Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

This page provides a forum for ors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2016
Ruth Bader Ginsburg

How to nominate an item[]

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated).
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting.
  • Please consider alerting ors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

Headers[]

  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as (Ready) when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked (Ready), you should remove the mark in the header.

Voicing an opinion on an item[]

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
  • Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • The blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...[]

  1. add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  2. 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.
  3. accuse other ors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  4. comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. oppose a WP:ITN/R item here because you disagree with current WP:ITN/R criteria (these can be discussed at the relevant Talk Page)
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Archives[]

September 19[]


September 18[]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Stephen F. Cohen[]

Article: Stephen F. Cohen (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Prominent scholar of Russian studies. Article appears in good shape. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Ruth Bader Ginsburg[]

Proposed image
Article: Ruth Bader Ginsburg (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: American Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (pictured) dies at the age of 87. (Post)
News source(s): NYT, CNN, The Hill
Crs:

Nominator's comments: Very breaking news still. Article is a GA. -- a lad insane (channel two) 23:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

  • She was an incumbent also massively impactful in law, growth of US liberalism, and pop culture. There's also the fact that most likely whoever is elected President in November will have to replace her, and that will be crucial to American law going forward. Kingsif (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I have to agree with GCG - massive ramifications for, well, how biased the SCOTUS gets in a time of political upheaval and pandemic that could have apocalyptic effects on US relations with the rest of the world, crisis management, upholding the constitution, and climate change. It's never good to see a legend like RBG go, but now is perhaps the worst time in human history, I mean this without hyperbole. Kingsif (talk) 00:18, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Good to see Mitch is still a man of principle.--WaltCip-(talk) 01:21, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
McConnell has put out a statement saying "President Trump's nominee will get a vote". And the WH says to expect a nominee in "the coming days". We will have a fight on our hands unless Democrats fold like a cheap suit again. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:23, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm expecting frogs myself —valereee (talk) 01:41, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

September 17[]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Joe Ruklick[]

Article: Joe Ruklick (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune, Northwestern Athletics
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Basketball player was cred with an assist on Wilt Chamberlain's last basket in his NBA record 100-point game. —Bagumba (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

September 16[]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

RD: Maxim Martsinkevich[]

Article: Maxim Martsinkevich (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Moscow Times
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Russian far-right agitator and real-life internet troll. Found dead in prison cell. Hrodvarsson (talk) 22:05, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: P. R. Krishna Kumar[]

Article: P. R. Krishna Kumar (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Padma Shri awardee, and Indian Ayurveda proponent. Article meets hygiene checks, but, I can take a look later this evening. If there are any recommended s, we can have them covered.  Ktin (talk) 18:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Would need some updates regarding the death on the article. Juxlos (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Juxlos, Done. Updated with details on death; segmented the article for readability. Well sourced / cited. Ktin (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support good work on the improvements. Juxlos (talk) 01:12, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Bahrain+UAE–Israel agreements[]

