Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
 | Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
In the news toolbox |
|---|
This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS. Archives of past nominations can be found here.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.
A blurb is a one sentence summary of the news story. An alternate suggestion for the blurb is called an altblurb, and any more suggestions get labelled alt1, alt2, etc. A blurb needs at least one target article, highlighted in bold; reviewers check the quality of that article and whether it is updated, and whether reliable sources demonstrate the significance of the event. Other articles can also be linked. The Ongoing line is for regularly updated articles which cover events that remain in the news over a longer period of time. RD stands for the "recent deaths" line, and can include any living thing whose death was recently announced. In some cases, recent deaths may need additional explanation as provided by a blurb; this is decided by consensus.
.jpg) Vladimir Putin
view — page history — related changes — edit |
How to nominate an itemIn order to suggest a candidate:
There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN. Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template. Headers
Voicing an opinion on an item
Please do...
Please do not...
Suggesting updatesA posted ITNC item that needs correcting can be addressed in two ways:
|
Archives
March 20
|
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
International relations
Law and crime
|
IPCC Sixth Assessment report
Article: IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change completes its Sixth Assessment Report with a final warning. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change completes its Sixth Assessment Report, outline actions humanity must take now to avoid irreversible global warning by 2030.
News source(s): Guardian; The Times; NYT
Credits:
Article updated
Blurb: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change completes its Sixth Assessment Report with a final warning. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change completes its Sixth Assessment Report, outline actions humanity must take now to avoid irreversible global warning by 2030.
News source(s): Guardian; The Times; NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Chidgk1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: As suggested below. There's work to do on the update... Andrew🐉(talk) 13:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose - as mentioned, not really updated. Additionally, the blurb above leaves out too much information for the reader. The IPCC's 6th assessment on what? What was the warning about? Finally, I question the long term applicability of this story given how prior UN predictions about climate change have aged wildly unwell and its pretty obvious that when it comes to climate change, everyone is naturally incentivized to exaggerate the severity to generate clicks and attention. Crusader1096 (message) 14:51, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Strong Support - Yes, yes, WP:RGW, but this is massive, massive news - a wake-up call to the world, in case all the previous evidence wasn't convincing enough. And it's made headlines across multiple reliable sources. I find Knightoftheswords's oppose rationale unconvincing; any perceived lack of accuracy regarding any prior assessments by the United Nations does not and will not diminish the significance of their office nor of this story. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 15:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Very significant even if the report would not get countries like mine to change their practices. MarioJump83 (talk) 16:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. I would be less opposed to this nom if the major components of this report had not already been published. As the article acknowledges, this report is composed of three main parts, the most recent having been published nearly a year ago. While the headlines are about the finished report at the moment, if any country is only now having a "wake-up call", they must have been asleep over the past two years. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Weak Support - @Knightoftheswords281 makes some good points, and the blurb isn't fit for posting, but at the end of the day I do think this is an event that should be ITN/R. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Per all of the above, User:Editor 5426387 (talk), 13:13, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per DarkSide. I can certainly see its notability, but the most recent part of the report having been published a year ago raises questions as to whether this is even eligible for ITNR or not. The Kip (talk) 17:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose today's publication of the report doesn't really change anything or tell us anything we didn't already know before (either from previous reports/news or from parts of this report that were already in the public domain). I don't think the publication itself is ITN-worthy 2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:60F7:5482:A96:B5CC (talk) 19:48, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose per DarkSide. There's not much in here we didn't already know. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:15, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
March 19
|
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
|
(Ready) RD: Earl of Crawford
Article: Robert Lindsay, 29th Earl of Crawford (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph
Credits:
- Nominated by The C of E (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Chrislindesay (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 peer, former Minister of Defence and last living MP elected in 1955 The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 21:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Ancestry needs a cite. Probably should have one for the arms too. Honours is missing two cites.-Ad Orientem (talk) 00:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)- @Ad Orientem: All are cited now. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 06:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Looks good now. --Vacant0 (talk) 11:50, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Marking as ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:12, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Agree. Jusdafax (talk) 15:35, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support, Article is ok . Alex-h (talk) 15:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Looks good to me; this looks ready to post. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) Acquisition of Credit Suisse by UBS
Article: Acquisition of Credit Suisse by UBS (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: After Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, Credit Suisse is the third major bank to fail within a few days, and is acquired by UBS. (Post)
Alternative blurb: After a series of bank failures in the United States, Swiss bank Credit Suisse is acquired by UBS.
Alternative blurb II: After a series of bank failures in the United States, Swiss bank UBS acquires Credit Suisse, its competitor, to prevent its failure.
Alternative blurb III: After a series of bank failures in the United States, Swiss bank Credit Suisse is acquired by UBS.
Alternative blurb IV: Swiss bank UBS announces its intention to acquire its competitor Credit Suisse.
Alternative blurb V: Swiss bank UBS announces its intention to acquire its competitor Credit Suisse in a government-brokered deal.
News source(s): BBC, Washington Post
Credits:
Blurb: After Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, Credit Suisse is the third major bank to fail within a few days, and is acquired by UBS. (Post)
Alternative blurb: After a series of bank failures in the United States, Swiss bank Credit Suisse is acquired by UBS.
Alternative blurb II: After a series of bank failures in the United States, Swiss bank UBS acquires Credit Suisse, its competitor, to prevent its failure.
Alternative blurb III: After a series of bank failures in the United States, Swiss bank Credit Suisse is acquired by UBS.
Alternative blurb IV: Swiss bank UBS announces its intention to acquire its competitor Credit Suisse.
Alternative blurb V: Swiss bank UBS announces its intention to acquire its competitor Credit Suisse in a government-brokered deal.
News source(s): BBC, Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Sandstein (talk · give credit)
- Created by Red-tailed hawk (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: This blurb should replace the existing bank collapse blurb. Major development in a developing global banking crisis. This is a breaking story, the Swiss government press conference announcing the acquisition is ongoing as I type this. Sandstein 19:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support on notability. I'm still working on getting the article in shape (and I can't speak Swiss German, so I'm relying heavily on U.S./U.K. financial media to expand this); it may be several hours before the quality is there. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:06, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Red-tailed hawk, thanks for your work. Swiss media are published in Standard German and French, not Swiss German, which should help. Here are a few Swiss media live blogs which should be accessible with Google Translate if necessary: Swiss TV, Swiss Radio. There is also Swissinfo in English. Sandstein 19:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support alternative blurb 2 as an independent entry (i.e. at the top of ITN). I think it is the most precise; there is good sourcing for it, and the global significance is obvious. The page appears to be good to post at this point, though development will be needed to make the article more comprehensive. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:22, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- I also support alternative blurb 4. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support on notability. This is a major development in the history of Switzerland, of its financial sector, and it is of great importance to the rest of the world.
