Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/March 2020

---

(Posted) RD: James A. Redden

Nominator's comments: American judge & politician, District of Oregon Chief Judge. Non-COVID. - Indefensible (talk) 23:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support it's okay but who (or what) determined which cases were "notable" for inclusion? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted - with no opposition and a support (albeit weak), this seems just about good to go. The structure is a little odd, with his death folded into the "federal judge" section but not the "notable cases", but looks OK to me as well otherwise.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Pape Diouf

(Posted) RD: Abdul Halim Khaddam

Nominator's comments: Syrian politician, Vice President of Syria and interim President. Non-COVID. - Indefensible (talk) 16:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support article is sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 20:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted—Bagumba (talk) 08:14, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Gita Ramjee

Nominator's comments: Top news on BBC. Sadly, the article was created recently. Covid-19 related. Sherenk1 (talk) 12:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Stub and orange tag requesting references Joseywales1961 (talk) 12:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – Stub. – Sca (talk) 14:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Prose resume at present. Spencer^T•C 15:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Article is now expanded past stub. TJMSmith (talk) 20:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD  — Amakuru (talk) 10:45, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Wallace Roney

(Closed) US offers Venezuela power-sharing deal

(Stale) RD: Pierre Bénichou

(Posted) RD: Reimar Lüst

Nominator's comments: German astrophysicist, Max Planck Society president, European Space Agency director general. - Indefensible (talk) 18:57, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• non-COVID related, it seems. --Masem (t) 19:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose what's there is fine but for such an eminent astrophysicist, the article is weak. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!)

  I need a break, Penderecki and all!! Will do tomorrow, unless someone beats me to it. I neglected a GA review all these days. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:58, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I found the ESA link and used it, please look again. Someone who knows astrophysics, please also look. I had no better way to summarize his achievements than putting it in quotation marks, - I'd have no idea how to rephrase it and still say the same. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Much better, needs the {{dn}} to be fixed but otherwise good improvement. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I dared to use the German WP for the dab ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:55, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dab? You're referring to the Dortmunder Actien Brauerei, nicht? – Sca (talk) 14:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support – At 300 words it's thin, but for a non-Anglo expert in a specialized academic field it may be just enough. (The footnoted Max Planck Society announcement is fairly extensive, and is in English.) Duly copy-edited. – Sca (talk) 21:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Brief, but what's there is referenced, and there do not appear to be any major chronological gaps in his biography. Hrodvarsson (talk) 02:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It was recently expanded. Article is sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 02:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• (Posted to RD)  — Amakuru (talk) 10:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: James T. Goodrich

 Natureium (talk) 15:34, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• COVID-related --Masem (t) 17:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support barring that one marked CN (about his influence from Olser, which I'm unable to find a source for immediately - however, there's still news reports coming in on his death so may be sourcable). That line's not needed immediately otherwise this seems ready to go. --Masem (t) 17:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Meets the requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per Masem's assessment. TJMSmith (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Awaiting missing reference (or removal of sentence if not required) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the uncited statement. TJMSmith (talk) 18:19, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose seems like a weak article (e.g. the fate of those he operated on isn't even mentioned). The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:10, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've expanded a bit on his processes and the current (healthy) fate of the two cases noted. --Masem (t) 19:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Very nice article by my eye. Clearly establishes notability and fleshes out contributions to field, awards, etc. Orange tag seems totally undeserved, at least as of this moment, and since it was added without any notes on the Talk page, I think it would be suitable to remove it in the same manner.130.233.2.31 (talk) 05:45, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment IP tagged it for notability --LaserLegs (talk) 23:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  And Fram untagged. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• (Posted to RD)  — Amakuru (talk) 10:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

---

(Closed) Amazon warehouse protests

(Posted) RD: Joachim Yhombi-Opango

Nominator's comments: Congolese president & prime minister. COVID-19. - Indefensible (talk) 02:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose it's justifiably tagged as poorly constructed, but once that's resolved, it might be suitable. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Will fully support this as soon as the career section is broken up into digestible sections. TJMSmith (talk) 11:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Yhombi-Opango was the prime minister and president of the Republic of Congo. Should this be a blurb? TJMSmith (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately I don't think the quality of the article leads it to reach that level of posting. Spencer^T•C 14:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  (edit conflict) Probably not. Based on the lack of consensus to blurb Daniel arap Moi, a twenty-year Kenyan president who also died of old age recently, it's unlikely there'll be consensus for this one in a non-English-speaking country... I'm guessing we will end up posting blurbs for the likes of Jimmy Carter, John Major, John Howard etc, but that's just the way it is. Also, the quality needs to be fixed up before it can even go to RD.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heads of state/government in non-English speaking countries tend to have a higher bar to clear for blurb status, which I don't believe this passes. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support satis. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added sections per The Rambling Man, TJMSmith. - Indefensible (talk) 16:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Indefensible! TJMSmith (talk) 16:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support RD only. Past sitting president of a non-G20-type country is ..at least at this point, not high priority for ITN. But otherwise looks good. --Masem (t) 17:04, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lorena Borjas

Nominator's comments: Mexican/American transgender rights activist. COVID-19. - Indefensible (talk) 02:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:48, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support A well sourced new article. TJMSmith (talk) 11:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Arianne Caoili

Nominator's comments: Filipino/Australian Chess Woman International Master. - Indefensible (talk) 02:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Non-COVID related. --Masem (t) 17:04, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support article is sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 11:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:44, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Needs editor attention) Viktor Orbán rule by decree in Hungary

Nominator's comments: Related to the coronavirus pandemic, but is more connected to the general shift towards authoritarianism under Orbán. A very significant focal point in that regard, and will have profound impacts on Hungarian politics. Articles needs updating and check for quality. ― Hebsen (talk) 22:57, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Lots of countries have been imposing decrees and states of emergency which have been criticised as threats to liberty. This doesn't seem very different and the article hasn't been updated. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I want to support this - it's a huge victory for right wing authoritarianism - but the target is orange tagged and there is no update. Maybe COVID-19 in Hungary is a better target? Is anyone contesting this (I smell a constitutional crisis brewing). --LaserLegs (talk) 11:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – Hungarian political machinations, however ominous they may sound, generally lack wider significance. (Blurb lacks period.) – Sca (talk) 14:18, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not... "oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." --LaserLegs (talk) 14:19, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Going to the infallible rule book again, are we? Use your head. The item is of scant interest to a majority of Eng.-lang. readers, esp. in the current news environment. – Sca (talk) 14:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How did you make that determination? 331dot (talk) 14:39, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I used my head. It's chock full of empirical guidance. – Sca (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you survey all English speakers in the world? I wasn't called. Seriously, what was your guidance? 331dot (talk) 14:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AUT TACE AUT LOQUERE MELIORA SILENTIO. – Sca (talk) 15:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on the merits. A legislative body voting to surrender its authority with no end date is unusual. 331dot (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose As noted, we haven't actually got any content on the issue at hand. Nigej (talk) 16:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support on merit, oppose on quality the "indefinite" part is the newsworthy item, however there are quite a few uncited paragraphs and a lot of citation needed tags, and an orange tag. Also, it hasn't been duly updated for this event. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support and suggest alt-blurb - A formerly democratic European country sliding to dictatorship is a big fucking deal. That said, Victor Orban isn't the best target - I suggest instead 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Hungary#State of emergency. Rami R 17:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support in principle, agree with above that the target should be changed from Orban Kingsif (talk) 18:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Week oppose This seems like yet another coronavirus article we're highlighting, and we have a permalink in the ITN box for a reason, to avoid incremental and local updates on the issue, which would overwhelm the ITN box. --Jayron32 18:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't feel there's much point to ITN if we don't occasionally highlight coronavirus related events - the permalink doesn't really cover everything, and completely ignoring individual events feels like we're ignoring the elephant in the room (think banner blindness). More specifically, it's very easy to miss local developments from the permalinks - local developments which nonetheless have global implications, such as these Hungarian developments. Rami R 18:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Every country in the world is doing something unprecedented and with long-term and global implications. Hungary is not particularly unique or unusual in this regard. While every single country may be doing different unprecedented things, they're all doing something which would be unusual, noteworthy, or maybe even outrageous in normal times. These are not normal times, and while not every country is responding in exactly the same way Hungary is, they are all doing something to which your argument could be applied. --Jayron32 18:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  COVID is just a pretext; this has been in the offing for years. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 20:53, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  That's as maybe. I can see he has dictatorial tendencies but its not our business to prejudge. Nigej (talk) 21:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Right, my point is, I think that just because there's some COVID aspect doesn't mean it should automatically be relegated to the COVID pages and barred from ITN. At some level we're always judging whether something is "newsworthy enough" for ITN. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 23:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is a big deal independent of the pandemic and isn't "just another country's response" . It is a)an indefinite state of emergency b)voluntarily granted by the legislature c)in a western country with a track record (admittedly not the best; if this were the US we probably would have already posted it by now) of liberal democracy. Also, I do highly suspect that Orban's been planning this for a while and is using the pandemic as a reason, but it'd be nice to get a reliable source to that effect; if we do that's all the more justification to post this (EDIT: to show significance outside of the pandemic, not to right great wrongs on Orban's behavior). (In retrospect this is a bit harsh.) – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • That said, I do not agree with Rami's argument that we should disregard the banner and post stories better suited for it willy nilly per IAR. While we'd all agree that this would be blurb-worthy without the pandemic, my argument is that even with it it's still a significant episode of democratic backslide. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt blurb; the "indefinite rule by decree" part is unusual and ITN-worthy independent of the coronavirus pandemic, but the article on Orban still needs cleanup. Titoxd^(?!?) 21:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt blurb per above. Davey2116 (talk) 22:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt blurb. Hungary is not a banana republic. It is a member of the EU and it just became a de-facto dictatorship. This is a highly significant event. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose A parliament approves an indefinite state of emergency in response to a crisis of indefinite duration. I would support if it spices up and the EU imposes some sanction(s) against Hungary but it is a little underwhelming at the moment considering many other governments are exercising emergency powers. Hrodvarsson (talk) 01:46, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The pandemic isn't particularly of an "indefinite duration"; most think that it'll largely be over by the summer and most states of emergency (at least in the US) end at that time. Even if it goes on longer the standard practice is to have a sunset clause that can be renewed if need be, something that the opposition in Hungary wanted but which was rejected by the government. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • It definitely is indefinite. (If you have knowledge of an exact date when the pandemic will subside, please tell me so I can make some bets on the market.) Hrodvarsson (talk) 01:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I am unsure why this article should be blurbed given the already-special attention given to COVID-19 in ITN. The notion that this is somehow out of the ordinary for these times is just not true. Germany has banned export of PPE, France has seized pharmaceuticals and banned them from export, every single EU state has imposed some sort of movement/expression/gathering prohibitions. All of these fly in the face of long-established (and once dearly defended) priciples of the EU, and could reasonable be characterized as "sliding to dictatorship". And they're all also covered in the COVID-19 ongoing special box.130.233.2.31 (talk) 05:39, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Enough with this false equivalency: France and Germany did not suspend parliament and cancel elections. No EU member has done this other than Hungary. Rami R 07:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Support Whenever a democracy suspends elections, no matter where they are, it is notable. This in particular is a brazen power grab that should be broadcasted to many people. Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 16:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Significant political development amid the COVID outbreak. Gotitbro (talk) 17:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per Rami and 331dot. ——SN54129 17:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I wanted to post this, but there's still sourcing issues on Orban's article. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose on quality, sadly. I have been through Orbán article and added citation needed templates to all the claims that were unreferenced. We cannot post it unless those are fixed, especially because it is a BLP. Honestly, I don't think we can fix it before this going stale. ― Hebsen (talk) 22:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Orbans article has more orange banners than ever and bold or not we can't link to a BLP vio from the main page. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I would like to know which elections have actually been cancelled. The next scheduled elections are for 2022. The same for referendums. Even if the bolded article were better quality, we would still have to find some reason why this rises above the content in the already-very-prominent COVID-19 banner.130.233.3.161 (talk) 07:12, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • During the state emergency, by-elections and national and local referendums cannot take place, and deliberate bodies of a local governments and national minority self-governments cannot be dissolved (source). Unless I read the law wrong, elections to both the National Assembly and to the European Parliament will still take place. ― Hebsen (talk) 15:23, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: rm attention needed. While there does appear to be consensus in favor of posting, concerns about the target article remain. Spencer^T•C 14:23, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Spencer, that's why I had put "needs attention" there, not "ready". It needs editor attention, not admin. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Ah I see, I've gone ahead and re-added it. I'm so used to seeing those tags be used to get an admin's attention. Spencer^T•C 15:31, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) The Parsonage Garden at Nuenen