WP:NAC: Consensus to post will likely not emerge. First article was already rejected two days ago, while second article was already posted less than a month ago. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:54, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Articles: Bahrain–Israel normalization agreement (talk, history) and Israel–United Arab Emirates agreement (talk, history)
Blurb: Bahrain and United Arab Emirates sign peace agreements with Israel (Post)
News source(s): NYT Guardian NPR White House
Article updated
 A few days ago Bahrain one was rejected as too early. The treaty was signed on the 15th together with the actual signing of the UAE one. Articles are adequately expanded now. 2601:602:9200:1310:59E3:615D:B40F:3822 (talk) 18:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – Strikes me as mainly political grandstanding. The UAE and Israel weren't at war, so how can they now proclaim 'peace'? – Sca (talk) 18:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - I'm not a Trump supporter, but these are the first peace agreements signed between Israel and an Arab country since 1994, and these are first Arab nations to recognize Israel without being under the pressure of securing their own border with Israel. It's also a significant diplomatic development as the Arab nations had previously committed to refusing to recognize Israel until Palestine was independent. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose We posted the UAE agreement already and rejected the Bahrain agreement already. Why are we discussing this again. The Bahrain agreement article is all background and reactions with very little detail on the actual agreement. Both are vassal states doing what they're told. Let me know when the 1948 partition is restored and Syria gets the Golan Heights back. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:54, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
That rejection was because it was too early, not because are not notable. No wonder u think Bahrain and UAE are vassal states. You probably hate the fact that there is peace. 2601:602:9200:1310:59E3:615D:B40F:3822 (talk) 22:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
About half of the original opposes were because of length (current article is mostly filler). As for your aspersions, there was no conflict so there isn't any new peace. Let me know when a country like Lebanon that's been repeatedly invaded by Israel piles on. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Just like ITN posts gay marriage-related material repeatedly. 2601:602:9200:1310:59E3:615D:B40F:3822 (talk) 22:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The first one is significant, and we posted it. Subsequent ones (especially those that are the same thing reheated) are less momentous.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
I mean ITN has posted like 20+ gay marriage-related legalizations already. This is similarly official, and if you think the 4th such peace agreement is already not newsworthy... 2601:602:9200:1310:59E3:615D:B40F:3822 (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
I easily found four which were nominated and not posted: no Germany no Denmark, no Pitcairn islands no UK perhaps you could cite the 20+ which were posted? Or find some other WP:OTHER to complain about. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose we seem to be repeating news stories here. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support I don't see why not. It's another country from a region that has historically been bitterly opposed to normalizing relations with Israel. Saying "we only post the first" is silly, that would imply we should stop posting the Olympics because the 2021 Tokyo Olympics is like the 30th Summer Olympics ever, making it old news. Banedon (talk) 22:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    No, that's nonsense. We routinely post the Olympics because they're recurring globally significant events. We don't post routine events which are hum-drum and have numerous precedents. Comparing this to the Olympics is a borderline in absurdum comment. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Saefullah[]

Article: Saefullah (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Highest-ranked bureaucrat in Jakarta for the past 6 years or so. COVID-19 caused. Article is fresh off the presses but I think it should be long enough. Juxlos (talk) 17:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  • Some Indonesian names are single word, yeah. Juxlos (talk) 23:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
yes. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael (marhata) 00:07, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Lamine Diack conviction[]

Articles: Lamine Diack (talk, history) and Doping in Russia (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Former president of the International Association of Athletics Federations Lamine Diack is convicted of corruption and coverup of doping in Russia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​Former president of the International Association of Athletics Federations Lamine Diack is convicted of corruption and coverup of doping in Russia and sentenced to four years in prison.
Alternative blurb II: ​Former president of the International Association of Athletics Federations Lamine Diack and five other people are convicted of corruption and coverup of doping in Russia.
News source(s): Telegraph, Guardian, Euronews
Crs:

Nominator's comments: Although the prison term is short, this involves a high-ranking sports official and bribery to cover up doping. The conviction and sentencing occurred simultaneously, it seems. Brandmeistertalk 16:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Human rights abuses in Venezuela[]

Article: Human rights in Venezuela (talk, history)
Blurb: ​A United Nations Human Rights Council fact-finding mission formally accuses the Venezuelan government of crimes against humanity, (Post)
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-54176927
Crs:

Nominator's comments: Human rights report by the UN about an arguably rogue state. Seems like ITN material This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 14:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  • LL, we know you have a thing for Maduro, but this is the UN you're trying to discr. Just this once, you can step away from POINT. Kingsif (talk) 19:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I don't have a "thing" for Maduro who seems equal parts corrupt and incompetent but I'm also rather sick of the hysteria. There is no "POINT" here. The article should summarize the findings in common across multiple NGOs and leave the hyper-reporting of "eye witness accounts" and "tweets" in the trash where they belong. The UN has also said that US sanctions against Venezuela amount to 'Crimes against humanity' but that doesn't fit the narrative now does it? --LaserLegs (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • What? This is about the article being COATRACK, which it isn't, because human rights abuses in Venezuela certainly happen. Nobody disputes the US sanctions are CAH, but it's a different story when it's a systemic government against their own people, which makes this declaration significant. Kingsif (talk) 12:22, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Ongoing: September 2020 Western United States wildfires[]