- XA1dUXvugi (talk) 19:46, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support something If there was an article covering the ongoing crisis in the banking sector, I think I'd support putting that in ongoing. But clearly this is a very significant move. On Friday people were openly warning that Credit Suisse was teetering on the brink and its collapse could set off a financial panic. Not sure how to frame this as a blurb that keeps everything in the context of a crisis in the global banking system. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:55, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- If more banks fail, perhaps we should consider an ongoing nomination for this item? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support, propose altblurb Significance is obvious, wrote altblurb for conciseness/clarity. The Kip (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support, propose altblurb, can be linked to the article on Bank collapses. Technically this is the fourth and not the third bank to collapse in March. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment This is not a bank failure; UBS stepped to acquire the bank to ward off a future collapse. Only two banks so far have been tank over by a government as a result of a failure. --Masem (t) 20:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Masem, that is true, but my understanding is that the two US banks were also not actually insolvent yet, either, when they were taken over. Maybe a better alt blurb would be "After a series of bank failures in the United States, UBS acquires Credit Suisse to prevent its failure". The proposed altblurb makes it sound like a standard corporate merger, whereas this was more like a shotgun wedding pushed through by global financial regulators to prevent the collapse of a globally systemically relevant bank and thereby a major financial crisis. Sandstein 20:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is complicated because UBS had been looking to acquire Credit Suisse's stable operations for a long time. The controversy at the bank is more related to its investment banking subsidiary First Boston, which is primarily based in the US, so UBS wanted to acquire the Credit Suisse assets minus the First Boston stuff. The current situation is giving UBS a chance to acquire Credit Suisse at a steep discount and also get numerous guarantees from the government over the investment banking subsidiary. Septemberisnottheseptmonth (talk) 00:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Masem, that is true, but my understanding is that the two US banks were also not actually insolvent yet, either, when they were taken over. Maybe a better alt blurb would be "After a series of bank failures in the United States, UBS acquires Credit Suisse to prevent its failure". The proposed altblurb makes it sound like a standard corporate merger, whereas this was more like a shotgun wedding pushed through by global financial regulators to prevent the collapse of a globally systemically relevant bank and thereby a major financial crisis. Sandstein 20:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support in principle, but the article needs to be expanded before it gets posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:00, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Kiril Simeonovski, I've expanded the article, although there is still much room for expansion; the global financial press will certainly provide ample coverage in the coming days. Sandstein 22:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the great work. Looks good to go now.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Kiril Simeonovski, I've expanded the article, although there is still much room for expansion; the global financial press will certainly provide ample coverage in the coming days. Sandstein 22:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support with a new burb and an expanded article. The altburb implies that there is a direct link to the US bank collapses and this event, even though the root causes of these two events are different. Technically, Credit Suisse did not fail as the blurb said. This acquisition prevents its failure and possibly a major financial crisis. The term "fail" in the blurb does not seem to be exact.--Maxxies (talk) 21:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Altblurb 2 proposed. Sandstein 22:15, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose - Credit Suisse did not fail. A major reason for the acquisition was to prevent volatility in the global markets, and it is also important to note that UBS has been looking to acquire Credit Suisse for a long time. Septemberisnottheseptmonth (talk) 23:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support alternate blurb Something like
- After a series of bank failures in the United States, the Swiss government arranges for the takeover of embattled bank Credit Suisse by its competitor UBS, to prevent further financial contagion. This wasn’t a normal M&A deal, but a government-backed private-sector bailout, and in my opinion should be noted as such. Credit Suisse’s AT1 bond holders are getting wiped out; shareholders are getting a 60-70% haircut; and the Swiss National Bank has stood behind all this guaranteeing $100 billion+ in backstops & extra liquidity. 2601:642:4C02:5D7E:5952:3E9E:551C:3E8A (talk) 00:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. Credit Suisse did not fail, and acquisition's not nearly as noteworthy. Furthermore, it is irresponsible to conflate the US failures with this event. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support altblurb IV CS is a globally systemically important bank, and the acquisition is basically described as a "shotgun wedding" forced upon UBS. Just the merger by itself would have been ITN-worthy, the circumstances make it more so. However, conflating it witb SVB et al. would be somewhat of an OR violation. Juxlos (talk) 01:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Support altburb II per above. DecafPotato (talk) 02:13, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Changing my vote to supporting altburb IV per Chrisclear. DecafPotato (talk) 04:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)- Oppose The proposed blurb, oppose altblurb 1, oppose altblurb 2, oppose altblurb 3. This has no direct relation to Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, or US bank failures generally. I added altblurb 4, which I support, and I would support a similar blurb that does not try to draw a dubious line between this and American banks. I also support altblurb 5. Chrisclear (talk) 10:25, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose any of the blurbs connecting this to the US banks, CS has had its own issues for months now. Dont think the acquisition is all that front-page worthy by itself either, but if there is any blurb worth posting it is only altblurb 4. nableezy - 04:15, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Added Alt V as basically every RS noted that the Swiss government was heavily involved in the deal. Juxlos (talk) 05:35, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Alt V also works for me. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support altburb V: Don't support burbs I to III. Readers must reach their own conclusions after reading the article, whether or not, or to what extent was the event related to US bank bailouts, and not CS's own making. — hako9 (talk) 08:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support altblurb V - Per all of the insightful comments above. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Alt V Lets not tie this to whatever happened in the USA at SVB / Signature bank, they are seperate events. ✨ 4 🧚♂am KING 12:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree that they should not be tied, but we should be aware that the collapse of SVB did trigger a general panic around banking globally as a result. Panics are hard to document and , per RECENTISM, we should not rush to make a connection (the timing aspects can be discussed on the CS page) but we should be aware that most economic experts point to SVB as the first domino here. Masem (t) 12:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Per all of the above, User:Editor 5426387 (talk), 13:13, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support and any of these blurbs work for me. I find #3 to be brief and factual. Jusdafax (talk) 15:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Resigned support - I suppose given that we already posted the story about the Silicon Valley Bank's collapse, we sort of have to continue the story here on ITN, since this now has international impact. But for God's sake let's trim down the number of alt-blurbs. I support using either IV or V, none of the others, certainly not the ones referring to the U.S. bank collapses.--⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 15:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support altblurb IV or V This is a big deal, an economic disaster averted or stalled for now. MarioJump83 (talk) 16:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support altblurb V A major deal and the target articles look ready to be posted for ITN. Vida0007 (talk) 18:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- support Altblurb V seems like the best hook for this. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted. Used Altblurb V. -- tariqabjotu 21:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Sargassum bloom
Blurb: Millions of tons of Sargassum (pictured) start to inundate coastlines around the Caribbean. (Post)
News source(s): Scientific American; National Geographic; CNN; Guardian; NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: It seems that these annual blooms have become a big deal since 2011 but I noticed it now because it's in the news. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:15, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose While I've seen this all over the news, it doesn't seem like a major disaster or the like, more another sign of climate change. --Masem (t) 14:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Climate change is quite major. This particular aspect is affecting numerous countries and thousands of people. Compare Gualaca bus crash, which we posted last month. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Above --User:Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose This may well be on its way to become a big thing in around U.S. Gulf states and Caribbean, but I'm afraid that this blooming is still far away from this becoming actually disruptive and dangerous to the oceans. MarioJump83 (talk) 15:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per Mario and Masem. Lacks current significance. The Kip (talk) 17:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- I hope the Gulf Stream weakening doesn't let this into New York in the future. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose good faith nom per above. Might make a good DYK though. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's not a new article and so doesn't qualify for DYK. And DYK has no need of nominations – it has so many that it's currently having to schedule two batches of 8 every day. ITN, on the other hand, is moribund . So far today, there's just this nomination. Yesterday, no nominations at all. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- WP:SLOWCYCLE, just because there hasn't been much these last few days doesn't mean this should be posted. The Kip (talk) 19:55, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is not even close to a slow cycle for ITN. I remember when Christopher Lee's death got posted. I am pretty sure his body had turned to dust by time he finally rolled off the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Is there a page with records like oldest image, oldest bottom blurb and oldest top blurb? Would be interesting. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- I remember a few months ago there was a two week gap between new blurbs, but there was possibly a longer break. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:25, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Is there a page with records like oldest image, oldest bottom blurb and oldest top blurb? Would be interesting. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is not even close to a slow cycle for ITN. I remember when Christopher Lee's death got posted. I am pretty sure his body had turned to dust by time he finally rolled off the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- WP:SLOWCYCLE, just because there hasn't been much these last few days doesn't mean this should be posted. The Kip (talk) 19:55, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's not a new article and so doesn't qualify for DYK. And DYK has no need of nominations – it has so many that it's currently having to schedule two batches of 8 every day. ITN, on the other hand, is moribund . So far today, there's just this nomination. Yesterday, no nominations at all. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support It's not supposed to be a disruptive or deadly disaster, it's ocean life and it's precious after all. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- That treaty is not in force yet. We're still waiting for member states to ratify it locally. Masem (t) 02:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not proposing it and don't need it to tell me life is precious. I just linked it to show that technically more powerful and definitely more influential people than I agree. If I hadn't, there's a 76% chance someone would have thrown WP:ILIKEIT in my face. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- And yes, I'm aware that about 24% of future opposers will think it more important to showcase Putin for a bit longer, because he's an adult male human life form and it's cool to hate. But in my humble opinion, this uncivilized mass of shifty asexual perennial blob is the lesser abyss to stare into. Call me a pervert. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- That treaty is not in force yet. We're still waiting for member states to ratify it locally. Masem (t) 02:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Even though this is not on the news, decomponsimg sargassum has major impacts on marine ecosystem, fishing, health and tourism in affected areas. For these regions, this is a major ecological disaster that impacts the lives of millions of people. The article could be misleading as it does not highlight the significant damages caused by decomposing sargassum.--Maxxies (talk) 06:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- The article does detail the issue of decomposition. For example, in section Biological impacts, "The decomposition of large quantities of Sargassum along coastlines consumes oxygen, creating large oxygen-depleted zones resulting in fish kills. Decomposing sargassum additionally creates hydrogen sulfide gas, which causes a range of health impacts in humans. During the sargassum inundation event in 2018, 11,000 Acute Sargassum Toxicity cases were reported in an 8-month span on just the Caribbean islands of Guadalupe and Martinique."
- Also, the topic is quite clearly in the news as many major media are carrying the story.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 09:25, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Just because the news covers it doesn't mean it is an encyclopedic worthy story. Eg: we would have posted when the DOE talked about the lab-leak theory as every source was rushing to post about that. The fact our article states "The size of annual blooms in the Atlantic increased by over a hundred-fold, starting in 2011, as a result of factors including increased fertilizer runoff in major rivers such as the Amazon and Congo." makes this story far far less compelling because this particular bloom is largest so far. Masem (t) 12:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- While the article describes briefly some of the biological impacts of the decomposition of sargassum, there are no details on the health problems encountered by the population in the affected areas. It does not detail the disastrous impacts on the fishing sector, tourism or even the marine life. These inundations are recurrent and have been occurring for many years and had a very limited coverage, even less on their impacts. Thanks for nominating this important story. Maxxies (talk) 13:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- The entire point of ITN is to report topics which are in the news. And this topic is clearly encyclopedic too because we already had an article about it and the phenomenon is the subject of scientific study such as this. It's far more worthy of consideration than showbiz, sport, shootings and such. They are ephemeral topics while this is a developing long-term phenomenon with international significance. Science! Andrew🐉(talk) 13:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment if there is interest in a climate change story, IPCC just released a new report today (March 20) that, once an article has been made for it would be a good ITNC candidate. --Masem (t) 13:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose lacks of general significance. Being "in the news" does not mean that "could/should be In The News". _-_Alsor (talk) 17:30, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
March 18
|
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
RD: Gloria Dea
Article: Gloria Dea (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1] [2]
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1] [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by Vladimir.copic (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and Koavf (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.