 Mjroots (talk) 16:57, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Support in principle, but target article(s) need expansion, esp. The Parsonage Garden at Nuenen, which probably should be the primary target. – Sca (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, expansion's going to be critical here, without that... --Masem (t) 17:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Instead of Singer Laren, the emphasized article could be changed to Vincent van Gogh, which is a Featured Article. Then it probably would be post-worthy on quality. - Indefensible (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added an altblurb to this effect. Support nomination for posting. - Indefensible (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Indefensible: - I've tweaked your altblurb to bold the painting article, which is in a reasonable shape and is the main reason for the blurb. Mjroots (talk) 06:16, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Only one link is to be bolded, reverted. --qedk (t 心 c) 09:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • In which case, I Oppose the alt blurb, as the painting is the story, not the artist. Mjroots (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • Switched the emphasis from the painter to the painting in the altblurb. This way also works fine in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 15:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Can't multiple articles be emphasized? This was the case with recent entries, e.g. the Turing Award. - Indefensible (talk) 15:30, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • WP:ITN always uses the "an emboldened link" terminology. In rare cases, if the article of focus (which would be the Turing Award) is not at par with ITN standards, it can be relegated and better, related articles should be used as the bolded link on an WP:IAR basis. --qedk (t 心 c) 18:58, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support original Article has been expanded, only the painting should be bolded. Brandmeister^talk 10:58, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support First Blurb per Brandmeister. Kenmelken (talk) 12:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• A few more cites needed, and support the original blurb once those are fixed. Per Masem and Brandmeister, it's the painting is the subject, not Vincent Van Gogh. It's debatable whether the theft should even be mentioned in the artist's article, and we don't generally choose the bolded article on the basis of whether it's an FA or not.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:06, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Question why is this notable? Seems like a non-violent petty theft of something a handful of people consider very important. If we could put a value on it, then it could be evaluated against something like the Dresden heist --LaserLegs (talk) 14:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support either. – Grabbing a multimillion-dollar painting is hardly "petty theft," and Van Gogh is a headline name. Good nuff to go. – Sca (talk) 14:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support once the cn tags have been addressed. This is an obscure early Van Gogh, not a hugely influential work, so in normal times I would oppose. But we need to put something up on the template and this is the best nomination we've had for several days. Modest Genius ^talk 15:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• References have been added.  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Post-Posting Comment – I'm guarding my own rather obscure Van Gogh (left) – and my remaining rolls of TP – with my life. In the present crisis, both must be considered priceless. – Sca (talk) 22:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Hau Pei-tsun

---

(Posted) RD: Francis Rapp

Nominator's comments: French historian, Knight of the Legion of Honour. Died from COVID-19. - Indefensible (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Publications section is not fully referenced currently, will remove unreferenced content as necessary. - Indefensible (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Would this help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  talk, I added it, looks decent enough for me. I checked that all publications without ISBN are listed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Article is well sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 11:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:39, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Philip Warren Anderson

Nominator's comments: American physicist, Nobel laureate. - Indefensible (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• non-COVID related (it appears) --Masem (t) 17:34, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Article is sourced and in depth. TJMSmith (talk) 19:44, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD Sourced, and unlike many scientist bios is well fleshed out about his contributions to his field. Spencer^T•C 21:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Ken Shimura

(Posted) RD: Isaac Robinson

Nominator's comments: Suspected COVID-19 death DannyS712 (talk) 03:21, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article is short but well referenced DannyS712 (talk) 03:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - This article was recently expanded and is well sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 03:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Seems to meet the requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:12, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I refuse to believe that a member of the US government less than 50 years old does not have a certain date or location of birth. There's more information in his mother's BLP. And blind speculation about his death as well? The two most important facts in a person's life and our BLP cannot even manage those.130.233.2.84 (talk) 12:36, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Rm ready; insufficient depth of coverage. In terms of his political career, article is a resume in prose format. There is only 1 sentence describing what he did as a politician, and that is related to coronavirus legislation. Spencer^T•C 15:32, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I just got the feeling that, with no disrespect, he was just a "meh" minor politician who warranted an article purely based on arbitrary notability criteria and who really hadn't done anything politically notable in his career. Maybe that was an oversight. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:39, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I checked Newspapers.com and Google for DoB and didn't find anything. Maybe someone else will have more luck but I am not sure it was ever published. Kees08 (Talk) 16:43, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Although I know that any person with an individual article is technically eligible for RD, the article reads like an obituary. Reliable source coverage will be needed to confirm this individual's notability pre-obit.--WaltCip (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added a source. Seems to have decent coverage now. - Indefensible (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There doesn't appear to be a single source actually about him apart from the news reports on his death (and all the others are local news sources). That doesn't exactly yell "notable" at me. Black Kite (talk) 17:31, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Members of state legislators are not notable enough, especially ones that haven't even served a complete term. It is not known if he died due to coronavirus and even if so that would still not make him notable enough for a recent death mention. - Jon698 (talk) 12:06, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Jon698, all U.S. state legislators are notable through WP:NPOL, and all notable individuals qualify for RD if the article is up to par. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• You can't just give out recent death notices to every random state legislator that dies. He had an unremarkable tenure of less than one term. - Jon698 (talk) 19:55, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Jon698, why not? Our policy is that anyone notable can be posted at RD if their article is good enough quality. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:15, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• This article isn't high quality enough. His unremarkable tenure has lead to there not being anything to add to his page besides minor personal life details and some bills that he created during his short tenure. I am currently the main contributor to the article and I have spent hours looking for sources to expand this article and I found barely anything excluding the endless amounts of articles from two days ago at max restating the same information. - Jon698 (talk) 20:18, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Article has large gaps in coverage which makes it ineligible for quality reasons for the main page. --Jayron32 18:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Are you able to prove a negative? This individual apparently meets WP:N but yet his career (with all due respect etc etc) appears to be completely unremarkable. If you can find bits that are missing from the coverage, could you point to them? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Not quite sure why this article is attracting such spurious opposition; it is not a stub and it is sourced, so it meets RD standards.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:41, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. As Muboshgu said, the policy is that all state legislators meet GNG. I agree with this policy, and editors who disagree should take it up at the appropriate place. There's not much that can be said about one year as a first-term legislator that isn't already in the article. What's there is of good quality and is thus ready for RD. Davey2116 (talk) 20:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps we need to look at WP:NPOL again when we can have an article like this which is pretty close to failing WP:GNG (his death would come under WP:BIO1E). But yeah, I guess it should be posted. Black Kite (talk) 20:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Article is sufficient. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I think it's time to make a change to our RD policy here at ITN. This is a flaw. We posted something that shouldn't have been posted.--WaltCip (talk) 16:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • How so? If you have a specific idea please put it on the talk page. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Robert H. Garff

Nominator's comments: 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Utah TJMSmith (talk) 02:24, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Seems to meet the requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support - plenty of local coverage and an AP press hit. Article is well cited. Not much coverage outside of Utah, so I'm torn as to notability. -- Javawizard (talk) 05:53, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joe Diffie

 -Thechased (talk) 20:10, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• COVID related death --Masem (t) 20:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks good. Article has GA status. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 20:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Meets criteria per above, however discography could use referencing. - Indefensible (talk) 21:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per the comments above. TJMSmith (talk) 03:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support LGTM, marked as ready --DannyS712 (talk) 03:18, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted—Bagumba (talk) 04:36, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Alan Merrill

Nominator's comments: American musician. Article has a couple cn tags currently but otherwise should be good, will try to ref or remove as needed. - Indefensible (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• COVID related death --Masem (t) 20:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Addressed cn tags. - Indefensible (talk) 21:24, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - looks like it is almost ready for a WP:GAN. A discography section might improve the article. TJMSmith (talk) 03:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:02, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Krzysztof Penderecki

Nominator's comments: Polish composer and conductor, works have appeared in many modern films such as the Shining and Exorcist. I spotted one CN tag but otherwise well sourced. Masem (t) 15:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Non-COVID related death --Masem (t) 20:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Already a class B/C article. sentausa (talk) 15:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Could use a citation for the paragraph He was an Honorary Member of and for some in the awards list. RD is a little backed up right now so maybe post tomorrow after improvements? Otherwise we can drop Michael Sorkin off the list but I just added it a few minutes ago. Kees08 (Talk) 16:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose needs refs. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Blurb on Principle oppose on quality. He was one of the greatest living composers of classical music at his death. Here is Reuters calling him "one of the world's most celebrated composers;" and this is the Hamburg Philharmonic calling him "one of the greatest living composers of classical music." Similar claims are being made on his obits today. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now on quality as NorthernFalcon wrote above; Oppose blurb. This is the issue that highly described subjects have; the more content there is, the more there is to maintain at the same quality level and therefore the more potential tripwires there are. - Indefensible (talk) 19:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  What I see now: the awards are almost completely referenced (5 or so missing, which could probably be dropped). The use in films is not referenced yet, but all these films have articles, so it shouldn't be too difficult, and I believe whether his music was used in films or not really doesn't make him any greater. The section about the St Luke Passion is little referenced, but it has its own article and doesn't need detailed treatment in the composer's article. What else? - Btw, once upon a time the article had a decent infobox ;) - We faced the same sourcing problems for Jessye Norman, remember? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Support - Looks good enough now even with a couple cn tags per updated referencing as Gerda Arendt wrote. - Indefensible (talk) 21:15, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for now. Some work needed to get it up to speed, but should be easy enough to fix before posting. RD ONLY, OPPOSE BLURB. Not a big enough individual to warrant a blurb. (and why the continued obsession to mention IBs? why, oh why, oh why...) - SchroCat (talk) 20:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Throwing my Oppose blurb as nominator. I don't believe he rises to that level based on the NYTimes article. --Masem (t) 20:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – RD only. Not widely known enough in Eng.-speaking world for blurb. – Sca (talk) 21:52, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support RD Referencing has improved. Spengouli (talk) 22:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support referencing has improved and will improve some more. Very significant composer. Krzysztof Eugeniusz Penderecki (Polish: [ˈkʂɨʂtɔf pɛndɛˈrɛt͡skʲi]; 23 November 1933 – 29 March 2020) was a Polish composer and conductor. Among his best known works are Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima, Symphony No. 3, his St. Luke Passion, Polish Requiem, Anaklasis and Utrenja. Penderecki composed four operas, eight symphonies and other orchestral pieces, a variety of instrumental concertos, choral settings of mainly religious texts, as well as chamber and instrumental works. Levenson, Eric (March 29, 2020). "Krzysztof Penderecki, composer of works in 'The Exorcist' and 'The Shining,' dies at 86". CNN. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:44, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Well referenced. The "Use in film" section would benefit from more citations, but it is uncontroversial content. Hrodvarsson (talk) 02:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks like the cn tags were addressed. Great work. TJMSmith (talk) 02:53, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• This one is Ready to go, I think. Hopefully will be posted soon. - Indefensible (talk) 05:32, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted --qedk (t 心 c) 07:32, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

---

(Posted) RD: David Schramm

Nominator's comments: Best known for role on the TV show Wings but also a theater actor. No cause of death given. Article in surprising decent shape. Masem (t) 23:41, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Article is well sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 02:56, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Meets the requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 05:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:59, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jan Howard

Nominator's comments: American musician and author. - Indefensible (talk) 04:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Excellent article. It is nominated for GA status. TJMSmith (talk) 04:11, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 08:58, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:59, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:56, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Thomas Schäfer

Nominator's comments: German politician, Minister of Finance for Hesse - Indefensible (talk) 00:22, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - New article but looks like the content is sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 04:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - It was sickening to work on, and I'd prefer to not see it in the news. I just tried to make the article decent. Thank you for more, Williamsdoritos. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Per improvements made. RD ready.BabbaQ (talk) 08:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support getting English-language coverage and article is satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I just try to imagine I was his daughter ... - also: he gets all the press coverage anyway, but how about Huisgen (below)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:41, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:49, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  sigh, after three days of dealing with four recent deaths, I wanted to write about a soprano today, on Sunday. Instead, more work to make this halfway decent. What do we know yet?? - Read Jessye Norman today, please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  sigh more, will you please help me watch the article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  sigh even more: Krzysztof Penderecki --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tom Coburn

Nominator's comments: He was indeed a public figure that has been revered by many Americans. RekishiEJ (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose much unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article does contain unsourced statements, yet it is not the reason why Tom Coburn should not be mentioned in "Recent deaths" section.--RekishiEJ (talk) 16:54, 28 March 2020 (UTC) Replaced the first "not" with "contain" 17:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose on the contrary- it is a valid reason why he should be omitted, and the sole matter of concern in a RD nom. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:27, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Significance is not an issue, but does not meet quality requirements yet, per The Rambling Man's comment. - Indefensible (talk) 17:08, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support pbp 18:05, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Since when is 'Sputnik' considered a reliable source? – Sca (talk) 22:01, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The article is missing citations in several locations. TJMSmith (talk) 03:02, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The missing citations have been resolved. Spengouli (talk) 18:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)([reply]
• Posted in spite of the MOS:LEADCITE problem the sourcing has introduced. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Looks good now per above. Added updaters. - Indefensible (talk) 18:45, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Azam Khan (squash player)

---

(Posted) RD: Robert Campbell

Nominator's comments: American politician - Indefensible (talk) 04:14, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support short but sufficient article. TJMSmith (talk) 04:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Ready for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 08:58, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support getting a bit of local coverage but not much more. Article is barely adequate. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:35, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joseph Lowery

Nominator's comments: Civil rights leader – Muboshgu (talk) 17:14, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Has a couple cn tags which should be addressed, however otherwise looks good and the guidelines say 1-2 cn tags may be ok. - Indefensible (talk) 17:36, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose while citations are still required. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, CN tags have been cleaned and references added. Spengouli (talk) 20:03, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks good, thank you for addressing the cn tags. - Indefensible (talk) 20:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - looks good enough for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted—Bagumba (talk) 03:46, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Daniel Azulay

Nominator's comments: Brazilian artist. - Indefensible (talk) 16:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose basically an orphan and not seeing it "in the news". The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It does seem to be reported in local Portuguese news, would say similar standard as Naomi Munakata. - Indefensible (talk) 16:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Rambling Man It was extensively reported in Brazil, but I don't know if the article is good enough for the main page.--SirEdimon (talk) 05:44, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Succinct article. Everything seems sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 03:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:55, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Les Hunter

Nominator's comments: American professional athlete, restaurant owner, and community college teacher. - Indefensible (talk) 06:02, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:11, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Sufficient quality and properly sourced.—Bagumba (talk) 15:13, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Good to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) North Macedonia joins NATO

Nominator's comments: First enlargement of NATO for years. A bit of non-COVID news for a change. EternalNomad (talk) 21:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Article looks in good shape --Masem (t) 21:45, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support although I would just call it NATO and not expand, the common name is NATO and I'm certain the majority of our "overseas" readers would understand that and not the expanded variant. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 21:46, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This. NATO, NASA, EU, UK, US, are the abbreviations I'd expect any English reader should be familiar with (though linking will always help). --Masem (t) 21:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, have abbreviated NATO in the blurb. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:29, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although there are some SEAOFBLUE issues in the new blurb, perhaps someone can take care of that. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:30, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as per The Rambling Man Joseywales1961 (talk) 22:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks fine, decent news story. Kingsif (talk) 22:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Can someone add a ref for the first part of the History section? Would think should be easy enough to find for the 1995 and 1999 items mentioned. - Indefensible (talk) 22:53, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support article looks good to go for posting. important news.BabbaQ (talk) 23:06, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, I have NOTHING against Slovak Prime Minister Mr. Igor, but his face has been here for long, can't we replace it?. If not, no problem. ^_^ --CoryGlee (talk) 23:18, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Just a comment on the blurb, I'm not sure when we are counting the negotiation process as starting, if we say it started in July 2018 with the invitation or back in 2008 and earlier, then maybe the blurb should say "multi-year negotiation process."-- Patrick, _oѺ^∞ 23:42, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:46, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• @Amakuru: I think I will change the image to File:History of NATO enlargement.svg as it seems more relevant (includes North Macedonia in 2020), does anyone have a problem? --qedk (t 心 c) 09:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@QEDK: Generally, purely decorative elements like flags or logos are not posted. --LaserLegs (talk) 09:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me to change it. A map also showing North America would be better IMHO, as it is misleading to focus only on Europe, but I don't have strong opinions either way.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of those cases where if we were tired of looking at that politician we should drag up and image from RD. The Macedonian flag doesn't offer any value for our readers, and a highlighted map of NATO wouldn't do great condensed into the box. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines you linked above also suggest no maps, as they are hard to discern at small size. Stephen 11:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Stephen, Amakuru, and LaserLegs: I don't see any options which are not maps (treaty parties, enlargement, NATO members) or flags (NATO/North Macedonia), all listed in order of decreasing relevance. Both flags and the enlargement map are protected and good-to-go. --qedk (t 心 c) 15:32, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So then put Matovic back or get a suitable image from RD. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The flag does seem inappropriate. It conveys no real visual information. (Also, my first association was the WWII Japanese war flag.)
– Sca (talk) 17:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would it not be appropriate to use the NATO flag or map of member states (with North Macedonia now included)? The image is now back to Mr. Matovič, but his news item was a week ago already and the nomination is not even on the page anymore. - Indefensible (talk) 04:39, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think File:History of NATO enlargement.svg works in a small size. If there is clear map of NATO members (without all the different colours which will be hard to interpret without the key) that would be good. Otherwise I have added Joseph Lowery to the protected list. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A NATO map without Canada and the United States is not a NATO map. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:18, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Any comments on this one? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Not sure what country that is in South America? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC))[reply]

French Guiana --LaserLegs (talk) 12:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added two maps to WP:CMP the one linked above with all countries, which has weird lines (I'm guessing it links it to the mainland, but it just looks bad). The other one is the North Macedonia highlighted among NATO countries (leaves out French Guiana but looks better imo) which I've placed right below it. --qedk (t 心 c) 13:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks qedk. I have added the green map. Improvements to the caption welcomed though — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bob Andy

Nominator's comments: Jamaican musician, Order of Distinction member. - Indefensible (talk) 16:16, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 21:42, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - RD ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Marked ready. – Ammarpad (talk) 04:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 05:11, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Boris Johnson has tested positive for coronavirus

---

(Posted) RD: Princess Maria Teresa of Bourbon-Parma

Nominator's comments: First royal to die from COVID-19, needs a bunch of work, she was quite notably outspoken but until recently her name redirected to her father's article. Kingsif (talk) 18:32, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Article is currently a stub that has a speedy deletion banner. - Indefensible (talk) 19:01, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose tagged stub. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment updated with translations from the French sister project. robertsky (talk) 21:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article still could use work and may not meet the threshold of RD guidelines, but good work updating the article. - Indefensible (talk) 21:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Stubby. (And "whilst" – ??) – Sca (talk) 21:57, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Article is much improved. TJMSmith (talk) 22:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Good enough for RD now.BabbaQ (talk) 23:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Marked as ready per above. Moved from the 28th to the 26th, as that is the correct date. - Indefensible (talk) 00:17, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - ready to post MurielMary (talk) 05:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posting. --Tone 10:14, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Michael Sorkin

Nominator's comments: Important architect, urban planner. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Has a couple cn tags which should be addressed, in particular the orange banner should be resolved. Looks good otherwise. - Indefensible (talk) 19:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per above fixes. - Indefensible (talk) 21:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose referencing work required. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:17, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know your default position, but article has now been referenced. User:The Rambling Man what is it you think is presently lacking? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:22, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's happening about the dubiously "useful" "Reporting, selected" section? Most of it is unrerferenced, and I'm not convinced I can see any value in this, do we normally list a "selected" (by whom, what criteria? One suspects, just whatever someone kind find...) list of mentions of someone? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Rambling Man Per your suggestion, I removed the section. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:16, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support looks fine. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted though technically stale, due to four from the 27th and four from the 28th. Kees08 (Talk) 16:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Rolf Huisgen

Nominator's comments: Chemist with a reaction named after him, 99. - Expanded stub. Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Meets the requirements, good work updating the article Gerda Arendt. - Indefensible (talk) 16:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:23, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Balázs Csákabonyi

Nominator's comments: Hungarian lawyer/politician, High Commissioner of the Hungarian Bar Association. - Indefensible (talk) 16:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support basically an orphan, and not seeing much news coverage. What's there is ok. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:25, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:18, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Naomi Munakata

Nominator's comments: Great woman, chorale conductor. VOVID-19 (my first) - The article was created in en and other languages the day she died. I could add recordings on demand, if needed. (See AllMusic link.) - I wonder if victims of the virus might appear within the box, if only to have some change there from time to time. Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Short, but with statements supported with references. robertsky (talk) 15:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• support: short but sufficient.BabbaQ (talk) 15:28, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - seems to meet minimum requirements for RD posting. - Indefensible (talk) 16:14, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Posted. El_C 18:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Jimmy Wynn

(Posted) RD: John O'Leary (golfer)

Nominator's comments: Some sourcing still needed in places DannyS712 (talk) 06:03, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now reasonably sourced DannyS712 (talk) 06:32, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as per nominator. short but decent article Joseywales1961 (talk) 10:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support one citation missing as far as I can tell. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now - lead needs to be a bit longer, and the lead says he played in the 1975 Ryder Cup while the body says he missed it.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Amakuru: Can you take another look? DannyS712 (talk) 00:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @DannyS712: it's already been posted anyway, but for the record it's all good now. Nice work.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Article seems to meet the requirements, the 1975 Ryder Cup detail per Amakuru's comment above seems to be consistent now. - Indefensible (talk) 15:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - It is RD ready.BabbaQ (talk) 23:19, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted --qedk (t 心 c) 07:31, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @QEDK: Would you mind posting the credit bit on my talk, so that I can claim this for the wikicup (unless not doing so was intentional)? DannyS712 (talk) 13:22, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @DannyS712: New to the posting side of ITN. Sent! --qedk (t 心 c) 13:31, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Curly Neal

Nominator's comments: Short but should be reasonably sourced. Masem (t) 01:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support one cn there, otherwise alright. Bit slim considering he was a Globetrotter, but meh. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:24, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD  — Amakuru (talk) 13:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Michel Hidalgo

(Stale) RD: Mark Blum

(Closed) Nicolás Maduro indicted for drug trafficking

(Closed) Guilty plea in Christchurch mosque shootings

---

Man in China dies from hantavirus

Nominator's comments: "Global Times reported the patient, a migrant worker from southwestern Yunnan Province, died while traveling on a chartered bus to Shandong Province for work on Monday." Count Iblis (talk) 04:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose way way way outweighed by coronavirus, and while more fatal (36% vs 2-3%), human transmission is extremely rare, hence why only 1000 cases. --Masem (t) 04:10, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose this doesn't stand a chance given the lateness of nomination and obscurity/triviality of the event; I do thank the nominator for the good-faith nomination, however. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: William Bartholomay

Nominator's comments: American businessman, owner of the Atlanta Braves. - Indefensible (talk) 16:32, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Harry Aarts

Nominator's comments: Dutch politician, Order of the Netherlands Lion. Article is short but seems referenced and may meet the requirements for RD posting. - Indefensible (talk) 06:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• support - indeed short but sufficient for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 15:29, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I agree with BabbaQ. Looks well sourced. TJMSmith (talk) 03:59, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I came to post but this death is now older than the latest on the template, sorry. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jennifer Bate

Nominator's comments: Concert organist - one of the first ever - who recordined all Messiaen guided by the composer. - Expanded a bit. There could be much more based on the present sources, but not by me right no, with two more RD waiting, and a GA review under way, + need fresh air. Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Looks ready to me. P-K3 (talk) 12:00, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support given the length of the career, it's a bit lacking, but what's there seems satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:32, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I added some bits especially for you, but believe anybody could have done the same, - it's all in English, while I feel more needed when sources are in German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:17, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - good for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 15:46, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted --qedk (t 心 c) 20:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kurti cabinet

 —Jon698 (talk) 15:17, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Government collapse due to COVID-19 pandemic. Notable development. (Also proposing ALT1) Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 17:43, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose because Kosovo lacks broad recognition as a state, and because the article is stubby. Kurti's replacement may qualify as ITN/R --LaserLegs (talk) 18:03, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @LaserLegs: Since when was "broad recognition" required for ITN? Surely we'd post a story about Taiwan, a non-UN member recognized by 7.3% of members, so why not Kosovo which is recognized by a majority 50.3% of members? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 19:34, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We posted the Taiwanese which I opposed as well though the article was much better. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The 2 examples are not exactly the same because in the Taiwanese case there was an election of a new government, in this case there is not yet a replacement government and the government which was voted out continues in a caretaker role. However, not necessarily against this being posted, as the blurb can be updated as appropriate later. - Indefensible (talk) 22:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support it's a self-governing region which suffices. Banedon (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - it is notable with a government that falls due to the coronavirus.BabbaQ (talk) 22:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a grey area that arguably could be covered by and is redundant with the coronavirus banner though. - Indefensible (talk) 22:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • If needed, we could post this story without mentioning the pandemic. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 23:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – The Kurti cabinet continues as a caretaker govt., pending its replacement. – Sca (talk) 13:47, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• So you'd rather add it then...? The Prime Minister will resign regardless, like when Theresa May resigned (which we posted) but was still "acting" PM for a while. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 15:40, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I would be very wary of directly connecting the COVID-19 situation with the govt's resignation. Sources in the article making such a claim also detail a long history of antipathy between the PM and President. This could very well be run of the mill politicking. Absent the COVID-19 angle, the time to re-nom this would be on the formation of a new government.130.233.2.33 (talk) 14:11, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @130.233.2.33: Just wondering, but do you have an account and just forgot to log in? – Jon698 (talk) 14:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added ALT2 with this in mind. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 15:40, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Per the ip comment can the blurb be changed to "Kosovo's Kurti cabinet loses a vote of no confidence after sacking a minister over disagreements on the handling of the coronavirus pandemic." – Jon698 (talk) 14:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Albin Kurti has not been updated! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @MSGJ: I updated it a few hours ago. – Jon698 (talk) 3:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

• Comment Is a decision going to be made on this article? – Jon698 (talk) 21:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mike Stratton

Nominator's comments: Six-time AFL All-Star and AFL All-Time Second Team selection. —Bagumba (talk) 14:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support very brief for such an "all star". The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:43, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The article is currently 1800 bytes of readable prose, which is above the 1500 minimum that DYK requires. ITNC does not have any formal size minimums.—Bagumba (talk) 23:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment "AFL" is a very unclear term. Here in Wikipedia it links to a disambiguation page with around 35 entries! This Australian initially wondered who this footy star was that he's never heard of, and would never use such an abbreviation in a global encyclopaedia. HiLo48 (talk) 23:47, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @HiLo48: I'm admittedly guilty of not following MOS in my nomination comment, though the comment field is optional for a nom, and the article does introduce AFL properly (and I did at least link it above). Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 04:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support - from what I can see everything seems legit and RD eligible.BabbaQ (talk) 23:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment After a bit more expansion, readble prose size is now about 2,400 bytes.—Bagumba (talk) 13:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support looks alright. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD  — Amakuru (talk) 13:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Robert Alan Levinson

 Count Iblis (talk) 23:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Just noting family has stated they consider him dead as of this date, despite no evidence of body/etc. so this is a reasonable date to post. --Masem (t) 23:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. I was just about to nominate this; it's clearly notable (three presidential administrations worked to find him) and has been making its way through the major news outlets. JOEBRO64 01:27, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support 25 March was the death announced date, which is what we work on. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:16, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Quite possibly not recent at all, less possibly not dead at all. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:32, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  And the article is about his disappearance, not him. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:33, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So if it's not a BDP, it technically doesn't have to be on Margaret Thatcher's level for a blurb. But it still has to be deadlier than the Zagreb earthquake. Or not related to you-know-what. Or possibly on a website's frontpage. Or maybe get a certain ratio of votes. Or...? InedibleHulk (talk) 13:13, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, he was no Nelson Mandela.--WaltCip (talk) 14:42, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - RD is only used for people who are individually notable enough to have their own article, rather than an article about the political events surrounding them.--WaltCip (talk) 12:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Opppse Valid point that there is almost zero about Levinson as a person in this article outside his profession related to his disappearance, so fails the basis of RD. --Masem (t) 13:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per TheJoebro64 and Joseph2302. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 17:55, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Article is not biographical per WaltCip, and the announcement of his death does not mean his death is recent nor that he is actually dead per InedibleHulk. - Indefensible (talk) 22:30, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It has been the case in the past that when we have a notable person prior to their disappearance that is then declared dead (either due to certain laws or the familys consideration) then we have posted their RD as that date here. I forget who that case was in the past but we have respect this factor. That means the death could have been years in the past, as long as the official declaration of death is within the "freshness" for ITN --Masem (t) 22:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ganz typisch. – Sca (talk) 22:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2020 India coronavirus lockdown

---

(Posted) RD: Anatoliy Mokrenko

Nominator's comments: Ukrainian baritone opera singer, who appeared in films, later also director of the National Opera, taking the company to France, other Europe and Asia. - Prompted by a red link, I collected from puzzle pieces, - additions welcome, hopefully by someone who speaks the language. Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:57, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD  — Amakuru (talk) 22:29, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Alfred Gomolka

Nominator's comments: EU politician, died on this date Joseph2302 (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - I see no major issues. Good to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, excellent expansion, and so lovely that I don't have to do it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• This has been marked as ready for 10 hours, please can an admin promote it? Joseph2302 (talk) 10:12, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Still ready 17.5 hours later. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:45, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @The Rambling Man:  Posted --qedk (t 心 c) 18:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: William Dufris

Nominator's comments: Notable VA, Bob the Builder. Major sourcing issues. Masem (t) 19:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose major sourcing issues need to be resolved. Can we fix it? Probably someone can. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:18, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per above. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:23, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Stuart Gordon

Nominator's comments: Director known for a few cult classics (Re-Animator, Honey I Shrunk the Kids); some sourcing problems though with article. Masem (t) 13:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - Needs referencing improvement. - Indefensible (talk) 19:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose filmography needs work. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:23, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted to RD) RD: Bill Rieflin

Nominator's comments: Drummer associated with multiple bands including REM and King Crimson, died after battle w/ cancer. Typical sourcing problems but looks like a few working on it. Masem (t) 00:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Masem, Should be added. :/ </3 ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I added you to updater... it says it there ...--Masem (t) 00:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Masem, I did mean, "I should be added" I meant, "This entry should be added to 'In the News', also, I am sad because Bill Reiflin is dead". Pardon me for being unclear. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, sorry. Yes, obviously definitely to be added (and has been to you and others getting it up to quality). --Masem (t) 18:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose somewhat perversely, the discog looks fine but the prose needs multiple citations. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:02, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Working through those at the moment, esp. the bits around Swans and Ministry. Damn. The bad news keeps a comin'! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support good work all. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support All cited now. Black Kite (talk) 09:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Note to posting admin: I added myself to the updaters, but User:Lugnuts should be in there too, however the template only has 3 slots! Black Kite (talk) 09:29, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support well sourced now. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support looks ok to go. robertsky (talk) 13:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 14:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Terrence McNally

Nominator's comments: Tony Award & Emmy Award-winning playwright, wrote the book for Ragtime, died from complications due to Coronavirus TenorTwelve (talk) 21:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment there are two orange tags in the article, will change to Support if these are addressed Joseywales1961 (talk) 22:18, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are Huff and People considered RSs? – Sca (talk) 22:28, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I switched it to NYTimes and CNN per your request -TenorTwelve (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huff is "debatable" and People is good for BLP - see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Sources Joseywales1961 (talk) 23:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huffington Post is well established as a reliable source; People would actually be questionable to a degree as it gets a bit more into celebrity gossip. --Masem (t) 23:58, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose multiple obvious issues. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:04, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Not ready yet. Mostly looks good but a couple sections need additional referencing to remove their orange banners. - Indefensible (talk) 18:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Overall, the article is well sourced. Only the writing section has a tag left. Everything in the section is sourced or hyperlinked to an article. TJMSmith (talk) 04:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Still one orange tag, and I'm afraid this nomination is now stale — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:08, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Reposted) 2020 Summer Olympics postponed

Nominator's comments: Pretty major sporting event, worldwide. I remember someone saying that this should be the only event that should be ITN if postponed. --Rockin 19:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait only because (after searching for confirmation) this is one IOC member saying this. Wait until the official IOC statement. --Masem (t) 19:53, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be clear, as from the BBC story [5] "The International Olympic Committee has given itself four weeks to decide on the future of this summer's Games, but veteran IOC member Pound says a decision will be announced soon. "It will come in stages," he said. "We will postpone this and begin to deal with all the ramifications of moving this, which are immense." So just wait for the "stage 1" announcement. --Masem (t) 19:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait for a statement from the IOC, this is just one member(who may certainly know, but doesn't speak for the group as a whole). 331dot (talk) 19:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait as premature per Masem and 331dot. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Just close this now It obviously hasn't happened yet. HiLo48 (talk) 23:19, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Reopened. Now confirmed per sources above. Black Kite (talk) 12:38, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Japan'sPM confirmed it. Starzoner (talk) 12:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Now it's official. Let's get it up there. Quick, quick, hurry!!--WaltCip (talk) 12:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I've written a present-tense blurb that avoids calling it the 2020 Games, as this will now be the 2021 Games. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Article has not been updated sufficiently as of right now. Fix the article and its lead to actually reflect the latest information, and then I can support this. --Jayron32 12:45, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support but only if the blurb also links to Dick Pound for some cheap laughs in these bleak times. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I've made an edit request to update updated the page. Kingsif (talk) 13:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Given the official confirmation I have gone ahead and lowered the protection level to semi-PP x 48 hrs. The article can now be edited by anyone who is auto-confirmed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I don't think the IOC have said anything yet but obviously the Japan PM announcing it is good enough. This is the one sporting postponement that is worth posting in my view. Once the article has been updated take this as a support.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:27, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. --Tone 13:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The "2020 Summer Olympics" should be bolded --Rockin 13:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull While I support in principle, far too many of the tables are poorly referenced. I would also note that there does not appear to have been a discernible consensus to post this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:45, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull per aO. Also questioning the "consensus"—excluding the nom, only two support votes, Tone?!? ——SN54129 13:54, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Official statement. Yes, this was posted too early but there's no question now. --Masem (t) 13:56, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull until consensus is reached per aO and Serial. Rockin 14:07, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep/Support. Fix the tables or remove them for the time being. The ITN process makes it take too long to pull a blurb and then have it reposted. Though consensus was weak, there's no doubt that this was going to be significant enough to post. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 14:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Pull until quality is fixed for BOTH of the problems noted above (sufficient update, referencing issues) UNLESS Nice4What (talk · contribs) or someone else fixes those problems before an admin gets to removing it. This should not have been posted in the state it was in. --Jayron32 14:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Pulled per the above comments. Consensus does not appear to be reached yet and some referencing improvements needed.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – For whenever the article issues are addressed, I'd just like to go on record saying the alt-blurb seems more appropriate. The format of the initial blurb doesn't seem to mesh well with other ITN headlines. Master of Time (talk) 14:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Re-post - I hate the practice of posting then pulling events of paramount importance. Let's post it and then improve it.--WaltCip (talk) 14:36, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Main page is too important to post sub-par articles and expect them to get improved. And Olympics - which were still 3months out - are not of "paramount importance" at this point. --Masem (t) 14:39, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree, however this line of logic also suggests that non-emphasized articles in a blurb should meet the same frontpage standards in my opinion. For example, currently Prime Minister of Slovakia is up but is essentially unreferenced. - Indefensible (talk) 18:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Major news, even though it's corona related it still an important announcement.  Nixinova   T   C   19:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose/Proposal - The article needs significant updating yet. Alternatively, Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on the 2020 Summer Olympics, which is better maintained, could be featured here.Renerpho (talk) 19:56, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Added alt2 The relation of the postponement to the pandemic should be highlighted. Clarified one year to 2021. Official title of event used in IOC statement is "Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games." Sleath56 (talk) 20:05, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Re-post per WaltCip. Banedon (talk) 22:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose this is just part of the fallout of Covid-19 pandemic which is already conspicuously displayed. And this is not unexpected, many, many things much more important have been canceled, we need not start listing them. In fact, going ahead to do it, might be the unexpected thing here, and I believe if that were the case, MS sources would have given it much more attention than they do now. – Ammarpad (talk) 06:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Re-post article is good enough now. Although it's caused by coronavirus, this is a major world event, this postponement was worldwide ramifications. This is the only postponement therefore that I believe it's worth adding to ITN. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose re-posting – It was a major story, but as a one-time announcement it will have a short shelf-life in the news. Further, as noted in the past, such Pushmi-Pullyu waffling comes across as highly amateurish. – Sca (talk) 13:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt1. This is the only sporting event for which I think a coronavirus-related delay is worth posting. The article is updated and of reasonable quality. It's huge and could do with a copyedit, but that shouldn't preclude posting. Modest Genius ^talk 14:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support either of alt1, alt2. The Tokyo Olympics is the only coronavirus cancellation/postponement story worth posting as a blurb. Olympics is a worldwide event with unique significance for the humanity, and in the past the Olympic Games were only cancelled because of war. In the case of Tokyo 2020 Olympics, the games could have easily been cancelled rather than postponed, so the current outcome was not inevitable. Nsk92 (talk) 19:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support reposting, per Modest Genius. Hrodvarsson (talk) 01:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Getting stale. – Sca (talk) 13:39, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support the reposting now as per Nsk92 before it becomes old news Joseywales1961 (talk) 14:53, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Ammarpad: nowadays, notability is more likely to be found in something actually going ahead. And, since events in the coronasphere are so fast moving, I'm afraid this must be deemed stale by now. ——SN54129 14:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stale. – Sca (talk) 13:55, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per Nsk92. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 15:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Not stale. This is newer than than the newest entry about the Slovakian PM. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A week-old announcement certainly is very stale indeed. Suggest close. – Sca (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who's in ITN for years knows, that's not how we suggest staleness. Don't be dishonest about this. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:35, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ZZZzzzz....Sca (talk) 22:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

•  Reposted. Item is less stale than the item it replaced. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the yawning monkey loses this time. ;-) WaltCip (talk) 13:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of news, this is silly. – Sca (talk) 13:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Suggest close as this has been reposted. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove I suggest removing this as it is just fallout of the Coronavirus pandemic. Noah^Talk 13:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove. @MSGJ: WTF? This is long-since stale, and clearly no consensus per the above discussion to re-post.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  It is not the case that it is “stale”, which has a specific meaning at ITN; the announcement was on 24 March, and Matovic became Slovakia’s PM on 21 March. P-K3 (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Boo! Both virus news and old news, just like WrestleMania. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:30, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I am afraid, there's no consensus to repost this, Martin. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:45, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it's in the news, it's updated, the referencing is good enough, and the Olympics is a major multi-day, multi-sport, multi-nation event. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be. But this year, it's nothing, the absence of all those things. Not even still watchable online, like bigger events will be. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I smell a rat. – Sca (talk) 16:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Remove no consensus, and it's definitely not in the news. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: at the time of posting I judged there was consensus, because the only objections centred around the quality of the article which seems to have been addressed. The comments about being stale are curious, because if this is pulled it will be replaced by an even older item ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Things just get curiouser and curiouser.
(And old news just gets staler and staler.)
– Sca (talk) 22:09, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Everything we post is stale, and if this is pulled something even older will get dragged up in its place. One COVID-19 story slipped past the gigantic unnecessary banner -- just let it go. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Pull, then repost, then pull again - We can do this all day -- or even better yet, why not let's just close this discussion and finally put a lid on this farce.--WaltCip (talk) 13:19, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Sca has provided and captioned three solid animal pictures. Should be clear enough to anyone what happened here. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:13, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You must admit that's much more economical in terms of cyberwork than posting 3,000 words of argument. – Sca (talk) 20:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Pull we have a big ol' banner for virus news, we don't need a separate article about something that isn't happening. Pointless entry, given the circumstances. It's also clear there is no consensus to post at all, so I'm not sure how the decision to post can be justified on that basis. - SchroCat (talk) 16:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) RD: Manu Dibango

Nominator's comments: Famous saxophone player, died today (from Covid-19). Article has been updated extensivley by a number of editors already (not me!), not clear who best to give credit. Fram (talk) 10:57, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose several citations needed and as usual, an unreferenced discography, worse than normal because many items not even linked. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Very well known musician, leader in his genre and region. --Varavour (talk) 19:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - needs referencing improvement still as The Rambling Man wrote. - Indefensible (talk) 17:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Albert Uderzo

Nominator's comments: Recent death of one of the most popular comics artists ever, artist (for over 50 years) and writer (for more than 20 years) of Asterix, known worldwide. Perhaps not quite at blurb level (though I wouldn't oppose one), but of the 10 most translated french language authors, he was the only one who still lived (see here). Fram (talk) 10:33, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose not seeing any prose update and some referencing required. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some prose update has been added since. Which parts need referencing? Fram (talk) 12:53, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • When I reviewed, there were at least three [citation needed] templates. Now they've gone but most of the "Family" section is unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • TRM, the family section is now fully referenced! Fram (talk) 11:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. CNN, Hollywood Reporter, The Times, AP, The Guardian, Independent, BBC, DW, Variety, RT, Euronews. There should be enough content in there for a blurb. If not, definitely belongs in RD. 2001:BB6:4713:4858:8458:7FA8:68FF:52B7 (talk) 14:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The blurb criteria is here, if that helps. Kees08 (Talk) 16:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose til the big orange tag is fixed; looks like unreferenced family, awards, and some other information. Not a ton more work, close-ish. Haven't seen a good enough argument for a blurb yet. Kees08 (Talk) 16:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd make an argument for a blurb when the article's up to scratch - if we're looking at the top of one's field, then storytelling comics (rather than the superhero-y/serial ones) is a field dominated by Asterix around the world. Kingsif (talk) 19:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Storytelling was Goscinny's field, though. Asterix and Obelix are pretty iconic designs, but the dog and wizard are pretty forgettable. Compare to the dozens more memorable toons Matt Groening drew, for perspective on world dominance. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, once concerns about content are resolved. KConWiki (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I added a few {{cn}}s, but this is close to being ready. Fix those and I will support RD. Oppose blurb as 'number of translations of a French author' is a very narrow field to be top of; not at the Thatcher/Mandela level. Modest Genius ^talk 12:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. I found reliable sources for two of these, and removed the third one which was simply incorrect (good tagging!). I think all "cn"s are removed now. As for the blurb: the "translations" was more a measure of popularity around the world than the sole claim to fame: having created a series which sold 370 million copies and spawned a dozen movies and so on (and has its own attraction park), and being arguably the last truly great artist from the heyday of European comics (i.e. before the advent of graphic novels and more adult comics) and one of the few who transcended their "local" fanbase and became universally known (like Hergé or Peyo or Morris), are the real claims to fame. But it's a borderline case for a blurb: when they were all still alive (those few, and Franquin, Jacobs, Vandersteen, ...), he probably would not have made the top 5 of most important ones; he just outlived them all. Fram (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Looks good, I now support RD. I agree Uderzo was very successful and well known; I enjoyed his work. I'm just one of the ITN contributors who think the threshold for a death blurb must be very high, because we have the RD section where most deaths can be featured. Modest Genius ^talk 14:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - However, the awards currently look unreferenced. - Indefensible (talk) 18:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - looks well-referenced now, also very prominent as the author of an iconic comic book series. --Clibenfoart (talk) 14:08, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, looks good now which I didn't expect to happen when I first saw it, - thank you all who helped. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:28, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now still a couple of cites needed in the with Goscinny section, and awards. Good to go after that.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I have sourced everything now (and added a few awards at the same time). I hope we are finally done now and this can get some time on the main page after all... Fram (talk) 09:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Am I allowed to mark my own nomination as "ready"? Considering all the supports, and the opposes which just waited until the article was ready, I hope this may be considered "ready" before it is stale and falls of this page. If I stepped out of line, feel free to remove the "ready" indicator. Fram (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, this is ready. Modest Genius ^talk 17:55, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is beyond ready. Why hasn't it been posted yet? Manish2542 (talk) 18:25, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posting. --Tone 18:36, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

---

(Stale) RD: Maurice Berger

Nominator's comments: American author, University of Maryland professor, art critic, curator, cultural historian. - Indefensible (talk) 06:54, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support: good to go for RD.BabbaQ (talk) 15:30, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - everything looks cited. It would be great if someone could expand the lead. TJMSmith (talk) 03:56, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Spencer, Dr. Berger's nomination is almost out of time for posting, could you please review? There are a number of other Ready entries waiting on the list too, but this one is the most urgent. - Indefensible (talk) 04:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • My apologies, things have been crazy offline given the field in which I work. I added myself to the ITNA template below, but I'm probably not the best person to ping for urgent requests in the next several weeks. Spencer^T•C 17:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I came to post, but the oldest item is now Mar 26. I'm sorry but I don't think I can post this now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• What an embarrassment. This one was ready to go too. Perhaps it's time to start changing the procedure on RD, whether it's how we notify a posting admin or at what point a nomination is considered stale. WaltCip (talk) 12:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Perhaps people should make more use of {{@ITNA}} to attract attention by admins? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:58, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Spencer, MSGJ, WaltCip - Thanks for your attention to this. Would it be possible to expand the active RD list from 6 to 10 to allow more time for names to be up (particularly during this coronavirus period in which the rate of notable deaths is increased), as I suggested on the talk page? - Indefensible (talk) 18:21, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'll take a look; I think having the discussion there is the best location. Spencer^T•C 01:32, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lucien Sève

Nominator's comments: Died on 23 March of COVID-19 Joseph2302 (talk) 19:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support not much there but what is looks ok. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose Insufficient depth of coverage at the present. What policies did the subject advocate for? For the subject's works, what are the main ideas proposed? Spencer^T•C 14:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Spencer I've added a couple of policies and some info on one work. Will look for more sources later (though lots of journals about his works are behind paywalls). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Meets minimum standards, thank you Joseph. Spencer^T•C 16:11, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per TRM above, although I agree that expanding the article bit more would be ideal. TJMSmith (talk) 14:26, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted must have been expanded since last comment, seems long enough for RD. Kees08 (Talk) 18:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Stanley Sporkin

---

(Pulled) 2020 Zagreb earthquake

Nominator's comments: Largest earthquake to hit Croatia in 100+ years, widely reported on and tangentially related to the coronavirus. - Indefensible (talk) 04:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose No casualties, and sub 6.0 scale. Not significant in the larger scale (Consider there was a similar magnitude in Utah a few days ago but outside of a power outage, wasn't much news either)... --Masem (t) 04:45, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not true that there were no casualties, also not sure if verified but at least one death was reported. UPI, Macau Business - Indefensible (talk) 05:02, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was an initial report of 1 dead but was later corrected. As I suspect this will not get a sufficient support to get to ITN, I already nominated it for DYK. --Tone 07:53, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would otherwise support ITN, however, since I am the one who started the article, I will not take any admin actions. --Tone 09:55, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I lean towards supporting. Significant damage and impact on the country. Judging significance from magnitude is, in my opinion, misleading, because damage depends on seismic readiness. Similar quakes have caused numerous deaths in India, and a slightly more powerful one in El Salvador caused thousands of casualties. Conversely, a 5.7 in Tokyo, the most-prepared capital, would be largely a yawner. I feel if an equivalent quake hit the capital of a more-populous country, such as D.C. or London, it would probably be posted. --47.146.63.87 (talk) 07:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Zagreb is a major European city and there was significant damage to the old city centre and many historic buildings such as churches and museums (e.g. [7][8][9]). The city's cathedral, which symbolises the city symbol as much as the Temple in aforementioned SLC, lost a spire (ref). There were also power and gas outages in parts of city, and other problems that go hand in hand with a major earthquake in a rarely affected region (ref), cf. Utah where the return period is 10 years (ref). Additionally, the strength still has to be ascertained for sure. Montenegro's seismological service estimates it at M_L 6.0 (ref). Apologies for some non-English refs, am in a bit of a hurry. Daß Wölf 09:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - a day later, this is still on the front page of the BBC site, it's major news. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:26, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Certainly unusual for Zagreb, but we can't post every <6M earthquake that kills no-one. See List of earthquakes in 2020 for the large number of bigger earthquakes we didn't post just in the last three months. The article is well-suited for DYK though. Modest Genius ^talk 10:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  A death has been confirmed. [10] Daß Wölf 20:34, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Modest Genius. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:02, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose I'm not opposed to posting earthquakes that are minor if they cause major damage to historic sites, but it doesn't seem to be quite at that level. Blythwood (talk) 14:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – Per Genius, Masem. Lacks broader significance. – Sca (talk) 14:07, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - DYK is a better fit.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Yes, it's a series of quakes with no deaths but if we marry together the rarity of the tremor in the area, the occurrence amidst the coronavirus pandemic and the damage it caused to many old buildings in the city, it's sensible to make an argument for. The main news in the Croatian media after this happened revolve around the fear of how letting people go out to prevent from potential aftershocks might impact pandemic's spread in the country. At the end, while the death toll is an important indicator for evaluating significance, it shouldn't rule out outright every similar story under unusual circumstances.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same issue with the Utah quake - several historical buildings damanged [11] several aftershocks, concerns on the impact re COVID, but no deaths. I would agree there is a good chance of a major disaster that could strike somewhere in the world where there is a shelter-in-place or a massive medical response where the disaster would worsen the COVID spread or impact the medical response to the treatment, even if the disaster itself resulted in no deaths, but this one does not appear to be it - the articles suggest that everyone remained calm and after the initial shakes, stayed indoors as ordered. So I don't see that a story to post yet, especially if we're not posting the Utah quake story which was essentially of the same scope. --Masem (t) 16:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I get your point and this is not far from what you consider postable. The Clinical Centre for Pulmonary Diseases at the University Hospital Centre was evacuated because of the building's high seismic risk. Unlike the Utah quake that you're referring to, this one shaked a national capital where people from the entire country and the surrounding area are frequently admitted to hospital these days. The apparent disruption of this process is a big deal and seems to be of a much larger scope compared to the impact it made on the response to the pandemic in Salt Lake City.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:12, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support seems to be a damaging and disruptive earthquake in a national capital. WP:MINIMUMDEATHS is meaningless. Weak because the article is stubby. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support once the tag is fixed. Kingsif (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment leaning towards posting once the article is fully referenced, anyone else have opinions? Kees08 (Talk) 18:09, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thought that the referencing was pretty good prior to nomination and it has been improved since, is there anything specifically you are looking for? - Indefensible (talk) 18:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I do not see it as notable enough for the News but I would fully support it for DYK. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 22:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Kees08 (Talk) 05:31, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was no significant consensus to post this (by !vote 5-5) --Masem (t) 05:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is none at all, so I have pulled it. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:44, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you know, its not a vote, but if it was, I count 7 supports to 7 opposes, am I miscounting? I thought the reasoning of the supporters was better than the reasoning of the opposes, a couple of which were that it was better for DYK than ITN, which as far as I know is not grounded in any policy (happy to be linked to it if it exists though!). A couple opposes cited that it did not kill anyone, which as of three days ago was not true anymore. Anyways my computer has an issue with its monitor when I have it on for awhile and it is very irritating, so summary: IMO, the arguments for posting were much stronger, grounded in policy, and accurate at the time of posting than the arguments for not posting, but its fine that it is pulled. If ITN is supposed to be based off of votes and not strength of arguments I would advise modifying the instructions however. Kees08 (Talk) 06:18, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Masem; not a particularly newsworthy event. ——SN54129 08:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Canada withdraws from the 2020 Tokyo Olympics

(Closed) RD: Lorenzo Sanz

(Closed) Yokohama Northwest Route

---

La Modelo prison riot

Nominator's comments: A prison riot, if coronavirus-related Kingsif (talk) 17:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Article is an underreferenced stub. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Hellmut Stern

Nominator's comments: Violinist, born in Berlin, fleeing the Nazis to China, Israel, U.S., back to Berlin, principal violinist of the Berlin Philharmonic, and making the impossible possible: bring the orchestra (the former Reichssender) to Israel. - New article. Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:36, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Article is short, but seems to meet the minimum requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 02:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I found a book source, added a bit, and more could be added if someone has time. What a life! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – Known not only as a concert violinist, but also for educational talks about the Nazi era. – Sca (talk) 14:13, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 17:11, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Janata Curfew

(Posted) RD: P. K. Banerjee

Nominator's comments: Legendary Indian Football player. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:04, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose early life and honours sections need referencing. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:20, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please take a look now.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are four awards uncited, and one of the two paragraphs for his career are uncited. Bonus points if you fix the humongous infobox image :). Kees08 (Talk) 16:34, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look now have added sources .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:02, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you cite the retirement? That's kind of a big one. Kees08 (Talk) 18:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks done anything else Kees08 .Please let me know.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted Kees08 (Talk) 05:21, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed pending article improvement) RD/Blurb: Kenny Rogers

(Closed) RD: Claude Bennett

---

(Posted) RD: Willigis Jäger

Nominator's comments: Quite an interesting person between Catholic spirituality and Zen. I expanded from one line. There could be more, but not now. Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted (ps if you know German and can properly translate article titles, that is always appreciated on these articles) Kees08 (Talk) 15:34, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Delhi Gang rape

Nominator's comments: This was one of the worst criminal cases happened in India and I acknowledge the fact that this incident is overshadowed by the country's coronavirus pandemic. Abishe (talk) 06:33, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose criminal sentences, whether being given or carried out, are not considered ITN-worthy. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 06:46, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support important news in a significant case of international attention. I think an exception can be made in this case. buidhe 07:04, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Logical conclusion to a criminal event. Support on worldwide coverage. The criminal event was posted in Wikipedia's ITN when it had occurred seven years ago. Regards, theTigerKing  10:59, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support — important news. Justice is finally delivered. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 12:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support — Because it was covered by world media. Justice conclusion.BabbaQ (talk) 12:16, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose We posted their conviction in 2013. We don't typically post executions behind that. --Masem (t) 12:39, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Wolfson-Masem; also oppose "per justice", which is one bizarre argument. ——SN54129 12:46, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Regarding the "justice" arguments, we are not here to right great wrongs. While we may record the righting of great wrongs, this does not suffice to upend our precedent against posting on criminal cases after conviction/acquittal in the absence of any noteworthy issues (of which there weren't any here). – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 12:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose domestic crime story, uninspiring article. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This case is at least as significant for India as the Harvey Weinstein case was in the US. Article appears to be in good shape. Beyond which we need some new and non-Covid-19 stories on the main page. This is a good candidate. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:16, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • With all due respect, we posted the conviction of Weinstein and not his imprisonment, and we posted the sentencing of these people in 2013. Also, new and non-Covid-19 stories are not factors in the worth of a given blurb; coronavirus might have been a factor a couple of days ago, but isn't now that we have a couple of non-covid blurbs and a non-covid image, and that presumably all but a few future blurbs will be non-coronavirus with the banner up. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 13:30, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I'd be okay with ignoring precedent on posting criminal punishment, but not ignoring the precedent on posting the same story twice. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – Widely featured on RS sites. Highly significant in India, where many speak Eng. as a 2nd language. More noteworthy than the weak Asteriornis item, which has zero tangible impact on anyone. – Sca (talk) 14:59, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Actual execution is more significant than conviction and this issue is highly featured in reliable sources. – Ammarpad (talk) 16:16, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Notable enough. Puddleglum^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 16:56, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment can someone please read and clean up this mess before it's rushed to the MP? The "Changes to the legal system" section has a whole section about a memorial held in London -- aka not changed to the legal system. Also has this grammar gem "From recordings made by a highway CCTV vehicle, a description of the bus, a white charter bus with a name written on it, was broadcast." among others. If we're going to paste irrelevancies on the main page at the very least lets not let the article be rubbish. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Masem and Wolfson. robertsky (talk) 18:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose as above Kingsif (talk) 21:34, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• It seems a bit strange that this is called the "2012 Delhi gang rape" case. Is the gang rape or the murder more significant? In a city the size of Delhi, this is probably not the only gang rape case that occurred in 2012; rather I would guess that it is noteworthy for its severity and outcome. However, the article is a Good Article. Since it is a noteworthy event in the news (although not locally for some editors), it may meet the requirements for posting. - Indefensible (talk) 22:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No one is denying it was notable, just that we posted the point when the men were convicted back in 2013. They've obviously been trying to get appeals which have failed and only just now the sentence carried out, but ITN doesn't duplicate posting the conviction and completion of the sentence. --Masem (t) 22:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Where in the posting requirements does it say that repeats are not allowed? If it is just by informal principle or tradition, I would argue that the coronavirus items violate that as well then. - Indefensible (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Generally, we don't provide "updates" on stories, particularly when the status quo is maintained which is the case here. There is a bit of concern with those arguing "justice served" which is a bit...righting great wrongs type of thought. WP wants to stay neutral and we respect appropriate legal punishments derived from fair trials and there's no doubt there was such the case here, but again, that they were executed now doesn't change anything at this point. Status quo is the same. --Masem (t) 23:18, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • When we get to the Olympics this year, if they do not get cancelled, I would think there would be a blurb for when it begins and when it ends. Would that not be the case? It seems arguable either way on whether the status quo is maintained or not, just based on the scope and how the event is framed. Now I do not feel that strongly about this specific event, but one could consider the difference being that 4 individuals are now dead whereas they were alive before, and the blurb is a sort of RD entry with broader social implications. - Indefensible (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • The 4 sentences are not notable so calling the RD factor is not really appropriate. --Masem (t) 23:33, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose posting the same story twice. P-K3 (talk) 00:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose criminals are executed daily across the world for heinous crimes. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:23, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @The Rambling Man:, It is quite rare that four men at the same time are executed. Five men have been executed since 1995 [12]. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 13:46, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per P-K3 and per TRM.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:25, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per GreatCaesarsGhost. Modest Genius ^talk 16:07, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Igor Matovič

Nominator's comments: Please run on 21 March when he is sworn in. buidhe 06:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• We generally do not post mere swearing-in/inauguration/coronation of a politician, as it is their choosing that usually considered to be notable(i.e. the election they won). 331dot (talk) 13:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC),[reply]

• Support As I don't believe we did post this when he was chosen. I could be wrong, please correct me if I am. Thanks, Puddleglum^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 16:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as first appearance on main page. ——SN54129 08:08, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: What do you want, ITN or DYK, because you can't have both. Or do just wait what will get there first? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:26, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support – Pro forma as new head of govt. & first mention in ITN. Not very timely, tho. – Sca (talk) 14:40, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Could be improved further, but meets minimum requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 03:01, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support. I would have preferred us to post 2020 Slovak parliamentary election when the results came in, but we didn't. The article is short but adequate. It might be a good idea to get a link to the election into the blurb anyway, adding altblurb. Modest Genius ^talk 10:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – If we're going to post this, it should be done today in order to be even minimally timely. – Sca (talk) 14:58, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything stopping it going up right now - no-one has opposed, the article is updated, and the quality is fine. I'll mark it ready, even though I !voted. Modest Genius ^talk 16:09, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posting. --Tone 16:12, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• PPC – Suggest switching from Edwin Catmull pic, which has been up there for several days, to this one of Matovič. →
  – Sca (talk) 17:26, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

---

RD: Stephen Schwartz (pathologist)

Nominator's comments: Notable pathologist at the University of Washington. 2607:FEA8:1DDF:FEE1:B502:FA28:F231:1CEB (talk) 01:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Article is currently rated as a stub, which is not allowed per the WP:In the News#Article quality requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 01:16, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Per Indefensible. Puddleglum^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 16:58, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Article needs work, there seem to be some good sources but a few are Canada-locked? Kingsif (talk) 21:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Article seems quite thin. – Sca (talk) 14:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Italy coronavirus deaths top China's

(Posted) RD: Peter Whittingham

Nominator's comments: Professional footballer, most notably for Cardiff City. It was already nominated a few days ago and turned out he hadn't died, but it is now confirmed. Date of death not certain, most likely today or yesterday but was announced today.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support CN tags were fixed by Black Kite with previous nom. Hopefully we can find a source that gives a solid date, but it was definitely either the 18th or 19th, as per police statement yesterday. PotentPotables (talk) 15:14, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The reference says he died "Thursday" will Support as per above Joseywales1961 (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseywales1961: That's not totally clear - the sentence says "Cardiff City confirmed that the club legend succumbed to his injuries on Thursday in an emotional statement", which is ambiguous - the "on Thursday" could refer to the "confirmed" or to the "succumbed"... The Cardiff statement on Twitter didn't say either way. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked the BBC, WalesOnline, Cardiff's statement and none explicitly say when he died. I think c. 19 or "18 or 19 March" is the best we'll get for now. PotentPotables (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the way I read those. They all suggest the death was overnight having been in critical condition since the accident. I would use "ca. 19 March 2019" only because, with GMT time zone, that's when the sources are reporting it. --Masem (t) 15:29, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru: struck through to support - I will continue looking for sources with a firm date Joseywales1961 (talk) 15:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt there are any sources yet, it looked like all were feeding off the Cardiff City announcement, and that didn't say exactly when. Will probably become clear in due course. It doesn't really affect the nom either way though, we know he died recently and it was announced today, so it is eligbible for RD.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:57, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That ambiguous Independent article is once again being used to "confirm" the death as the 19th.-- P-K3 (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support good to go once the date of death issue is resolved. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support looks fine. If date of death is widely reported as 19, use that. Kingsif (talk) 17:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Well referenced.-- P-K3 (talk) 17:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Kees08 (Talk) 17:33, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

---

(Posted) RD: Sir John Tooley

Nominator's comments: Longtime director of the Royal Opera House. Article appears to be in decent shape. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:46, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - @Ad Orientem: a proper source for his death now exists,[13] so I've reopened this. Decent sourcing, so it looks good to go to me. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 09:50, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Kees08 (Talk) 15:50, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Catherine Hamlin

Nominator's comments: Medical doctor, founded a nonprofit hospital in Ethiopia. - Indefensible (talk) 22:33, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. No issues that I can see. Marking as ready.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted (tho the death should be in the prose and not the intro) Kees08 (Talk) 15:59, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abel prize

 Fdfexoex (talk) 14:02, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Per past discussions, we realllly would like the winners to be the target article. I know they're not in great shape, but these are the people we should be featuring. --Masem (t) 14:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Yeah, we can't bold-link to an entry in a table. If there's no article about the thing they won it for, the two biographies will need to be brought up to scratch. Unfortunately they're a long way from being postable right now, and probably require the attention of an expert mathematician to sort out. Modest Genius ^talk 16:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• While we have a couple of images of Margulis, they aren't great in quality compared to what we have of Furstenberg. (no good tight head shot). --Masem (t) 16:45, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now unfortunately both peoples' articles are shoddy at the moment. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:12, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Asteriornis maastrichtensis

Nominator's comments: Obviously too short to post now (I will try to expand if no one else does), and yes, just had another paleo. story up, but again, it is widely covered ITN, it is the type of thing we'd usually cover and it's not COVID related. Also please see discussion below related the previous case of the "smallest dinosaur" though I'm not seeing the same doubts here: they've identified the core elements that a bird skull would have (it was found nearly whole), and have carbon-dated it. So it's not like more wild guesing. Masem (t) 01:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose We've had another similar article on here quite recently. Now that the COVID map is no longer the picture and we've had two blurbs unrelated to the pandemic (and presumably all future blurbs barring something like an Olympics cancellation now that the banner's up), "non-coronavirus" is not a reason to post. While I won't strongly object if consensus develops to post this, I still think it's much too early to post another paleontology blurb (and I say that as someone with a background in evolutionary biology). – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:39, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upon further thought I'll likely support this if we pull the earlier blurb, as this seems less scientifically controversial and more significant. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am further aware that having topically-similar blurbs at the same time or close together isn't completely unprecedented, mainly happening with stuff like the Nobel prizes. Unlike those instances, however, these aren't deliberately scheduled together. I also know that pulling a blurb for the sake of a better one doesn't have much if any precedent, so I'm essentially relying on IAR there. I still weakly oppose given the scheduling, but I might reiterate that I won't strongly object if this gets consensus. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:00, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can expand this article, it's the oldest undisputed modern-style bird and therefore more scientifically and popularly interesting than a controversial skull in amber.Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 02:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did try to figure out if this was some special issue of Nature to happen to warrant to rather similar stories but it seems like these are just coinicidentally two similar stories that were publishers at near similar times. If it were the case this were a special issue, I would agree with focusing on the story with the lease scientific doubt (this one), but that doesn't seem to be the case. --Masem (t) 03:53, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support now that the smallest dinosaur blurb has been pulled. It is adequately referenced and ready for the main page now. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as a replacement for the Oculudentavis blurb. I've made some substantial expansions, it should be as decent as Oculudentavis as an article. As a news item, it is much better, since the blurb about Oculudentavis being the smallest known dinosaur would be completely misleading if it turned out to be a lizard. From my perspective on the paleontology community's criticisms, that may very well be the case.Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 04:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Currently the article is supported by a single reference, its Nature paper. Are there any other refs that can be added to support it? While Nature is a respectable source, the other current paleo article also had at least one Nature ref, plus others in addition. From a referencing perspective, the other article seems better supported. - Indefensible (talk) 04:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is this, a second article by a different author in the same volume of Nature explaining at a slightly higher level the significance of this discovery (eg placing the start of the modern bird development earlier than previously known). And then using the top level news sources like NYtimes gives some outside quotes from others that also qualify the result (eg the NYTimes says "The Wonderchicken, Dr. Worthy said, “appears to fill that gap.”"). Add articles to flush out what was known before about birds , and what this discovery changes, and you'll have about 6-8 sources I think, 4-6 of those as scientific journals. --Masem (t) 04:41, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll get right to it.Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 04:46, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have cited eight more papers to elaborate on some of the info brought up within the article. Although the content of the NYT article looks good from what little I've seen of it, I don't have an account with them so I was unsure whether it was worth citing. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 14:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Excellent work @Fanboyphilosopher:, I just added a couple things from the NYTimes bit (only to point out the wonderchicken bit for the most part). This should be ready for ITN review. --Masem (t) 14:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. A much better replacement for Oculudentavis. The article looks to be in good shape as well (although some discussion of the Valkenburg Member's palaeoecology would be a good addition). Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 17:16, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Article looks well-referenced now, good work Fanboyphilosopher. Suggest Wiki linking paleontology again as it is a Good Article. - Indefensible (talk) 18:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting comment – Arcane and not really in the news. Zero tangible impact on anyone. – Sca (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Alfred Worden

Nominator's comments: Apollo 15 astronaut. A few cn tags, but items can be addressed or removed as needed. - Indefensible (talk) 22:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I've removed all but last of the "citation required" tags. If necessary, we can comment out this line. Article is a poor tribute to a brave man. A pity Wehwalt never got a round tuit. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Agree with above.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, we'll have 11 more of these to go. Should probably be a blurb though, only 24 people have been on or orbited the Moon. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure a blurb is warranted despite the notability. Maybe at the unfortunate event of the last Apollo astronaut's death? - Indefensible (talk) 01:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • At least the four remaining Moon walkers would deserve a blurb (hopefully many years away) and as many of the others as possible. Thanks for the nomination. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 03:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Eurovision Song Contest cancelled

(Posted) Turing Award

Nominator's comments: I will be updating about the Turing in both articles immediately after this. Catmull's needs a bit more sourcing. Masem (t) 13:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - looks like both articles are in decent shape. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 14:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Catmull's is undersourced, but it should not be that hard. --Masem (t) 15:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, nice nomination, important topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Edwin Catmull's article in particular needs improvement as noted above before posting. - Indefensible (talk) 16:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support in principle, especially with the image, but Catmull's article has many CN tags. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks good to me! Puddleglum^2.0_{(How's my driving?)} 23:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment in case it's not clear, Catmull's article needs much better referencing. Stephen 23:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Update Catmull's article no longer has any CN tags. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Looks good now, still missing a ref or two but meets requirements for posting. - Indefensible (talk) 01:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted good work, thank you. Stephen 01:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 03:00, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Has the image been switched to Hanrahan? Catmull has had a couple days now, for the architecture prize I believe both winners had their image shown on different days. - Indefensible (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Pulled) Smallest known dinosaur discovered

Nominator's comments: Both something that would get into ITN on some days, but also a need to fill blurbs due to the news otherwise being dominated by covid-19 stuff. (eg avoiding just news for news sake to be added). Article is in good shape. Masem (t) 04:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Satis, and while not a reason for posting in of itself it's nice to have something not coronavirus-related. 05:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
• Bee hummingbird is not quite up to the frontpage standard in my opinion, can that phrase be dropped from the blurb? - Indefensible (talk) 05:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • None bolded links are not required to be up to main page standards. --Masem (t) 05:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added an altblurb to this effect; even if it is not required, paleontology is a good article and dinosaur is a featured article, so this would be preferable I think. - Indefensible (talk) 05:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keeping Bee hummingbird, linked, seems very important and encyclopedic because it is the smallest known living dinosaur. This also calls the "headline" into question, as the bee hummingbird, being a dinosaur, is equally the smallest known dinosaur. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The suggested blurbs are dubious. Birds are dinosaurs and, moreover, this one was an avialan dinosaur. That said, the bee hummingbird is taxonomically the smallest dinosaur and it's unclear if this was definitely smaller. Additionally, the paper published in Nature points out that it represents the smallest dinosaur of the Mesozoic era, while NBC News have apparently generalised the context of the discovery in their news.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Re birds are dinosaurs, taxonomically that might be the case but in common parlance "dinosaur" is usually a paraphyletic group that excludes Aves, much like the Fish and Monkey categories tend to exclude humans from their definitions. If you can find a way to phrase this to make it unambiguous, please go ahead, but I don't think it should stop the nom.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Amakuru: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and it should always deal with complete scientific accuracy as such, so arguments revolving around "common parlance" are not welcome here (Monkeys and humans have very recent common ancestor but belong to distinct subfamilies of the primates order. Humans are apes and have never been excluded from that subfamily.). The common notion of dinosaurs as extinct species of gigantic lizards as presented in many illustrated books and animated films has proven to be false and Wikipedia is the right place to break this misconception. I've suggested another blurb that clarifies it was the smallest dinosaur species of the Mesozoic era as indicated in the paper.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm well aware of the scientific situation, but your point "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia" is exactly why we don't publish things in the same way as a scientific paper would. Using commonly recognised names rather than overly technical ones is enshrined in our policy. And let's be honest, even scientists don't regard humans as fish, and wouldn't find it useful to do so. Referring to the "mesozoic" is unnecessary detail, and dilutes the significance of this find. Using the standard term "non-avian dinosaurs" or similar might work though. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 10:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Birds, being dinosaurs, include the smallest known, the bee hummingbird. Saying that this new dinosaur skull is the smallest known should include clarification that the bee hummingbird is equally small. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  As someone with a background in evolutionary biology, I have to agree with Amakuru that Wikipedia, being a general-purpose encyclopedia, is targeted towards a general audience and as such should stick to the common understanding of "dinosaur" excluding birds, especially on the Main Page. The comparison to a bee hummingbird can remain in the blurb, but should not be referred to as a dinosaur. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - not corona related, thanks. I personally think this article is ITN ready. BabbaQ (talk) 09:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, I think alt 1 is the best of the blurbs but I'm not opposed to any of them. Thryduulf (talk) 10:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Obvious support -- Very happy to see this. I was ready to nominate this myself when news first broke but gave up halfway through filling the form, because [excuses]. I have added a slightly adjusted version of Alt II as Alt III (Too many wikilinks and missing "known", IMO). I would also prefer "Mesozoic dinosaur" to "dinosaur of the Mesozoic era" if it's okay to have two consecutive wikilinks. Finally, I do agree we need to be precise with the blurb even at the risk of losing other desirable attributes. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Stale I recall reading about this several days ago and indeed both sources given are dated the 11th. At the very least this should be re-filed under the correct date where it is about to fall off the tracker. 3142 (talk) 11:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is newer than any of the other blurbs currently in the board. We need something to fill space. --Masem (t) 13:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Add to the blurb "...bee hummingbird, the smallest known living dinosaur." for accuracy and informational data. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would oppose that: I have no interest in debating the merits of that point other that to say you will have a hard time convincing most that a bird is a dinosaur. Regardless, an ITN blurb is not the place to start grinding that particular axe. 3142 (talk) 14:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

? There is no debate, birds are dinosaurs and are accurately called dinosaurs on Wikipedia. The blurb is essentially inaccurate in not pointing that out. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The alternatives mentioning the Mesozoic would be preferable in this case, as it's factually accurate without needing to confuse people with true but not widely known taxonomy. Gʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ^ˣ 14:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Nice piece of news, article good to go. Kingsif (talk) 14:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Interesting item to add. Rlendog (talk) 15:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – Rather minor and arcane for ITN. That it's "not coronavirus-related" (per John Wolfson) should not be a factor. – Sca (talk) 15:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In these unique times, I think it may very well be from now on.--WaltCip (talk) 18:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted using alt1 which seems to be the least argued against blurb. Black Kite (talk) 19:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Black Kite, the present use is inaccurate, which is why nobody argued against it. The smallest known dinosaur is the Bee hummingbird. Saying this new discovery is the smallest known dinosaur is encyclopedically not correct. Please add that it "and the bee hummingbird, are the smallest known dinosaurs" or some such language, but what we have up there now is not only inadequate but misleading. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Propose changing the blurb to state "the smallest known prehistoric dinosaur." - Indefensible (talk) 22:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • The best thing to do would be to say "non-avian dinosaur" if we absolutely must make such a modification; it is correct and the least awkward of the options. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak pull. It’s not even clear from the article whether this discovery is a dinosaur, a lizard, or a bird. The blurb is unequivocal that it’s a dinosaur. 2607:FEA8:1DDF:FEE1:B9B7:3132:6C2D:910 (talk) 20:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Implicitly we recognize its a theory by those that wrote the paper, its not an absolute and will never be able to be proven but we are relying on the fact it was published in Nature a top-level peer-review journal that the conclusion that it likely was in the dinosaur group to be a reasonably accepted theory. --Masem (t) 20:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As an editor from the dinosaur project, I have no strong objections to this wording (since it is, after all, the reported conclusion of the paper, and the controversy cannot be summarized in one sentence). However, I disagree with your reasoning, Masem. To quote palaeontologist Mike Taylor, "the venue of its publication tells us nothing useful about the quality of a paper". One only needs to look to Andrew Wakefield's Lancet paper for a clear example. Even in the domain of palaeontology, the majority of text written for Nature and Science articles gets dumped into the online supplementary information, which is reviewed much less rigorously. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 00:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. I created the article and I have to say that the identification of the skull as avialan (bird) is very questionable. Many paleontologists have argued for an interpretation of the skull as a lizard both informally and formally, in the case of researchers at the IVPP in Beijing. The academic integrity of the primary author is also under scrutiny. We should not advertise a work as controversial as this on the front page. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 02:39, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Misleading blurb. Pavlor (talk) 07:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Pulled with regret as there seems to be agreement that the blurb is misleading. Please discuss if it can be reposted with a different blurb — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Please note that there is now a preprint (not yet peer-reviewed) of a scientific paper formally rejecting an avian identity for Oculudentavis: [17] Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 17:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2020 stock market crash

(Closed) Euro Cup and Copa America has been postponed

---

Sophie Wilmès

Nominator's comments: Notable change of government leadership. Article is a bit short, but may be good enough for posting as-is. - Indefensible (talk) 01:59, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The day after that she was sworn in. is uncited but otherwise I support. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:11, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

She's been prime minister for nearly half a year...? Ivar the Boneful (talk) 02:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I think the difference is that she was only a caretaker previously but now is not just a caretaker. Might still be notable enough to post, would probably need to update the blurb. - Indefensible (talk) 03:47, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Updated the blurb per the above. - Indefensible (talk) 04:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Betty Williams

Nominator's comments: 1976 Nobel Peace Prize winner. Article currently has an orange banner and could use light cleanup / a couple more refs, but is close to post-worthy I think. Nominating for visibility to improve & post. - Indefensible (talk) 04:16, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per nom Kees08 (Talk) 17:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article updated, left a single cn tag but should meet the requirements now. Kees08 (Talk), please review again. - Indefensible (talk) 00:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted though one citation needed tag was added, if any of @Indefensible, Ghmyrtle, and TDKR Chicago 101: are able to take a look. Additionally, the Bush comment comes out of nowhere and should probably be expanded or deleted per WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP policies. Also not sure if the Declaration of the Peace People text would be considered a copyvio; my instinct says yes but perhaps there is an exception I am not thinking of. If it is give me a ping on the talk and I can revdel as needed. Kees08 (Talk) 19:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Early human mammoth bone structure

Nominator's comments: This could be expaned upon more in the target article, but it is definitely is in the news with the journal publication. Masem (t) 15:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The History section is currently orange-tagged. Brandmeister^talk 19:33, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, this has been known about for years. In fact, they've had time to build a museum on top of it. Also, since nobody knows why the structure was made, it is hard to see how it has any "impact" on the field of archeology or anything else. It is in the news only because it turns out to be older then they thought before. Abductive (reasoning) 00:22, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose rather trivial and not as important as the oldest modern bird. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Thai Thanh

Nominator's comments: 20th century Vietnamese singer. One of the foremost singers of the 'New Music' period (WWII onwards). I am expanding it further Bumbubookworm (talk) 03:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support looks alright. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD  — Amakuru (talk) 09:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Eduard Limonov

Nominator's comments: Prominent Russian writer and controversary politician. VanHelsing.16 (talk) 20:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose needs plenty more referencing. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added a number of references and removed some unsourced statements. The article still leaves much to be desired, but I believe it is satisfactory VanHelsing.16 (talk) 12:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Controversial but notable person. Support. TarzanASG (talk) 08:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • For example Kommersant says: "Obituaries are supposed to tell about the biography of the deceased — but the life of Eduard Limonov is already known to every Russian person". [18] TarzanASG (talk) 09:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Literary work needs citations, and the 'ographies. Also BLP information needs cited in Jail and protest activities, 2001–2013. Could be others, that is a lot of work. Kees08 (Talk) 19:58, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Peter Whittingham