Article: September 2020 Western United States wildfires (talk, history)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Crs:

Nominator's comments: Procedural nomination to confirm that the Wildfires remain in ongoing where I just moved it to as it dropped off as a blurb. Stephen 07:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:POINT.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Support to keep it from getting renominated for a blurb This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 13:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Eh that's not how it works. Howard the Duck (talk) 14:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
      • You wouldn't think so given how many times this was nominated This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
        • @Howard the Duck: You're not gonna make your case about Americans burning all the time? LOL ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
          • For better or worse he's right, wildfires are in fact common and there are world record wildfires every year. If we apparently care this much about fires, make them ITN/RThis post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
            • Everything happens in America all the time. It's the most boring country on Earth. Howard the Duck (talk) 14:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
              • We don't post American mass shootings anymore. The same logic should apply to wildfires, unless wp:fires>murder is a new policy I missed This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 14:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
                • Like I said, mass murders, rioting, hurricanes, wildfares, snowstorms, elections, business mergers and acquisitions, everything you can think of except for cricket (the sport), it happens in America everyday. Howard the Duck (talk) 14:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

September 15[]

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

(Posted) RD: Faith Alupo[]

Article: Faith Alupo (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [4]; [5]
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Ugandan woman MP, died of COVID-19 at the age of 36. Career section needs a bit more flesh and bones, but will try to work on that today.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

September 14[]

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Bill Gates Sr.[]

Article: Bill Gates Sr. (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): GatesNotes; Business Insider
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Father of Bill Gates. Death announced on Sept 15 (15mins ago).  Nixinova T  C   22:27, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ralph Gants[]

Article: Ralph Gants (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Boston Globe, Boston Herald
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Another judicial-related article that is admittedly on the short side. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:42, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) United Kingdom’s Internal Market[]

WP:SNOW close. Continued trickle of Brexit changes, but nothing is happening immediately. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 04:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Article: United Kingdom’s Internal Market (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Britain’s plan for a post-Brexit settlement which deepens divisions. (Post)
News source(s): [6]
Crs:
Nominator's comments: It is a big topic in the United Kingdom, as well as a major event that will have a major effect on the functioning of the United Kingdom. It is also very controversial with both strong support and opposition creating tension within the United Kingdom, as well as causing collisions internationally with the EU causing making it a majorly polarised topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChefBear01 (talkcontribs) 20:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait. Definitely in the news, but the UK Internal Market Bill is still a bill, not law. It can be reassessed if it is passed. ― Hebsen (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment
The United Kingdom’s Internal Market is the overall topic and you cant talk about one without the other, this is an ongoing topic that has been talked about since July 2020 and most likely to feature multiple times as it is something likely to need tweaking and therefore will fall into the news again in the future as well.
ChefBear01 (talk) 02:09, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait. The UK Internal Market Bill has not been passed as of yet (per Hebsen), and significant improvements need to be made on the benefits and criticisms, add more citations as well. ― Hornets fan 4 life (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose how is any of this news now, as opposed to something Brexit vaguely happening this year (or last, or next)? The linked article is from JULY. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment
I chose the June news article as it provided the greatest clarity and information available to ensure that people would be well informed, it is happening now with news providers talking about the United Kingdom’s Internal Market.
ChefBear01 (talk) 01:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - many thanks to the nominator for nominating this item, and for your interest in the in-the-news section. Personally I don't quite see this as being noteworthy enough for us to post though. I'm seeing stuff about this in the news, and apparently the bill may break international law in some way, but we've posted quite a bit of Brexit stuff already and this is really just one more stepping stone on that path. If the bill is passed and it sets off an international incident, then sure. Similarly, if talks break down completely and no-deal Brexit is suddenly the only way forward then maybe? But those would be things to assess on their own merits. For now let's wait and see. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 21:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment
United Kingdom’s Internal Market is mentioned in the news alongside UK Internal Market Bill, and is a significant change to the U.K. structure and the way intergovernmental relations work. The core of this is constitutional and an “internal matter” that is separate from Brexit, it has only recently been minutely connected to Brexit through 3 clauses deep in the schedules of the U.K. Internal Market Bill.
ChefBear01 (talk) 01:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. If/when something concrete happens we can revisit this subject. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose a good faith nomination I suppose but a nonsense. Wait until any of this really happens. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:16, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose good faith nom. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment The article is significantly under referenced and will need serious attention to go onto the main page. If it were up to scratch I'd have no issue posting now. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:29, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Thank you for your feedback I will make the changes suggested to improve the article.
The UK Internal Market Bill specially covers the legislative process and the [UK Internal Market]covers the History, principles and governance of the UK Internal Market.
ChefBear01 (talk) 02:09, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment ChefBear01, make sure you sign your comments by adding ~~~~ at the end! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 23:37, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose the blurb - wait until more concrete information comes out of this. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 00:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb. The blurb is ambiguous and has nothing linked. Also, it may be Britain-ticking or Brexit-ticking, because even though the whole Brexit itself is interesting and newsworthy, every single development is not newsworthy. Suggest close of the good-faith nom.~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

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

(Posted) Phosphine detected on Venus[]

Articles: Venus (talk, history) and phosphine (talk, history)
Blurb: ​A team of astronomers reports detecting phosphine, a known signature of organic life, in the atmosphere of Venus. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​A team of astronomers reports detecting phosphine, a possible signature of organic life, in the atmosphere of Venus.
Alternative blurb II: ​A team of astronomers reports detecting phosphine, a possible signature of organic life, in the atmosphere of Venus.
Alternative blurb III: ​Astronomers report detection phosphine, a possible signature of extraterrestrial organic life, in the atmosphere of Venus.
News source(s): BBC, Wired Science Magazine The New York Times The Atlantic MIT News Nature Astronomy
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Notable discovery that's getting a lot of play both on science news sites and mainstream news sites. Not a conclusive discovery of life, but the most significant development pointing to extraterrestrial life in many years. Kudzu1 (talk) 16:04, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Except this is different because that sort of thing happens all the time with Mars,but this is a first for Venus, and alters our perceptions of both Venus and the prospects for extraterrestrial life as a result. As such the media are right to hype it, and we are wrong to ignore it (at least in my view).Tlhslobus (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for posting. Just wanted to mention that the carbon-based life is not quite up to standards of the main page. I suggest Life on Venus as a much nicer alternative. 2601:602:9200:1310:301E:BD4D:7004:87B7 (talk) 06:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Was about to say that unbolded links don't need to meet the quality criteria but yikes that page is a mess, agreed.  Nixinova T  C   07:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I have to disagree. The "possible" is deployed exactly for this reason. The only reason such an assertion passed muster in peer review was because there is no known route to phosphine in the Veneral atmosphere. Phosphine is not exactly a niché compound; it has a very long history within chemistry and industry, lots of work has been put into producing and studying it. The Veneral atmosphere is loaded to the gills with sulfur oxides which should very aggressively react with phosphine. By all known chemistry, there should be no phosphine on Venus. The fact any could be detected means that it is being produced, and aggressively so, because the bulk atmosphere is perfectly suited to transform it to something else. So, we're left with two options: 1.) this discovery leads to a heretofore unknown mechanism to produce phosphine, or 2.) this discovery confirms what is known about phosphine, which also happens to suggest life outside of Earth.130.233.3.21 (talk) 05:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Although, yes, grammatically it needs to say possible. Phosphine is a known biosignature on Earth, so it is a known biosignature, but it needs to be worded carefully enough so it doesn't imply it's a known biosignature on Venus. WilyD 08:49, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
It is a biosignature also for Venus, but no single biosignature is absolute proof for the presence of biological processes. Ultimately, biology is nothing more than chemistry, and from only one biosignature it's difficult to rule out some alternative complex abiotic pathway that can explain the observation. Count Iblis (talk) 11:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
So, I would say "A biosignature is something that is proof of biological processes", similar to the definition here: https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/ast.2017.1729 ) It's a problem, that we don't really know what might be a clear biosignature, but that's something we're working on. Maybe it's just astronomer jargon, but it's clear that without qualifying it as "possible" or "potential", several people understood the phrase to mean proof of life on Venus had been discovered. WilyD 11:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Yoshihide Suga[]

Proposed image
Articles: Yoshihide Suga (talk, history) and 2020 Liberal Democratic Party (Japan) leadership election (talk, history)
Blurb: Yoshihide Suga is to become prime minister of Japan following his victory in a party leadership election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Yoshihide Suga becomes Prime Minister of Japan, replacing Shinzo Abe. (For when he becomes PM)
News source(s): NYT, The Guardian
Crs:

Both articles need updating

Nominator's comments: We posted Abe's resignation, but precedent suggests we should also post Suga's inauguration, which will take place on September 16. (We posted Theresa May's resignation in May 2019 and Boris Johnson's inauguration in July 2019.) Davey2116 (talk) 06:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

  • There is no "Johnson precedent", we judge each nomination on its own individual merits. There are also powerless/puppet PMs. In Russia it depends on which office Putin decides to hold. There are reasons that we post heads of state that I won't repeat here. We post most changes in head of government as part of a general election, those that aren't part of one get evaluated on their own merits, and a party uncontroversially changing its leader, who will presumably carry out the same policies, counts for less IMO. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Putin is literally the one exception. I'll move this to ITN/R this afternoon so we can finally put an end to the insanity. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:27, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
There is no insanity here other than expecting different results from revisiting the same issue over and over. 331dot (talk) 16:54, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Well no, people come and go, or they stick around long enough to see that the status quo doesn't make sense. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:00, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
The status quo may not make sense, but it doesn't follow that it makes sense to try to waste everybody's time trying to change it with little or no prospect of consensus on new wording, when any agreed new wording would likely just make a bad situation no better, and likely even worse. And especially not in this instance, because a new Prime Minister of Japan will almost certainly be posted regardless of what ITN/R says (the only question here seems to be when to post it, not whether to do so),provided it reaches the required quality. However you might be right to try to change ITN/R if and when it fails (for reasons other than genuine lack of quality). Tlhslobus (talk) 19:00, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

September 13[]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment
  • COVID-19 pandemic
    • COVID-19 pandemic in Asia
    • COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal
      • After twice in a single week reporting the biggest daily increases in new cases since the national lockdown was lifted in May, with 646 on Wednesday and then 687 on Friday, Portugal reports another high increase of 673 new cases and seven deaths, bringing the cumulative totals to 63,983 confirmed cases and 1,867 deaths since the first infections were detected in the country on March 2. The 2020/2021 school year is set to start in-person classes between September 14 and September 17 nationwide. (DGS) (DGEstE)

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Aline Chrétien[]

Article: Aline Chrétien (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; CTV News / Canadian Press; The Globe and Mail
Crs:

Article updated

 Bloom6132 (talk) 23:58, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Blurb/Ongoing: September 2020 Western United States wildfires[]

Article: September 2020 Western United States wildfires (talk, history)
Blurb: ​At least 28 people have been killed and nearly 5 million acres burned by wildfires in the Western United States. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Wildfires in the Western United States kill at least 28 and displaces thousands, while burning millions of acres of land.
News source(s): CNN Express.co
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This article is of much better quality than the 2020 California wildfires. Now burning in California, Arizona, Utah, Oregon, Washington, and Montana. Nominated per Coffeeandcrumbs and Cryptic~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:10, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Change to square miles (km²) cause we're in size of Wales territory here. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:57, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
It's moot now because we've got an enhanced image of Venus in the box, but a satellite photo was just fine for the Brazilian fires we featured last year --LaserLegs (talk) 12:26, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

September 12[]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Closed) RD: Jack Roland Murphy (AKA Murph the Surf)[]

Stale. SpencerT•C 03:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Article: Jack Roland Murphy (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Crs:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Notorious criminal. Article is not in dreadful shape but a few cites needed. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:13, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Article is very well composed and the polished. I've reffed everything save the first para of Life after prison.130.233.3.21 (talk) 06:04, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Looks "okay" but needs an ib and reworking of the lead. Gotitbro (talk) 05:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, "ib"?130.233.3.21 (talk) 04:48, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

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

(Closed) 2020 California wildfires[]

Superseded. Stephen 00:16, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2020 California wildfires (talk, history)
Blurb: ​28 people have been killed, hundreds of thousands displaced and thousands of property destroyed by wildfires burning in California, Oregon and Washington State (Post)
News source(s): CNN, BBC News, Guardian, AP
Crs:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: It's a huge current event affecting millions of people in USA and Canada with wildfires and smoke. Efuture2 (talk) 02:58, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Snow oppose We've been over this This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:55, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Snow oppose No. SMB99thx my s 04:06, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Same as my comments before: Notable? Incredibly so. Articles? Absolute mess that topic regulars seem adverse to fixing. WP:CFORKs left and right without any real work on the main article(s) needed for this event. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 04:22, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support in principle but Oppose on multiple factors largely addressed above. This is major news. Under normal circumstances I would strongly support. But our coverage is too disjointed, and of at best, indifferent quality. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:44, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Strong support -- this is the most prominent story in the news today. The SNOW closers aren't explaining their reasoning at all. I understand the quality issues with the articles, but that can be fixed. --Rockstone[Send me a message!] 07:10, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support, and suggest changing the nomination header to 'United States western wildfires'. Given the scope of the fires, the most appropriate article for bolding in a prospective blurb is September 2020 Western United States wildfires. This article is actually not in such bad shape, in terms of referencing in particular, and is appropriate in terms of scope. There are lots of other articles floating around, of course, but they don't need to be mentioned in the blurb. Nsk92 (talk)
  • Support the suggestion from Nsk92 once that alternate target is cleaned up --LaserLegs (talk) 10:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support, this is much more significant (Vox) than I thought at first. The article has many problems as pointed out above, but the current wildfire season is one of the more prominent and impactful seasons i had ever seen personally. SMB99thx my s 11:18, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT, title is fine as is. Over 25 wildfires are actively burning simultaneously from Northern to Southern California. Many cities have thick smokes. Air quality index in many cities are above 200, which is hazardous to human health. See map of fires at fire.ca.gov. See red and purple color area in map of air quality at epa.gov. Many cities have evacuation warning as wildfires are near homes.SWP13 (talk) 11:32, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Where's the Americans burn all the time argument? Snow opposes argument lack quality. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:26, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – for Ongoing – The Western U.S. fire disaster is likely to persist well into October. The unprecedented magnitude of these multiple fires, which have killed at least 30 and left hundreds of thousands homeless and at risk, is so great that it's very odd indeed not to list the topic, at least in Ongoing. The reading public does not understand its total absence from the Main Page. – Sca (talk) 12:50, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I would Support the September 2020 Western United States wildfires (though simply retitled "2020 Western United States wildfires" since these are continuations of events from August) as an ongoing. That article is generally well put together and is far better than just a table of fires. Ongoing between no single event has happened beyond the massive haze that is causing people to take notice much like the Amazon fires last year. --Masem (t) 13:15, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Agree re the article cited by Masem, and with removing "September" from the title, since the CA fires have been going on for two-plus months. We also could change "United States" in the title to "U.S." or just drop it. (Where I live, in SW Idaho, we've been plagued with varying degrees of "smaze" for weeks. It's gotten worse since Oregon blazed up. This too shall pass, but not soon.)Sca (talk) 14:49, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
In titles, we should always spell out "United States" unless it is part of an official abbreviation or the like. --Masem (t) 16:46, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
It's really not necessary. Cf. 2020 California wildfires. – Sca (talk) 17:27, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose for a range of reasons. As noted above by Cyclonebiskit, there are numerous redundant content forks resulting in 19 articles, many of which lack the content that one should see in a standalone article. The proposed nomination is for a blurb which links to wildfires, California, Oregon and Washington State. The Wildfires link is problematic as it is a redirect, and the Washington State link is problematic as it is a disambiguation page. Regardless, none of these four articles are particularly notable to the specific 'news' under discussion, ie, wildfires in those locations. Finally, the blurb does not mention the country in which this weather event is taking place. Chrisclear (talk) 16:54, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
My my, such a litany of offenses!Sca (talk) 21:38, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose on quality and content forking. NoahTalk 18:40, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support for Ongoing but otherwise Oppose. Content forking still needs to be addressd. See the article's talk page.~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:46, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. What we're witnessing is that due to rapid climate change quite a lot of California now has a desert climate, but there is still a lot of vegetation there. This triggers enormous wildfires with the end result that the entire area will end up becoming desert wasteland. Count Iblis (talk) 19:16, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 19:25, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – We are an encyclopedia and not a news agency. The posting can wait forever and Wikipedia will be the better for it. This project is here to improve the encyclopedia, not to announce news. The only cudgel we have to ensure that the article starts off on good footing is withholding posting. The proposed article is still missing its core. It needs a summary of the most notable aspects of the fires listed in § List of wildfires. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:53, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose ongoing. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:40, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Newer article of better quality nominated above. Suggest closure of this discussion @Masem and Cyclonebiskit: as the newer one covers the same topics as this.~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:13, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

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

(Posted) U.S. Open[]

Proposed image
Article: 2020 US Open (tennis) (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In tennis, Naomi Osaka (pictured) wins the Women's Singles and Dominic Thiem wins the Men's Singles of the US Open. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​In tennis, Naomi Osaka (pictured) and Dominic Thiem win the Women's and Men's singles events at the US Open.
Alternative blurb II: In tennis, Naomi Osaka (pictured) wins the Women's Singles event at the US Open.
Alternative blurb III: In tennis, Naomi Osaka (pictured) and Dominic Thiem win the Women's and Men's singles events at the US Open.
News source(s): CNN
Crs:

Article updated

Nominated event is listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.

Nominator's comments: Men's winner will be added to blurb tomorrow has been added. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:14, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Old votes by --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 00:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Proposed target is a listicle with no prose on tournament matches. Would support with Naomi Osaka in bold but the section on the US Open is currently unsourced. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 01:37, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
    • SupportALT. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:44, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
      • SupportALT II, the men's article and Thiem's article are not ready. There is nothing stopping us from posting Osaka since she won yesterday. Thiem can be added if and when the article is ready. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:32, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Mark Newman (baseball)[]

Article: Mark Newman (baseball) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo Sports
Crs:

 – Muboshgu (talk) 20:20, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Navid Afkari[]

Stale. SpencerT•C 03:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Article: Navid Afkari (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, BBC
Crs:
Nominator's comments: I only just heard about him, and the article is not great. I'm trying to look up things on his wrestling career. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:51, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak Support Article is on the short side but it is not a stub and appears to be adequately sourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:33, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Oppose Unfortunately the article has devolved into an NPOV train wreck. There is no possibility of it being posted in its current state. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose WP:ITNRD requires the subject have a biography, but the page seems to be more about the death sentence and execution. Unless sources exist where his life can be fleshed out as a true biography, the page might ultimately need to be moved to a non-biographical name.—Bagumba (talk) 05:39, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per above, this article is almost entirely focused on his death. There must surely be some information on his life and sporting career that can be added. If not, maybe this article should be renamed to Death of Navid Afkari instead. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:41, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Important topic. Maybe it should be renamed to Death of Navid Afkari because even in the Persian Wikipedia there are no details about his wrestling career. I tried looking for more information by searching his English name on Google, but could not find any more, among the sea of articles about his death. It seems like the only way would be for someone who knows Persian to go to obscure wrestling websites in Persian to get more details. Tradediatalk 03:46, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
    For reference, the consensus for the fatal shooting of David McAtee a few months ago was not to post because it was about the shooting and not a biography.—Bagumba (talk) 11:31, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
    OK, thanks for the info. Tradediatalk 05:01, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

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

(Closed) RD: Terence Conran[]

Stale. SpencerT•C 03:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Article: Terence Conran (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Crs:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Noted designer, businessman and restaurateur. 2A00:23C5:5082:6101:C8AC:F359:9B4A:FA9E (talk) 19:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose – a few places where sourcing could be improved, including several unsourced paragraphs in "work" section. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 22:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Agree with PCN02WPS, sourcing needs to be improved across the article. It also suffers from what Amakuru pointed out in one of the other articles, rather than coherent prose the article has a list of disparate bullet points (across sections). E.g. In 2008, the subject did this. In 2010, he did this. Ktin (talk) 00:41, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

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

(Closed) Cuties[]

WP:SNOW. Good-faith nomination, but consensus will not develop to post this. TompaDompa (talk) 12:55, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Article: Cuties (talk, history)
Blurb: ​#CancelNetflix trends in the US over the release of controversial film Cuties in Netflix. (Post)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Thr film is even criticised by US Congress. Congress asked Netflix to premiere the film before them. 175.157.70.238 (talk) 06:08, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Snow oppose. Twitter hashtags are not notable.  Nixinova T  C   06:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - per Nixinova.--SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 06:27, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Nixinova. Wikipedia is not social media nor should we act like a trending ticker on it. -- a lad insane (channel two) 06:29, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait if if Netflix pulls the film due to pressure from PC right wing religious snowflakes then we have something, else it's just their usual whining. --LaserLegs (talk) 09:44, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. A strictly national dispute with a mid-sized company is always going to struggle to reach ITN status, and this is way below any reasonable threshold.—Brigade Piron (talk) 09:56, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - If the film is removed or banned, it could be important news. --WEBDuB (talk) 11:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Entertainment trivia. – Sca (talk) 12:40, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: John Fahey (Australian politician)[]

Article: John Fahey (politician) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-12/former-nsw-premier-john-fahey-dies-aged-75/12657882
Crs:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Premier of New South Wales in the 1990s. Cred with bringing the Olympic Games to Sydney. President of the World Anti-Doping AgencyHiLo48 (talk) 04:09, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) 2020 Peruvian political crisis[]

Wait for outcome. Stephen 04:24, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further s should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: 2017–2020 Peruvian political crisis (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Peru's congress launches impeachment procedures against President Martín Vizcarra (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​Peru heads into a political crisis as congress approves impeachment proceedings against President Martín Vizcarra
Alternative blurb II: ​President of Peru faces the possibility of removal after impeachment proceedings are approved by the Congress of Peru
News source(s): New York Times, Bloomberg, Washington Post El Comercio
Crs:
Nominator's comments: May be too insignificant? DoctorSpeed ✉️ 01:07, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose on quality -- article isn't updated, and the lede is way too long. Also, the WaPo link is to the wrong article. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Comment @User:power~enwiki It is the correct article. Please read it completely. DoctorSpeed ✉️
A two-sentence mention in an article about Coronavirus is really the best coverage there is, or is supposed to signify this is In The News? power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:36, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment This is a bit of a mess. The article identified at the top of the nomination as the one we are supposed to be looking at, is not actually linked in any of the proposed blurbs. What are we talking about linking on the main page in bold? -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:40, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose article is missing refs and has a stubby update. Clean it up, when the trial is concluded either way we can post a blurb --LaserLegs (talk) 09:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose on the basis that Peru works like the US, this is only the start of a process, no former declaration of impeachment charges have been made (has had been for Trump). --Masem (t) 12:38, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
In the case of Trump, they would not have started the process in the first place if they did not think they had a decent chance of success at impeachment(not the subsequent trial). The same may be true here. 331dot (talk) 06:47, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, so let's wait until the impeachment actually happens. --Rockstone[Send me a message!] 07:10, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Big development and newsworthy even if it doesn't go anywhere (see also: trump-ukraine) This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 17:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose this would be posting that something is probably about to happen; wait for it. Kingsif (talk) 06:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose until the president is actually impeached. 331dot (talk) 06:46, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait for the outcome. It's a good development to follow, but this gets posted only when Vizcarra is impeached. Somebody else created this article, which is still an orphan and seems to be stale. Could this be merged into that longer article? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 10:34, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

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

References[]

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

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