Vladimir.copic (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate and referencing is in good shape. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
March 17
RD: Lance Reddick
Article: Lance Reddick (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Uproxx Deadline Hollywood AP
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Uproxx Deadline Hollywood AP
Credits:
- Nominated by The Kip (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: Better sources on the way. The Kip (talk) 19:23, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- All sources I see right now point back to TMZ, so this should be still dubious. Masem (t) 19:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment The body is well sourced, but the filmographies etc need sourcing. --Masem (t) 00:54, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Incredible career, very sad news. Support this nomination.--SitcomyFan (talk) 08:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support,Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) ICC arrest warrant for Putin
Blurb: The International Criminal Court issues an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin on war crimes charges. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Commissioner for Children's Rights Maria Lvova-Belova for suspected involvement in the abduction of children from Ukraine.
News source(s): The Guardian BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Red-tailed hawk (talk · give credit) and The Account 2 (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Not updated yet but surely will soon be. Appreciate we have the ongoing link but this seems a major development - Dumelow (talk) 15:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support on the merits but I wonder if the "on war crimes charges" should be removed, given that it's only a charge. 331dot (talk) 15:35, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Furthermore, absent a revolution in Russia it is doubtful Putin (and the other person charged, the Children's rights official) will ever see the inside of an ICC courtroom or even be arrested. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support
in principle, but not ready. Wow, that was unexpected. There's no chance of Putin being arrested any time soon, but this is still a big deal in international relations. We don't normally post mere arrest warrants, but for Putin I think we should make an WP:IAR exception. The problem is getting a suitable update somewhere - I don't think a couple of sentences in Putin's long biography article is particularly helpful to readers. Is there one of the Ukraine war articles that could be updated? Or a new article started? Modest Genius talk 15:44, 17 March 2023 (UTC)- Update: the altblurb is good and the new target article has a small but sufficient update. Seems postable now. Modest Genius talk 16:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: would War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine be a possible link here? Masem (t) 15:45, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Child abductions in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is another possibility once it's updated. I've suggested an altblurb also naming the second suspect - Dumelow (talk) 15:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes that would be a good option - it gives context on the specific crime, rather than a general biography (I think most readers will already know who Putin is). Modest Genius talk 15:58, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Child abductions in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is another possibility once it's updated. I've suggested an altblurb also naming the second suspect - Dumelow (talk) 15:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Conditional & Reluctant Support Normally I would oppose a report of war crimes charges as I think they should be covered by ongoing and singling out an individual in a blurb based on a charge only, could raise BLP issues. However, this is Putin himself and that puts things on an entirely different level. The main problem at the moment is that this needs to be substantially expanded. Ideally it should be the subject of its own article. As of right now, this cannot be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Vladimir Putin arrest warrant is now an article. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Weak support - unprecedented act indeed, but let's be honest, the ICC knows that the chance of this warrant being carried out is extremely low, and will almost certainly come with major escalation. This is at least in part a virtue signal. Crusader1096 (message) 15:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support based on the importance, international coverage and quality of the articles. This is simply unprecedented. --NoonIcarus (talk) 15:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- dont really know whats unprecedented about the ICC issuing an unenforceable warrant, but plenty of heads of state have been charged previously. This has next to no chance of doing anything, as the Russians would likely react similar to what the US would do. It is in the news though, but all the same, covered by ongoing and of little impact. nableezy - 16:09, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Can somebody please tell me what is unprecedented about this? I guess a warrant against the head of state of a UNSC permanent member, but again several heads of state were indicted while they were heads of state for actions in an ongoing armed conflict. Off the top of my head Omar Bashir for crimes against humanity in Darfur. Gaddafi for the Libyan Civil War. Russia isnt a signatory to the Rome Statute, this is effectively a press release. nableezy - 16:57, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'd say that
a warrant against the head of state of a UNSC permanent member
is both entirely unprecedented and significant. I think that's where the minds of most people in support of posting this are. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)- I tend to think ICC issues unenforceable warrant against target that will never be brought to trial unless there is a regime change being a non-event and not at all unprecedented, but thats just me I guess. nableezy - 17:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'd say that
- Given the precedent cited below on Bashir and Gaddafi being posted when indicted then my objections are lessened, though this still is indeed covered by ongoing. nableezy - 20:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Can somebody please tell me what is unprecedented about this? I guess a warrant against the head of state of a UNSC permanent member, but again several heads of state were indicted while they were heads of state for actions in an ongoing armed conflict. Off the top of my head Omar Bashir for crimes against humanity in Darfur. Gaddafi for the Libyan Civil War. Russia isnt a signatory to the Rome Statute, this is effectively a press release. nableezy - 16:57, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support significant development in the Ukraine war, and the ICC is the global body for prosecuting war crimes. While it may seem that the odds of carrying out the warrant are low right now, many former heads of state have been arrested and prosecuted years afterwards. NorthernFalcon (talk) 16:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose. Almost certain to amount to nothing seeing as there's basically no chance Putin ever shows up to face these charges. If Putin does eventually come before such a court and is found guilty however? Now that's ITN material. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support alternative blurb. This is unprecedented in the history of the ICC, and it is extremely significant in that the head of state of a P5 country is being charged. I like the focus on the article relating to the abductions, though both that article and Putin's biography are now updated to include this information, which was absent at the time of the nom. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 16:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb - there are two items which lack references, but this is not serious enough to prevent it being posted. Mjroots (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think I've fixed the reference issues; please let me know if there is anything else that needs fixing. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 16:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Red-tailed hawk: - last paragraph of "Reactions" needs a ref. Mjroots (talk) 17:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think I've fixed the reference issues; please let me know if there is anything else that needs fixing. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 16:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support blurb - Unprecedented in ICC history, major development in the war.
- The head of state of a nuclear power having an arrest warrant from the largest criminal court in the world is big news. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb Major news, think its good to include Maria Lvova-Belova in the blurb and important to note that the charges relate to the alleged abduction of children. ✨ 4 🧚♂am KING 16:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support blurb Major international event Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support – Unprecented and major enough to be posted regardless of the 'ongoing' (like we did for the annexations last year). DecafPotato (talk) 17:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted altblurb in a slightly more concise form. Image can be added once it is protected on Commons. Sandstein 17:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Sandstein: Just as a quick WP:BLPCRIME note, I think we should probably use the less concise version; something like "alleged involvement in" or "suspected involvement in" seems more compliant with that policy than the thing that got posted. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- In my view, "arrest warrant" implies that they are accused, not yet convicted of crimes. If other admins disagree, feel free to adjust, but "involvement in" is euphemistic; they are accused of ordering these crimes. Sandstein 18:16, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Would "allegedly ordering" work better? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Actually, one would need to look at the arrest warrants to determine what specifically their respective relation to the abductions is alleged to be. That would complicate the blurb and make it overlong. Sandstein 19:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Would "allegedly ordering" work better? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- In my view, "arrest warrant" implies that they are accused, not yet convicted of crimes. If other admins disagree, feel free to adjust, but "involvement in" is euphemistic; they are accused of ordering these crimes. Sandstein 18:16, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Sandstein: Could you link Vladimir Putin arrest warrant? Seems to be the root article for this topic. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:09, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Still a very new article that needs community examination before posting it to the front page. Sandstein 19:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- That article is absolutely unnecessary, making too much fine grain on the level of detail we should cover. Put it with Child abductions in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine instead. Masem (t) 19:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Sandstein: Just as a quick WP:BLPCRIME note, I think we should probably use the less concise version; something like "alleged involvement in" or "suspected involvement in" seems more compliant with that policy than the thing that got posted. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting oppose per Nableezy. A nuclear power answers to no courthouse. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 17:44, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting oppose. Not really relevant given that Russia (and even the US) don't recognise this court. Also no chance anything will come of it, and we already have a line item in Ongoing for everything related to the Ukraine war. — Amakuru (talk) 18:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Post-posting oppose. This is not really ITN worthy as it has no real world significance. It is very unlikely this will result in any real world action in the next month. On the off chance something comes of it, it will come months or years down the line and we should post that if it ever happens. Aure entuluva (talk) 18:35, 17 March 2023 (UTC)(Striking in line with extended-confirmed restriction of WP:GS/RUSUKR.) — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:55, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose (edit conflict)
- "First catch your bear"
- Today there were lots of high profile news stories that "China's Xi to meet Putin in Moscow next week". Why are we not reporting that too as it seems more likely to actually happen?
- And there were lots of news stories about Russia downing a US drone.
- But we already have Russian invasion of Ukraine in Ongoing to cover the numerous and various news stories arising from this conflict. How is this different?
- WP:PERP says "A living person accused of a crime is presumed not guilty unless and until the contrary is decided by a court of law."
- Andrew🐉(talk) 18:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Presidents meeting each other is a routine activity. International courts issuing warrants for permanent members of the UN Security Council who are engaged in open warfare is not routine. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Cyclones, floods and other disasters are routine. Elections of national leaders are routine. Sporting events are routine. And yet we post all these. What's supposed to matter is significance and Xi's meeting with Putin seems more significant than the ICC because China is a superpower and the ICC isn't. Neither China nor Russia nor the USA is a signatory to the ICC. Even the Ukraine hasn't ratified it. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome to nominate Xi's visit and check out opinions. As for ICC's arrest warrants, regardless of enforceability and bureaucratic obstacles, this is a major public degradation of Putin's international standing that would enter history textbooks as a symbol of everyone's equality before the law, regardless of ranks, and determination to seek justice at the highest possible level. That alone is sufficient for a blurb. Brandmeistertalk 22:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Here's a report which ties the two together: How a warrant for Putin puts new spin on Xi visit to Russia. There's lots of posturing and speculation so it's still a long way from the history books and still seems best at Ongoing. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome to nominate Xi's visit and check out opinions. As for ICC's arrest warrants, regardless of enforceability and bureaucratic obstacles, this is a major public degradation of Putin's international standing that would enter history textbooks as a symbol of everyone's equality before the law, regardless of ranks, and determination to seek justice at the highest possible level. That alone is sufficient for a blurb. Brandmeistertalk 22:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Cyclones, floods and other disasters are routine. Elections of national leaders are routine. Sporting events are routine. And yet we post all these. What's supposed to matter is significance and Xi's meeting with Putin seems more significant than the ICC because China is a superpower and the ICC isn't. Neither China nor Russia nor the USA is a signatory to the ICC. Even the Ukraine hasn't ratified it. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Presidents meeting each other is a routine activity. International courts issuing warrants for permanent members of the UN Security Council who are engaged in open warfare is not routine. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support - it doesn't really matter whether or not something will come of it. What does matter is that it's making news around the world and is unprecedented to boot. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Per above, still, WTF happened? - User:Editor 5426387 (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support. Obviously there will be little to no immediate practical effect barring a dramatic Russian collapse, but an ICC warrant is significant and news in and of itself. ITN has blurbed both previous ICC warrants of sitting world leaders: Omar al-Bashir [3] and Muammar Gaddaffi. [4] al-Bashir's trial still has not occured, though after the 2019 coup, he might be handed over to the ICC. Gaddaffi of course, was killed in the war, so never stood trial. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support ICC warrants for heads of state are highly uncommon, let alone the leader of a UNSC permanent member. The Kip (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support It doesn't matter that nothing will probably come of it. The ICC is widely recognised worldwide, even by those who don't recognise its jurisdiction over their own country. It's an arrest warrant for a major current world leader. It's clearly notable news. -- KTC (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Really??? As far as I can tell there are exactly two sentences in the bolded article about this, plus one in the lead. That is completely inadequate coverage for an ITN blurb and to the best of my recollection has never been considered acceptable in the past. We need to slow down and actually look at what we are linking. ITN is not a news ticker and we should not be lowering, or simply ignoring our standards just because something is grabbing headlines. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- ...or we can be responsive to what happens in the world and remain relevant. I would urge you to review the stated purpose of ITN for which this IMHO checks at least three of the boxes. Quality can always be improved, but perfect should not be the enemy of good. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- In other words, we should become a news ticker? -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- No, we should
- -help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news.
- -showcase quality Wikipedia content on current events.
- -point readers to subjects they might not have been looking for but nonetheless may interest them.
- -emphasize Wikipedia as a dynamic resource.
- If you disagree with these things, I believe you know where the discussion page is. 331dot (talk) 20:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- In other words, we should become a news ticker? -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- ...or we can be responsive to what happens in the world and remain relevant. I would urge you to review the stated purpose of ITN for which this IMHO checks at least three of the boxes. Quality can always be improved, but perfect should not be the enemy of good. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support A significant action by a respected organization with great moral weight against Putin’s crimes.-TenorTwelve (talk) 23:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Untested allegations against two living people, tiny update and covered by Ongoing. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support - The ICC has never made an arrest warrant against a (sitting) head of state. As others have said, it doesn't matter if a trial occurs (which it almost certainly will not), it's still important nonetheless. Estar8806 (talk) 23:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Untrue. Multiple times untrue. nableezy - 23:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Every criminal suspect deserves a fair trial. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is the most annoying part of the BLP correction from every unsourced tidbit should be retained cus it may in fact be verifiable of yesteryear to today's unambiguous facts should be suppressed because other future things may not be true. It is unambiguously true that an arrest warrant was issued for Putin by the ICC on these charges, and no future trial, conviction, acquittal or anything else would change that from being true. nableezy - 23:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's the for the abduction of children from Ukraine part I find prejudicial. That's the charge. The two never-to-be defendants weren't neccesssarily served the warrant for actually abducting children. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:13, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is the most annoying part of the BLP correction from every unsourced tidbit should be retained cus it may in fact be verifiable of yesteryear to today's unambiguous facts should be suppressed because other future things may not be true. It is unambiguously true that an arrest warrant was issued for Putin by the ICC on these charges, and no future trial, conviction, acquittal or anything else would change that from being true. nableezy - 23:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support. I am not really surprised but still disgusted by the number of Putin's defenders who came out of the woodwork here. Shameful. Nsk92 (talk) 00:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- If you're referring to me, you've got it wrong, I did the same for Lvova-Belova and I'd do the same for you. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:44, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose since when did we start posting arrests instead of convictions? Banedon (talk) 01:00, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Since when did we consider an Event article that only has Background and Reactions "ready"? Since now, bud. This is yet another stupid fucking precedent to have to remember we threw on the pile, like the Mandela/Thatcher Standard, Lebrongate or WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sure I'll get killed for this but I actually think the LeBron record will go down as more significant. This is DYK material here. The fact that the arrests are likely getting merged into the abductions article substantiates the fact that in-actionable warrants such as these are footnotes in a much larger story. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- If anyone wants to kill you, they'll have to get through me next! LeBron setting an all-time NBA scoring record is still a bigger deal than yet another Putin hater trying to hurt him with words. As are the facts that Nelson Mandela and Margaret Thatcher are dead (I don't think anyone here really still cares that 197 died in this suicide bombing or 306 in that flood, though). InedibleHulk (talk) 05:41, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sure I'll get killed for this but I actually think the LeBron record will go down as more significant. This is DYK material here. The fact that the arrests are likely getting merged into the abductions article substantiates the fact that in-actionable warrants such as these are footnotes in a much larger story. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Correction: The current event article was never even the target for this In The News fiasco. Just Putin and missing children. Two things that have already happened. At least it got his picture on the front page. That'll show him. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:50, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Since when did we consider an Event article that only has Background and Reactions "ready"? Since now, bud. This is yet another stupid fucking precedent to have to remember we threw on the pile, like the Mandela/Thatcher Standard, Lebrongate or WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. It's an entirely symbolic move, as acknowledged by all parties, and there's virtually no chance that an arrest will follow it. Not the sort of thing we should post at ITN – we shouldn't just consider whether an event is unprecedented, but whether it has real consequences or the potential to. — Goszei (talk) 03:09, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
• Post-posting oppose per @Goszei, @Banedon, @InedibleHulk Evan224 (talk) 03:55, 18 March 2023 (UTC)(Striking in line with extended-confirmed restriction of WP:GS/RUSUKR.) — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 06:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Pull Firstly Ongoing exists for a reason. We should also not be throwing out BLP in any case, these are still just charges not a conviction (Bashir and Gaddafi might have been posted but those were a decade ago; regardless mistakes should not be repeated). Gotitbro (talk) 05:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- There's no BLP involved here. Saying X has an arrest warrant for crime Y does not say X committed crime Y. And while this is just charges, this is for one of the top world leaders. Masem (t) 14:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- While formal indictments might be included in articles without BLP violations, it is something else to feature these on the main page through ITN. All the recent indictment noms for politicians et al have been shot down at ITN, with an ask for formal convictions. I don't see why we need to move away from precedent, opening a Pandora's box whenever some high profile person gets charged. Gotitbro (talk) 19:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Clearly this case with Putin falls into the IAR-type territory due to the ongoing war and Putin's and Russia's position. We also know any trial is unlikely to happen, so waiting until the results of that highly unlikely trial would be pointless. So this is an IAR-type area.
- We are going to have to think about this as next week, it is expected that NY State will arrest Trump on various charges. There may be other reasons to post (Trump is calling for his supporters to revolt, so we may have significant protests that would be appropriate), but there is something to be said about the arrest of a former President. Masem (t) 19:51, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- While formal indictments might be included in articles without BLP violations, it is something else to feature these on the main page through ITN. All the recent indictment noms for politicians et al have been shot down at ITN, with an ask for formal convictions. I don't see why we need to move away from precedent, opening a Pandora's box whenever some high profile person gets charged. Gotitbro (talk) 19:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- There's no BLP involved here. Saying X has an arrest warrant for crime Y does not say X committed crime Y. And while this is just charges, this is for one of the top world leaders. Masem (t) 14:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Posting the arrest warrants for Gaddafi & al-Bashir set a precedent for posting this & the arrest warrant for Putin is even more notable since he’s the leader of a UNSC permanent member state. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 06:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting support - Historic decision. Clearly appropriate for ITN, even if there is not a huge amount of update about it.BabbaQ (talk) 10:51, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Post-posting support - For a head of state to be wanted for war crimes is clearly a signficant development in international relations. I know it's not unique, but that's not a barrier here. And I support the detailed blurb used; there's no BLP violation in specifying the nature of the charges for which the accused are wanted. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2023 (UTC)- I brought this up on ERRORS, but the current blurb is absolutely a BLP violation. The arrest warrant is not for "abducting" children, it is, according to the ICC news release, for the unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation. The current blurb is both inaccurate and a BLP violation and needs to be corrected. nableezy - 15:50, 18 March 2023 (UTC)]
Unlawful deportation is abduction. This is 'you don't need to cite that the sky is blue. GenevieveDEon (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)- No it is not. The crime here is the unlawful transfer of civilians in to or out of occupied territory. Abduction in the Rome Statute is about forced disappearances, not transferring civilians in to or out of occupied territory. And yes, this is definitely something that needs to be cited, and BLP applies to Vladimir Putin as well as every other living person. I dare say that our BLP policy's main purpose is to protect the people we dislike the most from our biases. nableezy - 19:24, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Also, you may not participate in this discussion due to the extended confirmed restriction applied to the topic area. nableezy - 19:25, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose for multiple reasons. Firstly, the ICC isn't a global judicial authority as the ICJ, which is a UN organ, and this view has recently gained support with the numerous controversies surrounding its work. Note that Russia and the United States withdrew from the Rome Statute, whereas China, India, Indonesia and Turkey have never signed it. These countries make up almost a half of world's total population and include three of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council. Secondly, it's been a long-standing practice that we post convictions, not arrest warrants or arrests, so this posting practically violates both WP:BLP and WP:PERP. Thirdly, the updates in both articles on the people involved are too short and don't indicate that they've committed the alleged crimes. A reader of Maria Lvova-Belova would guess that she rescued a 15-year-old boy given that she's a mother of 5 biological and 18 adopted children. There's absolutely nothing about why that adoption is considered abduction. How the boy's parents and relatives reacted? Did the they file a lawsuit? These are highly relevant questions that should be addressed in the article. Fourthly, this is covered by the ongoing item.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:51, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- And this is the problem with using "abduction" when the charge is not that. It makes one think kidnapping. The charge is the unlawful transfer of civilians from occupied territory. nableezy - 16:02, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support—The ICC issuing an arrest warrant for a current, former, and in one case future head of government and/or state is not unprecedented. In the past, they've indicted Omar al-Bashir (Sudan), Muammar Gaddafi (Libya), Laurent Gbagbo (Ivory Coast), and Uhuru Kenyatta (Kenya). Out of the four, the only one who ever spent any time behind bars in the Hague is Gbagbo, and he was ultimately acquitted of all charges in 2018. Gaddafi was killed before he could stand trial, the charges against Kenyatta were dropped due to alleged witness tampering in Kenya, and Bashir is supposed to be transferred into ICC custody from Sudan, but the status of his impending extradition is in limbo. So, suffice it to say, the ICC has had a... less-than-stellar record when it comes to prosecuting and convicting heads of state. Nevertheless, the symbolic significance of issuing an arrest warrant for the leader of Russia—either the second or third most powerful country in the world, depending on how you rank China—should not be understated. Kurtis (talk) 20:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose— More or less a symbolic move, the war is already featured in the ongoing section and int'l news outlets seem to have already moved on to other incidents of this war, mostly. DogeChungus (talk) 09:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Comment - Has anyone looked at the featured article lately? After a quick look there are multiple broken references, and some interesting sentences (the construct "sometimes maybe" looks especially strange in an article discussing war crimes). Since it's protected, there isn't much I can do about them.51.154.145.205 (talk) 12:24, 19 March 2023 (UTC) (Striking in line with extended-confirmed restriction of WP:GS/RUSUKR.)
- In my movie script, Putin is arrested and taken to the Hague to be put on trial, where he reveals that Donald Trump granted him American citizenship. Whereupon American commandos launch a daring raid to rescue him. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-posting oppose 1.-Already in ongoing. 2.-Unfortunately, it's an order that cannot be fulfilled 3.-If we have hardly posted arrests or indictments, it makes no sense to post arrest warrant issues now. Only Putin's conviction for crimes against humanity would be ITN-worthy. . _-_Alsor (talk) 22:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
(Removed) Ongoing Removal: Cyclone Freddy
Nominator's comments: The article is in past tense. Seems to be over. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support I think that's really all we need, so sure, I think we should remove it.
Palmtreegames, Looking for a better signature. (talk) 15:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: As stated in the nom below, we were waiting for the death toll to stop increasing so rapidly before removing it. 111 more bodies were recovered just yesterday between Malawi and Mozambique. The storm is considered dissipated as soon as the low-level center can't be tracked or the agencies simply decide to stop tracking it and the article transitions to past tense. This is regardless of whether or not the remnants still exist and are still causing flooding. In this case, heavy rainfall is still occurring over the flooded areas and floods haven't begun to recede as of the latest reports. NoahTalk 15:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Pull While heavy rain is still falling and floods are still killing people, the cyclone itself has "dissipated". This is part of the reason why ongoing is honestly inappropriate for tropical cyclones. They are "finished" as soon as they degrade enough that agencies don't bother tracking them anymore. We can't keep this here forever while the hunt for survivors and remains is conducted. As far as Meteo France and the Joint Typhoon Warning Center are concerned, the disaster ended on March 14–15 when they ceased tracking it. NoahTalk 16:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. No longer ongoing. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 16:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Per above - User:Editor 5426387 (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Curbon7: keep your $5. :P MarioJump83 (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Removed Stephen 22:09, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: World Baseball Classic
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: 2023 World Baseball Classic (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
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.
2600:1700:31BA:9410:9CE6:94D8:E140:7B1E (talk) 04:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by 2600:1700:31BA:9410:9CE6:94D8:E140:7B1E (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.
- The tournament is ITN/R but doesn't need to be ongoing. We'll have the article ready to post after the final game concludes on Tuesday. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Needs work A typical sports article with lots of flags and scores and tables and not much else. And there are other issues such as the use of future tense. And it doesn't seem suitable for Ongoing as it's nearly over. And there's an issue with some of the teams which are rather phony. For example, though baseball originated in Britain, the game has died out there and is only played by a tiny number of amateurs. And just about none of these are on the roster for the so-called GB team which seems to have been packed with ringers. These claim to be British in the same way that Boris Johnson was American – a technicality of birth or parentage. But they are really Americans who play in the US, right? The article doesn't explain this. The sport has generally struggled to establish itself as an international sport, having been removed from the Olympics, and so this shaky background needs explaining. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- While the odd team composition is all interesting to bring up, I don't see any of that as being necessary to establish the prose of the article unless it's something specific to WBC 2023. Most of what you are describing seems to be an issue with the competition in general rather than its yearly iterations. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Too soon. The tournament is only at the quarter-final stage and doesn't conclude until Tuesday (which is a weird day to hold the final, why wouldn't it get a prime weekend slot?). I suggest you withdraw this nomination and come back once they tournament is actually completed. The article will need referenced prose - not just tables - describing what happened at the tournament, during the final etc. Modest Genius talk 12:03, 17 March 2023 (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.
(Ready) Ongoing: 2023 French pension reform strikes
Article: 2023 French pension reform strikes (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Rushtheeditor (talk · give credit)
~ Rushtheeditor (talk) 00:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy SNOW close Article is on the verge of being a stub, and also has 11 edits in the past week on it. This is not Ongoing worthy. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 00:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- How does this meet the criteria for WP:SPEEDY and WP:SNOW? Just because an article is a stub doesn't mean that it can't be posted, and whose to say that there won't be an uptick in edit activity? Additionally, you can't invoke the snowball clause for only two opposes. Crusader1096 (message) 02:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- We dont post things to ongoing on the chance that there will be an uptick in editing activity. That is getting into WP:CRYSTAL territory there. A blurb would be more appropriate as Masem has said below once the article is updated enough. NoahTalk 02:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- It isn't WP:Crystal to wait until an article is expanded. WP:SNOW is becoming stupidly overused at this point. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:23, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Anybody who calls for WP:SNOW and is wrong/prematurely early should have any of their future calls for WP:SNOW struck through, in my opinion. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Anybody who calls for WP:SNOW and is wrong/prematurely early should have any of their future calls for WP:SNOW struck through, in my opinion. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- It isn't WP:Crystal to wait until an article is expanded. WP:SNOW is becoming stupidly overused at this point. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:23, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- We dont post things to ongoing on the chance that there will be an uptick in editing activity. That is getting into WP:CRYSTAL territory there. A blurb would be more appropriate as Masem has said below once the article is updated enough. NoahTalk 02:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- How does this meet the criteria for WP:SPEEDY and WP:SNOW? Just because an article is a stub doesn't mean that it can't be posted, and whose to say that there won't be an uptick in edit activity? Additionally, you can't invoke the snowball clause for only two opposes. Crusader1096 (message) 02:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Probably this should be first improved but brought as a blurb - the decision by Macron to push through the retirement age bill today is causing a newfound round of protests, which have been covered by the news (they ahve been a million strong at times). --Masem (t) 01:17, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Wait per @Masem. Crusader1096 (message) 02:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Blurb when ready - Generating a lot of media coverage and the scale of the protests is blurb-worthy, but the article needs improvement. ✨ 4 🧚♂am KING 07:43, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note that the article has an orange maintenance tag. Schwede66 09:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support: Article's expanding; I've dealt with the maintenance tag. RAN1 (talk) 12:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not ready: this might be significant enough to post, but the article is pure WP:PROSELINE. It doesn't even explain why the protests are happening - just one sentence saying it's related to pension age - or why the government is attempting to bring in these reforms. What's there is well-referenced, but it needs to explain the causes of the protests. Modest Genius talk 12:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support when updated per above. The Kip (talk) 19:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support as its definitely ongoing and the article looks very good and ready to post. Flyingfishee (talk) 03:13, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Definitely not ongoing, maybe blurb - This is In The News, and is getting bigger and bigger (especially as it's about an issue that will only become more relevant as demographics in the western world age), so I could hear arguments for its notability, but we post a blurb first, and if by the time the blurb has rolled off the event is still ongoing, then we can post it to ongoing. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support: the page quality is acceptable and it's receiving updates. The incident has been ongoing for at least two month and It had to be on the main page sooner than this. The incident is statewide, serious and ongoing. Still making news and further protests are announced [5]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhhossein (talk • contribs) 06:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support, The strike is ongoing and the article is OK. Alex-h (talk) 15:32, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Laura Valenzuela
Article: Laura Valenzuela (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Vanguardia, El País, Hola
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): La Vanguardia, El País, Hola
Credits:
- Nominated by Alexcalamaro (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: Very popular Spanish actress and presenter. Alexcalamaro (talk) 20:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
March 16
|
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
(Posted) RD: Jacqueline Gold
Article: Jacqueline Gold (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [6]
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [6]
Credits:
- Nominated by Muboshgu (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) 18:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Weak Support That's Jacqueline Summers Gold, by the way, once hailed as the 16th richest woman in Britain and former chair of three apparently leadworthy companies (two notable). The article needs more pronouns, or at least to refer to her by her cool and only slightly longer surname. I'd do it, but I don't want to. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:15, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- support - Sourced and ready. Looks ok.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - go for it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:13, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Meets the criteria for posting. Jusdafax (talk) 21:29, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 07:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
March 15
|
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
|
2023 Turkish floods
Article: 2023 Turkish floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Floods in Turkey killed at least 15, caused extensive damage, and left many missing in the same regions affected by the deadly earthquake. (Post)
News source(s): Daily Sabah, Al Jazeera, Bloomberg
Credits:
Blurb: Floods in Turkey killed at least 15, caused extensive damage, and left many missing in the same regions affected by the deadly earthquake. (Post)
News source(s): Daily Sabah, Al Jazeera, Bloomberg
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Ainty Painty (talk) 14:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality Article is still far too short/sparse on details for ITN. The Kip (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not ready. Article still needs a lot of work. Vida0007 (talk) 19:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support upon expansion - currently not enough information on the actual flood itself outside of the lead. Also, both of the computers I use in a string of bad luck are or will be broken so I'm currently on mobile and thus can't fully tell, but the article seems to be a little short. Crusader1096 (message) 23:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Antje Vollmer
Article: Antje Vollmer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German politician, Green party. Vice president of the Bundestag. Grimes2 (talk) 11:54, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Wait. She deserves more nuance, also awards, but I'm too tired. Help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support now. But there's still much more detail in German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- support - looks ready for posting. Sourced.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 07:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
(Closed) GPT-4 releases
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: GPT-4 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: OpenAI releases GPT-4, a generative AI, to the public (Post)
Alternative blurb: GPT-4, the successor to GPT-3 (ChatGPT), releases to the public
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-64959346
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Very unorthodox nomination, but this is (in my opinion) a HUGELY relevant event. It is In The News, sending shockwaves throughout the internet and tech world, and is a groundbreaking innovation in Artificial Intelligence, a technology that will probably come to define this era. This is truly a breakthrough, and (in my opinion) qualifies for ITN. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Blurb: OpenAI releases GPT-4, a generative AI, to the public (Post)
Alternative blurb: GPT-4, the successor to GPT-3 (ChatGPT), releases to the public
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-64959346
Credits:
- Nominated by PrecariousWorlds (talk · give credit)
- Oppose — No worldwide significance. Product releases aren't suitable for ITN. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:25, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Why not? This is already having a gigantic impact. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose: The BBC article shows it suggesting you can make omelettes with flour. GPT's "humor" aside, it's just another chatbot. RAN1 (talk) 17:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. Just another example of why Searle's Chinese room argument is so sound, and of no wider significance. Main page is not for advertising. Courcelles (talk) 17:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. Companies doing company things. Not ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:50, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per all of the above, - User:Editor 5426387 (talk), 18:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. Tech news today. I don't believe we announced the other AIs. Maybe when it turns into Skynet (of course by then though...) CoatCheck (talk) 18:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC).
- Oppose - This is not an advertising ticker. We shouldn't overstep WP:CRYSTAL in foretelling the impact of this product. And it's not AI: it's just a statistical large data model with no self-awareness. GenevieveDEon (talk) 18:23, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The original ChatGPT had made such a shockwave, I feel, that any new additions won't top when it first showed up. I could be wrong on that, after all I don't pay very much attention to the tech world, but even then, I still oppose for the reasons brought up previously as well. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 19:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose its just a new product, how is this ITN-worthy? It's just another service from OpenAI, nothing special. TomMasterRealTALK 19:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Neater than a new camera phone, but still, ten against one. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose - i do feel like people are missing the point a bit. It isn't just some "new product". From what's been told, this new AI version is MUCH stronger than its predecessor by over a quadrillion times. Yet, what makes me oppose this is that it's not that great. It's a major improvement from its previous but it's still not blurbable imo. I would possibly support the blurbing of a hypothetical GPT-5 depending on how good it is but GPT-4 just isn't good enough. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:39, 15 March 2023 (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.
Cyclone Yaku
Blurb: Cyclone Yaku causes widespread destruction in Ecuador and Peru, resulting in at least six deaths. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Cyclone Yaku causes widespread destruction in Ecuador and Peru, resulting in at least six deaths and leaving thousands homeless.
News source(s): Bloomberg, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by WMrapids (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Very unusual weather phenomenon for the region that is causing widespread destruction in Peru. Death toll is expected to increase. WMrapids (talk) 03:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The sources say this has killed six to eight people, not at least 60. About that many have died in the rainy season. Unless I'm missing something (I read Spanish poorly). InedibleHulk (talk) 04:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
I oppose since we don't know what the hell has actually happened due to conflicting sources (multiple Spanish sources say 58-60 deaths for the storm and some say 6). Collapsed further discussion under InedibleHulk's oppose due to its size and it's now straying off the topic of the storm itself. NoahTalk 22:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
|
|---|
|
- Needs expansion This is a highly unusal event but the article needs a significant expansion to make it into ITN. MarioJump83 (talk) 13:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- I provided the tools at Talk:Cyclone Yaku#Impact Sources for those who want to. NoahTalk 14:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- @MarioJump83:Should be decently expanded now.--WMrapids (talk) 15:56, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm supporting this now. Once again, this is an unusual disaster. MarioJump83 (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Support Unusual disaster with a decent amount of deaths. The article is in okay shape now but could always use more expansion. NoahTalk 16:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)- Support. Meets impact standards, and on top of that this event should be one that readers are particularly curious about. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Giving the article a bit of a skim, might have missed some stuff I'm unaware of, but meets notability standards IMO, it's rare for hurricanes to hit Ecuador and Peru. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support
60 deaths,unusual event, and the impacts section has beeb expanded (particularly for Peru)! Tails Wx 21:37, 15 March 2023 (UTC)- That 60 deaths part is a misunderstanding, but the rest seems true. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:05, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Deaths or no, there is no need to meet a WP:MINIMUMDEATHS toll in order to merit posting, and there are good reasons for posting this, not the least of which is the rarity of this storm. --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:40, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Due to contradictory sources. Support When an accurate death toll is found. 47.23.10.234 (talk) 17:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
March 14
|
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
International relations
Science and technology
|
US drone downed in the Black Sea
Article: 2023 Black Sea drone incident (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: An American MQ-9 Reaper drone is downed in the Black Sea by Russian Sukhoi Su-27 fighter jets (Post)
News source(s): See article
Credits:
Article updated
Blurb: An American MQ-9 Reaper drone is downed in the Black Sea by Russian Sukhoi Su-27 fighter jets (Post)
News source(s): See article
Credits:
- Nominated by Banedon (talk · give credit)
- Created by PLATEL (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Kind of surprised we don't have a nomination for this. "First direct contact between the Russian and United States Air Forces since the Cold War", per the article. Blurb might need improvement, since the facts are disputed. Banedon (talk) 01:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Covered by the Ukraine ongoing for all purposes. It hasn't really tripped the relationship between the US and Russia that's already not stressed by the Ukraine war. --Masem (t) 02:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think it's covered by Ongoing, just loosely connected. But I also know we still don't know much and that nobody died in this downing/crash/whatever. We don't mourn robots here, and shouldn't always anticipate doom. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose unless the US invokes Article 5 over this, in which case, it's been a pleasure editing with you all. Juxlos (talk) 08:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know about you, but the first thing I'll do when I see the mushroom cloud rising in the distance is post it to ITN. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. Of all the death and destruction being caused in the Ukraine war, one drone being forced down is a drop in the ocean. This is covered by the entry in ongoing. If it prompted a major response from the US we can consider that as a nomination, but right now it's a minor diplomatic scuffle, akin to the missile that accidentally hit Poland a few months ago. Modest Genius talk 12:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Not a big enough incident that it needs its own posting in addition to the ongoing. Curbon7 (talk) 14:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Leaning oppose. If this had been a piloted plane that's a different matter. Based on the video, this actually looks accidental (it was physically struck by a Russian fighter trying to do a near pass; no sane pilot will ever intentionally collide with another object in the air). BD2412 T 16:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose It's just a drone being downed in the ocean, its not something big. TomMasterRealTALK 01:15, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
RD: Bobby Caldwell
Article: Bobby Caldwell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today
Credits:
- Nominated by Vida0007 (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 yesterday but death was only announced today; saw no {cn} tags but there is still no section about his death yet. Vida0007 (talk) 15:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Film soundtracks and Japanese audience sections do not contain any sources. --Vacant0 (talk) 19:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Article orange tagged for lacking sources. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 23:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) Ongoing: Cyclone Freddy
Article: Cyclone Freddy (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Cyclonebiskit (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Catastrophic flooding ongoing in Malawi with the death toll rapidly rising (199 confirmed as of this nomination). Rainfall is continuing across Malawi and Mozambique in association with the cyclone's remnants. The article is continually being expanded and meets criteria for ongoing. Opting to nominate instead of add it myself given my involvement in the tropical cyclone project. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Very much an ongoing event and very much in the news. Quality seems A-OK. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support per above - was not expecting this to last as long as it has. Crusader1096 (message) 20:42, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's the only tropical cyclone on record to outlive a long month (31 days). And it broke the record by days. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support its still going as the cyclone's remnants is still bringing heavy rainfall and 238 fatalities is confirmed so far which is very notable for a tropical cyclones
- Rainbow Galaxy POC (talk) 20:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support per above - User:editor 5426387 (talk) 21:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support A notable cyclone that broke any records. HurricaneEdgar 21:05, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support ongoing. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted to ongoing. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Question. Is this really ongoing? Our article on this topic has this as the first line of the lede.
Very Intense Tropical Cyclone Freddy was an exceptionally long-lived storm that tracked across the Indian Ocean for more than five weeks in February and March 2023.
. Can any knowledgeable editor, update the lede if it is indeed ongoing. If it is not ongoing, we should not include this in the ongoing section. Ktin (talk) 21:24, 15 March 2023 (UTC)- Rainfall is still ongoing and expected to continue for a few more days as a result of the remnant moisture. The storm is no longer being tracked and is considered "dissipated" as of this morning because its center position could not be located. That doesn't mean the disaster is over. NoahTalk 21:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Got it thanks. If the storm is "dissipated," I would recommend removing it from ongoing. Alternately, if the storm is ongoing, I would recommend the lede of the target article be updated. Ktin (talk) 22:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- It is no longer a tropical cyclone and the wind map is no longer "rotation around a center" but it is still raining. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- If it's still otherwise worthy of ongoing (I have no idea) maybe the link can be Cyclone Freddy flooding or something piped to the article. If a 1993 or 2011-level or worse Mississippi flood was caused by a storm new states could start flooding for months after the storm disappears. The rivers in this part of the world aren't as long in water travel time as the Mississippi but an organized wind map still existing is not needed for water from that storm to still be rising in many homes. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- We need to look to Relief Web to see how the disaster is progressing. NoahTalk 00:27, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Got it thanks. If the storm is "dissipated," I would recommend removing it from ongoing. Alternately, if the storm is ongoing, I would recommend the lede of the target article be updated. Ktin (talk) 22:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- We can remove it if the death toll starts to wane off in a day or so (which is expected). We would not give ongoing coverage to continued humanitarian efforts, similarly to the Turkey/Syria quake. Masem (t) 01:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Main issue is rainfall. [8] specifically mentions "Over the next 48 hours, very heavy rainfall is forecast over southern Malawi and over Zambezia, Sofala and Tete Provinces (central-northern Mozambique)". This would still be ongoing as long as the article is updated, heavy rainfall is occurring, and scores of people are being reported deceased. NoahTalk 01:12, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- 101 more dead in Malawi today and missing there increased from 41 to 201. No word on increases in Mozambique yet, but more likely there since they couldnt access many areas. NoahTalk 14:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Rainfall is still ongoing and expected to continue for a few more days as a result of the remnant moisture. The storm is no longer being tracked and is considered "dissipated" as of this morning because its center position could not be located. That doesn't mean the disaster is over. NoahTalk 21:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Pull The cyclone moved on, rain lasts forever. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:12, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
March 13
|
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections |
(new) RD: Ernst Tugendhat
Article: Ernst Tugendhat (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): taz and others
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): taz and others
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Internationally recognised German philosopher. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Vera Selby
Article: Vera Selby (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://wst.tv/vera-selby-mbe-passes-away/
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://wst.tv/vera-selby-mbe-passes-away/
Credits:
- Nominated by Lee Vilenski (talk · give credit)
- Updated by HurricaneHiggins (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.
Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:52, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 04:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - per above. Nigej (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted. --Tone 10:44, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Kenzaburō Ōe
Article: Kenzaburō Ōe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, BBC News
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, BBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Cielquiparle (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Khiikiat (talk · give credit) and Cielquiparle (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 March 3, but death was only announced on March 13; article looks mostly ok, with just a few places missing citations which we can hopefully fix quickly. Cielquiparle (talk) 10:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support No unsourced content now. Looks to be ready for RD. --Vacant0 (talk) 19:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - article seems to meet requirements, could use some ref clean up though. - Indefensible (talk) 04:57, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support, lovingly improved since you brought it here --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Nothing to complain.
OK. Grimes2 (talk) 10:10, 16 March 2023 (UTC) - Posted. --Tone 10:44, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Tone I didn't realize it had posted already! Next time I would appreciate a notification. I went ahead and sent one to everyone else. Cielquiparle (talk) 23:06, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Pat Schroeder
Article: Pat Schroeder (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Nohomersryan (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: Some sourcing problems, but it doesn't look like too many. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 03:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
CommentNow Support I still see 2 cn tags. Once they are sourced it should be posted. Rushtheeditor (talk) 17:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC)- @Rushtheeditor: I've found sources for both. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 00:39, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good to post then. Rushtheeditor (talk) 16:30, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Rushtheeditor: I've found sources for both. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 00:39, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 19:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Joe Pepitone
Article: Joe Pepitone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [9]
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [9]
Credits:
- Nominated by Muboshgu (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) 22:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. C-class article looks ready. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Sorry for the premature vote of confidence. Looks good now. -SusanLesch (talk) 13:17, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Two unreferenced paragraphs with contentious material. Stephen 01:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Everything seems to be sourced now. --Vacant0 (talk) 19:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 03:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
RD: Naonobu Fujii
Article: Naonobu Fujii (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Olympics JA insidethegames
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Olympics JA insidethegames
Credits:
- Nominated by Rushtheeditor (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.
Rushtheeditor (talk) 21:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not yet ready Article is not holistic, more expansion of his volleyball career is needed. Curbon7 (talk) 13:40, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
(posted) Update blurb: Collapse of Signature Bank
Article: Collapse of Signature Bank (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Silicon Valley Bank (headquarters pictured) and Signature Bank collapse in the second and third–largest bank failures in U.S. history. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Silicon Valley Bank (headquarters pictured) and Signature Bank collapses in the second and third–largest bank failures in U.S. history
News source(s): [10]
Credits:
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Blurb: Silicon Valley Bank (headquarters pictured) and Signature Bank collapse in the second and third–largest bank failures in U.S. history. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Silicon Valley Bank (headquarters pictured) and Signature Bank collapses in the second and third–largest bank failures in U.S. history
News source(s): [10]
Credits:
- Nominated by Juxlos (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Third largest banking collapse in US history, right behind SVB and WaMu. 29th largest bank in the US by assets according to the Federal Reserve, $110 billion in assets or thereabouts. No article yet on its collapse Collapse of Signature Bank is still a W.I.P., so feel free to oppose on quality for the time being if needed. Juxlos (talk) 03:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - two of the largest bank failures in American history occurring in a few days is certainly a major - and worrying - event. Crusader1096 (message) 04:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Article on the SB collapse has since been created. Crusader1096 (message) 04:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support – and also link 2023 United States bank failures once it's expanded. DecafPotato (talk) 04:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Amending because the blurb was updated with the article Collapse of Signature Bank, in which case I have to oppose on quality for the time being. DecafPotato (talk) 04:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have spent a lot of time today adding information about the Signature collapse to its article and overhauling it. I have ported some of that material to the new Collapse of Signature Bank page, but I fear that it will actually be quite redundant the way that the page is structured. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Amending because the blurb was updated with the article Collapse of Signature Bank, in which case I have to oppose on quality for the time being. DecafPotato (talk) 04:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment While one can call the Signature Bank a bank failure, my read of articles states it was done preemptively to prevent a mass rush on the bank markets following the SVB failure (which came out of nowhere). As such I don't think an update is necessary, but it is wise to be looking at a broad article on 2023 bank collapses if they keep happening and suggest that for ongoing. We definitely can't keep adding more banks to blurbs. --Masem (t) 04:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support This is incredibly worrying for global economy. MarioJump83 (talk) 04:34, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose on qualityNow Support The article needs to be expanded. Currently, there are very few details. Once the article is improved, I will gladly support it. As Massem suggested, future bank failures should be included in a broad article if that trend continues. --Maxxies (talk) 04:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)- @Maxxies: Has the article been expanded to your satisfaction? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. There's an article that's currently under construction at 2023 United States bank failures. I don't oppose updating for now, but I do think that we may want to consider the article under construction as the bold entry if we're going to be making this update. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Photo RD Whatever else this collapse portends, I think it's high time a bank was pictured, or a banker or something. Kaja Kallas had a good run. But times change. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:28, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- How do you feel about File:Signature bank storefront (39th & Madison) reporters swarming.png? (cc: SWinxy, who took the photograph). — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 22:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)]
- I think this issue became moot when the Oscars blurb was added with image of Michelle Yeoh. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Mootish. I think a hundred billion dollars is worth more (in importance bucks) than a movie which might see a hundred million in sales, if lucky. But Michelle Yeoh is definitely the Best Picture, aesthetically, and both are about as topical. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Bah! Let Yeoh enjoy the spotlight. She deserves it :) SWinxy (talk) 22:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I cannot dispute a bah. She can have it, then the director, then maybe the next bank. Seems that movie was pretty lucky after all, already raking in over a tenth of a billion before the Wikipedian consideration. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Bah! Let Yeoh enjoy the spotlight. She deserves it :) SWinxy (talk) 22:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Mootish. I think a hundred billion dollars is worth more (in importance bucks) than a movie which might see a hundred million in sales, if lucky. But Michelle Yeoh is definitely the Best Picture, aesthetically, and both are about as topical. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think this issue became moot when the Oscars blurb was added with image of Michelle Yeoh. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- How do you feel about
- Oppose The 29th largest bank of a single country…… _-_Alsor (talk) 07:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are we seriously going to have this argument again? Crusader1096 (message) 07:35, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- It is roughly a full half the size of the last one, where it counts, in dollars and cents. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:47, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have the same arguments, you have the same arguments. And we should respect it. _-_Alsor (talk) 08:21, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are we seriously going to have this argument again? Crusader1096 (message) 07:35, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Per WP:ERRORS, there are serious issues with these claims. Our list of rankings is not reliable and, in any case, the authorities are taking action and so the matter is a work-in-progress. So, we should wait rather than rushing to make sensational claims. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Third-largest is verified by Reuters. The 29th largest is my quip, not part of the hook. Juxlos (talk) 13:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not impressed as the Reuters source admits to the amusing error of dropping a billion. The discussion at WP:ERRORS indicates that they still have more work to do in explaining what a "bank" is in this context. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's extremely clear to anyone with mild familiarity of the subject matter that "bank" in this context is referring to a depository institution. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Bank Classification is not simple and that's just in the US. We should not assume that our international and general readership understands this complexity and jargon in a particular way. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:34, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sure? But we're talking a bout failures of U.S. banks here, so we would be a bit amiss if we were to include entities that were not considered banks in the United States on the list. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:05, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Entities such as Lehman Brothers were certainly considered banks and they are shown as such on Wikipedia being in categories like Banks based in New York City. The issue which arises especially in the US is the divide introduced by the Glass–Steagall legislation which separated commercial and investment banking in a way which is not so common in other countries. Both sides of the Glass-Steagall divide were still banks and they have both failed in a big way. If we're going make claims like "second-largest", then this distinction is vital. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with this note above. Ktin (talk) 17:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- This was pointed out on the talk page of the List of largest failures. Maybe that article needs to be reformatted to include Lehman and other banks-but-not-exactly-banks in the same. I was surprised when I opened the article and saw that Lehman wasn't on top of it. -- Rsrikanth05 (talk) 23:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Entities such as Lehman Brothers were certainly considered banks and they are shown as such on Wikipedia being in categories like Banks based in New York City. The issue which arises especially in the US is the divide introduced by the Glass–Steagall legislation which separated commercial and investment banking in a way which is not so common in other countries. Both sides of the Glass-Steagall divide were still banks and they have both failed in a big way. If we're going make claims like "second-largest", then this distinction is vital. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sure? But we're talking a bout failures of U.S. banks here, so we would be a bit amiss if we were to include entities that were not considered banks in the United States on the list. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:05, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Bank Classification is not simple and that's just in the US. We should not assume that our international and general readership understands this complexity and jargon in a particular way. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:34, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's extremely clear to anyone with mild familiarity of the subject matter that "bank" in this context is referring to a depository institution. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not impressed as the Reuters source admits to the amusing error of dropping a billion. The discussion at WP:ERRORS indicates that they still have more work to do in explaining what a "bank" is in this context. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Third-largest is verified by Reuters. The 29th largest is my quip, not part of the hook. Juxlos (talk) 13:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose until the issues with the wording of the current blurb are resolved on WP:ERRORS. Then, of course, support. I even consider posting this onto ongoing as it already seems to be a major developing story impacting stock markets and financial regulation in the US. A good target for ongoing would be 2023 United States bank failures, but it's currently not in a postable shape.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Working on that. Any help on improving the article would be much appreciated. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 13:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I joined you in expanding the article. Now it should be fine.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Working on that. Any help on improving the article would be much appreciated. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 13:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
_reporters_swarming.png){kind=link}
- Oppose per Masem.--⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per above - User:Editor 5426387 (Talk) 12:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Should link directly to Signature Bank, not the unnecessary, duplicative, and low-quality Collapse of Signature Bank. Reywas92Talk 14:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Redirected again, you were right about redirecting. —Alalch E. 16:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have changed the link in the article to point once more to Signature Bank after merger. Pinging editors who wanted to see this: @Reywas92 and DecafPotato:. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Looks good on quality now, but I would still like to see March 2023 United States bank failures linked somehow. DecafPotato (talk) 17:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Would
Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank both collapse over the span of three days, becoming the second- and third-largest bank failures in U.S. history
work for you? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)- That works I guess. —Alalch E. 17:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I would not object. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Two bank failures is not a trend, so at this time it would be far too soon to use that article as a target. The situation does change day to day so this might be appropriate later. Masem (t) 18:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- They seem to have common cause (i.e. bank runs), and the Federal Reserve created a whole new lending facility to try to stem the contagion from both failures. I think that boldlinking the article on the bank failures (which also includes the bank failure that kicked this all off, Silvergate Bank) is more than warranted given the extraordinary nature of the response to these failures. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Two bank failures is not a trend, so at this time it would be far too soon to use that article as a target. The situation does change day to day so this might be appropriate later. Masem (t) 18:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I would not object. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- How about
- Following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank collapses in the third major U.S. bank failure of March 2023.
- ? DecafPotato (talk) 19:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC) (Edit for rationale: partially per WP:ERRORS, I think noting that this is the third major bank failure this month is more important than the scale of them, but possibly both could work, in text following the
third major U.S. bank failure of March 2023
text. DecafPotato (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)- I like that. —Alalch E. 19:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Also works for me. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- That works I guess. —Alalch E. 17:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Would
- Looks good on quality now, but I would still like to see March 2023 United States bank failures linked somehow. DecafPotato (talk) 17:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Sounds good, put it up 2A00:23C8:B03:9F01:C980:3C99:352:FAFA (talk) 18:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support alternative blurb of
Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank both collapse over the span of three days, becoming the second- and third-largest bank failures in U.S. history
. I think all three articles are in good enough shape to post, and I believe that the article covering the March bank collapses should be boldlinked. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)- I also think the 2023 collapses link should be boldfaced because it also covers the third (and the first to collapse) bank, which is essential to what's happening. —Alalch E. 18:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. It's also better to make all of this an ongoing news story about the FED interest rates hikes and the economic fallout from that. A lot more banks and companies will go belly up.Count Iblis (talk) 22:35, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - obviously just bump the blurb back up and merge them together, though. --RockstoneSend me a message! 22:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Definitely. NB Could be out of date by tomorrow. Thelisteninghand (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Updated Blurb per nom. No sense messing with combined articles or Ongoing at the moment though, we're just talking about two incidents that are in the same bucket and may stand as more notable when considered together. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Two bank collapses within a couple days is obviously significant. Curbon7 (talk) 13:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support per above. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 16:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. If the trend continues and there are more developments, then a standalone article and ongoing might be appropriate, but this incident isn't individually ITN worthy. — Amakuru (talk) 17:45, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Moody's has downgraded the outlook for the banking sector. Yet even with these banking crises, the stock market actually took a 1% bounce yesterday - 2% for the NASDAQ. A very healthy clawback. I don't think it means the ITN item is totally insignificant, but it speaks to one of the major difficulties in tracking complex economic stories through ITN! --⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- That's my concern still is that while many major sources are talking of this as a larger trend, it really is OR at this point to say "two banks failed and some stock corrections" == major event. Its the same reason that when the DOE report about their stance on the lab leak theory was all over the place, it wasn't the type of news that Wikipedia, including ITN, would really give much weight to. Its the 10-yr view we need to consider with topics like these if they will be long-lasting or just a burst of coverage. Its still something to watch for, but the news over the last few days, particularly when the FDIC assured all funds would be covered and alleviating major concerns, have made this story less compelling than when the SVB closure was first announced. Masem (t) 12:44, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Wait. I would have said support but it looks like other banks are now getting affected: Switzerland's Credit Suisse seems to be in trouble (and apparently this has been ongoing since at least 3 March). Per these articles from AP, CNN, and The Guardian, it looks like this is a bigger event now. I say we should wait for more developments before we update this, although admittedly the collapse of SVB and Signature are big news and frankly, ITN worthy. Vida0007 (talk) 15:14, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Considering the issue is getting larger (and collecting more bank casualties with it), I'm beginning to think we could go with Masem and Amakuru's suggestions of putting it on Ongoing. I still support a blurb, but since the problem is most likely not ending at SVB and Signature, I think a spot in Ongoing can work as well. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- I would also support that. DecafPotato (talk) 19:56, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yup, that suggestion would be fine with me. Vida0007 (talk) 19:48, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Credit Suisse has been shaky since... 2021? Also, it is not an US bank, so it's hard to say if it would be related. The Swiss National Bank just bailed it out, anyway. Juxlos (talk) 09:40, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Considering the issue is getting larger (and collecting more bank casualties with it), I'm beginning to think we could go with Masem and Amakuru's suggestions of putting it on Ongoing. I still support a blurb, but since the problem is most likely not ending at SVB and Signature, I think a spot in Ongoing can work as well. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support updating blurb &/or adding it to ongoing This is clearly a major additional event, so I think it’d be best to update the blurb, but more banks may fail, so it could be an ongoing crisis. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support updating blurb to include both Signature and Silvergate bank as well. Yes, please do link to the March 2023 failures article. Not too sure about making it ongoing. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 23:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Needs attention most of the early !oppose votes were over article length and quality, which seems to be mostly resolved by now. Significance has at least been established to some extent, in that most financial/business newspapers still have them as headline news a week in. Juxlos (talk) 09:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Posted the hook proposed by Red-tailed hawk. Schwede66 09:48, 17 March 2023 (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: