Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Blue Ghost lunar lander Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost (rendering shown) successfully soft-lands on the Moon as part of NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program. At the Academy Awards, Anora wins five awards, including Best Picture. In the German federal election, the CDU/CSU, led by Friedrich Merz, wins the most seats in the Bundestag. Archaeologists announce that the empty tomb Wadi C-4 near Luxor, Egypt, was that of the pharaoh Thutmose II. At the British Academy Film Awards, Conclave wins four awards, including Best Film. Ongoing: M23 campaign Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: Vimala Rangachar Ferenc Rados Kazimierz Romaniuk Roberto Orci Jack Vettriano Simon Lindley view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary 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. Headers 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. Please do... 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. Please do not... 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). Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive. Suggesting updates There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items: Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors. Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.

Archives

Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives

Sections

This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.

---

March 4

Portal:Current events/2025 March 4

March 4, 2025 (2025-03-04) (Tuesday) Business and economy Second Trump tariffs 2025 United States trade war with Canada and Mexico U.S. President Donald Trump's 25% tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports to the United States take effect, while an existing 10% tariff on all Chinese imports rises to 20% amid an ongoing trade war. (AP) Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says "Canada will not let this unjustified decision go unanswered" and says that he will impose a reciprocal 25% tariff on American goods worth up to $155 billion. (Canada.ca) Disasters and accidents A Philippine Air Force FA-50PH fighter jet is reported missing during an overnight training exercise. A search and rescue operation to locate the missing pilots is underway. (Phil Star Global)

---

March 3

Portal:Current events/2025 March 3

March 3, 2025 (2025-03-03) (Monday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russian invasion of Ukraine United States and the Russian invasion of Ukraine U.S. President Donald Trump orders a pause on all U.S. military aid to Ukraine with immediate effect. (Bloomberg) Arab–Israeli conflict A 70-year-old Arab Israeli man is killed and three others are injured in a mass stabbing at a bus station in Haifa, Israel. The perpetrator, an Israeli-Druze from Shfar'am, is killed by civilians present at the attack. (Al Jazeera) (DW) (The Times of Israel) Insurgency in Balochistan A suicide bomber kills one person and wounds three others in Kalat, Balochistan, Pakistan. (AP News) Western DR Congo clashes The Congolese military announces that eight members of the Mobondo militia, including one of their leaders, were killed the previous day when an army patrol seized the group's headquarters in the Kwamouth Territory, Mai-Ndombe Province. (Radio Okapi) Business and economy President of the United States Donald Trump announces that TSMC, a Taiwanese semiconductor chip company, will invest $100 billion in new manufacturing plants in the United States. (CBS News) Disasters and accidents 2024–25 Australian region cyclone season Cyclone warnings are issued to residents of Brisbane, South East Queensland and the Northern Rivers region of New South Wales as Tropical Cyclone Alfred is expected to make landfall on Thursday or early Friday local time. (The Guardian Australia) A bus rolls down a ravine after colliding with a truck in southern Bolivia, killing at least 31 people and injuring 22 others. (Reuters) At least 80 people are trapped inside a supermarket in Güímar, Tenerife, and dozens of cars are swept away to sea and stuck in mud in Gran Canara after torrential rain caused floods across the Canary Islands in Spain. (Canaria Weekly) (The Sun) Law and crime 2025 Mannheim car incident A car drives into a crowd of people near a Carnival market in Mannheim, Germany, killing two people and injuring 25 others, including fifteen seriously. A man has been arrested. (Euronews) (DW) Politics and election The Holy See reports that Pope Francis has been diagnosed with "acute respiratory distress" as a result of bronchospasms and a build-up of bronchial mucous, after recovering from pneumonia and bronchitis several days ago. (VOA) (NPR)

---

RD: Lincoln Díaz-Balart

Article: Lincoln Díaz-Balart (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS News
Credits:

• Nominated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Has a fair amount of CNs but hope to work on this soon. Natg 19 (talk) 18:03, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Dore Gold

Article: Dore Gold (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

• Nominated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Needs work. Natg 19 (talk) 18:15, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jack Vettriano

Article: Jack Vettriano (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by SchroCat (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Scottish artist; article in pretty good shape SchroCat (talk) 12:45, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Support — good, well-written article with extensive history & supplementary article surrounding one of Scotland’s highest selling paintings ever Hauntbug (talk) 12:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Support, everything looks sourced. Suonii180 (talk) 13:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support - No issues ✈ mike_gigs ^talk_contribs 13:44, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Posted – Schwede66 23:07, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Comment - Good, clear article. I have expanded details of his death with everything currently known, for fullness - i.e. location, when he was discovered, who announced his death (his publicist), lack of suspicious circumstances, and publicist's comments on his passing (via The Guardian). Montezuma69 (talk) 00:42, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: James Harrison

Article: James Harrison (blood donor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: His blood donations saved the lives of over 2.4 million babies. -Abhishikt (talk) 19:04, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support article seems to be of adequate quality. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 19:28, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support per above. Flip^andFlopped ツ 00:31, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

March 2

Portal:Current events/2025 March 2

March 2, 2025 (2025-03-02) (Sunday) Armed conflicts and attacks Gaza war 2025 Gaza war ceasefire Israel agrees to a United States-led plan to extend the first phase of the ceasefire through Ramadan and Passover, during which half of the 59 remaining hostages will be released. Hamas rejects the proposal, insisting that the deal proceed with phase two, which includes the release of all remaining living hostages, a full withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and a permanent end to the war. (The Times of Israel) Arts and culture 97th Academy Awards The 97th Academy Awards take place at the Dolby Theatre in Los Angeles, United States. Anora wins the most awards, taking five, including Best Picture. Adrien Brody wins Best Actor for The Brutalist, while Mikey Madison wins Best Actress for Anora. (Reuters) Disasters and accidents 2025 Southeastern United States wildfires Several wildfires erupt across South Carolina and North Carolina, United States, resulting in the evacuation of endangered towns, including several in the Myrtle Beach area. South Carolina governor Henry McMaster declares a state of emergency in response. (The New York Times) (NBC) International relations Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine Coalition of the willing (Russo-Ukrainian War) United Kingdom prime minister Keir Starmer announces after a meeting of European Union leaders in London that a "coalition of the willing" is working on a Ukraine peace plan that they will present to U.S. president Donald Trump. (Sky News) Russia–United States relations United States Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth orders a halt to offensive cyber operations and information operations against Russia by U.S. Cyber Command. (NBC News) Politics and elections 2025 Abkhazian presidential election Acting leader of Abkhazia Badra Gunba is elected President with 55% of the votes. Georgia rejects the election, as it claims Abkhazia as part of its territory. (Reuters) Science and technology Firefly Aerospace successfully lands the Blue Ghost Mission 1 on the Moon as part of NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, delivering payloads to Mare Crisium with instruments to study lunar regoliths and the interactions between solar wind and Earth's magnetic field. (Space.com) (NASA)

---

RD: Bernhard Vogel

Article: Bernhard Vogel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tagesschau
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: German Minister-president (Rhineland-Palatinate, Thuringa) Grimes2 (talk) 10:28, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support, meant to help but find it short but fully sourced. He was the only person heading two German States, btw. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:48, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Weak support Sourcing and citations are good, but it feels as though there could be some additional information added to the article. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 11:54, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support - looks good enough ✈ mike_gigs ^talk_contribs 13:45, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support Fine article. Yakikaki (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

(Posted) 97th Academy Awards

Article: 97th Academy Awards (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At the Academy Awards, Anora (director Sean Baker and star Mikey Madison pictured) wins five awards, including Best Picture. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At the Academy Awards, Anora (director Sean Baker pictured) wins five awards, including Best Picture.
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

• Nominated by ElijahPepe (talk · give credit)

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 03:45, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Baker and Madison

• Support per ITN/R. –DMartin 03:49, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support - good quality article. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 03:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment We also have this image (thumbnail right), with both Sean Baker (Best Director) and Mikey Madison (Best Actress in a Leading Role) if we want to feature both of them as the two named winners (though the photo may be a bit wide for the limited in-the-news space). ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  Agreed with Ham, this is way better. –DMartin 04:13, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  +1 per Supes. And a fine main article. – SJ + 05:25, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality In Memorandum section is not sourced Masem (t) 04:15, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

   Fixed Thanks for pointing that out. –DMartin 04:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support Fernanda Torres deserved it but good prose overall. ArionStar (talk) 05:08, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Posting, looks good now. --Tone 07:45, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  It was posted with a link to a dab page! And then someone moved it, while it was on the main page! I've tidied up but none of this was urgent as we are not news. Secretlondon (talk) 08:44, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Question Since Baker won four Oscars, is the parenthesis when using his photo going to somehow address this, or just the biggest two (Best Director, Best Picture co-winner)? Kingsif (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Edip Akbayram

Article: Edip Akbayram (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Turkish
Credits:

• Nominated by Anlztrk (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Joseph (talk · give credit), Anlztrk (talk · give credit), AgerJoy (talk · give credit) and Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 – anlztrk (talk | contribs) 20:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Discography is unreferenced. Secretlondon (talk) 22:17, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

(Posted) Moon landing of Firefly Aerospace Blue Ghost

Article: Blue Ghost Mission 1 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ First commercial Moon lander Blue Ghost by Firefly Aerospace lands successfully (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Firefly Aerospaces Blue Ghost becomes the first successful commercial Lunar lander.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Firefly Aerospaces Blue Ghost successfully lands on the Moon as part of the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program.
News source(s): https://plus.nasa.gov/scheduled-video/firefly-blue-ghost-mission-1-lunar-landing/
Credits:

• Nominated by Abhishikt (talk · give credit)

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 -Abhishikt (talk) 08:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support this is cool but i feel the blurb is kinda oddly written. im an ESL myself mayhaps someone could rewrite it to sound less odd? Udder1882 (talk) 13:14, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose Not important enough. This is not the "First commercial moon lander" it's the "First ... moon lander ...by Firefly Aerospace". Big for them maybe but not big enough for ITN. Nigej (talk) 13:32, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  This is an ITN/R event, even if it was mistakenly nominated with a blue box rather than green. So its importance is automatic; this page isn't the place to discuss whether an editor feels it's important or not. Nottheking (talk) 23:03, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support with blurb 'Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost becomes the first private spacecraft to land successfully on the Moon.' Celjski Grad (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Not true, IM-1 predates it. Masem (t) 17:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Not according to many sources.[3][4][5] Celjski Grad (talk) 18:21, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Second is a press release so not a reliable source. Third states this "The first mission by Astrobotic last year suffered a catastrophic failure of its propulsion system prior to its scheduled landing attempt. The second, operated by Intuitive Machines, got its Odysseus lander to the surface in February last year; though it tipped over on landing, the instruments it delivered remained fully functional." Masem (t) 18:25, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I'm not debating this here anymore. I'll point out that "tipped over on landing" is a strange indication of success, and if numerous NASA press releases can act as sources, so can one from Firefly. Celjski Grad (talk) 18:29, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Fully functional perhaps - but many payloads were unable to complete their mission. Or even be deployed. Some others were unable to be deployed because of the complexity of the emergency landing. Also with not enough sun for the solar panels, the entire lander failed after only 7 days. Nfitz (talk) 02:23, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  The qualification is that Odysseus was not a successful landing mission: the tipping over precluded many of its objectives, though naturally, it was in the company's best interests to stress what objectives were able to be accomplished in spite of its failure on landing. The lander's electronics failed (and contact was lost) about a week after touchdown as a result of its orientation, meaning it only achieved approximately half of its design life of 14 days post-touchdown. So this is a difference of "partially successful" vs. "successful." Nottheking (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Whether true or not (as brought up by Masem), we need to at least be internally consistent. The IM-1 article currently says in the lead: IM-1 was the first commercial mission to successfully soft-land on the Moon. Hence, a proposed blurb cannot say that this is the first commercial Lunar lander. Either the article, or the blurb, has to change. Schwede66 00:43, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  would suggest adding mention of the soft-land in the blurb. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 03:27, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support alt made an alt that fixes the problems with this nomination. Scuba 20:47, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• strong oppose per Nigej. Sportsnut24 (talk) 21:00, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose The BBC says that it was second and clearing up this confusion seems essential before we post a "first". Andrew🐉(talk) 21:34, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I believe this is now fully addressed two points up. And even if true - how is it relevant with ITN/R already met? Nfitz (talk) 02:26, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  No, the issue remains. Multiple respectable media such as the BBC and CNN describe this is being second. Where the claim of being first is reported, it is attributed to the press release rather than being stated as a plain fact. So, as this is commercial and promotional in nature, we should just say that the probe landed without stating claims of first/second in Wikipedia's voice. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:56, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• This is actually ITN/R. The ITN/R criteria for space exploration has become vanishingly small, but a soft landing on the Moon is one of the few events that qualify. Hence, there should be no discussion on editors' personal subjective opinions on how important the subject matter is, but rather as for whether the article itself is of quality for ITN. Nottheking (talk) 22:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• I have struck those !votes that oppose on grounds of importance to reflect ITN/R. Andrew Davidson is presumably opposing the blurb wording, and that is within the rules. Schwede66 00:39, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  Striking !votes seems too heavy-handed. ITN/R is just a guideline and so explicitly says that "exceptions may apply". We had a huge fuss previously about this when several editors felt that a launch was not actually significant. IIRC a rules hardliner who refused to accept that there might be exceptions was banned from ITN after the matter was taken to ANI. That case established a precedent that opposition to such space stories may be legitimate. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:57, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• I hear you. I've self-reverted. Schwede66 23:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• There's a flurry of such moon probes this year. IM-2 launched four days ago and is scheduled to land in just three days from now. And there's a Japanese probe in transit too which is planned to land in April. ITN is going to look weird if it's full of moon probes powered by ITN/R. At some point, we have to raise the bar again. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:56, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  Strange that two in one year is a "flurry," (and if this article is still on the FP when that occurs, we can easily put the two together) yet we have a minimum of 14 different Football & Rugby ITN/Rs each year. (with another 8 that take place every few years) It would seem that some would argue that anytime an INT/R without a fixed recurrence date does show up, folk will make the argument that the condition should be removed. the vast majority of the Space Exploration category was already removed, and at that rate there'll soon be nothing left. The point of ITN isn't to be a ticker for which heads of government are in and out, but to actually cover what's "in the news." Nottheking (talk) 13:27, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  There's more than two. For example, we just had three in transit at the same time, which is new. And there's more. See List of missions to the Moon which shows that lunar exploration is ramping up to a level not seen since the 1960s.

  But I'll grant this is more significant than the football which is mostly just routine ritual.

  Andrew🐉(talk) 16:09, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support Article is a bit short but I don't see any citation issues. By the way, I modified the template to mark this as ITN/R. Whether this is the first or second commercial moon landing can continue to be discussed. --SpectralIon 00:44, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support groundbreaking-ish accomplishment for the private sector. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 03:24, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support per above. Could we maybe add File:Blue Ghost Mission 1 rendering.jpg or File:Blue Ghost On Moon.jpg as an image? –DMartin 04:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• The rendering seems fine so I've added it. It's ironic that being commercial makes the mission more difficult to report. If they want coverage, they should release CC images too. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support I saw a few opposes last time I checked this, then realized it met ITN/R. It would appear that I was beaten to the punch. Oh well. qw3rty 09:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support per above (and it still hasn't tipped over). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:35, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Added Altblurb2 which avoids the question of whether it qualifies as a "first". Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:50, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Support First lander of 2025, and reported on by various different news stations, has notability. It has to go on the In the News due to ITN/R. Shaneapickle (talk) 16:06, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support ALT2 per ChaoticEnby. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:46, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support Any successful space landings are a plus from me. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 21:18, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Posted ALT2 amended by the word "soft". Schwede66 23:24, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

March 1

Portal:Current events/2025 March 1

March 1, 2025 (2025-03-01) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks War on terror War against the Islamic State Islamic State insurgency in Puntland Puntland counter-terrorism operations The Puntland Dervish Force captures an IS–Somalia base in Buqa Caleed, in the Cal Miskaad mountain range of Bari Region, Puntland, Somalia. (The Somali Digest) (Horseed Media) United States Central Command says that it has carried out a precision airstrike in Syria, targeting and killing Muhammed Yusuf Ziya Talay, a senior military leader in Hurras al-Din. (Al Arabiya) Colombian conflict 2025 Catatumbo clashes Three men are found dead in a vehicle near the village of Orú in the Tibú municipality, Norte de Santander, Colombia, with one body dressed in a National Liberation Army (ELN) uniform. (El Heraldo de Colombia) After placing an ELN flag at the entrance of the municipality of Saravena, Arauca, the ELN detonate an improvised explosive device, targeting Colombian soldiers attempting to remove the flag. No casualties are reported. (El Heraldo de Colombia) Gaza war 2025 Gaza war ceasefire The first phase of the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas is scheduled to expire today while talks on the second phase, which aims to end the war, remain inconclusive. (DW) Gaza Strip famine Israel blocks the entry of all humanitarian aid from entering Gaza as the first phase of the ceasefire ends. (AP) Kivu conflict Allied Democratic Forces insurgency Civil society groups in the Ituri Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo, report that 23 people were killed and another 20 were taken hostage in raids by an Islamic State-affiliated faction of the Allied Democratic Forces militia over the past week. (Arab News) Kurdish–Turkish conflict Kurdistan Workers' Party insurgency The Kurdistan Workers' Party announces a ceasefire with Turkey after forty years of conflict. (Al Jazeera) Syrian civil war Druze–Syria clashes At least one person is killed and approximately nine others are wounded in the Druze-majority city of Jaramana, following armed confrontations between local residents and security forces affiliated with the transitional government. In response, the Suwayda Military Council declares a state of alert, while Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz instruct the Israel Defense Forces to "prepare to defend" the city. (ANHA) (Times of Israel) Arts and culture Brit Awards 2025 At the 2025 Brit Awards, Charli XCX wins British Artist of the Year, while her album Brat wins British Album of the Year and her song "Guess" wins Song of the Year in collaboration with Billie Eilish. Ezra Collective wins Best British Group. (BBC News) A group of winter swimmers in Most, Czechia, set a new world record for the largest polar bear plunge with 2,461 participants. The previous record was 1,799 participants set in Mielno, Poland, in 2015. (AP) Disasters and accidents At least 37 people are killed and 30 others are injured when two passenger buses collide near Uyuni, Potosí department, Bolivia. (BBC News) International relations United Kingdom–Ukraine relations Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy meets with UK prime minister Keir Starmer in London, where they sign off on a British loan of GB£2.26 billion to buy military supplies for Ukraine. (BBC) Politics and elections 2025 Romanian presidential election 2024–2025 Romanian election annulment protests Tens of thousands of demonstrators hold a rally in Bucharest, Romania, in support of presidential candidate Călin Georgescu and demand that the second round of the annulled 2024 election is held instead of a new election. (AP) Executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump United States President Donald Trump signs an executive order designating English as the country's official language. (The Guardian) Presidency of Yamandú Orsi Yamandú Orsi and Carolina Cosse are inaugurated as the president and vice president of Uruguay in Montevideo. (Reuters) Sports At their annual general meeting in Northern Ireland, the International Football Association Board approves a new rule stating that beginning the following season, if a goalkeeper holds the ball for more than eight seconds, the opposing team is awarded a corner kick. (BBC)

---

RD: Nugzar Bagration-Gruzinsky

Article: Nugzar Bagration-Gruzinsky (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 1TV.ge National Parliamentary Library of Georgia
Credits:

• Nominated by Mr. Lechkar (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Head of the House of Gruzinsky (disputed claim to the defunct throne of Georgia), also known for being a director. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 12:17, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose A third of the biography section is just an anecdote about him meeting an Estonian politician. Overall the quality needs a lot of improvement before this is ready for the main page. Yakikaki (talk) 19:20, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Joey Molland

Article: Joey Molland (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone
Credits:

• Nominated by Ollieisanerd (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 69.127.76.121 (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: English guitarist from Badfinger. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 21:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Not Ready. Discography section is mainly unsourced. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 21:19, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Hazel Dukes

Article: Hazel Nell Dukes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, NY Times
Credits:

• Nominated by Funcrunch (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American civil rights activist. Article appears to be reasonably well-sourced. Funcrunch (talk) 20:01, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support. Citations throughout. Rater says B-class. The article should probably be renamed Hazel Dukes with the longer version of her name as a redirect. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:06, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Angie Stone

Article: Angie Stone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, AP, CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by Jalapeño (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American R&B and soul singer. Former member of The Sequence. Died on March 1, death widely reported.   Jalapeño   (u t) 08:40, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose a death is rarely put in ITN, unless its an assassination or a death of a world leader Rynoip (talk) 09:36, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb. Doesn't rise to the level of significance required for a death blurb and while a traffic accident is not "old person dies of old age" I'm not seeing any evidence that the death is the main story here. It's not ready for RD due some uncited prose and a complete lack of citations in the discography, filmography and awards sections. Thryduulf (talk) 12:37, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Changed to RD nomination This essentially a RD nomination but blurb can be discussed regardless. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb as tragic as this is I don't think this person meets the threshold of fame for a blurb. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blub Not transformative in her field (didn't even win a Grammy). The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 12:51, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: David Johansen

Article: David Johansen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

• Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American singer, songwriter, and actor. The lead singer of the New York Dolls. Death announced 1 March. Thriley (talk) 16:49, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose I've orange-tagged the article as significant portions are uncited. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:59, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Khalil Fong

Article: Khalil Fong (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): South China Morning Post
Credits:

• Nominated by Nahnah4 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by DemocracyDeprivationDisorder (talk · give credit), Robertsky (talk · give credit), NotNowAndYet (talk · give credit), ForsythiaJo (talk · give credit) and Weareblahs (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Prominent Hong Kong singer-songwriter. Nahnah4 (talk | contribs) 12:16, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Comment: I am expanding the biography at the moment. The biography is short, probably stubby, with much of the content unsourced, i.e. discography section is mostly unsourced. Although there is a tag stating to expand from the Chinese Wikipedia, the sourcing there is not ideal. Thus the expansion may take a couple of days. I am leaving an orange tag, which I may eventually remove upon completion of the expand, giving a suggestion for others to help to expand his article at where possible. – robertsky (talk) 15:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

A lot content have been added to the article over the last few hours by many editors. There are still the awards section uncited for now. Making good progress. – robertsky (talk) 02:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

PKK ceasefire with Turkey

Article: Kurdistan Workers' Party insurgency (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ PKK declares ceasefire after over 40 years of insurgency in Turkey (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: I think it would be nice to link this bit of serious good news, especially as today is the first day of Ramadan Chidgk1 (talk) 10:56, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• soft oppose the target of this nomination should be the ceasefire itself. If/when there is said article I would change my vote to support. Scuba 13:46, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Others may decide to create one, but I think there is not enough info for a separate article and details can be put in the existing articles. By the way I just noticed there is also Timeline of the Kurdistan Workers' Party insurgency (2015–present) so I think we have enough articles. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose on the article updates. Neither have been updated with more than a couple of sentences and neither goes deeper than “a ceasefire was declared”. I think more content is needed first before this is considered. ✈ mike_gigs ^talk_contribs 13:50, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Mike gigs I have added a little more to Kurdistan Workers' Party insurgency#2025 ceasefire. Please could you take another look Chidgk1 (talk) 14:49, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality, open to supporting on notability but the target articles do not include any real depth of coverage about the ceasefire as noted above. Flip^andFlopped ツ 16:44, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality per Flipandflopped. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose for now Solely based on need for new updates and details. A forty year insurgency ending is notable. Bremps... 00:05, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose due to no article, it's notable but the ceasefire itself should have an article; I'd support if it had one. 675930s (talk) 02:17, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support on notability is enough. --Plumber (talk) 03:06, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  ITN nomination is not about the notability. It is a notable event, but a comprehensive update or a new target article must be created Nyanardsan (talk) 03:14, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment We don't necessary need a new article as long as there's a reasonably significant update in a target article to reflect. However, the current article is a mess and needs a lot of work, including likely some split of matter (not necessarily the ceasefire) to even get close to posting. Masem (t) 03:25, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I am not intending to do a lot of work on this - if that is necessary and no one else steps forward in the next day or two then please close this nomination Chidgk1 (talk) 09:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

RD:Javier Dorado

Article: Javier Dorado (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Marca (in Spanish) Real Madrid,
Credits:

• Nominated by Sura Shukurlu (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: A former Spanish footballer who played for Real Madrid. Sura Shukurlu (talk) 10:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Not Ready. The article is a stub. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 21:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

(Closed) 2025 Darul Uloom Haqqania bombing

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

---

Article: 2025 Darul Uloom Haqqania bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least seven people, including Hamid Ul Haq Haqqani, were killed and around 20 injured in a suicide bomb blast at Darul Uloom Haqqania in Akora Khattak, Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): VOA, APP, BBC, Al Jazeera, CNN, AP, Reuters
Credits:

• Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
• Created by Sackiii (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Borgenland (talk · give credit)

 Ainty Painty (talk) 03:11, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Similar article is already nominated for ITNRD. Fahads1982^talk/contrib 04:02, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose based on the fact that this is already the 17th entry in Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2025 and it's only February. It would appear that this is relatively routine, tragic as that may be. –DMartin 05:23, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose - routine-ish per DMartin. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 06:19, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per DMartin. Unfortunately, not an uncommon occurrence in Pakistan, and it's not even the deadliest attack this year. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:56, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

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.

(Closed) Skype to be discontinued

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

---

Article: Skype (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Microsoft plans to retire Skype, a long-standing video calling and messaging application, in May 2025. (Post)
News source(s): DW, Bloomberg News
Credits:

• Nominated by Justanothersillyboi (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Even if its userbase has shriveled in the past few years, this marks the end of an era for a platform that has played a significant role in Internet communications since 2003, and impacts millions of users worldwide. Justanothersillyboi (talk) 00:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Wait until May 2025 when it's actually discontinued. E_F⁵ 00:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose - for all intents and purposes this rebranded as Teams last decade. Nfitz (talk) 00:41, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose though interesting, we do not usually post product announcements. And agree with Nfitz that this is a long time coming. Natg 19 (talk) 00:53, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per Nfitz. Skype has been a dead man walking for some time now, this just formalizes it. The Kip ^(contribs) 01:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Wait until it's actually discontinued, as per EF5. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:54, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose Maybe if we were talking about the discontinuation of Microsoft Windows, given how ubiquitious it is, where there was no obvious replacement for it, but Skype users are being transitioned to Teams, so its not like people are losing functionality. --Masem (t) 01:57, 1 March 2025
• Oppose per Nfitz and also that Skype has effectively been succeeded by Microsoft Teams. Kaito-san (talk/contribs) 03:02, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose both now and on the actual date of closing. Online services are discontinued all the time. Not of historical consequence. –DMartin 05:19, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

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.

RD:Monta Mino

Article: Monta Mino (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Livedoor (in Japanese), Japan Today (in English)
Credits:

• Nominated by Dmartin969 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by User:Khairul hazim (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 –DMartin 08:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Almost Ready Just a few sections in the career section needs sources. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 21:23, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

February 28

Portal:Current events/2025 February 28

February 28, 2025 (2025-02-28) (Friday) Attacks and armed conflicts 2025 Darul Uloom Haqqania bombing Five people, including Hamid Ul Haq Haqqani, the head of a faction of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (S) party and son of Sami-ul-Haq, are killed and twenty others are injured in a suicide bombing inside of a mosque in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. (The Indian Express) Mexican drug war At least four people are shot dead in a mechanical workshop in Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz, Mexico. This is the second massacre this week in the state, the other in Perote, which left three workers dead and one wounded. (La Jornada) Three policemen and a civilian are killed in two attacks in Guanajuato, Mexico, the first in Celaya and the second in Apaseo el Alto. (Revista Proceso) Business and economy Protests against the second presidency of Donald Trump Economic Blackout A 24-hour consumer spending boycott takes place across the United States, in protest of wealth and income inequality, high prices of essential goods, and the rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives by the Trump administration. (AP) 2025 United States federal mass layoffs The United States Social Security Administration announces it will lay off over 7,000 jobs to align with President Donald Trump's executive order, despite its workforce already being at a 50-year low. (NPR) Disasters and accidents 2024–25 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season Three people are killed as tropical cyclone Garance makes landfall in Réunion in the Indian Ocean. (AP) 2025 disease outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo At least 60 fatalities and nearly 1,100 symptomatic cases are reported to be a result of a disease outbreak of unknown etiology in the Province of Équateur, Democratic Republic of the Congo. (CBS News) Health and environment 2025 Southwest United States measles outbreak The number of measles cases in Texas, United States, increases to 146 with 20 people hospitalized, spanning nine counties in the state. (AP) International relations Ukraine–United States relations Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine 2025 Trump–Zelenskyy meeting U.S. president Donald Trump, U.S. vice president JD Vance and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy end their talks early after their meeting in the White House turns into a "heated" exchange. Trump rejects any discussion of specific security guarantees for Ukraine, being interested solely in discussing the Ukraine–United States Mineral Resources Agreement. (Time) (AP) The U.S. State Department terminates U.S. support of Ukraine's energy grid restoration amid an ongoing energy crisis. (NBC) Colombia–Israel relations, Israel–Malaysia relations, South Africa–Israel relations, Boycotts of Israel Colombian president Gustavo Petro, Malaysian prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, and South African president Cyril Ramaphosa release a joint statement announcing they will close their ports to any ship carrying weapons supplied to Israel. (Middle East Monitor) Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict The East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) postpone the joint summit of their foreign ministers that would have agreed on a ceasefire plan for the conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Congolese and Rwanda governments never received invitations to the meeting. (Critical Threats Project) Russia–United States relations Russia appoints Alexander Darchiev as its new ambassador to the U.S. following talks between the two countries in Istanbul on restoring regular diplomatic contacts and embassy staffs. The post has been vacant for several months. (Barron's) (Interfax) Law and crime Mexico extradites 29 cartel members to the United States, including Rafael Caro Quintero, Miguel Treviño Morales, Omar Treviño Morales, Vicente Carrillo Fuentes and Jose Rodolfo Villarreal-Hernandez. (BBC News) (CBS News) Politics and elections Greeks organize a 24-hour nationwide general strike on the second anniversary of the Tempi train crash, Greece's deadliest railway disaster. (Reuters) Following the 2024 quota reform movement in Bangladesh, students who led the protests announce the formation of a new political party, the National Citizen Party, led by Nahid Islam, a student activist and the chief coordinator of the Students Against Discrimination movement. (DW) Science and technology Microsoft announces it will shut down Skype in May 2025 to focus its support and development on Teams. (DW) (Bloomberg News)

---

Tempi train crash protests

Article: Tempi train crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Mass protests occur in Greece on the second anniversary of the Tempi train crash. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Reuters, AP, The Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by MtPenguinMonster (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Nationwide protests occuring in Greece are receiving international coverage. MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:55, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support notability but Oppose target article. The protest section merits a WP:FORK and WP:SIZESPLIT and it's notable in itself. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:46, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Er, not really. The target article needs some cleanup and trimming, and what I'm seeing about the protests (which as I'm seeing, is one of several that have occurred in response to the crash) is not great. We don't need to be doing this endless splitting of event articles when the context for them is clearly explained in main even article, which is a major NOTNEWS problem.

  To that point, because there have been several protests over this crash over the last 2 years, oppose this due to the fact this isn't a unique event, even if there were violent clashes as a result of this one. Masem (t) 16:25, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Joseph Wambaugh

Article: Joseph Wambaugh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

• Nominated by 240F:7A:6253:1:69D8:FCDF:F69C:463 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American novelist and screenwriter. 240F:7A:6253:1:69D8:FCDF:F69C:463 (talk) 09:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Not Ready. Quite a few sections need sources. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 21:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Hamid Ul Haq Haqqani

Article: Hamid Ul Haq Haqqani (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express VOA, APP, BBC, Al Jazeera, CNN, AP, Reuters
Credits:

• Nominated by Fahads1982 (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Pakistani Islamic scholar and politician Fahads1982^talk/contrib 23:44, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Weak support A bit on the short side, but it seems fully-cited. The Kip ^(contribs) 01:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

(Ready) 2024 United Nations Biodiversity Conference

Article: 2024 United Nations Biodiversity Conference (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An agreement to provide developing countries with $200 billion a year by 2030 is reached at the extended session of the 2024 United Nations Biodiversity Conference. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A roadmap towards providing developing countries with $200 billion a year by 2030 is agreed to at the extended session of the 2024 United Nations Biodiversity Conference.
News source(s): The Independent, The Guardian, Avvenire
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Oltrepier (talk · give credit)
• Created by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Cosmicseeds (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Definitely less relevant than... well, whatever has just happened over at the White House, but still, this agreement couldn't have been less taken for granted, especially since negotiations had already broken up back in November. Yet, this conference has ended on a somewhat positive note, and since we usually report on the better known COPs, I think it would be nice to cover this event, as well. Oltrepier (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support Article looks great and we could definitely use some positive news. NewishIdeas (talk) 22:07, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment The agreement, based on what I'm reading, is really flimsy and doesn't seem to have any serious means of enforcing these payments to happen. This isn't as strong as, say, the Paris Agreement, in terms of commitment from countries (barring individual countries having to sign onto said treaties). Masem (t) 23:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Just to add, I point this out as the bar we have usually done for any type of global meeting like this or the G7 or G20 (which happen with relatively high frequency) is that the result should be something clearly actionable, and not just another bit of lip service. --Masem (t) 13:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Weak oppose per Masem, unless someone introduces reasoning to the contrary. The Kip ^(contribs) 01:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @The Kip That was a very good point, in fairness. At the very least, though, we know that $20 billion need to be raised by the end of this year: that would be the first test of serious commitment from the participating countries. Plus, progress on this matter will be reviewed at the next COP in 2026, and ministers of finance and environment from all of the countries are expected to hold an "international dialogue" to ensure the targets are reached. So, I guess there's some kind of political will, if anything... Oltrepier (talk) 11:42, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Weak support Masem is correct, this is not a firm commitment to the $200b funding, but rather, an agreement on a potential "roadmap" towards $200b by 2030. The COP16 participants can choose to follow the road map or not at any time, at their total discretion, between now and 2030. With this being said, a quick google search indicates that this is indeed getting coverage in RS (the Guardian, BBC, Politico, La Presse, etc). Some of the coverage is critical of the deal for the reasons indicated - the Guardian calls it flimsy and says it does not do enough. Although critical, this is nonetheless substantive coverage, so I will weakly support with the stipulation that we should probably use altblurb if we do post. Flip^andFlopped ツ 06:47, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Masem @Flipandflopped You're both right: I actually intended to clarify that it was a roadmap, rather than an obligation, in my original blurb, but I was afraid of making the blurb too verbose and unclear... I most definitely support the use of altblurb, as well.

  Also, can you direct me towards the articles you've found, please? That would help me add more sources and bits of information to the article. Oltrepier (talk) 11:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  The Guardian, BBC, Politico (EU), La Presse, CBC, New York Times, South China Morning Post, Times of India

  As I recall, the two with the more pointed criticisms are the Guardian and Politico. Flip^andFlopped ツ 16:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Flipandflopped Thank you very much, I'll take a look at them and see what's missing! Oltrepier (talk) 19:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Flipandflopped @Yakikaki Done! Let me know how do you feel about my latest changes. Oltrepier (talk) 20:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Good work, article is much improved. I support posting the altblurb. Flip^andFlopped ツ 22:19, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Weak support Not because it's positive news (I'm not sure it is, the final agreements could/should have been much stronger), but because it's still an important landmark in the efforts to tackle global biodiversity loss, and will set the pace and direction of this work until the next meeting. And it's a well-written article. The only thing is that the coverage of the actual negotiations is a bit on the weak side, hence my weak support. Yakikaki (talk) 07:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Yakikaki Do you mean the original negotiations, or the outcome of the extended session? Oltrepier (talk) 13:01, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Good development of the article, I'd be willing to drop my "weak" from the support. Yakikaki (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support Relevant agreement. ArionStar (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose just one of many international conferences or summits. 2A02:8071:78E1:A100:DDF5:3907:4AAA:5FA3 (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Yeah, I guess... but at least they've managed to reach some notable agreements, and it wasn't meant to be taken for granted at all. Oltrepier (talk) 09:21, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose more talk more pledges more promises; all of it meaningless in the grand scheme of things. If anything flying in lots of people from around the globe on private jets to sit around in conference halls eating prepackaged sandwiches does more harm to biodiversity than good. Abcmaxx (talk) 12:52, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  But even if that is your personal political opinion (that global environment conferences are meaningless "pledges and promises" which do more harm than good), shouldn't your assessment of notability be rooted in whether or not this event has a significant depth of coverage in the reliable sources? Flip^andFlopped ツ 14:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  We also measure impact to assess notability. Politicians jetting off to sit in meetings in order to announce vague promises isn't exactly very impactful and is WP:ROUTINE. News with no impact doesn't meet any ITN notability criteria. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:40, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Support Whilst these summits are regular, they're not too frequent (i.e. annually). The final agreement and outcomes are not particularly strong or radical, yet they sadly very rarely are; it's all slow, incremental progress, but it sets the direction and pace of travel and gives a summary on the state of the World. The agreement the operation of the new global mechanism to share benefits from digital genetic information is substantial and perhaps the most practical, concrete outcome and this has been a long time coming - the Convention on Biological Diversity was all the way back in Rio 1992; and Nagoya (COP10 (2010)) were a long time ago. Montezuma69 (talk) 12:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support. High quality notable encyclopedic content that is in the news. Some of the opposition seems to come from criticisms about the conference rather than whether it's notable. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 21:10, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

(Closed) Trump-Zelenskyy altercation

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

---

Article: 2025 Trump–Zelenskyy meeting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Trump berates Zelenskyy for not agreeing to his mineral deal to surrender Ukrainian national resources to the US (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ An altercation between President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and President Donald Trump in the Oval Office causes ongoing negotiations between the countries to break down.
News source(s): [6]
Credits:

• Nominated by Udder1882 (talk · give credit)

 Udder1882 (talk) 21:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose, SNOW close - WP:NTRUMP. Not an ITN-worthy development. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 22:09, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Strong oppose, this is celebrity gossip. Anything short of a ceasefire is already covered by Ongoing. 675930s (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

I dont know about the blurb, but this is definitely IN THE NEWS worldwide

• Oppose - Not significant. E_F⁵ 21:29, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• WP:ITNCDONT Udder1882 (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Udder1882, I clearly voiced my reason. This isn't significant enough on a world scale to post. — E_F⁵ 21:34, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

    fair point. I think this is significant enough, namely because it's on the front pages of newspapers across the world and this place is supposed to be showing off what's in the news worldwide Udder1882 (talk) 21:39, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

    Not really of any major importance, though. — E_F⁵ 00:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose WP:NTRUMP, editorialized blurb, article isn't in front-page shape. Estreyeria (talk) 21:45, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

not a native speaker, feel free to come up with a better blurb, i didnt mean for it to sound non neutral thats just how it came out -------- Udder1882 (talk) 22:02, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose and snow close this nomination goes nowhere. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:49, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support This is widely-reported, nonroutine, unexpected, and earth-shattering with existential implications. On top of that, it's the first time we've seen a major world leader not just sit there and smile, but to call out obvious big lies and US bullying. Nfitz (talk) 23:05, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  strong support. The impact of the meeting is worldwide, the consequences of that international political scandal are unpredictably chaotic. The resonance in the media is similar to the Castle Bravo hydrogen bomb explosion. This catastrophic fracas will go down in history student books K. M. Skylark (talk) 00:50, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment. I reversed the inappropriate SNOW close. First of all it wasn't WP:SNOW, User:Jalapeño. Secondly, this has huge world-wide coverage, and already many western leaders have spoken out in support of the Ukraine following this bizarre American action - Lithuania, France, Poland, Canada, Denmark, Moldova, Sweden, Germany, Croatia, Estonia, Ireland, Finland, Holland ... among others. Sure, not everything Trump does (though it looked more like Vance to me) isn't ITN. But such a major event is. Nfitz (talk) 00:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Strong support. One of the most obviously notable diplomatic incidents in years, if not decades. The relevance is obvious and evident, and it is not restricted to the United States or Russia–Ukraine but to the entire world, especially Europe. RodRabelo7 (talk) 00:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Stong oppose this is just "Trump news". It has already been known that Trump is more preferential towards Russia, instead of Ukraine, and this meeting just proves it and does not make any new policy changes. Additionally the bolded article needs to be improved. (Honestly I don't think this article should exist and could be covered in Ukraine–United States relations.) Natg 19 (talk) 00:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose. Per above, this is just another example of WP:NTRUMP. Trump and Vance yells at Zelenskyy, the meeting ended abruptly with no agreement with the world reacting. That's pretty much the conclusion of what just happened over there. If Trump decided to sever ties with Ukraine, that would be a total different story but for now, I don't see any significance of posting this. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 01:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Strong oppose There may be impacts from this in terms of the Ukraine/Russian war, but this is basically the equivalent of Trump's presence dominating the headlines, and there is no immediate obvious impacts; the US-Ukraine relationship was already strained before this meeting, this didn't change that. as many others have said, ITN (much less WP as a whole) is not a Trump news tracker. Masem (t) 01:28, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  The speed in the strongly-worded statements of support from almost every major western leader doesn't happen often. Even the recent US threats of war against Canada have been met with surprisingly muted responses by some of the same leaders. Nfitz (talk) 02:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  I think this is much more significant in Europe than people in the US realise. Secretlondon (talk) 11:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose NTRUMP and ongoing. The Kip ^(contribs) 01:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Trump was hardly the worst of it. And I don't think we have an NVANCE. Bottom line is when the Americans make such massive and embarrassing diplomatic blunders and it becomes a massive international news story, it's ITN. And I'm disturbed that we'd want to suppress that, while reporting on elections in Vulgaria. Nfitz (talk) 02:21, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

This is just USA-bias. Natg 19 (talk) 02:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

I've spoken out about the biases in favour of USA stories that are routine, but only have regional significance. But this isn't that. Nfitz (talk) 09:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per above, I would also like to point out that both involved parties have since tried to downplay the intensity of their argument and leave the door open to further dialogue. --SpectralIon 02:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose, suggest SNOW close Not a Trump ticker, blah blah, the global impact is WP:CRYSTAL, blah blah, if WW3 does come because of it, we post WW3, blah blah. Kingsif (talk) 02:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Probably doomed nom given the "no US stuff other than ITNC elections and big storms car crashes et al" principle various people have, but: I would support a blurb/article that is focused on the international reactions/responses from other governments. The fact is that the POTUS and friends putting on a pro wrestling heel tag-team duo performance in the White House, with the head of govt of another sovereign country roped into the "face" role, is one of those "Highly Unusual international event" sort of things which (as demonstrated) immediately causes a whole lot of people and governments to "react strongly" and then, start thinking deeply about a lot of things. Like it or not many people around the world, including in various national capitals, pay a bit more attention to the US govt than they do those of [one of your favorite smallish countries goes here].

Speaking of likely doomed attempts, wish people would stop punching their "paste WP:SNOW for any proposal I oppose" buttons, for anything that isn't blatant, like "this Influencer™ I like got an award". Sure has a tendency to come off as bullying especially to people not already, ah, familiar with ITN/C's tendency to be a bit brusque. (On a completely unrelated note I wonder why ever it may be, that more people don't nominate a broader range of candidate articles for ITN?) --Slowking Man (talk) 02:53, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

The international reactions/responses from other governments are just words. Not news. HiLo48 (talk) 03:04, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

"Your money or your life" are also "just words", and yet... Or, "we're going to leave the European Union"; yet plenty of people holding pound sterling acted in response to those words. --Slowking Man (talk) 07:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Slowking, this is a polite recommendation that you stop whining about perceived but non-existent anti-US bias. Trump threw a fit, and just looking at noms here shows that happens every day, and it is not itself news. We would not, and did not, post when Brexit was first suggested or even when actual action was first announced. If something of actual significance comes from this particular Trump fit, it will get posted, and your disingenuous suggestions that British users are malicious in these ways - as well as your downright rudeness about users indicating a clear SNOW close - are neither helpful nor acceptable. Dare I postulate that it is actually genuinely mean-spirited comments like yours that prevent more people being involved in any nomination and discussion, instead of the situation alluded to in your thinly-veiled accusations. Please assume good faith before writing a spiel half the length of the entire previous discussion about how you think every preceding !vote is unfair to your opinion. Kingsif (talk) 12:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Oppose and SNOW close, I have no idea why this was reopened. Hungry403 (talk) 05:46, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Because it's a massive international news story, that's overwhelming the news. I haven't seen such concentration since the Queen died, and before that the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The epic spectacle of Trump making such a complete fool of himself, and trying to bully the most vulnerable country there currently is, is very much news. And also in terms of the future of the western alliance versus a potential combined USA+Russia. The shear disrespect shown by the "leader of the free world" to a massive hero of freedom. And even existential existence of the Ukraine (among other nations the USA is threating to invade). I'm not saying this will happen - but the world fearing that this may happen is big news. This is going down in history - it may be the most epic and important world-changing meeting since 1938 when Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to German. That so many aren't thinking we blurb something this important, and yet will blurb the deaths of B-list regional actors is disturbing - and demonstrates some major systemic issues here. Nfitz (talk) 09:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps more to the point, is because the whole thing is so shocking and earth-shattering, that many are still trying to come to terms with this, and that we need to let this have a fulsome, slow, discussion. Nfitz (talk) 09:22, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

It is absolutely the biggest story of the moment and has major geopolitical consequences. Secretlondon (talk) 11:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per Masem above. Yakikaki (talk) 07:33, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Maybe This is certainly in the news and so should be discussed rather than suppressed. The question should be whether the ongoing items that we have cover this already but they don't seem to. My impression is that Peace negotiations in the Russian invasion of Ukraine ought to be the right article for the current process but that's full of many previous attempts and hasn't caught up with this latest debacle. The nominated article now seems to have the best account of the matter and so would be useful to readers wanting to know more about this per WP:ITNPURPOSE. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:22, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose Routine media coverage with no apparent lasting significance. The only items worth posting in the Russian invasion beyond ongoing are either major excalations or peace deals. This isn't unexpected either, Trump had already called Zelenskyy a dictator, met with Russia without Ukrainian leaders and has previously bullied him before. As for Vance and European leaders calling him out, much more significant was the meeting where advocacy and intervention for far-right parties was made. No, this isn't "earth-shattering" in the slightest, embarassing perhaps. Yes, nominating this is perhaps a result of systemic bias though IMO more a function of Trump-bias than anything else. Comparing this to nuclear tests or ITNR elections, as some have done above, is absurd. Gotitbro (talk) 09:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support (I am European) Obviously in the news and an important part of European leaders realising the US govt does not support them any more, which is a historic turning point Chidgk1 (talk) 10:01, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per others. We would never post a diplomatic incident involving non-western countries

Kowal2701 (talk) 11:10, 1 March 2025 (UTC)*

Err does “western countries” still mean anything now? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:39, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Support (I'm in Europe) this historic and has great geopolitical significance. The biggest news story - Europe can no longer trust America. What happens now? Secretlondon (talk) 11:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

If the US ditches Ukraine, then that should be posted, but this is just gossip that will have no long term impact, Trump’s already walked back his dictator comments Kowal2701 (talk) 11:16, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Even if Trump changes his mind we still won’t trust him as he could change his mind again the next day. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

But that’s not a reason to post this. We should focus on impactful events not indicative ones. If the US peaces out of the war then we post that. If the EU establishes its own army or security institutions we post that. This is just a media storm Kowal2701 (talk) 11:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Even if Trump changes his mind we still won’t trust him Mate, that is 1. a vibe, and 2. also not news. Trump doesn’t act like a politician so how he does politics is unusual. But it’s still just a politician going about their job. Kingsif (talk) 14:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Weak support, maybe wait I generally agree with Andrew Davidson. This strikes me as a major escalation and a significant development in the geopolitical paradigm of the past 15+ years (a united western alliance vs Russia/China alliance). I believe that the peace negotiations are starting to clear the threshold for independent notability, but the target article is not adequately updated. The situation seems fluid, and I think we could also likely return next week as the negotiations continue to unfold and the peace negotiations article is further updated. Either way, it's getting a little silly not to post about this when the Trump-Ukraine rift is clearly a unique, historic event which is dominating global headlines. Flip^andFlopped ツ 15:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Strong oppose current blurb This kind of phrasing may lead some editors to think that we should write a page and an ITN blurb for every shocking thing that Trump does, which we absolutely shouldn't. At the very least, we should wait and then consider blurbing whatever this altercation's effects on international relations might be. Yo.dazo (talk) 15:23, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Conditional support If the blurb is reformulate. ArionStar (talk) 15:50, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Added altblurb Given many have expressed the current blurb is not tenable, I have added an altblurb which could help make discussion more clear. As an interesting tidbit, I took the phrasing of the altblurb from the Russian Wikipedia, who have already posted this to their version of ITN. Flip^andFlopped ツ 17:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose Trump being Trump, and deliberately on camera to send a message to other countries of how things will go if they challenge him - diplomatically or otherwise. CoatCheck (talk) 17:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

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.

February 27

Portal:Current events/2025 February 27

February 27, 2025 (2025-02-27) (Thursday) Armed conflicts and attacks Israeli–Palestinian conflict Gaza war 2025 Gaza war ceasefire As part of the first stage of the ceasefire deal, Hamas releases the bodies of four Israeli hostages in return for the Israeli government releasing 617 Palestinian prisoners. The second phase of the ceasefire has not been negotiated. (DW) Thirteen people are injured in a car-ramming attack in Pardes Hanna-Karkur, Israel. The suspect, a Palestinian residing in Ma'ale Iron, is later shot and killed by police after an attempted stabbing attack. (Times of Israel) Kivu conflict 2025 Bukavu offensive 2025 Bukavu M23 rally bombings A grenade attack at an M23 rally in Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo, celebrating their recent victory over government forces in the city, kills at least eleven people and wounds 65 others. (Reuters) Kurdish–Turkish conflict Kurdistan Workers' Party insurgency Jailed Kurdish leader and Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) founder Abdullah Öcalan calls for an end to the conflict with Turkey and asks the group to disarm and disband, amid peace efforts between the Turkish government and the PKK led by the pro-Kurdish Peoples' Equality and Democracy Party. (Rudaw) (Reuters) (DW) Somali Civil War Somali capital city Mogadishu enters a security lockdown after several mortars were fired toward Aden Adde International Airport during a visit from Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed. (Anadolu Agency) Somali forces regain control of Balad after Al-Shabaab launches a coordinated attack, detonating roadside bombs and briefly seizing the town. (Hiiraan Online) Villa Somalia security guards open fire on civilians at Lido Beach in Mogadishu while attempting to clear the beach ahead of a visit from Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, killing a teenage boy and wounding several others. (Idil News) (HBN) Business and economy Denmark–United States relations Danish retailer group Salling Group, which operates around 34% of the retail market share in the country, announces it will start differentiating brands owned by European companies from American ones, in retaliation to U.S. President Donald Trump's proposed acquisition of Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Danish Realm. (DW) Disasters and accidents A fire at a three-story residential building in Quezon City, Philippines, kills eight people and injures one other. (AP) Two people are killed when a Robinson R44 helicopter crashes on a private property in Uvalde, Texas, United States. The Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board are currently investigating the accident. (KENS-TV) Two Russian tourists are killed in a shark attack while scuba diving in the Verde Island Passage off Batangas, Philippines. (Fox News) International relations United Kingdom–United States relations U.S. President Donald Trump meets with U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Washington, D.C., for talks that include the Russo-Ukrainian War peace negotiations. Starmer also presented a letter from King Charles III inviting Trump to visit London. (NPR) Law and crime Persecution of Uyghurs in China Forty Uyghur men detained in Thailand for over a decade are deported to China, despite concerns regarding their likely imprisonment. (Al Arabiya) The prosecutor's office in Paris, France, closes a criminal complaint case by the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) against technology company Apple for alleged money laundering and deceptive business practices related to the purchase of minerals in the DRC from armed militias. It is one of the DRC's two lawsuits, with another in Belgium. (Reuters) Politics and elections 2024 Austrian legislative election The Social Democratic Party, the Austrian People's Party, and the NEOS party in Austria agree to form a coalition government, leaving out the far-right Freedom Party, who won the most seats in the National Council in the 2024 legislative election. The coalition agreement ends Austria's longest period without a government since World War II. (DW) (Euractiv) The Trump administration bans NASA scientists and US government officials from attending the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change conference that started this week in Hangzhou, China, which are focused on the seventh IPCC Assessment Report on climate change. (Nature) Science and technology Meta Platforms says it has fixed an error that resulted in Instagram users' Reels feeds displaying violent and graphic videos despite these users having content filters enabled. (Al Arabiya) OpenAI releases their latest large language model, GPT-4.5. (The Verge)

---

RD: Pilar Del Rey

Article: Pilar Del Rey (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline
Credits:

• Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American actress. Death reported 27 February. Thriley (talk) 18:39, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

(Closed) 2025 Ontario general election

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

---

Article: 2025 Ontario general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A general election is held in Ontario, with the Progressive Conservative Party winning a majority of seats. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the 2025 Ontario general election, the centre-right Progressive Conservatives win a majority of seats.
Alternative blurb II: ​ An election is held in Ontario, with the Progressive Conservative party winning a majority for the third consecutive time.
News source(s): CBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Pnc4k (talk · give credit)

 pancake (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose - not a national election, probably not notable enough for an ITN spot. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 17:51, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. ITN has consistently declined to post sub-national elections, for good reasons. I see no reason to make an exception in this case. The article is mostly tables, with no prose on the outcome, so wouldn't be of sufficient quality anyway. Modest Genius ^talk 18:06, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Strong oppose - sub-national election with little change to the status quo. Departure– (talk) 18:06, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose - are you trolling us User:Pnc4k? Particularly given the result is very similar to the last two elections. This is an absolutely nothing story - and so obviously not ITN that I have WP:CIR concerns. Even in Canada (where I voted yesterday in this election) this local story has the same prominence as Mummy Pig is pregnant. I'd argue that Mummy Pig is pregnant is more ITN, as it's getting international coverage. And even then, you missed the most significant international aspect of the election - that the right-wing was re-elected on a platform of attacking the nuttery in the USA. Nfitz (talk) 18:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  Alright alright, let's remember WP:AGF and WP:NOBITING. ✈ mike_gigs ^talk_contribs 19:06, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose regional election. Scuba 18:56, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

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.

RD/Blurb: Boris Spassky

Article: Boris Spassky (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Russian chess player and former World Chess Champion Boris Spassky (pictured) dies at the age of 88. (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

• Nominated by Fahads1982 (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 Fahads1982^talk/contrib 22:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support Incredible chess player, deserves a blurb even 70.107.88.211 (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Not sure how ITN works, but this definitely deserves a blurb. His impact in the chess world was significant, there's even a variation named after him. This is all over the news. Sad. dxneo (talk) 22:52, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb on notability'. Absolutely transformative in his field as Boris_Spassky#Legacy briefly describes. Additionally, the 1972 Championship match against Fischer was important not to chess players, but a major symbol of US-USSR competition. Sincerely, Dilettante 23:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb as he was transformative figure in chess with great legacy, one of only seven living former undisputed World Chess Champions at the time of his death in a time span of more than 50 years and a household name far beyond chess. All this is well-documented in the “Legacy” section.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:24, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality, Support blurb, legacy is properly demonstrated why he was a major figure in chess. However one quality issue is the unsourced list of notable games at the bottom. I know some of these are discussed in the body, so I'd suggest these be converted into context appropriate links using the external media template. Second, while I know outlining chess moves is that common in discussing the game, the amount of detail this is given is sorta eye-blurring particularly in the legacy section. I don't know how much those are needed and minimization will greatly help the topic. Masem (t) 23:33, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Adding that the Para in the Legacy sect ion with the chess moves is unsourced. I assume this can be easily fixed but that's needed to be fixed along with a couple other points there. — Masem (t) 00:07, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Fix article first, then support on notability Spassky was an incredible chess player, even excluding the infamous 1972 WCC: note that back in 2008 when Bobby Fischer died, he was placed on ITN as a blurb (though of course 2008 was 17 years ago at this point). Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb Notability is easily demonstrable. @Masem: I agree with the games list—their external links could just be turned into citations, for example—but I strongly recommend keeping the chess move notation and other details currently in the article. People uninterested in chess can easily gloss over them, while being easily available for anyone who actually needs it. Yo.dazo (talk) 00:00, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb, not ready for RD. Needs some quality improvements, including some cn tags. His life is the main story, which meets criteria for RD and not for a blurb, regardless of his significance. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 23:59, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  We're dealing with a major figure: he was Fischer's opponent in World Chess Championship 1972, which is almost legendary both in chess and in Cold War history (I know we should avoid puffery, but still.) Yo.dazo (talk) 00:05, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  I interpret the major figure qualifier with a higher degree of significance -- e.g. Elizabeth II, I'm on the side of only using this provision for blurbing those for whom a detailed "Death of X" article is present or soon will be, and for whom a high degree of information surrounding the death/state funeral is widely published. I understand if consensus falls the other way, but this'll stay my vote. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 00:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  Major field is based on the field the person was in, so that we're not trying to compare the achievements of an athlete or actor to a world leader, for instance. Masem (t) 00:28, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  The standard is "Thatcher or Mandela stature". That applies whatever field you're in. Chess is quite a niche topic so it's clearly harder for someone in that arena to be considered than a world leader or a major leading actor.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:45, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  There's no such standard on Wikipedia, and it's mostly used by editors who run out of arguments. In first place, it's impossible to compare people from different fields, so people should be considered on the grounds of their contributions to the respective field. Furthermore, chess is all but a 'niche topic' as more than 70% of the adult population in the US, UK, India, Germany and Russia has played chess at some point in their lives (UN).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:37, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Leaning against blurb. Yes, he was world champion for a time, but he's not generally in the conversation for being the greatest ever. Kasparov, Fischer, Carlsen, Karpov, Capablanca, Morphy et al would usually be considered more transformative. I feel like in chess he's a big name, but not so much outside of it or so influential to merit a word. I can see why some think he should have one though.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:43, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  Being the world champion isn't the only reason. His impact was significant, and to say he isn't big outside chess isn't entirely true as he was portrayed as the main antagonist in the Bobby Fischer-center film, Pawn Sacrifice. Even non-champions like Hikaru Nakamura made a significant change in the world of chess. Maybe I notice such things because I follow chess, but I do see where you are coming from. dxneo (talk) 02:34, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  Your observation that he's not a big name outside of chess is outright wrong. His name alongside Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov has become synonymous with chess for a layman in the last decades of the 20th century. The reason for that is perhaps the politics behind the World Chess Championship 1972, but it's completely irrelevant at this point.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:27, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support blurb per above, he was an extremely important chess player. His match with Fischer was one of the most important of all time, and he was of course champion. Wait on Quality as the article is horribly cited. --SpectralIon 02:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb - one of the most famous chess players of all time. Wait/temporary oppose posting per quality concerns. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 03:13, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb on notability. However, the citation quality/presence in the article needs to be improved before posting. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:04, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• I would also support a blurb due to the subject's significance. I think the "life is the main story" test doesn't work very well here – at some point the person is so significant that even if they don't die in a bizarre way they deserve a blurb. Toadspike [Talk] 09:34, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  He's not remotely "so significant" though, he's just a run-of-the-mill super grandmaster who happened to home the championship for three years. Similar to Vladimir Kramnik, Vishy Anand and Ding Liren. Are all those going to be blurbed? It seems like the only reason this is being considered is because he was the opponent in the match against Fischer and there's been so much said and written about that over the years. But that's not a reflection on Spassky himself. Don't get me wrong, he was a great player, but not transformative any more than Gene Hackman was in the acting sphere.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Not vital Famous mainly for his matches with Fischer, he's not among the twelve chess players graded as vital. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:20, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Since the vital article project purposely caps the number of articles they consider vital, this should not be taken as a metric at all in evaluating RD blurbs. — Masem (t) 15:51, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
    • The WP:VITAL project has a system of levels and the 10,000 level 5's seem far more systematic, comprehensive and encyclopedic than ITN's incoherent selections. Because ITN's blurb discussions are ad hoc and sui generis, they are inconsistent and incomprehensible. Spassky seems to be getting more support here than Hackman because some chess fans have turned up to vote for him and you see exactly the same sort of lobbying for footballers, rock stars and other fan favourites. But because WP:VITAL is systematic, it provides a more objective rating in which all chess players have been considered and Spassky hasn't made the grade whereas Hackman has been considered to be level 5 vital when compared with his peers. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia is well-known for not being a reliable source, and that goes for its internal metrics or grading sstems, which are generally the preserve of a committed minority. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 15:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

And so the opinions in this discussion are not reliable either. That's one reason I like to look at the readership stats which are presumably reasonably accurate and represent the aggregate interest of the global readership. In this case, the readership views peaked at about 33K which is about 1% of the equivalent statistic for Gene Hackman. That's quite modest as these things go and indicates that the level of coverage and reader interest is comparatively small. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

No that just favours celebrities. Secretlondon (talk) 17:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but... WP:VITAL only lists 12 chess players whereas it lists 168 film actors from the U.S. alone. Given that, I don't think we can read too much into Spassky's exclusion and Hackman's inclusion. Moscow Mule (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

I suppose that there are a lot more actors than chess players with articles on Wikipedia but I'm not sure how to find out the exact numbers. Perhaps the VITAL project then makes the numbers proportionate to the overall population but, again, I'm not sure of the details. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia categories are terrible for this sort of datamining, but there are around 5,200 probable chess player biographies and at least 120,000 probable actor biographies. —Cryptic 17:19, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support blurb. In Russian Wikipedia they have already published on the main page at 7 o'clock in the morning. Also Boris Spassky was the opponent of legendary Robert James Fischer in the Match of the Century. K. M. Skylark (talk) 16:37, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb, per above, however the article is lacking a lot of citations and should be improved before posting. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 18:52, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb Highest title in arguably the second most popular sports/game in the world? Remember there's only been 8 world champs (ignoring pre-FIDE stuff) in the entirety of the XXth century and only 17 (if i've counted right) overall Udder1882 (talk) 19:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment/Reminder Before this can be posted either as blurb or RD, please resolve the various [citation needed] tags throughout the article first. – robertsky (talk) 23:37, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb Top of his field. ArionStar (talk) 15:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb As historically significant beyond the field as Kasparov, Fischer, Carlsen, Karpov, Capablanca, Morphy et al. Cheers, Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 15:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb per Udder1882. Flip^andFlopped ツ 16:54, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb Sorry: still needs a few citations. Moscow Mule (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb. I would say that the only chess players to deserve a RD blurb would be undisputed World Chess Champions- so in the future, Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik, Anand, Carlsen, Ding, and Gukesh. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 21:19, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Not ready yet, still has a fair amount of missing citations. Natg 19 (talk) 23:04, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Strong oppose blurb as I did with Gene Hackman and David Lynch. We cannot be posting to ITN every time a famous old person dies. We have recent deaths for a reason. –DMartin 03:39, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Objectively fails blurb criteria. Article has zero information about the event that's not in the proposed blurb except for a single word giving the location of his death. Besides which, he wasn't "top of his field" as falsely claimed above, and hadn't been since 1972. —Cryptic 17:04, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  He was indeed top of his field between 1969 and 1972. Not having been top of his field for a long time doesn't suddenly change history to make him never having been top of his field. Also, his 1972 match against Fischer has its own article, so info about that does not need to be in Spassky's article. I guess there could be an altblurb mentioning it. Spassky is fine on notability, the problem with this is the 19 CN tags on his article. SpectralIon 21:27, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Chris Hughes

Article: Christopher Hughes (quiz contestant) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, RTE
Credits:

• Nominated by The C of E (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Diademchild (talk · give credit) and The C of E (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: British quizzer and TV personality  The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 20:02, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Article is too stubby and has quite a few uncited statements. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
  • @Fakescientist8000: I have added more cites. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 20:12, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

February 26

Portal:Current events/2025 February 26

February 26, 2025 (2025-02-26) (Wednesday) Armed conflicts and attacks Somali Civil War African Union Support and Stabilization Mission in Somalia The Somalian government and the African Union finalize the troop distribution for the new peacekeeping mission AUSSOM, resolving prior disputes with Ethiopia and later Burundi. The mission will deploy 11,900 personnel, including soldiers, police, and civilian staff. Under the agreement, Uganda will contribute 4,500 troops, followed by Ethiopia with 2,500, Djibouti with 1,520, Kenya with 1,410, and Egypt with 1,091. (VOA) Sudanese civil war, 2024 famine in Sudan The United Nations-operated World Food Programme announces it has been forced to temporarily cease the distribution of humanitarian aid in the Zamzam refugee camp in North Darfur, Sudan, due to an escalation in fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces in the region. Doctors Without Borders also temporarily ceased operations in the camp last week. (DW) Mexican drug war A roadside bombing kills a Texan rancher in San Fernando, Tamaulipas, Mexico. Authorities say the victim was driving on his ranch when the explosive device detonated. (El Financiero) Arts and culture Conservation and restoration of Pompeian frescoes Archeologists find monumental frescoes at the House of Thiasus in Pompeii, Campania, Italy, providing insight into the Dionysian Mysteries. (Reuters) Business and economy 2025 United States tariffs against the European Union United States President Donald Trump announces impending 25% tariffs on the European Union, which he states will be generally applied to sectors such as the automotive industry. (The Guardian) British oil and gas company BP announces an agreement with the Iraqi government to develop four oil fields around Kirkuk and increase production, with the value of BP's investment estimated at US$25 billion. (Society of Petroleum Engineers) (Reuters) Disasters and accidents Eighteen people are killed and thirty-one others are injured when a bus overturns in Prachinburi province, Thailand. (CTV News) Health and environment An unvaccinated child dies of measles at a hospital in Lubbock, Texas, United States, as the first death since the disease was considered eradicated in the country in 2000. (ABC News) (AP) International relations United States–Venezuela relations U.S. President Donald Trump cancels energy corporation Chevron's license to operate in Venezuela. (Reuters) United Nations Human Rights Commissioner Volker Türk condemns Israel's human rights violations in Gaza and denounces Israeli settlements. (Reuters) Law and crime 2020 Nice stabbing Brahim Aouissaoui, the perpetrator of the 2020 stabbing in Nice, France, is sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. (CTV News) 2025 Romanian presidential election Călin Georgescu, the candidate received the most votes in the annulled 2024 presidential election, is detained by police and taken for questioning by the general prosecutor's office over allegations of false statements about financing sources, illegal possession of weapons, and forming an organization that is "fascist, racist, or xenophobic". (AP) Milorad Dodik, President of Republika Srpska, an entity within Bosnia and Herzegovina, is sentenced to one year in prison and banned from participating in politics for six years for "separatist actions", such as advocating for secession. (The Guardian) Politics and elections 2025 Anguillian general election The opposition Anguilla United Front (AUF) wins a majority in the House of Assembly. AUF leader Cora Richardson-Hodge becomes the first female Premier of Anguilla. (Jamaica Observer) Freedom of the press in the United States, Gulf of Mexico–America naming dispute The Trump administration bans reporters from the Associated Press, Reuters, Der Tagesspiegel, and HuffPost from the White House over their refusal to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the "Gulf of America". (Reuters) Constitutional crisis in Somalia Somalia's Federal Parliament fails to meet due to a lack of quorum, with only 137 MPs present, two short of the required amount. The delay raises concerns about a potential no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre's council of ministers. (Hiiraan Online)

---

RD: Betsy Arakawa

Article: Betsy Arakawa (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Gene Hackman's wife found deceased beside him. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:48, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support Especially since Gene Hackman's death has also already been RD'd. The article looks good, it's a little short but definitely not a stub. --SpectralIon 21:34, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  Whether someone else's death was posted to RD has absolutely no relevance to whether this article should be on RD. The only thing that matters is whether the nominated article is nominated for speedy deletion (it is not), contains biographical content about the subject (it does) and if so whether it of sufficient quality for the main page (it is). Thryduulf (talk) 23:33, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support. The article could be more in depth, but there is about enough there and it is all cited. Ideally the picture would have a date, but the source doesn't give one (beyond "in the last few years", which we couldn't use verbatim because of the vague relative time) so there isn't anything we can do about that. Thryduulf (talk) 23:33, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Anike Agbaje-Williams

Article: Anike Agbaje-Williams (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): PM News Nigeria
Credits:

• Nominated by Mr. Lechkar (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: First woman to appear on television in Nigeria. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 14:10, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Not Ready. Stubby article. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 22:25, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

(Pulled blurb, RD) RD/blurb: Gene Hackman

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

---

Article: Gene Hackman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American actor Gene Hackman (pictured) dies at the age of 95 (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ American actor Gene Hackman (pictured) is found dead alongside his wife in New Mexico at the age of 95
News source(s): BBC Santa Fe New Mexican
Credits:

• Nominated by Aydoh8 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Mezzanine96 (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Has only 1 CN tag. Aydoh8^[contribs] 08:18, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• support blurb two oscars Fdfexoex (talk) 09:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• We have List of actors with two or more Academy Awards in acting categories. How many of the actors there who are still alive would we blurb? I could make rationales for Streep, Nicholson, Day-Lewis, De Niro, Fonda, Hoffman, Hanks and Caine; I'd struggle with the rest. Black Kite (talk) 13:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Hackman is one of those. BilboBeggins (talk) 15:09, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Perhaps you could come up with a rationale, but Black Kite couldn't, and that's the rationale of their note here. Departure– (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  One of the greatest American actors of all time [7] plus clear case where death is the story that is in world news and literally every website makes that proposition for blurb. BilboBeggins (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality. Great deal of unsourced material at present. Innisfree987 (talk) 09:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support RD (when finished) Being worked on by a number of peeps as we speak, I don't think the article is in too bad shape. R.I.P. Govvy (talk) 09:38, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb. A great actor no doubt, but merely winning Oscars isn't sufficient bar to blurb, there would be too many if we went down that route. There may be something unusual about the deaths given that his wife and dog died too, but I'd say unless it was a murder I wouldn't blurb it on that basis either. Quality has a long way to go for RD too.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  I'd argue even if it's accidental in terms of CO poisoning or something like that, it's still a bit rare and could warrant a blurb, especially to happen to someone like a two-time Oscar winner. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:43, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  I mean yes, there's all that, but death blurbs are supposed to be rare and only for those figures whose death and funeral might warrant an article in its own right. I've long thought we should have the option of "sticky" RDs which sit at the front for a couple of days outside of the usual merry-go-round, with the option of a separate pic too, to cover these sort of in-between cases where the person's paticularly famous but an an outright blurb isn't warranted. French Wikipedia has an optional second photo slot for RDs.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:52, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  But still death is the story here, ir satisfies criterion. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:49, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  @BilboBeggins: @Amakuru: NYT report finding scattered pills by wife’s body and authorities now believe the death might be suspicious. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support blurb Not only his he a two-time Oscar winner and I'd argue significant in his field along with having some significant credits in many well known (and I'd argue) historical films, the circumstances of his death (found dead with his wife and dog at the same time; though no foul play is suspected) may also be another reason to consider a blurb. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:41, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• His Oscars were Best Supporting Actor in 1992 and Best Actor in 1971. He hasn't, even arguably, been at the top of his field for more than half a century. No blurb. Don't be ridiculous. —Cryptic 10:58, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  32 is "more than 50"...? Anyway, regardless of when he was at the top, the simple fact is he was. And adding Trachtenberg while at the same time omitting Hackman, that is "ridiculous". - \\'cԼF 18:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Indeed, that's my sentiment. Everyone thinks "I've heard of that guy" and immediately reaches for the "Blurb" button. But that's not how it's supposed to work. If Kirk Douglas and Vera Lynn don't fit in the blurb bucket then neither does Hackman.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  It was wrong not to blurb them, If you use that argument then we can mention Dilip Kumar, Betty White, Fillipino actress, Indian singer Lata Mangeshkar, Shane Warne, O. J. Simpson. If they were blurbed so should be Hackman. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:42, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  While I believe Lynn and Douglas should have been blurbed (along with others like Havilland). I should clarify that Shane Warne was posted because of the nature of his death besides notability and there was wide agreement among sources and editors that both Kumar and Mangeshkar met the blurb criteria of being transformative and on the top of their field. Gloria Romero's blurb was pulled and I disagree with the postings of White and Simpson (as did many at the time and continue to do so). Gotitbro (talk) 20:56, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  I've long argued that an objective measure for a blurb where the death isn't usual, is a legacy or impact section backed by several RSes that explain how said person was a major or great figure in their field, which avoids the bulk of the hand waving and frankly OR claims of importance. Using this standard aligns with those in Gotitbro's comment (eg we would have likely Lynn but not White) Masem (t) 21:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  "He hasn't, even arguably, been at the top of his field for more than half a century" - why do you say that? He was still top actor in 90s and 2000s, with lead roles in The Firm, Get Shorty, Crimson Tide, The Replacements, Enemy of the State, Behind Enemy Lines, Royal Tenenbaums. He had lead roles in films that are among best known in 70s, 80s, 90s and maybe even 2000s. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:47, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  He won a Golden Globe for The Royal Tenenbaums. BD2412 T 23:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  I think the leaning argument here is the circumstances of his death. NYT report finding scattered pills by wife’s body and authorities now believe the death might be suspicious. If true that this might be a murder-suicide scenario then I’d argue this death is quite Blue worthy since how often do we have a murder-suicide involving an Academy Award winning actor? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support alt blurb The person and circunstances of his death are relevant. ArionStar (talk) 11:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality, andSupport RD, Oppose blurb. Famous? Yes. Top of his field? Not really. Transformative? No. Black Kite (talk) 11:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Black Kite: Then look at the blurb argument from the other angle. NYT report finding scattered pills by wife’s body and authorities now believe the death might be suspicious. If it’s foul play/murder-suicide, I think that is a bit blurb worthy considering how rare and a bit odd that now there’s a story about a two-time 95 year old Oscar winner being the potential victim of a murder-suicide. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  @TDKR Chicago 101: That might be a reason to edge more towards a blurb ... but we don't know anything yet. Black Kite (talk) 12:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  CNN is saying we might not have a full answer for several weeks to the cause of death. We know they are treating the death as suspicious, but that only is a procedural aspects - besides more extensive testing of the bodies, they're also doing a more thorough investigation of the house, but its still possible that the end result could be something simply related to old age rather than foul play or suicide. Masem (t) 13:07, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Wait regarding blurb. If this is just a death from natural causes or something like that then we shouldn't blurb, if it turns out it's something like a murder-suicide then we should consider it. We simply don't have enough information at this time. Thryduulf (talk) 11:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb on basis of the claim of being a great/major figure. Nothing in the article indicates how he had a significant legacy or impact on Hollywood. However, the concerns on the manner of death may be reasonable (officially don't think it was foul play, I read the situation as being something like CO poisoning and rather common manner of death). Oppose RD due to lack of sourcing in filmography section. --Masem (t) 13:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  NYT report finding scattered pills by wife’s body and authorities now believe the death might be suspicious. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment I didn't propose either of the blurbs, only the RD. Thought I'd just clear that up. Aydoh8^[contribs] 13:42, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb. While he's a great actor, I think he falls short ~~ Jessintime (talk) 14:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I'm not basing my position on who was or wasn't posted in the past or whether he was transformative/influential or whatever term you want to invent. My concern is that Hackman isn't on the same tier as his contemporaries like De Niro, Eastwood or Pacino. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 16:42, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@Jessintime: NYT report finding scattered pills by wife’s body and authorities now believe the death might be suspicious. Would you consider a blurb if this is a case of murder-suicide? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I think so, but I can also see scenarios where it still wouldn't be a murder-suicide. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 22:57, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support blurb. One of the best known actors. Even Russian sources list him as one of the greatest actors of XX century [8]. And there could be also arguments for death as the story. But in that case we would need to name his wife, too. BilboBeggins (talk) 14:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb. On one hand, that his Oscar wins were a half-century ago - should not be an impediment to a blurb. On the other hand - really - Gene Hackman? I don't think 40 years ago, that anyone would have thought that this is someone we'd consider in such a way. And how didn't we blurb Kirk Douglas and Vera Lynn? Good grief ... if Lynn doesn't pass the test, who does? Nfitz (talk) 14:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  His second Oscar win was not 50 years ago, 30 years. Then he won Golden Globe in 2000s. He was nominated for SAG twice, winning once, in 90s. Even in terms of awards only, he was top actor still in 90s and 2000s.

  But we did blurb Sidnez Poitier who won one Oscar. How is Gene Hackman less influential then Sidney Poitier? Poitier was nominated for two Oscars, and Hackman for five, they both won Silver Bear. Poitier won 2 Golden Globes and honorary award and Hackman won 3 Globes and honorary award.

  " I don't think 40 years ago, that anyone would have thought that this is someone we'd consider in such a way." On the contrary, 40 years ago he was top star, having appeared in previous decade in Conversation, French Connection, Poseidon Adventure, Superman. The other thing that there was no Wikipedia and no Internet. BilboBeggins (talk) 15:08, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Please tell me you didn't just say "How is Gene Hackman less influential then Sidney Poitier?" ... oh, you did. Good grief. Black Kite (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Sidney Poitier had only 4 roles in 34 years before his death, and only one was lead role, in not a famous movie. Hackman was still top actor in 90s. BilboBeggins (talk) 15:59, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Poitier was the first Black actor to win Best Actor and broke down a massive amount of barriers for Black actors in Hollywood. He had a far greater impact on cinema than just simply leading roles and award wins. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:34, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Lynn failed because of a combination of mostly American "never heard of her" which should have been discounted on the spot but weren't, but also a number of "Not on the Thatcher/Mandela level" and pointing out that we recently hadn't blurbed Little Richard (which was also unforgivable IMO). Some comments that she wasn't important enough or transformative were quite funny, though. The one that amazed me was Douglas. Black Kite (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose on notability. I definitely think ITN should be much more forgiving towards life-as-a-story deaths of major figures, but Gene Hackman definitely isn't among those I'd want to see posted. Departure– (talk) 14:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose blub - American Celebrity dies should be RD not ITN. Harizotoh9 (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  NYT report finding scattered pills by wife’s body and authorities now believe the death might be suspicious. I think if the death wasn’t natural and if it’s indeed foul play, surely that would warrant a blurb. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:52, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Not Ready for RD for the usual reason. Oppose blurb for consistency. Although I disagree with the extremely high bar we seem to have adopted, the fact remains that the community has routinely refused to blurb the passing of Hollywood legends of similar or higher stature. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Support RD based on improved referencing. I may reconsider my oppose to a blurb in the unlikely event this turns into a murder case. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

With respect, Ad Orientem, the "high bar" you reference is primarily unwritten. There is plenty of leeway available to you to support, and that's the only way to change the "routine refus[als]". Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 04:30, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support RD once sourcing issues are solved, mostly at the television and theater sections. --NoonIcarus (talk) 17:23, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support RD if Michelle Trachtenberg is on the RD list, definitely should have Gene Hackman who is arguably more well known. --viridianwindow (talk) 17:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Excellent point. @Black Kite:, what's the deal with Trachtenberg being on there anyway? - \\'cԼF 18:18, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Per Recent Deaths standards, 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.

  Once her article met quality standards, she was eligible for the list. The same will apply to Hackman. Determinations are not based on notability but on article quality, including citations and updates around the death. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 19:10, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Thewolfchild Well exactly. When I commented originally, Hackman's article didn't meet ITNRD. Black Kite (talk) 19:26, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you for the reply. I see he is now listed and so I'm not looking to further debate how he got there, and when, compared to who, because of what, etc., etc. This was my first time addressing a Main Page issue, and will likely be the last. And with that, I believe another episode of Wikipedia Cat Rodeo is at a close. Cheers - \\'cԼF 03:24, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support blurb if death is non-natural. Oppose blurb, support RD otherwise. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  We won't find that out until an autopsy? Secretlondon (talk) 19:39, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb, needs work for RD. Theater and TV filmography are uncited. Article is otherwise in good shape. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 17:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Now support RD (I worked on said citations). ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 19:04, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support RD a... "blurb", I suppose? (Does that mean his name is added to the list of recent deaths in the In The News section for a day or two?) I really can't believe his name is not there, nor can I believe there is an actual dispute here about adding him. Of course you add him. All the major news outlets are reporting his death, so why is WP at odds with that? Most days when I look there, that little section is filled with a bunch of people named Joe or Jane, people I bet the majority of readers looking at that section never heard of. Well, people have heard of Hackman, they're seen his movies, his performances on stage, and they've read his books. He served his country as a Marine then went on to become one of the best at his craft. He is worthy of a... "blurb". a notice in RD - \\'cԼF 18:09, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

For clarity for some of the above new to ITN editors, "blurb" means that they get a bulleted "news headline" with a report of their death. "American actor Gene Hackman (pictured) dies at the age of 95." Every biographical article can be added to the list of recent deaths, provided they meet quality standards. The discussion for RD is only based on if the article meets quality standards. Natg 19 (talk) 18:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) What you're referring to is not a "blurb" but an "RD". The blurb would be a full line item up top amongst the other headlines, whereas RD is the list at the bottom, which is automatic once the quality is met. Unfortunately it isn't though, which is why He can't be listed in either location yet, and perhaps never will unless people work hard to eliminate the issues in the article. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you both. Now I see why I kept getting edit conflicts when trying to correct that. - \\'cԼF 18:25, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb per arguments above, weak support RD - there's still a handful of uncited items in the filmography, but for the most part the article is good to go. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Filmography now fully cited. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:48, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Posted as RD – robertsky (talk) 19:38, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Blurb Famous but not transformative/era-defining for American cinema. Should the death turn out to be a murder-suicide or similar, I support blurbing. Sincerely, Dilettante 22:20, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Post-posting support RD, the article is satisfactory and based on the developing news, featuring in RD is a useful MP link while we wait before posting blurb for any conclusion on what a blurb would have to say. While I am still personally on the side of opposing blurbs for deaths where the death is not the story (i.e. we have RD for a reason), I also acknowledge that most users see blurbs as a recognition of outstanding lives and in my opinion, Hackman would meet the criteria such users set for having a blurb. I suppose that would make me a "support blurb if we have to" - however, I do not feel we should yet post a blurb until we know if it would be a "recognition of outstanding life" or "unusual death is the story". So wait, until there's further clarity from whoever is investigating - obviously all the details won't come soon but I expect it won't take longer than a week for them to say whether it's natural or foul play. Kingsif (talk) 23:48, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb There are several good reasons to blurb this including:

1. It's in the news in a big way, being all over the front pages of newspapers in the UK for example
2. The death is the story as it seems he and his wife were dead for days before being discovered
3. The subject was top of his field with two Oscars and an entire page devoted to his other awards
4. The topic is of huge interest to our readership with over 3 million of them reading the article on the news. Few deaths attract this level of attention.
5. The alternative is the bottom blurb about the Romanian PM. We've been running that for two weeks now and so it's well overdue for replacement as few people are reading it now – about three orders of magnitude less than Hackman. One of ITN's objectives is to "emphasize Wikipedia as a dynamic resource". Persisting with such a stale story does the opposite, giving the impression that ITN is broken and not staying fresh.
6. The article is of reasonably good quality with lots of content, over 100 citations and graded as vital.

Andrew🐉(talk) 08:58, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

+1. ArionStar (talk) 12:20, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support blurb He had enough critical & commercial success to merit a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 12:22, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Most of that is completely irrelevant. Point 2 is directly relevant, but my "wait" recommendation from above still stands - we don't know enough yet. Point 3 is arguable (and regularly argued!) - some people see it is relevant, others do not with several people suggesting that if there isn't scope for an article about the death and/or reactions to the death (social media platitudes do not count) then there shouldn't be a death blurb. Everything else has consensus (in some cases very strong consensus) that they are not relevant. Thryduulf (talk) 16:24, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support Posting Image Putting up a photo seems reasonable given that his death is under active investigation and the level of coverage this is all getting. Still opposed to a blurb though, unless this is ruled a homicide. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Wait until the cause of death becomes clearer. Support Altblurb if the death is found to be suspicious, and Oppose blurb if the death is found to be natural. --SpectralIon 18:30, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Apparently the results may take several weeks, by which time of course this would be stale. Black Kite (talk) 18:57, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  If it takes too long then yeah I would continue to oppose. At least his RD is already posted, so his death gets some recognition. SpectralIon 21:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  If the results make the news when they are released, then we can consider a blurb at that time. I can't speak for everyone of course, but I don't see the RD posting as meaning we would be posting the same story twice (not quite the same but WP:ITNRD makes it clear that someone can have a blurb when they disappear and then later have an RD entry when they are declared dead in absentia, and that seems comparable to me). The only restriction I'm aware of is that the same person cannot have a blurb and an RD entry at the same time. Thryduulf (talk) 21:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb The fact that a famous person dies in strange circumstances is far from being a reason to have a blurb, not even if a violent death is proven. This is not a news portal, nor is it a scandal magazine. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:56, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  You mean, Wikipedia ≠ TMZ? ArionStar (talk) 22:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• The fact that a famous person dies in strange circumstances is explicitly a reason to have a blurb – see WP:ITNRDBLURB which says

  Death as the main story: For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident) or where the events surrounding the death merit additional explanation (such as ongoing investigations, major stories about memorial services or international reactions, etc.) a blurb may be merited to explain the death's relevance.

In this case, see the NYT which has sections "Gene Hackman's Death; The Latest; What We Know; Jarring End to a Quiet Life; etc.". And they have a detailed story about the time that his pacemaker stopped, the medications, test results for carbon monoxide, etc. So, it's very clear that the death is a big part of the story here and so a blurb is appropriate.

Andrew🐉(talk) 00:01, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

We have no idea yet what the circumstances are, only that the police are considering them to be "suspicious" and having more than routine evalutions done. It still could be a routine death (given their age, there's a huge number of possible death cases that would be related to health conditions that would be considered routine). What we're seeing here is the media systematic bias that is around famous Hollywood people, the TMZ effect. We have to fight against that. Masem (t) 00:24, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

The investigators have gathered lots of evidence already and so we have plenty to report. And we have plenty of readers who are coming to read it – the article was the top read by a considerable margin for the second day with over another million views. But, in Masem's view, we should ignore the media, ignore our readership, ignore the accolades and legacy and ignore the vital rating. Instead, ITN should do nothing so it hasn't posted a new blurb for 5 days. Tsk. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:23, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

If it is confirmed as a crime, it is not extraordinary. We are not going to post all the celebrities who are murdered. That is not ITN's aim. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:10, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Then the "Death as the main story" criterion should be removed altogether. As it stands, there is a fair argument to be made for blurbing ("such as ongoing investigations" - that's exactly what's happening here). TVShowFan122 (talk) 16:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support blurb Famous, successful, revered actor who may have been blurbed anyways dies in suspcious circumstances. Seems like a good candiate for a blurb to me, thought I would suggest that the blurb could be altered to mention that his death has been called suspicious. Perhaps "American actor Gene Hackman dies at the age of 95 under suspicious circumstances, triggering an investigation" DriveAllKnight (talk) 03:22, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb per Andrew Davidson. He was a borderline candidate for a blurb on baseline notability given his success in his field, but the death under suspicious circumstances (confirmed as not carbon monoxide poisoning, FYI) is giving it even more enduring coverage in RS. There are additional articles about the death still being posted in top news outlets even as of this morning, and he died days ago. Flip^andFlopped ツ 15:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Posted as blurb. There is a rough consensus to post, taking into consideration of the extended discussion. – robertsky (talk) 16:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Would you consider amending to post the altblurb instead? I regret not clarifying that in my above comment. I think the altblurb better conveys the "found dead under mysterious circumstances" aspect of the story. Flip^andFlopped ツ 16:33, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Robertsky: what the hell?? There's not remotely a consensus to blurb. Please pull immediately.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Sorry if this seems overly blunt, but it makes a mockery of ITN if we have a lively debate, in which more people oppose the proposition than support it, only for one admin to randomly decide there's a "consensus" days later when presumably others had decided there wasn't one. It's a lopsided process that favours posting.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  WP:NOTAVOTE. If you feel the arguments were weighed improperly, that's a matter for WP:AARV. I don't think favoring posting is bad- the German election had been at the top all this week. 331dot (talk) 18:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @331dot If you think something was posted incorrectly then the first step is to note it in the discussion here, e.g. with a "pull" request. AARV is a couple of steps further down the dispute resolution pipeline. In this specific case I do not see a consensus for (or against) posting as a blurb currently. Thryduulf (talk) 18:14, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Perhaps, but if it's felt that an admin acted improperly ("for one admin to randomly decide there's a "consensus" days later when presumably others had decided there wasn't one") in how they judged consensus(not just disagreement with the decision itself) it would seem to me AARV should be higher up the pipeline. 331dot (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Firstly, AARV is pretty useless here - by the time any decision is made, the item could be long-gone from the page and then what? Censure the admin who posted it? That's not really the point. The issue is an immediate one, with IMHO a need to remove an item from the main page that the the community had not given consensus for. Secondly (and I've said this repeatedly over the years) you simply cannot apply "NOTAVOTE" arguments to ITN discussions. Unlike RM and AFD, which have robust policies and guidelines backing them up, what qualifies ITN is almost entirely a subjective one (with the exception of ITN/R and RD entries, neither of which applies here). The only requirements are that it be in the news, article updated, quality concerns addressed, and the matter be "significant" - with very little in the way of objective criteria to evaluate that. So an admin applying "NOTAVOTE" and attempting to view the discussion through some sort of weight-of-argument measurement is in fact simply applying their own point of view, which is no more valid than anybody else's in the discussion. Thus although it's no ideal, we simply have no choice but to respect the numbers. And as Andrew says below, the numbers are split which means no consensus.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  If this is a vote and not a weighing of arguments as most everything else on Wikipedia is, or we don't trust admins to judge the consensus here, then that should be spelled out in policy. I'll defer any other comment to a discussion raised elsewhere. Thanks 331dot (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  It's my understanding(maybe I'm wrong) that AARV is simply a forum to discuss most administrative actions and perhaps simply decide if they were proper/justified, not to assess punishment/censure. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  The numbers opposing and supporting a blurb were roughly equal by my count at 13-13, (putting the waits in the support column, now that we see that the story has legs). You then have to weight by strength of argument. My reasoning was the only one to quote the ITN guideline which fits this case perfectly and that seems quite weighty. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  You didn't quote a guideline. You quoted an information page. From INFOPAGES, information pages, like essay pages, have a limited status, and can reflect varying levels of consensus and vetting Sincerely, Dilettante 20:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  To add on to this, ITNRDBLURB reads In general, the following criteria are used to decide this. Like a PAG, then, this documents common procedure. Unlike a PAG, however, there is no claim that the information documented therein should generally be followed, only that it generally is. This is more akin to directly pointing at precedents, rather than pointing at a PAG. Since ITN blurbs are, for better or worse, typically argued almost entirely de novo, this shouldn't count for much. Sincerely, Dilettante 20:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  (edit conflict) x3. An effect of such ITN discussions that involves multiple options, RD or blurb posting, the continued discussions in previous similar discussions is that, we regularly post up RD first when it is ok to do so while the discussion about the blurb continues until it either falls off the page or being closed from further discussions.

  The discussions since have noted that the circumstances of his death is suspicious and that an investigation is underway, turning it into a main story, as noted by Andrew. I posted the original blurb, partly as what 331dot noted as well, it is difficult to succinctly indicate in the blurb. Nonetheless, the additional information is now in there, I am still trying to get it to be shorter.

  Understanding that the investigation is still ongoing. If the investigation turns out nothing much, I am ok with it being amended further, either by putting the entry back into the RD row at where it was positioned, i.e. before Jeong Su-il's entry or remove the entry totally if there's isn't a spot left in the RD row. – robertsky (talk) 19:02, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Pull it, or we will have to go to more extensive dispute resolution. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:37, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I support this being posted, what do you mean by "more extensive dispute resolution". BilboBeggins (talk) 17:40, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  More extensive dispute resolution is things like WP:AN, where we discuss the admins actions and thought process, to seek prospective correction. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Flipandflopped amended to altblurb as suggested. – robertsky (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment. The blurb makes it sound like he died because he was old, not under unexplained, sudden circumstances that don't seem related to his age or health(given that his wife was also found dead, similarly collapsed on the floor, as well as one of his dogs). Maybe there's really no way to succinctly indicate that in the blurb, but... I don't know. Just seems odd. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Post-posting support blurb/RD Good call by Robertsky; both the curious (so far) nature of his death (...speculation thereto) and his previous global renown make this a no-brainer. Alsdo per Andrew Davidson's acute analysis. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 18:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb, ESPECIALLY in its current state. Many of the blurb supports here mention the unusual circumstances as part of their reasoning. To omit that completely is a problem. For the record, I also oppose the posting of the death either way. --Torsodog^Talk 18:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retroactive oppose blurb as this is not of histroical significance. An elderly person dying is not news. –DMartin 18:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment Not evincing an opinion on whether a blurb here is needed; but it is clear from the discussion that there is either no-consensus or a slight opinion against a blurb. The major reason for supporting a blurb is death as a story which maybe justified but note the current blurb has no indication of that (making it appear to be a posting based solely on ITN siginificance which is not the case). PS: Note though that the latest news reports point towards an accidental death, and I am not sure how much weightage do freak accident deaths actually carry on ITN. Gotitbro (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Suggestion: There is a concise alternative available at "errors" to what is now an even longer sentence. --Gaois (talk) 19:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Well I have acted on this "suggestion" and posted a note there. I hope this won't be considered badgering or forum-shopping, but it would be good if someone independent could look at it. CHeers  — Amakuru (talk) 19:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Again, the UK media is not what should be looked in to assess notability for American news. We get loads and loads of it Kowal2701 (talk) 19:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Post-posting oppose blurb While Gene Hackman was a highly respected and accomplished actor, simply winning two Academy Awards does not automatically warrant a blurb. Many actors with similar accolades have not been given this recognition upon their passing. His career, while impressive, peaked decades ago, and his influence on contemporary cinema waned. While the circumstances of his death reveal an unusual or newsworthy aspect beyond natural causes, this does not rise to the level of figures whose deaths have had a global cultural or historical impact. A listing under Recent Deaths (RD) is appropriate, but a blurb would set a precedent that could dilute the standard for such recognition. --Bedivere (talk) 19:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  According to policy unusual cirumstances of a death do merit it a blurb; see WP:ITNRDBLURB. 331dot (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  That is not a policy but an information page. His death is nowhere meriting a blurb. Bedivere (talk) 19:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Then I suggest that you work to change what WP:ITNRDBLURB says. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  The problem is that we don't know the manner of death yet, it could be unusual, it could be something just dealing with age. Playing on the speculation around the cause is something left for TMZ and other tabloids to focus on, not WP until the information is actually determined. Masem (t) 19:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  He was found in one room, his wife in another, and his dog somewhere else. Sounds pretty unusual to me. But I digress. Thanks 331dot (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  ITNRDBLURB is certainly not a policy, and in any case it merely says "If the person's death itself is newsworthy for either the manner of death or the newsworthy reaction to it, it may merit a blurb. (emphasis mine). Certainly not that a blurb is mandated.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:00, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  It still says what it says and if we're not going to do it, it should be changed. Thanks. 331dot (talk) 20:06, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  It doesn't say that though, as I've just explained. It says they may be posted for that reason, not that they must. In fact, you yourself pulled the story on Park Won-soon when there wasn't consensus for it. But death was the story there, he didn't die of natural causes.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:14, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Kudos to you for pulling up something from four and a half years ago; I don't recall those circumstances(though he was a local official who merely served a long time). I didn't say it was mandated, but if we're not going to follow our own guidelines at all, they should be changed. I don't have anything else to say. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  The point is that the guidelines say "may", not "must" or "will". It is fair to raise the question if these death circumstances are unusual enough to be considered for a blurb, but that's still a decision to be reviewed by consensus, not mandated by the guideline (in comparison with how non-blurb RDs are to be included once quality is met) --Masem (t) 20:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  it's not even a guideline, much less a policy, it's just an information page. It is not a mandate to anything. Bedivere (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  No comment on the blurb, but WP:ITN is the de facto guideline for ITN, inasmuch as WP:AFD isn't "just an essay". —Bagumba (talk) 03:35, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Page views do not matter. Secretlondon (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Blurb as per Bedivere. Less notable with JEJ even with the mysterious death. Sharrdx (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support blurb due to the career achievements + the days-long news cycle his death has generated. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 04:30, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb per above. The bar for blurbing is rightfully extremely high, and Hackman, while famous, does not meet it. RD is sufficient. Sdkb ^talk 06:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• FYI as discussion still continues, note that Hackman was the top read article on Wikipedia for a third day, attracting more interest than all other topical topics such as Pope Francis, Ramadan, Trump, Musk and the rest. Our other blurbs all have a comparatively small readership. Note also that Angie Stone is a recent RD which is attracting a lot of interest too but she doesn't seem to have been nominated yet. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:02, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  We're not a tabloid. Secretlondon (talk) 15:38, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  The media source I've been checking for this is the New York Times and that's not a tabloid. They are still publishing more stories about this. For example, this was their #2 Trending story when I checked just now. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:33, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Post-posting support blurb. It is a textbook death as the story example. The coverage is still there. The situation has changed. Plus he qualifies as major figure. BilboBeggins (talk) 08:05, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Pull blurb – Who? What? How are editors seriously supporting this? 5225_C (talk • contributions) 08:07, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  He was described as one of the biggest stars of the New Hollywood cinema. ArionStar (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  • Hardly of worldwide significance. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 00:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  Are you being serious? Two time Oscar winner, Berlin winner, Cecil De Mille Honorary Award Golden Globe winner, Clint Eastwood and Coppola collaborator, one of the greatest or the greatest American actor [9], death is now discussed on little every news outlet so it is impossible to miss it [10][11][12][13]. BilboBeggins (talk) 15:35, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  • I'm very serious, and judging by the links provided, this is of interest almost exclusively in the USA. Pull was definitely the right call. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 00:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  If you've not heard of someone, you're not in a position to judge. But also, how not? Kingsif (talk) 23:11, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  • I am absolutely in a position to judge, and I am pleased to see it has now been pulled. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 00:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb per numerous above (and the spurious guesswork and tasteless comments about this being a potential murder-suicide are disgusting, let alone a flagrant breach of BLP, given BLP still counts for recent deaths). - SchroCat (talk) 12:48, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb this sensationalist crap on the front page is not a remotely supportable editorial decision for the encyclopedia. WP:NOTTABLOID and WP:BDP are more than enough to oppose putting, this 'we don't know, something happened which may be something but we don't know speculation about a person's recent death' blurb in ITN. Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:58, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Where in the blurb is there speculation about his cause of death.... are we reading two different blurbs? It literally says the circumstances are under investigation, which is a factually and objectively true statement, and is the exact opposite of speculative. This is not only targeted at you but is more of a general comment; with this being said, I am quite bewildered at experienced editors showing up at ITN, quite aggressively attacking an admin for making a consensus decision they disagree with when it is clear the votes are roughly ~50/50 split, and wantonly calling others, for example, "tasteless" or "promoters of "sensationalist crap". WP:AGF governs just as equally as WP:BDP. Flip^andFlopped ツ 15:09, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  No. Nothing of what I wrote spoke of anyone's intentions only the result, which is horrible. (And nothing the prior person wrote had to do with intentions, only actions, criticizing what others said). The under investigation part is the 'we don't know, something happened and we don't know what' which is absurd for an encyclopedia to jump on. The administrator made a terrible decision on a flimsy basis on a matter in contention. And you are wrong, WP:BLP takes precedence especially with a matter in contention, the thing to do under BLP is remove the Blurb, while discussion is ongoing. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:21, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I stand by tasteless, particularly many of the comments here are outrageous breaches of our BLP policy. Why the fuck are people talking about murder-suicide when there is zero information about what happened? A stack of these comments should be deleted under the BLP policy and some people left messages telling not to be so idiotic and stupid as to put forward their brain-dead theories. We have a BLP policy for a reason - and it should have stamped down on several comments in this thread straight away. - SchroCat (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Agree. Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:54, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  You are taking comments out of context in order to make some pretty serious allegations about other editors. Aside from perhaps one commenter who asked multiple people if their views would change if it was a murder suicide, most of the mentions of "murder suicide" in this thread are people saying to WAIT to post the blurb unless there is more evidence that the death flowed from something more like foul play: so, the opposite of a rush to judgment. Amongst the supporters, the reliance is simply on the manner of death being so unusual as to generate excess coverage in reliable sources: even if it is a highly unusual accident, it is the unusual death of a well-known person itself which generates the notability, not theorization of a murder. To this end, the Santa Fe Sheriff's Office themselves has declared the death "suspicious" and there is widespread acknowledgment within the RS that the death is highly unusual. If you disagree with the sheriff's decision or how the media, including RS, are characterizing the death as "suspicious", take that up with them instead of attacking and maligning other editors in violation of WP:AGF. ITN is not the place to litigate how the sheriff and media are choosing to describe the investigation. Flip^andFlopped ツ 16:08, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  No. Opposition has nothing to do with taking issue with the media or the sheriffs, it has to do with poor (and in the case of the administrator, unsupportable) decisions made by Wikipedians. Wikipedia is not the media, nor are we sheriffs. Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:18, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Respectful opposition is one thing. Bludgeoning the discussion and using a collective we to intimidate the posting admin ("we" will take you to dispute resolution), accusing 13+ editors of "fuelling crap" and being "tasteless" based on the comments of a single editor, and advancing a false allegation that simply stating factual information ("the circumstances are under investigation" is factual), somehow constitutes a BLP violation, is what I take issue with. Flip^andFlopped ツ 16:26, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I don't care what you take issue with: BLP is one of our most stringent policies on Wiki, and numerous people have completely ignored it to post nonsense that just rides roughshod over it. Describing those comments as tasteless is about as respectful as I can be on unmitigated nonsense like that. I don't think you can point to either side in this discussion and say that they are responsible for bludgeoning either - that's incredibly blinkered and utterly erroneous. Both sides have been doing that and the thread is littered with examples. I suggest you have another look to see; maybe count them up as I suspect there have been more bludgeons of the opposes, rather than support (not that I care either way too much, nor does it really matter: both sides have been doing it, which is the point). - SchroCat (talk) 16:39, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Bludgeoning? I think you must be referring to your comments. (Just look at where you are posting.) And no, using the "we" is standard practice when talking about what we do. We are responsible. And you have to be open to criticism of your positions, even strong criticism of your positions. Re-read WP:BDP, it is concerned with the implications of words - the implications of our words matter -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Pull What on earth is the point of a discussion if it's going to be unilaterally discarded by a single admin? What nonsense. Black Kite (talk) 14:02, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Many arguments against blurbing are not based on rules. BilboBeggins (talk) 15:36, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  All the opposes look to be based on "rules," the rules of ITN and Policy. Was he transformative, etc, and what kind of suggestive speculation belongs. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, he was transformative, Rolling Stones called him greatest American actor. Dustin Hoffman likened him to Brando. He is top of the field. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:42, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Youve said that a couple of times already, but neither of those sources support ‘transformative’, nor does anything in the article. Don’t get me wrong, he’s one of my favourite actors and (in my opinion) his name in the cast list is a stamp of quality, but I’m struggling to see ‘transformative’ or any other real metric which puts him in the acting equivalent of Thatcher/Mandela. - SchroCat (talk) 17:50, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  So, you admit that transformative, etc, discussion in the opposes is applying "the rules". Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  With that one I agree. I was referring to the comment like "American Celebrity dies should be RD not ITN". That someone is American plays no role in blurbing, also being a celebrity does not rule out blurbing (see Tina Turner, Betty White, Sidney Poitier, O. J. Simpson, Maggie Smith). BilboBeggins (talk) 18:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I don't think that's fair, because you could change American to any other nation, and it would still be an expression of the 'routine rule'. Alanscottwalker (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  As far as I can see, most Opposes seem to be pretty rules-based, though ironically a lot of the Supports appear to be something that should probably be called WP:WELLKNOWNACTOR, rather than any "rule". Black Kite (talk) 16:02, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Pull - I agree with pretty much everyone else above, this was a bad post. — E_F⁵ 16:04, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: I have been trying to suggest the following since yesterday, though it is always removed or overlooked.

"American actor Gene Hackman (pictured) is found dead at his home in Santa Fe, New Mexico." The "American" at the beginning means it is probably unnecessary to state where New Mexico is. It is concise and does not focus on speculation (so should not require regular updating if new information emerges). By stating it as simply as possible there is no need for words such as "circumstances" and "investigation", which makes it longer anyway. This can/should be enacted immediately if this is a BLP emergency. This appears to be a concern for many in opposition here (I haven't supported or opposed so am not really involved otherwise). The discussion can always continue afterwards. --Gaois (talk) 16:10, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment This is the second time in little over a month that robertsky has posted a recent death blurb without consensus; the previous one was Gloria Romero (discussion link), which was pulled after being posted wildly prematurely. More care is clearly required here. Black Kite (talk) 16:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I think the next stop is WP:AN, given that. This is terrible precedent. Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:25, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Gloria Romero has 18 articles in different languages, Gene Hackman has 79 as of now. He warrants blurb more than her. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:48, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Utterly not the point of my comment, but carry on. Black Kite (talk) 19:06, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Black Kite, what you say is without consensus, I saw as a rough consensus at the time of posting. You said more care is required here, but there was an intervening period of about 2 days which the discussion had remained opened before I made that decision. It wasn't done in haste at that point in time, and I believed that there was an allowance to post given that it is not strictly prohibited ("may", anyone?) in WP:ITNRDBLURB. If 2 days of extended discussion is being hasty, I shall not be bothered with posting up blurbs after RDs have been posted in similar discussions in the future. – robertsky (talk) 01:46, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Robertsky There was absolutely no consensus - not even a rough one - at the time of posting the blurb. Indeed, there were more people opposing a blurb than supporting it. Did you count those supporting an RD as supporting a blurb (though there would still have been no consensus)? Black Kite (talk) 14:38, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Black Kite I tallied only those that had blurb for or against. I am not sure how you counted, but the votes were the same, what tipped to rough consensus for were the strengths of arguments. – robertsky (talk) 17:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Robertsky I don't see how you got either equal numbers or strength of arguments. Looking only at the numbers, at the time this was posted the counts were:

  • Support blurb explicitly: 8 (Fdfexoex, TFKR Chicago 101, ArionStar, BilboBeggins, Andrew, Blaylockjam10, DriveAllKnight, Flip and Flopped)
  • Support blurb implicitly: 0
  • Oppose blurb explicitly: 13 (Amakuru, Black Kite, Thryduulf, Masem, Jessintime, Nfitz, Departure, Harizotho9, Ad Orientem, Malvoliox, TheKip, Dilettante, Alsor,
  • Oppose blurb (implicitly): 4 (Govvy, Cryptic, NoonIcarus, SpectralIon)
  • No stated opinion on blurb: 3 (Audoh8, Innisfree987, Thewolfchild)
  • Other: 2 (Wildfireupdateman, Kingsif)

  So even if you count only the explicit !votes and count the others (those who express a more complicated position) as supporting a blurb (when at the time it was posted they were closer to opposing) that's still 13-10 against. Thryduulf (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Exactly. And not only that, many of the Support arguments don't really relate to a blurb at ITN, for example ("has two Oscars", "very famous actor", "One of the best known actors", "enough critical & commercial success to merit a blurb"). Robertsky: I would take your own advice and hold off posting blurbs on this page. Black Kite (talk) 19:07, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Pull hastily published. There was no clear consensus and the real trend is against blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• 24 hours later - why is this still up?  — Amakuru (talk) 20:50, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  It's dubious that there was ever consensus for posting, but the many oppose/pull !votes since then make it very clear that there is not consensus for it now. I'd suggest that the next uninvolved (I !voted above) admin to come across this action the pull. Sdkb ^talk 21:07, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I'm also involved but I agree with Sdkb. If there ever was consensus for posting then there definitely isn't now. Thryduulf (talk) 21:42, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Timezone difference? And had been recovering from an earlier food poisoning episode, and sleep. Would have pulled about now given the evolving consensus. – robertsky (talk) 01:24, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Pulled Stephen 22:51, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  I saw that 90 minutes ago and didn't have enough time to deal with that prior to having to go into a meeting. Was going to do it now; good to see that Stephen has dealt with it already. Schwede66 23:25, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks Stephen for pulling. Would have dealt with this similarly about now as well. – robertsky (talk) 01:16, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support I don’t know whether this is still open but compared to the amount of “thing crashes, people die” WP:NOTNEWS occurrences, routine elections, and obscure sports events routinely appearing on the front page I don’t get why Hackman “only” being a highly acclaimed and iconic two-time Oscar winner is disqualifying. Dronebogus (talk) 23:50, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  Look at it this way: How many two-time Oscar winners are there? Quite a few. And since the Oscars are primarily in English, we have to multiply by every other language's film industry. If we blurbed for every death of an actor with that level of fame, it'd be on ITN fairly frequently. And if we applied the same standard to deaths in other industries, we'd have RDs on ITN constantly. There is no question that Hackman was highly acclaimed in his field. But the RD list is meant to contain recent deaths for the vast majority of notable persons, including highly acclaimed ones. The only exception to this is people whose death is such a monumental event that it constitutes an ITN-worthy event in and of itself, such as heads of state whose death precipitates a period of national mourning. That's a narrow exception, but there is pressure every time someone famous dies to expand it, and if we don't maintain it then we'll end up in a situation in which the RD loses its purpose. Death of Gene Hackman is currently a redirect, not even a standalone article, let alone one with ITN-level significance, so it does not meet the standard for blurbing. Sdkb ^talk 00:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Weak Oppose blurb I guess I would draw the line at 2 Lead Oscars. A Lead and a support, is just below where I could really show strong support. I am a big fan of his work. Being retired for over 20 years means a lot of our readership does not remember him as a working actor.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:40, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment. My 2c. I have shared this position of mine prior as well. Articles once posted to the mainpage should NOT be pulled unless there is an error (i.e. the fact being posted to mainpage is no longer true) or the article does not meet hygiene expectations of the mainpage. Yes, consensus can evolve and change, but, that is alright. Alternately, if you believe that the posting admin has incorrectly read the consensus, a gentle reprimand (e.g. a WP:TROUT) will do. That said, I have no view for or against this posting. Ktin (talk) 01:41, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  I agree, the repeated song and dance of pile-on calls to pull after a death blurb has been posted is getting pretty old. I think it reflects poorly on us. Connormah (talk) 03:13, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Pull - It was weird to have this as a blurb. Solid actor, notable, well-known, award winning, very nice guy, and a marine -- all that being true, sentiment is not a reason to have a blurb. Jehochman ^Talk 03:09, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Pull there is obvious consensus. Why are we still talking about this? –DMartin 03:34, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Admins willing to post ITN: –DMartin 03:35, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Dmartin969 it was pulled about 5 hours ago and hasn't been reposted, it can't be pulled again. If instead you meant to say "repost" then that's not going to happen: there was no consensus when it was posted, the arguments against posting were more numerous and stronger between it being posted and it being pulled, and nothing has changed consensus-wise since it was pulled. Thryduulf (talk) 03:42, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  My fault. I didn't notice it had been pulled, I just assumed it hadn't since the discussion hadn't been closed. You know what they say happens when you assume… –DMartin 03:44, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• For the record note that the readership for Hackman yesterday dropped to the point that it was only the #2 top read story with 375,000 views – but still way more than the other ITN blurbs. Replacing his blurb with the Oscar ceremony makes a nice segue as he won two himself and a special tribute was made about him at that ceremony, seeming to stand out from all the others in the In Memoriam segment.

And, despite all the fuss here about RD/blurb, I don't get the impression that this has been noticed or made any difference outside of the ITN bubble. It was a storm in a teacup.

Andrew🐉(talk) 10:45, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment. This discussion proves once again that while "death not relevant/not the story/not extraordinary" is a valid, routinely used argument for opposing any blurb of a person whose death wasn't unexpected, when the death truly IS the main story, Wikipedians choose to collectively ignore that. At this point, there's no logic at all behind any figure being/not being blurbed, it usually goes down to fans of the dead person vs. people who have never heard of them (often because they're from a different continent) arguing for/against a blurb precisely because they're fans/because they've never heard of them. The rules should be modified to either explicitly mention that only influential former state leaders - the only individuals for whom bona fide consensus is able to develop - can get blurbed (current state leaders are ITN/R anyway), or to entirely eliminate the possibility of blurbing deaths. But frankly, even doing away with ITN altogether wouldn't be a bad idea, that section is not what attracts people to the site in any case. TVShowFan122 (talk) 16:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Just like the "major figure" criteria, "death as the news" is a subjective measure. But most of the time we've used this in the past the means of death was clear, like assassination, death by suicide, or being in a major transportation accident. The situation around Hackmans death is still up in the air of whether it was natural causes or suicide or something else, but key is that emphasizing that speculation is trending on bad BLP waters, we are not TMZ. It us absolutely fair to say that we should elevate an yet known cause of death, particularly as we are also seeing editors here trying to push the "major figure" reason with lots of handwaving of demonstrating importance. It's far more complicated than previous RD blurbs as to not try to use this as a reason to push change. — Masem (t) 18:02, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Suggest Close There is no realistic likelihood of a consensus forming to post this as a blurb. It's time to lower the curtain and move on. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:29, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

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.

(Closed) Discovery of Pompeian frescoes

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

---

Articles: Conservation and restoration of Pompeian frescoes (talk · history · tag) and House of Thiasus (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Archeologists discover historical large frescoes at the House of Thiasus in Pompeii, Campania, Italy, providing insight into the Dionysian Mysteries. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

• Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)

 ArionStar (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality. The first bolded article does not mention the discoveries, and the second bolded article is purely a stub. Besides quality concerns, discovery of frescoes may not be ITN-significant either. Natg 19 (talk) 03:03, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  That the frescoes relate to the Cult of Dionysus - one of the bigger mysteries of ancient Rome - indicates there is likely some significance, but it is impossible to tell with the article(s) in such inadequate states. Curbon7 (talk) 03:25, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality and weak oppose on notability per Natg. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Weak support in principle - the "discover" article should NOT be the bolded one, it hasn't even been edited since April last year. The actual target article, House of Thiasus, is a stub, so strong oppose on quality. Departure– (talk) 03:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Maybe It's in the news and so merits attention. But I get the impression that there's a lot more to it than this particular fresco. For example, I find that there was a recent Great Pompeii Project which lasted 10 years and did a huge amount of work, including a discovery which helps date the eruption. This latest discovery seems to be part of a subsequent big dig which is ongoing and so generating regular reports such as last month's bathhouse. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose. Interesting finding, but new friezes and mosaics are being uncovered at Pompeii every few years, as more of the site is excavated. These latest ones do not seem particularly unusual or influential - they provide only an incremental advance in our understanding. That's reflected in the media reports, which provide few details, being mostly background about the site. The House of Thiasus article (which should be the bold link) is a two-sentence stub, while Conservation and restoration of Pompeian frescoes does not even mention the latest findings. Modest Genius ^talk 13:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  PS. If House of Thiasus can be sufficiently expanded, it might work at WP:DYK. Modest Genius ^talk 14:10, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per MG. This is but one set of several such discoveries over the years, and while it is important to study to learn more about the culture at the time, isn't likely to bring us any breakthroughs in understanding what happed in Pompeii. Masem (t) 13:43, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose - While cool, I don't see this being ITN-worthy to a large audience; things like this happen all the time (per MG). — E_F⁵ 14:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose The first bolded article has no update and the second bolded article is a stub. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Anil R. Joshi

Article: Anil R. Joshi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chitralekha (in Gujarati), Indian Express
Credits:

• Nominated by Fahads1982 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Gazal world (talk · give credit) and Nizil Shah (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Might need some copyediting Fahads1982^talk/contrib 18:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support. The article seems adequate enough. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 22:27, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Posted – robertsky (talk) 16:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Michelle Trachtenberg

Article: Michelle Trachtenberg (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [14]
Credits:

• Nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Jolielover (talk · give credit), CarciaNullius (talk · give credit) and Malvoliox (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 17:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose for the usual reason of a mostly-uncited filmography. The Kip ^(contribs) 17:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  Now fully cited. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 20:20, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support - Notable death, highly covered in international news. --CommanderShepardX (talk) 18:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  @CommanderShepardX 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. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  I don't need your opinion on the interpretation or classification of ITN. CommanderShepardX (talk) 19:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  That literally is ITN's guideline, not my opinion. The Kip ^(contribs) 20:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  I don't think The Kip is trying to be snarky; your comment is confusing because it is unclear what you are "supporting". Notability and internationality of coverage is simply not a consideration for whether an article is suitable for RD - that is only a criterion for a blurb. However, this nomination is not for a blurb, and nobody has yet explicitly proposed a blurb. So, are you suggesting she should have a blurb in addition to RD, or did you just not realize that RD noms are only about article quality? Flip^andFlopped ツ 21:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Needs work This article will be getting lots of readers regardless of what ITN does – it's had over 100K in the last month and that's before this news. Those readers won't be looking for references for the filmography – that's a very low priority. They will be starting with the lead which currently doesn't even say that she's dead. It's the details of the death which are the priority because it was untimely and her illness/liver transplant is currently unclear. The NYT published a short report just 37 minutes ago which says that "A full obituary will follow." We should follow their lead as we want a good respectable source like this. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)(edit conflict)
• Oppose for now. As the top editor of the page in terms of authorship, I do not believe it has reached quality standards expected of articles featured on the main page. As previously stated, much of the filmography is uncited, and some statements in the main prose too. I've been trying to help on the citations bit, however the high number of edits every minute makes this really hard. I'm going to postpone my editing attempts until tomorrow so the page can hopefully cool down; then, we can work on the citations and prose, and I'm sure the article will be good to go :) jolielover♥talk 19:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Support the article has improved significantly, all sourced up, adequate for main page jolielover♥talk 02:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose for now - quality concerns. Getting closer to adequate quality, though. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support, article is in good shape, not perfect, but certainly acceptable. –DMartin 19:32, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support - Notable, and article is not in a bad shape. It is definitely better than some of other, current RD article's quality. 51.154.145.205 (talk) 19:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support per above. All CN tags have been addressed; the article is not perfect (still needs more info on her death, but that is forthcoming). However it is well above the typical minimum threshold which we require for RD. Flip^andFlopped ツ 21:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose for now (until the page stabilizes a bit). We are getting a lot of vandalism right now. If we're able to get to a stable version soon enough, it is well-cited and contains the bones of being ready, save for the aforementioned unconstructive edits. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 22:32, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support per FlipandFlopped. Steam5 (talk) 01:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support and marked ready. there are no outstanding tags, no glaring errors or omissions (afaict there is no more information about her death that has been made public). The article is semi-protected which seems to have dealt with the vandalism, so no reason not to post (I'd do it myself if I were more awake). Thryduulf (talk) 02:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Note: I am holding off posting this until at least 4 hours from now as the current bunch of RDs are on there for less than 12 hours. – robertsky (talk) 04:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Posted Stephen 11:19, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jeong Su-il

Article: Jeong Su-il (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20250225115600004
Credits:

• Nominated by Didgogns (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former North Korean spy, NK defector, one of leading West Asia experts in South Korea Didgogns (talk) 03:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Biographical sections are barely longer than a stub, and the Writings and Translations sections are wholly uncited. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment A North Korean spy who became an Arabic and Silk Road expert and posed as a Filipino in the Middle East (aka Muhammad Kansu); defected to South Korea and furthered his research on the Silk Road. Quite a story, the lead simply does not do a good job at all. Gotitbro (talk) 15:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Support the lead and article have been expanded. This is an interesting story about a person. Rynoip (talk) 20:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support The issues mentioned in the first comment seem to have been cleaned up, the article seems well cited and sourced. Seems fine to me to run. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:07, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Posted– robertsky (talk) 19:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

February 25

Portal:Current events/2025 February 25

February 25, 2025 (2025-02-25) (Tuesday) Armed conflicts and attacks Kivu conflict M23 campaign 2025 Uvira offensive The Congolese military launches an attack against M23-aligned rebels around the town of Minembwe in South Kivu in an effort to recapture it, and claims to have killed four rebel commanders in a drone strike. (Critical Threats Project) Syrian civil war Israeli invasion of Syria The Israeli Air Force strikes targets throughout Southern Syria as Israel begins a military operation to "demilitarize" the southern Syrian governorates of Daraa, Suwayda and Quneitra. Syrian state media reports airstrikes near Damascus. At least two people are reportedly killed. (ABC News) (The Times of India) 2020s European re-armament The United Kingdom announces an increase in military spending to 2.5% of its GDP by 2027, and 3% by 2034 at the latest. The move comes just before UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is to meet with U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday in Washington, D.C. (The New York Times) Casamance conflict The Senegalese government and the Movement of Democratic Forces of Casamance reach an agreement to end their 40-year conflict at talks mediated by Bissau-Guinean President Umaro Sissoco Embalo. (The Defense Post) Central African Republic Civil War Nine people are killed and hundreds of homes are burned down in 3R rebel attacks in Bamingui-Bangoran, Central African Republic. (AP) Business and economy American fabrics and handicraft supplies retail chain Jo-Ann Stores files its second bankruptcy claim and announces it will close all 800 stores in the 49 states, with liquidation sales beginning immediately. (NPR) Iraq agrees to reopen the oil pipeline between Iraqi Kurdistan and Turkey after a conversation between U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia' Al Sudani, having been closed for two years due to a dispute between Iraq and Turkey. (Andalou Agency) (The Arab Weekly) Disasters and accidents 2025 Chile blackout A nationwide power outage occurs in Chile, impacting most of the country's population and causing the temporary stoppage of several significant industries. (Reuters) 2025 Queensland floods At least twelve people are killed by a melioidosis outbreak caused by standing waters from persistent flooding in Queensland, Australia. (7News) 2025 Sudanese Air Force Antonov An-26 crash A Sudanese military plane crashes shortly after takeoff from Wadi Seidna Air Base on the outskirts of the capital Khartoum, killing at least 46 people and injuring several others. (BBC News) Four workers are killed and six others are injured when an elevated highway under construction collapses in Cheonan, South Chungcheong Province, South Korea. (AP) A magnitude 5.9 earthquake hits near the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, with no damage reported. (ABC News) International relations Rwanda–United Kingdom relations, Democratic Republic of the Congo–Rwanda conflict The UK government suspends financial aid and imposes economic sanctions on several high-ranking Rwandan officials over the country's military support for M23 rebels in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (Reuters) Ukraine–United States relations Ukrainian Justice Minister Olha Stefanishyna announces that Ukraine has reached a deal with the United States on mineral resources. (Kyiv Independent) Law and crime 2025 Thiruvananthapuram mass murder A man brutally beat ( five people, including his brother, girlfriend, to death with a hammer in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, South India. gulfnews Economic Times Environmental issues in Brazil The Brazilian Public Prosecutor's Office files a lawsuit against mining corporation Vale S.A. and the state of Pará for mass metal poisoning that has affected the Xikrin indigenous people, whose Indigenous Territory is located in the state. (News-Press NOW) The Indonesian Attorney General’s Office arrests three executives of state-owned oil and gas company Pertamina on charges of corruption and fraud regarding gasoline quality that cost the government more than $11 billion USD. (The Straits Times) (The Jakarta Globe) Politics and elections Second presidency of Donald Trump Executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump U.S. District Judge for the Western Washington District Court Jamal Whitehead temporarily blocks President Donald Trump's executive order to suspend the Refugee Admissions Program, ruling that President Trump cannot nullify the law passed by Congress, following a lawsuit against the Trump administration by the International Refugee Assistance Project. (AP)

---

(Posted) RD: Vimala Rangachar

Article: Vimala Rangachar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:

• Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Indian educationist. Rater.js says B-class, but, the article has shaped up at least to a Start or perhaps even a C-class biography. Ktin (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Suppport Looks good enough. – robertsky (talk) 01:06, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Posted Stephen 02:33, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Simon Lindley

Article: Simon Lindley (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Franz Liszt Academy of Music
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
• Updated by PamD (talk · give credit) and Sfjohna (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Organist and Master of Music at Leeds Minster, with a load of other posts in choral conducting, academic teaching, music publishing and administration. The article was there but with few refs. The obit from the Minster is very engaged and personal, but also full of facts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:05, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support. Seems good enough. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 21:41, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support Article's quality is fine enough for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:04, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk)

(Posted) RD: Ferenc Rados

Article: Ferenc Rados (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Franz Liszt Academy of Music
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Influential Hungarian piano teacher at the Franz Liszt Academy of Music of a generation of students. The article was a stub with a long lists of students. Only the students with articles remained, still many. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Not Ready. The article still needs some work done. Changing to Weak Support. The article is well sourced and its structure is barely adequate. If more information could be added, that would be great. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 21:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Support Sufficient in all relevant aspects. Grimes2 (talk) 11:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 02:19, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

RD: Jennifer Johnston (novelist)

Article: Jennifer Johnston (novelist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.rte.ie/culture/2025/0226/1499010-jennifer-johnston/
Credits:

• Nominated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Needs references for list of works and awards. Will try to work on this. Natg 19 (talk) 18:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per nom on the works list - bio isn't much longer than a stub either. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

The works list now has a lot of references, but isn't fully done yet. Natg 19 (talk) 07:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kazimierz Romaniuk

Article: Kazimierz Romaniuk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.vaticannews.va/pl/kosciol/news/2025-02/zmarl-biskup-senior-kazimierz-romaniuk.html
Credits:

• Nominated by EUPBR (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Michael Valentini (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 EUPBR (talk) 13:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Very weak support I don't technically see anything wrong, but I'm a little concerned how much the article seemingly relies on the first source. The Kip ^(contribs) 17:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  Entry available here in the Internet Archive. The publishing house is associated with Jagiellonian University (per [15]) and while I don't speak Polish it seems fine at a glance. Curbon7 (talk) 00:41, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support article is decent length and the sources used are reliable; it is of sufficient quality for RD. Flip^andFlopped ツ 23:47, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 02:17, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

2025 Sudanese Air Force Antonov An-26 crash

Article: 2025 Sudanese Air Force Antonov An-26 crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Sudanese Air Force plane crashes near Wadi Seidna Air Base, Omdurman, killing at least 46 people. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)

 ArionStar (talk) 13:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support on notability, oppose on article quality Personisinsterest (talk) 13:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• While we have generally avoided posting military craft disasters (such accidents being seen as part of the risk inherent in their jobs), the claim that this also carried several high-ranking officials of the Sudanese military forces brings that beyond just a military crash. But that all needs to be confirmed, along with article expansion. --Masem (t) 13:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Wait for more details. We don't know who was aboard or which type of aircraft was involved (only that it was made by Antonov), let alone what might have caused the crash. 46 deaths is a lot even for a military crash, but the article needs more information to properly assess the significance. Modest Genius ^talk 15:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  Weak support. The article is in better shape now and has more information. This seems borderline on notability, but is good enough to post. Modest Genius ^talk 11:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Conditional support, but oppose on quality Article needs more sources to make a quality article. INeedSupport ^:3 17:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose - on quality in general, given the article's short length, and on notability overall, per Masem's reasoning. One high-ranking military official among the dead does not elevate this beyond the significance of other military accidents and incidents. The Kip ^(contribs) 17:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support Damn thing crashed into a residential neighborhood, killing 29 and injuring 10. All people on board were fatalities. So it's not just a military crash, and it wasn't even directly tied to the conflict, it's a civilian disaster. The article needs work and needs expansion though. Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Strong Support on notability, neutral on quality. Large amount of civilian casualties, article is short but has no glaring problems. –DMartin 19:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Wait a few days, conditional support for more info. Article is slightly stubby for now but I can work with that. Support on notability. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 19:42, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Also, I can't find the source that states it was an AN-26. Am I just blind? Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 19:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Maybe here... can't state how reliable this is as a source though Montezuma69 (talk) 20:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support; but as I've been updating/contributing to the article, I have not come across a definitive, independent and reliable source to say it was an Antonov An-26, other than on some aviation-specific websites that I cannot vouch for quality. Montezuma69 (talk) 21:15, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  You may be right. I have seen multiple articles calling it an Antonov, but not the specific An-26. Maybe change it for now? Harizotoh9 (talk) 15:17, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support per dmartin969. Especially in light of us posting Med Jets Flight 056 it is somewhat settled precedent at ITN that crashing into a densely populated area and inflicting mass damage/casualties on the ground, enhances notability. This is especially true here - even if there weren't any high-profile military on board it is well-clear of our minimum threshold for blurb notability, IMHO. Flip^andFlopped ツ 21:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  As someone who was against posting that as well, just because ITN makes a mistake once in a while doesn't mean it needs to double down on said mistake. The Kip ^(contribs) 21:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Observation 2012 Talodi Antonov An-26 crash was posted. ArionStar (talk) 23:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  Over a decade ago. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:15, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  And with similar notability and casualties, this should be a pretty arguable precedent.廣九直通車 (talk) 04:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. "People died" is not a claim to significance. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 18:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  It having several high-ranking officers on board, as well as it crashing in a residential neighbourhood, definitely are claims to significance.   Jalapeño   (c) 19:42, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Ongoing covers this via the timeline entry. It doesn't seem big enough news to warrant more. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:27, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

RD: Vladimir Beșleagă

Article: Vladimir Beșleagă (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stiri.md ProTV Chișinău Ziarul de Gardă Adevărul
Credits:

• Nominated by Chesspugnator (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

• Oppose as a virtual stub. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

(Closed) End of Casamance conflict

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

---

Article: Casamance conflict (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The government of Senegal and the Movement of Democratic Forces of Casamance reach an agreement to end the Casamance conflict. (Post)
News source(s): The Defense Post
Credits:

• Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)

 ArionStar (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose As the linked article says, this is a first step towards peace, it is not a firm commitment. Masem (t) 01:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per Masem. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose. The article indicates that there has been a ceasefire since 2014, with attacks being rare since then, and multiple previous attempts to find a permanent peace deal. This latest development gets only 3 sentences in the article, one of which says one of the dissident factions has refused to agree to it. So it seems to be one more unsuccessful attempt that hasn't satisfied all the rebels. There's little coverage in mainstream media either. Seems too incremental for ITN to declare it's the end of the conflict. Modest Genius ^talk 15:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per Masem. I do think it is notable if there’s a firm end. Personisinsterest (talk) 21:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

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.

(Closed) Ukraine signs the critical minerals deal

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

---

Article: Russo-Ukrainian War (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ukraine agrees to the critical minerals deal which is a huge advancement in the Russo-Ukraine war. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/25/world/europe/ukraine-minerals-deal.html
Credits:

• Nominated by 135.180.61.27 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: A critical diplomatic improvement in the Russo-Ukraine war.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.180.61.27 (talk) 23:58, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Wait There is no deal yet. The NYT article just says that they have "agreed" to a deal, but nothing official has come out. Unclear if this is even significant enough or ITN-worthy, but for now, this should not be posted. Natg 19 (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

The target article also probably should be Ukraine–United States relations. Natg 19 (talk) 00:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

If anything , this should be covered under the ongoing, since this was claimed to be step Trump claimed would lead Russia to withdraw from the conflict. --Masem (t) 01:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Regardless of the outcome, this development isn't even noticeable. Hence oppose on this blurb. Rager7 (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per above, not to mention the editorializing in the current proposed blurb. Estreyeria (talk) 01:40, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose Blurb is editorial, and the Russo-Ukrainian War is covered by ongoing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per above - covered by ongoing, and blurb is highly editorialized. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. There are lots of problems with this nomination. The blurb is biased not neutral; no deal has been signed yet, only hearsay reports that an agreement has been reached; we wouldn't post such a mineral deal if Trump hadn't been talking it up; the war is already in ongoing; there's no update whatsoever in that article, which doesn't even mention this deal; there should really be a stand-alone article with the detailed content of the agreement and discussion of the diplomacy around it; and this is not a major development in the war itself just haggling about how the US provides support. Any one of those would be enough to sink this nomination. Modest Genius ^talk 11:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose wrong target article, other problems per above. Scuba 12:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Oppose, nothing has been signed yet, the deal itself has no article of its own, and the blurb is editorial. Unless there's a ceasefire or Russia drops nukes in the capital, this war is covered under the Ongoing conflicts. 675930s (talk) 13:32, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Strong oppose Huge in this context is an awfully informal word, wouldn't you think? I echo the concerns of editorializing shared above as well. Departure– (talk) 15:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Roberto Orci

Article: Roberto Orci (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Screenwriter and producer. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 23:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Strong support, well-cited 675930s (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Note: There are some entries in Filography section requiring citations. – robertsky (talk) 15:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

I am still unclear on what the policy is for citing filmographies, and have received conflicting information on this front. Certainly uncredited work requires a citation, but is a citation required every time for a work in which someone is credited onscreen? ITN participants seem to say yes, other discussions I've had with editors elsewhere are split, and one time I added citations to a living actor's filmography and was reverted on every one except the uncredited ones, with the editor claiming it was unnecessary if they appear in the credits/poster billing. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 18:47, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

@Sunshineisles2 in general ITN operates on the basis that the article has to be at GA level even if they are not rated as one yet at least for ensuring that the facts are cited properly, that includes every entry in the filmography. Such articles may end up being GA articles in the end after all the work that had been done. – robertsky (talk) 17:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

@Robertsky: The filmography is completely cited now. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 21:46, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Posted Stephen 02:10, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

(Closed) 2025 Chile blackout

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

---

Article: 2025 Chile blackout (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A major power outage takes place in Chile. (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Diversifying the ITN template. ArionStar (talk) 23:32, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose barring it going on longer than a day, this was the result of human error and power is expected to be restored in a few hours. It's an interesting story and thus suitable for DYK, but not significant enough for ITNMasem (t) 23:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose Good faith nom. I'm not 100% convinced that this is going to be an event of sufficient impact to justify an article much less a blurb at ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose It lasted 4 hours... --SpectralIon 01:03, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose - No major impact besides a few-hour power outage, which happens relatively often (the monkey-touched-a-powerstation incident in Sri Lanka from earlier this year immediately comes to mind). — E_F⁵ 01:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per above - seems to have had a generally limited impact. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support. If I remember correctly, we have posted US cities blackouts before. This affected a whole country. The article is short but properly cited. Alexcalamaro (talk) 05:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. It's not significant enough to post on ITN. IDB.S (talk) 08:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support This affected 14 of 16 regions of Chile, more than 90% of the total population. How come this is not significant enough? In some cities (including mine) it lasted for over eight hours. Definitely outstanding. Bedivere (talk) 02:48, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support on significance as per Alexcalamaro and Bedivere. Over 90% of the population was affected; this is unusual and notable. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 13:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Abdullah Al Noman

Article: Abdullah Al Noman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): observer bd
Credits:

• Nominated by Fahads1982 (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

 Fahads1982^talk/contrib 20:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Support Article seems to be fully-cited and length is enough. The Kip ^(contribs) 03:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 11:15, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

RD: Clint Hill (Secret Service Agent)

Article: Clint Hill (Secret Service) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Politico
Credits:

• Nominated by Ad Orientem (talk · give credit)

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: US Secret Service agent who tried to shield JFK in Dallas. Died on 02/21 but just announced. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose The "Assassination of President Kennedy" is missing some sources. 139.164.154.34 (talk) 08:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support. BTW, I'm not sure what the previous oppose !vote means, but it is not very relevant.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Ianmacm: the IP is referring to how the #Assasination of President Kennedy section of the article is largely uncited. — Knightoftheswords 16:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  I agree. That section needs some work on refs. I've tagged it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

RD: John Lawlor

Article: John Lawlor (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today
Credits:

• Nominated by mike_gigs (talk · give credit)

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Died on February 13 but was just announced today. The article is in rough shape.  ✈ mike_gigs ^talk_contribs 22:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Article is far too stubby and there is a surprisingly little amount of cited areas. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 13:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

References

Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents: