgang Rihm (45)
Edna O'Brien (48, at the time of writing). It would be great to post that picture of her too. Sad to think that "the most gifted woman now writing in English" is no longer doing so. --
Goevenonme (
talk)
13:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Most of the photos that you mentioned were for political leaders where the nomination fell under ITNR (though the ones for Biden and Trump were not), so it is not at all surprising that they were featured. And all of them were for blurbs, so by virtue of them being blurbed, of course their picture will be featured. Unless you can show that female leaders are being deliberately left out of ITN, the claim that this has anything to do with systemic bias is completely unfounded.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
17:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Current official death toll is at 12 as of time of writing. Although the scale of this attack is dwarfed daily by IDF bombardments of Gaza, I propose that we cover this particular story because:
It is the single deadliest attack on Israeli civilians since October 7.
[11]
It is the single deadliest spillover incident of the war since inception.
The attack was carried out in the context of a conflict with Hezbollah, which would make it separate from the Israel-Gaza war itself.
Attacks by other regional entities (Iran, the Houthis, and Hezbollah itself) have not previously resulted in this number of casualties during the conflict.
The article is expanded, well-written, and of a suitable length, with no citation needed tags.
For the above reasons, I hereby nominate this entry.
Oppose for now. This is covered by ongoing, or should be, because it’s part of a wave of attacks against Israel by Iranian proxies, and the ensuing counterattacks by Israel.
JehochmanTalk09:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose, covered by ongoing as direct spillover of the war. Also, if we specifically post attacks killing Israeli civilians but not those killing Palestinian civilians, we'll be having a pretty big NPOV issue on the main page.
Chaotic Enby (
talk ·
contribs)
10:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait - Posting this may be a problem as pointed out above, as it naturally invites comparisons to civilian casualties in Gaza (though this could be considered more notable as there are less Israeli civilian deaths, it's still a POV problem). I think it's best to wait to see what the Israeli response is; if this escalates the conflict with Hezbollah it's definitely enough to post, but until then OpposePrecariousWorlds (
talk)
12:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per above (covered in ongoing), but particularly in light of what Chaotic Enby has said about the neutrality here. --
Masem (
t)
13:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
In general I would support this, along with routine killings of civilians in Gaza. Both are significant and should be posted whether or not we have the ongoing
Israel-Hamas war.VR(Please
ping on reply)20:35, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Whoops, I didn't realize that there was a reference at first. But either way, the article looks cleaner with it moved out, as the list of 500 works does make the article unwieldy.
Natg 19 (
talk)
17:24, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: I just started updating, and am too tired for more today. Had to work on last-minute violinist who needs attention today, look for Dahn who updated. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
20:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support, nice work you two. I'm considering trying to take this article to GA over the next few weeks... although many of the many bios are hard to access, it seems. – Aza24 (talk)01:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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:
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.
Ismail Haniyeh
The United States, Russia, and their respective allies agree to a prisoner exchange of 26 people.
Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.
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
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our
minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually - a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be
reliable,
support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in
simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
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.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check
WP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because
consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Voicing an opinion on an item
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.
Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
Tell about problems in articles if you see them.
Be bold and
fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.
Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful.
A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as
ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle
conflicts of interest.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
At least 12 people are killed and more than 250 people are declared missing after heavy downpours and flooding in
northern India, with rainfall amounts of up to 183 millimetres (7.2 in) reported in some areas.
(Reuters)
The death toll from the
landslides caused by torrential rains in
Kerala,
India, increases to 296 people, with at least 240 others still missing.
(Onomanorama)
Fourteen protestors are killed, four are injured and at least 31 are arrested, including a journalist, during nationwide protests that turned violent in
Nigeria amid a
cost-of-living crisis, which protestors blame on
PresidentBola Tinubu's new reforms.
(Al Jazeera)
Oppose on notability prisoner exchanges happen frequently and even amongst warring nations, I cannot see why this particular exchange is notable.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
15:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose both on significance and quality. Ignoring the descriptions of the exchanged persons, the article has like two paragraphs of material about the actual process, nowhere close to standards. Biggest the biggest since the Cold War is not how significance should be judged.
Masem (
t)
16:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
What impact does it have on US Russia relations or is this going to impact the situation in Ukraine or with NATO. This reads as a routine type of exchange outside of the number being made at one time. —
Masem (
t)
17:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
There is nothing routine about it. The scale, the preparation, the fact that seven countries participated, amount of prisoners exchanged and their weight and recognisability, connections to Navalny case. There are several people on the list whose getting to prison justified a blurb.
Unprecedented is that a third country takes political prisoners who don't have any connection to it, among other things such as structure of this exchange.
First of all, what it has to do with Ukraine? It didn't participate in the exchange.
Second, why does this item need to depend on events that are WP:CRYSTAL? How one can know what the impact will be? Some people say that this may lead to further negotiations, on a higher level, some say that it inferes thaw in relations, others are convinced in the opposite. But the important thing is that people discuss it and it is focus, it is in the news all over the world
BilboBeggins (
talk)
12:25, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support. Globally significant (views to the contrary are baffling to me - the biggest prisoner exchange between two nuclear-armed, Permanent Five powers since the Cold War?). It also involves numerous other nations (Turkey was a mediator, some of the prisoners were from Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Norway, at least one prisoner was freed from Belarus). So this is a multilateral thing. Article quality seems there, and improving still.
Neutralitytalk18:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose The nomination presents this as a US initiative when it seems that Germany has the lion's share of the Western end of this.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
20:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The news source given in the nomination presents it as a "Russia-West prisoner swap". The nomination then replaces West with America throughout. It's wrong.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
22:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The fact that the blurb is bad doesn't make this postable or not. Suggest a new blurb if you think it is inaccurate or unacceptable.
Natg 19 (
talk)
21:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Let the record reflect that I comment on ITN most often to note U.S.-centric bias. I incorrectly assumed that the deal was between the U.S. and Russia at first, as well. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him)01:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support on notability, oppose on quality. As others have mentioned, the details on the prisoner exchange itself are lacking in prose. The article should be expanded upon before the blurb is posted.
ArkHyena (
talk)
21:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support on notability In fact, there is precedent to post these types of things; for instance, Brittney Griner's release was
posted. And with this event having many more prisoners being exchanged than that one, this passes the bar of significance in my mind.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
00:08, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support on notability, oppose all current blurb options. A better blurb may be something along the lines of Russia released western journalists/political prisoners in exchange for releasing criminals held in western countries. Or similar. My wording is crap. There isn't a clear good short wording for this. But I agree with others that the blurb should not place undue emphasis on the US, given that from my reading 7 western countries were involved in the discussions for this exchange. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |
me |
talk to me!04:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. There weren't 26 people released, only 24, other two on the plane being kids whose parents were detained in Slovenia. Regarding the sides of exchange, altblurb3 is the correct one, because seven countries participated. Maybe it makes sense to mention Germany explicitly, because the most important contribution was by Germany and it has received all but three people of those who were sent to the West.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
12:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment The photo should not be posted as it would be pro-US bias . Altblurb 3 is the best one
Support blurb. The biggest prisoner exchange between West abd East since World War 2
[3]. In the news and analysed all over the world, the biggest news currently. The event is by no means trivial, as seven countries participated in swap, with Turkey serving as neutral party, and there were also difficulties in legal justification and abiding by law. This led to debate in Germany and may influence future of the governing coalition (because its members had varying opinions on thr issue). The situation is very complex and for sure there will be consequences, changes for bilateral relations between countries participating in the exchange, and more.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
13:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The article quality has improved considerably and the title has been changed in view of the discussion. I think the consensus has shifted to support? Let me see some more feedback, then ready to post. --Tone15:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't feel the quality concerns raised early have been sufficiently addressed. Take out the background and list of people, and you have almost nothing of substance here and less than what we would normally expect. All the claims how this is that significant should be then easy to source to explain that by those making those claims, not just handwaving that factor. I am not going to ask for it to be pulled, but we have to make sure that what we are posting represent some of WP's best work since we're highlighting it on the main page. --
Masem (
t)
17:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree. The posted blurb still emphasises the United States and treats the other countries involved as insignificant allies, i.e. puppets or stooges comparable with Belarus. This is not accurate or complete, as I understand it. The key prisoner was not Gershkovich, who is currently the primary focus of the article, but Krasikov who was the guy that Russia really wanted as he's a personal acquaintance or colleague of Putin. Krasikov was held by Germany and so their agreement was vital in getting the deal done. The Germans refused previously, holding out for a swap with Navalny and so it was his death that opened things up. The article doesn't explain this well and just seems to be cheer-leading for the US to make Biden and Harris look good. It comes across as blatant US propaganda.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
18:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
If not for Germany, the swap wouldn't have happened. So I agree with you. As I mentioned before, I also have issue with 26 released. If by ghat we mean that they were on planes, then yes. But many may understand this as if all 26 were released from prison, which is not the case.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
18:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The blurb is now in play at
WP:ERRORS so we have a multilateral situation. I just looked at the lead of the article and the only named people are Americans. The lead picture is American showing Americans and an American flag. There's then a section all about a particular American. The negotiations section then starts with a link to VP Harris. It's like the Simpsons when Homer chants USA! USA! But see
WP:NPOV...
Andrew🐉(
talk)
18:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Pull The article is nonsensically lop-sided. There's an entire massive paragraph about Gershkovich (why?), a paragraph about negotiations which should be titled "American negotiations", and the reactions section ... well, you get the picture. Practically nothing about Germany without who this wouldn't have happened at all.
Black Kite (talk)19:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose as stale. The notable thing would be the death of Deif, not the announcement of his death. And, if the announcement is correct, he would have died weeks ago, so this would be stale. Also, as others have said, it is still not fully clear if he really was killed in the strike.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
13:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Gödel2200: The timing and staleness of a news story are based on the date when the news was announced, which is not necessarily the date that something happened. Per
ITN's procedural guidelines: "for purposes of determining timing and staleness, the date is considered when the event was first reported in reliable sources."Kurtis(talk)23:33, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
One was the political leader of Hamas and the other its main military leader and so they naturally complement each other. Both events still have some uncertainty about the details but so it goes.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb as worded. "Assassination" is a term used to denote an act of criminal murder and as such would be highly problematic per NPOV. I can't recall any incident where the killing of the military commander of an enemy with whom you are in a formal state of war was labeled as an assassination. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
17:07, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Orbitalbuzzsaw: The timing and staleness of a news story are based on the date when the news was announced, which is not necessarily the date that something happened. Per
ITN's procedural guidelines: "for purposes of determining timing and staleness, the date is considered when the event was first reported in reliable sources."Kurtis(talk)23:35, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I disagree with the closure of this discussion, which I feel was done prematurely and based on erroneous reasoning. First, the news itself is not stale if it was just announced. As ITN's guidelines
very clearly state: "for purposes of determining timing and staleness, the date is considered when the event was first reported in reliable sources." Therefore, Mohammed Deif's death is still breaking news, and still a viable candidate for a blurb. I also feel that the discussion was closed too hastily, as even if we don't approve a separate blurb, we might still incorporate it into the current blurb regarding the death of Ismail Haniyeh like Andrew Davidson suggests (which is what I would support). And although I think it's very helpful to have non-admins closing discussions, NACs should mostly be done in cases where the consensus is completely unambiguous and unlikely to change in the near future. In more complex cases, the closing party should have the full range of options available to them, which includes the ability to post it, or to modify an existing blurb. I'd re-open this discussion myself, but I'll leave the decision to other observers.
Kurtis(talk)23:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
There were conflicting reports on his death as early as the airstrike itself, which was weeks ago - this is just Israel formally staking a claim, which itself isn't entirely clear on veracity.
TheKip(
contribs)16:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Several things to comment. First, Iceland is a parliamentary republic and its head of state has no executive powers. Consequently, it is not ITNR. Secondly, I would wait for the official inauguration. And, thirdly, the presidential election was two months ago, so the main article cannot be the one about the election because it is stale and should be the one about Tómasdóttir.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
10:49, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
thanks! The problem now is that it's a short biography. The articles in Icelandic and Italian have more content with sources. The articles may help to expand on this.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
11:03, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
No. We didn’t miss the Icelandic election. It was put up as a cannidate. The result of the discussion was to not post it since 1) it’s Iceland and 2) the office of president is ceremonial and 3) we haven’t posted an Icelandic presidential election before.
Scu ba (
talk)
13:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
I wasn't aware of the previous discussion but none of those seem like a good reason on their own to oppose: 1. Iceland is a fully sovereign state, and isn't a micronation by any means; its relatively small population should not really be a discriminating factor. 2. It's ceremonial in many states, and the president is still a representative of the nation with political influence 3. That does not mean it cannot ever be posted.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
15:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Don't get me wrong, I agree, Iceland's results should've been included in the news, but it wasn't. We don't include swearing ins so we shouldn't break precedent here.
Scu ba (
talk)
16:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on both quality and notability; the main article is a stub and the office is largely ceremonial, with little impact.
Yakikaki (
talk)
16:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Mali announces that it carried out joint airstrikes with
Burkina Faso on insurgents in and around
Tinzaouaten. The
CSP-PSD says that a Burkinabé drone strike killed dozens of civilians.
(Reuters)
The
Cavite provincial government in the
Philippines declares a "
state of calamity" after an
oil spill from the sunk
MTTerra Nova ship reaches the shores of eight municipalities, requiring implementation of a no-catch zone and relief aid to be given to around 25,000
fishermen.
(GMA Network)
The Mirola 1 oil tanker is discovered to have ran aground near the coast of
Bataan, becoming the third vessel to cause an oil spill in
Manila Bay in the past week.
(GMA Network)
Strong thunderstorms and winds in eastern
Nebraska cause significant destruction, causing widespread power outages in
Lincoln and
Omaha, the two largest cities in the state.
(The New York Times)
The
United States pauses US$95 million in assistance to the country of
Georgia due to its government passing a
law on "foreign agents", which US officials referred to as "anti-democratic" and a "draconian measure to stifle dissent".
(Reuters)
Twenty-six people are arrested by
Spanish police in
Madrid,
Málaga, and
Toledo for operating a
sex trafficking ring that abused over 600 women. 32 women were freed during the operation.
(AP)
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.
Conditional support The really notable thing here is their guilty plea removes the possibility of a death penalty (instead they will serve a life sentence) but also removes the possibility of a trial and the risk of the case being overturned due to 'invalid' evidence This has been in flux for years, and its an important development after a decade+ of legal drama. With that said, there could be a possible 'mini trial' and we could post then (likely next year). Or post now, but after improvements to the article (currently only contains a single sentence about the guilty plea and is not nearly ready for ITN).
Schwinnspeed (
talk)
22:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support, big news. this is the biggest development in this case that has been ongoing for more than 20 years. A guilty plea wasn't expected because there was talk of the government wanting to imprison them for life (or just sentence them to death). President Biden even denied a plea proposal
just last September.
— ThatCopticGuyping me! (
talk) (
contribs)
01:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is really nothing, doesn't cap off anything since they've been incarcerated since. Article is also poor quality, far too much proseline and details and not really a narrative approach of a quality article. --
Masem (
t)
01:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose WTF? This event was 20 years ago. The first thing the article needs to explain is why this is happening at all right now. And a quick glance didn't answer that question for me. A simple explanation for us ignorant masses please, before I can support anything being posted.
HiLo48 (
talk)
01:56, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
@
HiLo48 - Various leaders of al-Qaeda and their associates have been imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay since the early days of the Bush administration, on charges that they were the planners behind 9/11 alongside bin Laden. The U.S. government has brought up a criminal case against them and has purposely drawn it out so these terrorists have little to no chance of release. The death penalty or life in prison is what they were seeking, and there were also concerns that exculpatory evidence was being withheld. Today, indeed after 20+ years, a deal seems to have been reached where the terrorists have entered a guilty plea. It is the most significant movement in the case against the 9/11 terrorists in years.
— ThatCopticGuyping me! (
talk) (
contribs)
02:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
User:That Coptic Guy Thanks for that explanation. I'd suggest that some of what you've written there needs to be right up front in the article this nomination is based on. This is a global encyclopaedia, and a lot of readers will be like me, quite unaware of that background information.
HiLo48 (
talk)
03:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Currently, the article does not indicate that they have actually pled guilty. Certainly we would not post people only "agreeing" to plead guilty. And even if they do plead guilty, they would still not have been sentenced.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
00:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose on quality, article still needs plenty of work. Among other issues, there is a tag that has been there for almost 10 years asking for an update on the massacre that the former president is responsible for.
— ThatCopticGuyping me! (
talk) (
contribs)
01:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality per above. Will switch to support if/when it’s improved, a former head of state being convicted of crimes against humanity is notable enough.
TheKip(
contribs)02:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait Lets get some more detail and flesh out the article. Right now we don't know much at all. It's also worth noting that today/tonight Israel is believed to have killed a senior military commander of Hezbollah in Beirut. Kind of reminds me of the last 10 minutes of
The Godfather when all of the family's accounts are settled. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
03:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Zero need for a separate death article, unless the actual operation that took him down is well documented. Save for a couple of tags, the main bio article is ready to go. (And this is pending confirmation that seems up in the air right now. And to add once more, if true, clearly notable and ITN appropriate beyond the current ongoings) --
Masem (
t)
04:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong support Confirmed by Iranian sources, which are likely to be biased more towards Haniyeh and in favor of reporting him alive, but that is not the case. Apart from the legitimacy of this assassination, I strongly disagree with Masem in this regard and believe this should have a standalone article aswell as this marks the highest killing of a Hamas official/leader since the Israel-Hamas war started on October 7 and since the killing of Saleh al Arouri in January. Although it's very early right now to say anything about the killing, I believe as more time passes, more information will eventually be revealed as this is a huge event. Worst case scenario, if the killing is so poorly documented, I still believe it should have a standalone section in some article somewhere. Haniyeh has also held numerous positions other than just leading Hamas. TwistedAxe[contact]04:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Unlike
Killing of Osama bin Laden, where there is a great deal of discussion of the specific operation as well as the past attempts to kill him, all that is in the present article is 50% reaction material, 25% background, and the rest speculation as to the actual event. This is not how we write event articles, but we certainly can present the death as part of the biographical article. --
Masem (
t)
12:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Right, but I believe we’re still in the early stages and clearing the fog of war. If the dust settles and the assassination is still poorly documented, I’d say we put it under the Death section definitely. If, however, enough information is presented, I’d say we definitely keep the standalone article. TwistedAxe[contact]14:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
It's not unreasonable to have kept the details in both the bio article as well as at least one of the overarching ongoing articles about this Gaza conflict, particularly the latter because it provides the necessarily context of the larger picture. And then if extensive details of the actual Assassination emerge later then create the standalone. But this reverse way encourages bad splits as the potential of POV forks, as well as poor quality articles in trying to isolate the event from the larger picture without clearly knowing if that split makes sense. This type of approach is contrary to NOTNEWS and doesn't make for high quality ITN material that we are supposed to feature.
Masem (
t)
14:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality: Article still needs a lot more work in order to qualify for ITN. More information is also needed on the assassination. Support once all these issues have been addressed.
Tofusaurus (
talk)
04:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait - article is still developing/too short, and fog of war is still very much in effect w/ regards to exactly what happened (airstrike vs “raid,” official claims of responsibility, etc). Pretty much all that’s clearly confirmed at this moment is that he was assassinated in the first place.
TheKip(
contribs)04:39, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support ITN worthy, but wait until more reporting comes in, then we need to add the cause of death to the blurb because the current one is too short
Afif Brika1 (
talk)
05:06, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Strong Support Israel-Palestine is arguably the most notable topic in the world right now , Article is good enough . Altblurb is better as it states that he was political leader
AlexBobCharles (
talk)
11:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Post-posting conditional support - Disagree that NPOV issues warrant pulling, but agree with the above discussion that any blurb should specify he led the political bureau for clarity and accuracy. He was not the commander of the militant organization. The leader of the military wing,
Mohammed Deif, is still alive. The average reader could plausibly assume "leader of Hamas" means the leader of the militant group, which is not accurate. An average reader might also assume that him being "the Hamas leader" meant he was the leader of the Gaza Strip, which is also an inaccurate reading as that person is
Yahya Sinwar, who is also still alive. He was the highest ranking Hamas official killed in the war so far, but not important in the ways you might expect just based on his title. I do not support having it posted with the current blurb. Vanilla Wizard 💙19:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
An armed conflict between Israel and Hamas-led Palestinian militant groups has been taking place chiefly in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel since 7 October 2023. This outlier took place in
Tehran, killing a non-militant. That's the way I see it, anyway.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
09:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Post-posting support and comment Article looks good and I firmly believe (as long the article quality is good) assassinations are blurb worthy. @
Stephen: Would it be possible to swap images with a better crop? --
TDKR Chicago 101 (
talk)
19:51, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Israel launches a missile attack on southern
Beirut,
Lebanon, killing at least four civilians and injuring 80 others. Senior
Hezbollah commander
Fuad Shukr is claimed by
Israel to be the main target. He was in the area at the time of the attack, but his status is currently unknown.
(Anadolu Agency)(Al Jazeera)
The
United States carries out an airstrike near
Hillah,
Iraq, killing four members of Iraq's
Popular Mobilization Units. Iraq condemns the strike, saying the
US-led military coalition committed a "heinous crime" by targeting security sites and said the attacks were a serious violation of the coalition's mission and mandate.
(Reuters)
Tesla recalls more than 1.8 million vehicles due to a hood issue that could increase the risk of a crash. An
over-the-air software update for the issue was made available in June.
(Quartz)
The
Taliban suspends relations with 14
Afghan overseas diplomatic missions and announces that they will no longer accept consular documents issued by these missions.
(RFE/RL)
Interpol announces that more than 200 people have been arrested and more than US$1.6 billion of illegal drugs and precursor chemicals seized as part of a two-month operation against narcotics trafficking conducted across
Europe,
North America, and
Africa.
(ABC News)
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.
This should probably be combined with the blurb below, but I think the protests are only becoming larger and larger, and are now international news. Article is making good progress. Libertad!
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
10:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support Perhaps reads more like a chronology, but well updated. And anecdotally, the BBC News report leads with the scale and severity of the protests, only saying "disputed re-election" as context - so I don’t think this needs to be combined with or wait for the election nom (below), it’s sufficiently standalone news.
Kingsif (
talk)
12:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose I know that there are protests going on there, but just listing a bunch of events in a chronological order without anything else that indicates these are all tied together is not a quality article. --
Masem (
t)
12:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Surely we would combine this blurb with the blurb for the election, so this nomination probably can just be replaced by adding an altblurb to the nom for the presidential election.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
14:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I have added an alt blurb. Unfortunately I am not (as of this comment) satisfied with the quality of the main article on the elections. But I do think the situation in Venezuela merits a blurb on the main page. The protest article is adequate for posting. I have included an unbolded link to the article on the elections. Hopefully it will continue to improve. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
15:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Added alt3. It can definitely be improved; death toll taken from the article, which could also be improved, especially after another day.
Kingsif (
talk)
20:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose the blurbs as politically charged, we didn't say it like that for the
Rwandan election, even though it is more likely to have had irregularities, judging from the
results. Also, wait for the protests to unfold further as they clearly been planned well beforehand, and the article is also largely currently only one-sided.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
12:02, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Added alt4. There really is no need to append that the results are disputed - the protests themselves would indicate this. And I'm not sure the usage of "widespread" is needed here. But I do think this is to best, and works as a combined blurb.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
14:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support alt4, as it is more neutral and not politically charged i.e. imply which side the protests are on. Wait on article about the protests, as work needs to be done to ensure the article is not all on the anti-Chavista side.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
23:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose in general; this article is not being developed, is woefully incomplete, the infobox is mostly OR, and I don't see any chance it is going to improve because of lack of effort.
SandyGeorgia (
Talk)
00:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I copied my note on the July 29 listing here. These are some comments I would like to restate:
IMO, I think the only thing in the way of this being posted is the flagrant political bias in both articles. I think I would like to work on this ^ - ^ --
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
04:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Protesters taking part in a march in
Gwadar,
Pakistan, attack security forces deployed to guard them, killing a soldier and injuring 16 others, according to the
Pakistani Army.
(Reuters)
At least two people are killed and as many as 100 others are injured when a passenger train carrying 800 people collides with a
Kamaz truck near
Volgograd,
Russia, and partially derails.
(Al Arabiya)
Panama suspends diplomatic relations with
Venezuela and withdraws its
diplomatic personnel from the country until a full review of the presidential election results is concluded.
(Reuters)
Sakina Muhammad Jan becomes the first person to be jailed under
Australia's
forced marriage laws after ordering her 21-year-old daughter to marry a man who later murdered her.
(BBC News)
French police report multiple sabotage acts targeting telecommunications operators in parts of
the country, affecting 11,000 clients, with the incidents being treated as
vandalism.
(DW)(Politico)
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.
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.
A consensus to post this will not develop. Too niche. Not sure if we posted the last Avengers movie when it broke the overall record. Closing now. --Tone13:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose ITN is not for these types of news. First of all, we do not post News items just because they are the most read one, that goes
here. Second, R-rating is just a US specific rating and a large of readers probably do not know about it and therefore this record holds little value to them. Lastly, it is only the 6th largest opening in the US overall and around 12th biggest worldwide opening for any movie, so hardly a groundbreaking record.
PrinceofPunjabTALK11:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Not the type of business news we post, and to state this yet again, we do not use page views as a metric of whether we should post at ITN in the first place. --
Masem (
t)
11:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Prince of Punjab. This isn't the overall record, which is inevitably broken due to inflation. This is like saying there is a new tallest building in the world...well, the tallest that Americans under 17 can enter with adult supervision.
Unknown Temptation (
talk)
13:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The newly selected UNESCO World Heritage Sites are normally featured in the News here. Example can be left out or swapped, I think it is usually a wonderful addition. --
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
09:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support After a huge emphasis on sports and politics lately, more cultural news are definitely appreciated! And this is certainly the most relevant of the past few weeks.
Venustates (
talk)
09:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Maybe It's interesting, in the news and encyclopedic but there are over a thousand of these sites now and another 24 seems too many to be headlining particular cases. In the UK, it was the
Flow Country which got
attention. How do we decide which to feature?
Andrew🐉(
talk)
10:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: I totally get that, that's why I said the example can of course also be left out, though it is nice to have a picturesque example included. But I wouldn't put much emphasis on that. Greetings,
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
10:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The article looks good, no doubt! Though the Good Article batch is from 2017 already and criteria have become quite a bit more strict. Greetings,
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
13:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment This happens every year and sometimes more than once per year, and we never post them. This time there are more than 20, and overall more than 1000. What we post are removal of the sites because the countries have managed them badly. This comment coming from someone heavily involved with World Heritage lists ;) --Tone13:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Certainly! At the same time, there are several things that happen every year or multiple times a year, like various sports events, or Oscar recipients (yawn ;) that are *always* posted. It's usually in all national news when a country gets a new World Heritage List entry. --
Venustates (
talk)
13:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Actually, I'll add that the list is factually inaccurate. For example, the Moravian Church settlements were listed in 2015 in Denmark. In 2024, the site was extended to include sites in the US, UK, and Germany. And yet, in the list, everything is listed as in 2015, which is incorrect. Oppose on quality, and on no prose. (but yes, I am all for posting good news) --Tone03:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on account more than anything else of not being sure the best way to blurb this. It's a routine event, but unlike an election, prize, or sporting event, there is no "winner". There is no overarching individual story here save the same sort that happens any individual year. Either we're just saying sites are announced (which isn't really news itself because, again, it's a scheduled event), or we're singling out one like in the original blurb, which is putting undue focus on whichever site we select to feature.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
15:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support A wonderful nomination! With regards to pics, we could feature several ones over the course of the days this stays on top. E.g. start with Gedi, then Schwerin, etc. until something else supersedes this. Should this make it, and be supported also in upcoming years, this could even be a regular feature for ITNR?
Khuft (
talk)
15:33, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on article quality. No stand alone article and in the linked page there is no prose, just tables. I'm not opposed on principle. But we need something with meat on it if we are going to be promoting this on the main page. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
15:52, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support in principle, with no comment on article quality as I haven't looked over any of them yet. I've added a second altblurb for consideration.
Kurtis(talk)18:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose I really want to support given coverage of this has raised my spirits amongst everything else, but per The KIP and Ad Orientem we've declined much more urgent and pressing news in the past due to similar article quality and lack of prose.
Schwinnspeed (
talk)
02:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose. This seemingly happens every year and there's nothing particularly remarkable about this one, particularly as we're not highlighting any of them in particular. Incremental statistics are rarely good ITN material. Obviously would need to address the lack of prose too to be even considered. —
Amakuru (
talk)
05:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: Would it help to add some prose introduction to the Committee session in the article? Or rather integrate it in the
World Heritage Committee article as an individual section that can be updated for every new session when new entries are publicly announced? :) Greetings,
Horst-schlaemma (
talk)
10:04, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Absolutely no article would ever get posted if the only update to it was a table with no prose whatsoever attached, and this should not be an exception. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
13:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support per principle, as these kinds of news are nice and kind of rare, but I don't know about the articles though. Wish I had the time to polish them up, but I'll be working on the Venezuela articles foreseeably.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
12:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose I prefer this kind of content for ITN to the usual bleak mirroring of major news outlets' headlines, but the article is quite weak (just a list) and it's essentially something recurring annually by default, so not very strong on the newsworthiness scale, either.
Yakikaki (
talk)
19:10, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose blurb language used and oppose for citations needed - I caution users to tame their chauvinism. Western media is very obviously biased on this matter. For decades, the West has sought regime change in this nation and election after election we see the West attempt to discredit elections in socialist countries in the Global South. It is frankly disgusting that Wikipedia is joining in this rather than critically assessing our sources for reliability. How many times must we watch as the US manufactures consent for a coup before we realize that we can't trust most US sources on this issue. ---
C&
C (Coffeeandcrumbs)
05:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
With all due respect, it's outrageous to refer to the BBC as a "US source", and it makes you look very bad. Honestly, your entire comment is outrageous and doesn't serve to help the project in any manner. You should consider striking it. --
RockstoneSend me a message!15:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Regardless of the authenticity of the election, these discussion pages are not meant to be used to petty bickering. We will use the source deemed most reliable, and whether or not it fits with your stance on the subject, be it politically or as an external perspective/opinion, is not to be taken into consideration. Let's do our best not to become Reddit, thank you.
Daneellis114 (
talk)
23:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Do you have any independent sources to back up your entire comment? If not, you yourself are guilty of pushing a pro-Maduro POV. Tube·
of·
Light14:06, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose The proposed blurbs don't adequately convey the phony nature of the process. And the article is in a poor state with a lot of rambling, citations needed and tense errors.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
09:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Repeatedly has been shown tht we're not going to try to call out sham elections or their ilk at ITN. We can use language how we say who won that implies that it was not democratic win, like we have done for the last Russian election, but it becomes a NPOV problem to suggest in the ITN blurb if the election is a sham; that's a topic left for the article in question. —
Masem (
t)
11:59, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
That's nonsense because numerous editors have supported the alt blurb as a standard signal to the reader that the election was not free and fair. So, we do regularly call out such sham elections in that way but it's too subtle -- we should be more direct rather than dropping hints.
In any case, there are still the quality issues which are not resolved.
Oppose article has two cn tags, two orange tags, one yellow tag and result section is empty. Therefore, it is no way near ready to be posted. I support the Alt Blurb when it is ready to be psoted.
PrinceofPunjabTALK11:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose those and any blurb that does not acknowledge the denounces of electoral fraud, which are a relevant news topic in themselves.
Cambalachero (
talk)
15:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose There are multiple orange tags, and the endorsements section is missing a lot of citations. Will support the alt when ready.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
20:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait The
National Electoral Council (Venezuela) has
been offline and/or has a DNS problem since at least the last day or so, although some
archived snapshots e.g. 28 July are available. As of the 2010s and 2020s, the electoral results coordinated by any national election commission, except for the internet-poorest countries, are normally published in full detail on the commission's website. Whether the reason for the website non-availability is attacks such as DDOS or tech incompetence or a desire to hide the results, the fact is that by the current standards of a national election, the results in the sense of
open data are not yet published. There is currently only a "believe-us" XXth century style "result" announced by the CNE so far. The heads of many American states, such as
Gabriel Boric, are putting pressure on the CNE to get the full results published. Waiting for a more serious release of the full results would make sense.
Boud (
talk)
21:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait Along the lines of what Boud said, in lay terms, the election result hasn't actually been called, Maduro has just said he's won. The opposition has not conceded, there are no results to show (some apparently have fully gone missing) - the last update from even Maduro's own commission is that vote counts will be coming soon.
Kingsif (
talk)
21:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose For now, as the results themselves are still unavailable in the article. Granted, the results aren't gonna be super shocking.
Dyaquna (
talk)
22:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Reliable sources are essentially unanimous in describing the election as neither free or fair. Therefore, Maduro being declared the winner is about as surprising as "water is wet".
KlayCax (
talk)
00:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait There should be something, however it ought to mention the dispute. This is major news.
Update of blurb needed: While waiting for the
CNE to announce the full results, the
2024 Venezuelan protests (probably not the best name, since there were probably other protests in Venezuela in 2024) are already 11 kb of source text just 5 hours after being created, so should be integrated into the blurb. Things could change fast depending on if/when the CNE publishes the full results or continues to refuse to publish them, so further updates might be needed.
Boud (
talk)
01:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Suggest nominating the protests as their own blurb. If the photo can be confirmed as free, it's also really good to go in the box.
Kingsif (
talk)
02:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose unless the blurb states clearly that it was rigged and that it sparked massive protests. Plus, the article has certain problems. If these are solved, take this one as a support. --
Bedivere (
talk)
06:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support altblurb2. That thing with words like "announced" or "declared" in dubious elections simply doesn't work, and I don't think our readers get the difference that a group of editors here wants to convey. Simply use "re-elected" and let the readers visit the article to find out the details. All winners are "announced" or "declared" no matter if the election was free and fair.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
08:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Most readers don't click through to the article. The main page gets about 5 million views daily but the number of readers that click though ITN links is only about 10K -- a tiny fraction. So, most readers will glance at or skim the main page and will just see the headline and the grinning picture of the tyrant/dictator/president-for-life. So, we should make the headline plain and clear if we run one because that's all most readers will see.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
09:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Why do you think that "announced" or "declared" makes it clear that the winner is a dictator or that the election was not free and fair? Why not extend the blurb to say that "X was re-elected in a dubious election"?--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
09:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree that the protests should be the main story now. My point was that the words "announced" or "declared" wouldn't make any difference. If we post that Maduro was "announced winner", we practically accept the announcement of the National Electoral Council, so we practically side with them and pick Maduro as winner. Note that the opposition rejects outright what the National Electoral Council announced as a result of the election.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
14:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The sources do not currently show which is more notable: the election or the protests, so putting both in bold would be better justified.
Boud (
talk)
13:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with this, but both articles currently are not of sufficient quality. So if one is improved before the other, we could just make that the target to start out.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
14:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose altblurb3, we didn't say that when Trump claimed fraud, or put that into the same blurb. Wait for the protests to unfold further as they CLEARLY have been planned well before the elections took place. And, the article for the protests largely covers only one side.
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
12:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
ALT3 does not take a side on the fraud controversy, only points that they are disputed presidential elections... which they are, and it doesn't take a POV to say so
Cambalachero (
talk)
15:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
and the OAS will speak today. Blurb III is best (but both of the Venezuelan articles are in much worse shape than indicted by the tags still on them -- it's very hard to even document all of the cleanup still needed).
SandyGeorgia (
Talk)
16:25, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
And this:
Applebaum, Anne (31 July 2024).
"Venezuela's Dictator Can't Even Lie Well". The Atlantic. Retrieved 31 July 2024. In the hours after the polls closed, much of the international media had refrained from stating the obvious. 'BREAKING:,' the Associated Press tweeted on Monday. 'Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro is declared the winner in the presidential election amid opposition claims of irregularities.' But by Tuesday morning, it was absolutely clear that the election was not merely irregular or tainted or disputed: The election had been stolen.
We are in a new cold war, and as per
Coffeeandcrumbs, the mainstream media of one side will all portray the conflict in a certain way.
See these two articles from an left-wing American media organisation:
Macleod, Alan (30 July 2024).
"Venezuela: While US politicians call fraud, American election observers endorse results". Mintpress News. Retrieved 31 July 2024. I spoke to a person who is voting against Maduro, a professional who studied psychology in San Francisco. She was hopeful for change. But what was very significant was that she thought that the electoral process is free and fair. Overall, our impression of going to the various polling places was that people were very welcoming to us international observers, and were very proud to be out there voting for their country."
"People are happy and welcoming tons of foreigners to look and see what they are doing and explain it patiently, with confidence and real enthusiasm for democracy. Actually, I think that one of the reasons that there is so much cynicism in the United States about democracy is that people don't trust the system. And here, part of their enthusiasm is that they have a lot of confidence in their system, that their voice will be heard".
Well, Mintpress published two articles on their blacklisting on Wikipedia. They and another major leftist news outlet TeleSUR, were blacklisted in 2019-2020 the context of the 2019
Venezuelan presidential crisis. You can read the article if you are curious:
First of all, if anything, Wikipedia has a slight pro-left bias (like much of the internet). Second of all, it does not matter if they are a "leftist" news outlet. It matters if they are reliable or not. And the consensus on Wikipedia is that they are unreliable because they have been shown (with proof) to have routinely published fabricated information. Regardless, that is not even a discussion that needs to be had here - you can review the reasons the community decided it is so unreliable as to deserve deprecation at
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 268 § RfC: MintPress News if you so wish. If you continue to act that source needs to be considered for anything, much less an irrelevant
policy violating commentary about whether the protests are "legitimate" or not, it is not likely to bode well for your continued participation in the topic area/Wikipedia as a whole. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |
me |
talk to me!05:13, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
May I ask who planned the protests? Because they occured suddenly, opposition figures didn't ask for protests, they asked only for verified ballots to make the result of election transparent, because they know what are consequences for them.
BilboBeggins (
talk)
20:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
You mean the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that's run by and subject to the whims of Maduro himself? Of course Maduro is going to try to delegitimize the protests regarding his attempt to falsify election results. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez |
me |
talk to me!05:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment IMO, I think the only thing in the way of this being posted is the flagrant political bias in both articles. I think I would like to work on this ^ - ^ --
Viva Nicolás (
talk)
04:46, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Please
stop using this page as a forum: MintPress is a deprecated source and Tweets from government officials are not secondary independent sources. You cannot bring "articles up to standard" with this kind of misunderstanding of Wikipedia policy and guideline.
SandyGeorgia (
Talk)
12:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
Support altblurb3 if emphasis is changed. The elections article is mostly cleaned up (one cite check orange tag remains, which I can't fix), while the protests article is quite deficient. Altblurb3 works if the emphasis is changed from the protests article to the main article:
Support altblurb3 due to the ongoing controversy and protests following the election. Highlighting the disputed nature of the election and the subsequent civil unrest is important to convey the full context to readers.
Wilfredor (
talk)
23:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
The
National Electoral Council announces that, with 80% of the ballots counted, Maduro's lead of exactly 51.20000% to González' 44.20000% is "striking and irreversible".
(BBC)(Infobae)
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.
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.
Comment I've expanded the article out a bit; I don't think there are any unsourced statements anymore, but it's definitely still on the shorter side. I would add that the "sources" section, which seems to awkwardly combine a bibliography and a reference list, does not seem appropriate for the article in its current form and the bibliography side of it is basically unsourced, as it has no ISBNs or anything of the like.--
Sunshineisles2 (
talk)
14:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
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.
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.
Weak support DoB is cn tagged and also the infobox includes his spouses but it isn't anywhere in the prose nor is it sourced, so that info should be added to prose and sourced or excised from the infobox. Otherwise article looks fine. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror16:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Twelve people, all children, are killed in rocket strikes on the
Druze village of
Majdal Shams in the
Israeli-occupied
Golan Heights. Israel claims that
Hezbollah is responsible for the attack, but Hezbollah denies any involvement.
(Reuters)
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.
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.
Support what the others said. I think the quality is at least as as good as all the others currently listed (and better than some actually). It has also more references than all but one of the others -
Alexander Waugh (27),
John Mayall (54),
Jerzy Artysz (8),
Eugene Sârbu (18),
Randy Kehler (11),
Wolfgang Rihm (45)
Edna O'Brien (48, at the time of writing). It would be great to post that picture of her too. Sad to think that "the most gifted woman now writing in English" is no longer doing so. --
Goevenonme (
talk)
13:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Most of the photos that you mentioned were for political leaders where the nomination fell under ITNR (though the ones for Biden and Trump were not), so it is not at all surprising that they were featured. And all of them were for blurbs, so by virtue of them being blurbed, of course their picture will be featured. Unless you can show that female leaders are being deliberately left out of ITN, the claim that this has anything to do with systemic bias is completely unfounded.
Gödel2200 (
talk)
17:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Current official death toll is at 12 as of time of writing. Although the scale of this attack is dwarfed daily by IDF bombardments of Gaza, I propose that we cover this particular story because:
It is the single deadliest attack on Israeli civilians since October 7.
[11]
It is the single deadliest spillover incident of the war since inception.
The attack was carried out in the context of a conflict with Hezbollah, which would make it separate from the Israel-Gaza war itself.
Attacks by other regional entities (Iran, the Houthis, and Hezbollah itself) have not previously resulted in this number of casualties during the conflict.
The article is expanded, well-written, and of a suitable length, with no citation needed tags.
For the above reasons, I hereby nominate this entry.
Oppose for now. This is covered by ongoing, or should be, because it’s part of a wave of attacks against Israel by Iranian proxies, and the ensuing counterattacks by Israel.
JehochmanTalk09:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose, covered by ongoing as direct spillover of the war. Also, if we specifically post attacks killing Israeli civilians but not those killing Palestinian civilians, we'll be having a pretty big NPOV issue on the main page.
Chaotic Enby (
talk ·
contribs)
10:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait - Posting this may be a problem as pointed out above, as it naturally invites comparisons to civilian casualties in Gaza (though this could be considered more notable as there are less Israeli civilian deaths, it's still a POV problem). I think it's best to wait to see what the Israeli response is; if this escalates the conflict with Hezbollah it's definitely enough to post, but until then OpposePrecariousWorlds (
talk)
12:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose per above (covered in ongoing), but particularly in light of what Chaotic Enby has said about the neutrality here. --
Masem (
t)
13:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
In general I would support this, along with routine killings of civilians in Gaza. Both are significant and should be posted whether or not we have the ongoing
Israel-Hamas war.VR(Please
ping on reply)20:35, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Whoops, I didn't realize that there was a reference at first. But either way, the article looks cleaner with it moved out, as the list of 500 works does make the article unwieldy.
Natg 19 (
talk)
17:24, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: I just started updating, and am too tired for more today. Had to work on last-minute violinist who needs attention today, look for Dahn who updated. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
20:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Support, nice work you two. I'm considering trying to take this article to GA over the next few weeks... although many of the many bios are hard to access, it seems. – Aza24 (talk)01:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
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: