This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

This page provides a forum for editors 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.

Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump shaking hands at the North Korea–United States summit
Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump

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) in UTC.
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process. Remember, we use UTC dates.
  • 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 editors 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...

  • ... 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.
  • ... 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.
  • ... accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  • ... comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  • ... 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)


Suggestions

June 18

Portal:Current events/2018 June 18
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports

RD: XXXTentacion

Article: XXXTentacion (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Pitchfork (BBC)
Nominator: Nohomersryan (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Might as well get the ball rolling on this one. Doesn't look in awful shape, but I'm no expert Nohomersryan (talk) 22:11, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Wow. Article is good, but wow.  Nixinova  T  C  22:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - and ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 22:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

RD: Zhao Nanqi

Article: Zhao Nanqi (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Xinhua, The Paper
Nominator and updater: Zanhe (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Korean-born Chinese general. Zanhe (talk) 18:09, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Good faith support I can't really verify most of the content, but I trust the nominator and the article is in good nick. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Elizabeth Brackett

Article: Elizabeth Brackett (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Chicago Tribune
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support - Fully referenced. Ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 07:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support this is good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 09:46, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(Ready) 2018 U.S. Open

Article: 2018 U.S. Open (golf) (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In golf, Brooks Koepka wins the U.S. Open for the second consecutive year
News source(s): [1][2]
Nominator: Compy90 (talk • give credit)

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.

 – Compy90 (talk) 11:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support decent article, decent prose coverage, a shame we have no photo of the winner (surely someone took his picture over these past two US Opens???) The Rambling Man (talk) 06:32, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
    • Plenty of pictures, but none with the right free license for us to use. :/ --Masem (t) 13:55, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per TRM. Thryduulf (talk) 09:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per TRM. Lepricavark (talk) 14:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Yeah, decent article. Ammarpad (talk) 15:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Colombian presidential election, 2018

Article: Colombian presidential election, 2018 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Conservative political newcomer Ivan Duque has been elected president of Colombia.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Sherenk1 (talk • give credit)

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: Yellow tags. Sherenk1 (talk) 02:08, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Almost no prose, just tables. SounderBruce 02:40, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose article is barely a stub. Also, blurb is heavy on the commentary and would need to be rewritten sticking just to the details.--Jayron32 03:40, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose tagged stub. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:33, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

June 17

Portal:Current events/2018 June 17
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
  • 2018 Osaka earthquake
    • A magnitude 5.9 earthquake strikes Osaka, Japan, at 7:58 a.m. local time on 18 June (22:58 UTC). At least two people have been killed and several are transported to hospitals with injuries. Electrical services are disrupted citywide, affecting 170,000 buildings. (NHK)
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports

24 Hours of Le Mans

Article: 2018 24 Hours of Le Mans (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In motorsport, the 24 Hours of Le Mans is won by Fernando Alonso, Sébastien Buemi & Kazuki Nakajima, driving a Toyota Gazoo Racing hybrid car
Nominator: Modest Genius (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

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: The article is generally OK but still needs a proper prose summary of the race. Unfortunately I won't have time to add one today, but am nominating in the hope that others can help out. Modest Genius talk 13:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose as noted in the nom, race overview is missing, plus accessibility issues with the tables (e.g. no row/col scopes, use of bold in contravention of MOS:BOLD etc) which in a highly technical article such as this should be remedied. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Is it correct to say this team “won” Le Mans when there were three separate classes of vehicles competing? —LukeSurl t c 23:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) Northern Macedonia

Closing per WP:SNOW. The previous discussion suggested waiting until it was official. The nominator describes this as "things are finally moving", and no other editors support posting. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:04, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Macedonia naming dispute (talk, history)
Blurb: No blurb specified
Nominator: Tone (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: This has been nominated five days ago but today the agreement has been signed by the PM and there have been significant developments on both sides, such as Tsipras surviving the vote of confidence. The referendum will take place some time in future and full implementation on both sides is pending, but given the circumstances, I believe the time to post this is now. Tone 09:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose The signing of this agreement does not mean that the country must change its name, which may only happen after the agreement is ratified in both countries, a referendum held in Macedonia results in favour of the name change, and the Macedonian parliament votes on constitutional changes as stipulated in the agreement. That said, posting this now would be premature given the uncertain circumstances, and the earliest time to do it would be when the results from the announced referendum come in.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
    • This is why I did not propose a detailed blurb with the name change. What is currently a story is that things are finally moving toward some kind of agreement, after 27 years of disputes. It will take at least months before any formal change takes place, so we can post it then as well. --Tone 12:55, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
      • I don't agree with you because it's not certain that a formal change of the name will take place. In case it fails to happen, this agreement would have zero importance. The agreement just sets out a proposal and paves the way for the people to decide, but it doesn't say that the country must change the name in near future.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Interesting and noteworthy story, but still several hurdles to go through once approved. Would be worth posting after the referendum when the change is certain to happen. BubbleEngineer (talk) 11:11, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait for the referendums. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait If this was, say, signage of an agreement that ended 20-some years of bloodshed or other violent actions between the countries, I'd agree that the agreement that would put an end to that while waiting for a referendum for the name change would possibly be ITN. This has just been legal and political battles, and thus there's clearly no rush on this. When the name is changed (and that seems to be when our article's name will be changed, too), then we can feature that ITN. --Masem (t) 13:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

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

Tutti ODIAMO young signorino — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.161.211.33 (talk) 20:22, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

June 16

Portal:Current events/2018 June 16
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
  • 2018 lower Puna eruption
    • The Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency states that the eruption of lower Puna has destroyed 467 homes in total. (Upi)
  • At least 17 people are killed in a stampede at a nightclub in Caracas, Venezuela. The stampede was reportedly triggered when a tear-gas canister was set off during a brawl. Seven people have been arrested. (BBC)
Politics and elections
Science and technology
  • A missing Indonesian woman's body is found inside a python, being one of only two fully documented cases of a human being consumed by a snake. (The Hindu)
Sports

RD: Syd Nomis

Article: Syd Nomis (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): [1]
Nominator: GreatCaesarsGhost (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Needs a few more refs, but not too far away. ghost 00:39, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak support per nom. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:40, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Found a reference for the cap table, which was the most glaring issue. ghost 13:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article is OK for RD. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) Caracas nightclub stampede

Article: El Paraíso stampede (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Seventeen people die in Caracas, Venezuela, following a stampede after a tear gas canister is detonated in a crowded nightclub.
News source(s): Independent CNN Al Jazeera
Nominator: Jamez42 (talk • give credit)
Updater: ZiaLater (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Significant coverage, both nationwide and abroad, and unusual circumstances. It also appears to be the first human stampede this year. I'd be open to know if an alternative blurb should mention the people wounded or that most of the persons involved were students or underage. Jamez42 (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose not seeing this "in the news" anywhere. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - ITN and article sufficiently developed Sherenk1 (talk) 13:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment replaced blurb - original was not grammatical and had a spelling mistake. Does appear to be ITN - BBC story here... Black Kite (talk) 13:50, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
    • Was that on some BBC front page, or did you search for it? I can find highschool basketball games reported by WP:RS if I search for it. This is well on it's way to being yet another local disaster story posted purely on WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:55, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
      • Not sure about its ITN notability myself, which is why I didn't say "support", it is however on the front page of BBCs World News section. Black Kite (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Not there at 16:00, though. Sca (talk) 16:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
No, you're right - I suspect it's been kicked out by the Mexico World Cup result and the minor (for the USA) shooting in New Jersey. Black Kite (talk) 17:31, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak support I'm satisfied that this is getting non-local coverage ITN and the article is good enough all things considered. My only concern is the background graph has a lot of different claims and only the one Spanish citation at the end (no hablo Español). Would prefer more inline citations, but if someone here can vet the claims against the source, I'm in. ghost 16:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@GreatCaesarsGhost: Hi! I was meaning to take a look at the section, but it seems ZiaLater was one step ahead of me and expanded it (thanks!), so I added more references regarding the incidentes in 2018. Cheers! --Jamez42 (talk) 21:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)--Jamez42 (talk) 21:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support this is a high enough death toll for an unusual event from a country that probably doesn't appear on ITN very often. Lepricavark (talk) 18:57, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article seems in good shape, and as long as other world reporting agencies are covering it (even if not front page), that's a bar met. --Masem (t) 19:34, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak support nowhere near the major news headlines I've seen over the past day or so, but digging into Google finds global coverage. Article is satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:00, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - significant death toll. Article is in good shape. -Zanhe (talk) 23:55, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support receiving global coverage therefore news worthy, and the article looks fine. Tillerh11 (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 00:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
    • Well, at least it's settled. The minimum deaths for posting is 9. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Er, there were 17 deaths here, not 9. Lepricavark (talk) 20:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • No, the minimum deaths for posting is zero. The standard is "has good enough article, covered sufficiently in news sources, consensus that both of those are met". There is no arbitrary number of anything.--Jayron32 03:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Jayron is correct. We post on significance and quality of article, not how many deaths there were. Obviously an event resulting in a high number of deaths is more likely to be ITN, but there isn't - and indeed can't be - a hard and fast rule. Black Kite (talk) 08:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Honestly guys, this kind of pointy bollocks is not worth dignifying with a response. Just let the user believe what the user writes, as we all know it has no impact here at ITNC. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:37, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • And yet you still dignified it with your own pointy bollocks. Just admit that American deaths are only worth around 0.666 non-American deaths and stop pretending otherwise. Unless it's a shooting death, in which case the Americans who died deserved to be shot. It's your standard position everywhere else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.225.0.109 (talk) 15:14, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Every editor here has their blind spots; it's why we do things by consensus. But when the consensus goes against you, lick your wounds and go home. ghost 15:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • IP, I don't think you get it. I supported the posting and recommended that the usual pointy bollocks be ignored. That's all. But hey, thanks for stopping by. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:53, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

RD: Gennady Rozhdestvensky

Article: Gennady Rozhdestvensky (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Sherenk1 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Russian conductor. Refereeing Referencing issues. Sherenk1 (talk) 15:24, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Five unreferenced sections. Article also needs a massive cleanup.  Nixinova  T  C  06:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose even his date of death is unreferenced. Basics. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) Glasgow School of Art fire

Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 23:49, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Glasgow School of Art (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In Scotland, a fire destroys the Glasgow School of Art
News source(s): Glasgow Herald
Nominator: Yorkshiresky (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Second time building has been devastated by fire in four years. Damage appears to be significantly more extensive than 2014 fire. Category A listed building. yorkshiresky (talk) 07:49, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Stating the obvious: A tragic event for those associated with the school, but no wider significance. Sca (talk) 13:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Indeed tragic, especially as the historic music venue O2 ABC Glasgow got wiped out as well, but doesn't rise to ITN status. Black Kite (talk) 13:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose in the headlines this morning, I'd support, but the article is missing refs and the update is inadequate. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:21, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. This does seem to be a highly significant structure from an architectural standpoint, but I would like to see wider coverage. 331dot (talk) 15:41, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Sca and Black Kite. Lepricavark (talk) 15:47, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Local fire. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose Seemingly no significance for anyone not associated with the school/locality. Not ITN worthy Mkwia (talk) 20:45, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose, not because this a regional story, but because the original (very architecturally important) building was destroyed in 2014. This fire is of the replacement, which really means either that it is only a setback for the rebuilding effort, or, if they give up, then the story should have been posted in 2014 and is now stale. Abductive (reasoning) 05:54, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Buildings catch fire all the time. Not of significance even in the UK.  Nixinova  T  C  06:35, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Lead story on UK national news, coverage in New York Times, Le Monde etc. Building of international importance. Hardly insignificant and more than just a local story. yorkshiresky (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

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

June 15

Portal:Current events/2018 June 15
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Sports

(Posted) RD: Enoch zu Guttenberg

Article: Enoch zu Guttenberg (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): FAZ
Nominator: Zanhe (talk • give credit)
Updater: Gerda Arendt (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: German conductor. Article is fully referenced. Zanhe (talk) 22:42, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose Article is very overlinked and quite hard to read. Well referenced, but all in German. Google auto-translates this page for me which is not a good thing on the English Wiki.  Nixinova  T  C  06:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
I found exactly one doubled link and replaced it. It's normal to link awards in the Award section even if mentioned before. - For English, see external link Bach Cantatas, but it's not considered reliable by one user. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 23:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) Morocco vs Iran own goal

Good faith nom but the World Cup is already listed in "Ongoing." There is zero chance this will be posted as a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:12, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2018 Fifa World Cup (talk, history)
Blurb: Morocco scores an own goal against Iran in the 94th minute.
Nominator: 71.42.239.106 (talk • give credit)

 71.42.239.106 (talk) 17:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Snow close. Is this a joke submission? yorkshiresky (talk) 17:08, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Recommending quick Snow Close of this. It is rare that a team scores a goal against itself, but not unheard of. It's a funny/interesting story, but not ITN material. --Masem (t) 17:10, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

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

AT&T / Time Warner merger complete

Articles: AT&T (talk, history) and Time Warner (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Following Judge Leon's ruling of its legality, AT&T acquires Time Warner for $85 billion.
Alternative blurb: AT&T acquires Time Warner for $85 billion.
News source(s): Reuters
Nominator: Masem (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Both articles are updated with this, but neither not in immediate shape for posting (not far off, its not a major sourcing issue). This is ink on the paper, deal is done, as of now Time Warner is a subsidary of AT&T; the Justice Dept. can still appeal but Judge Leon in his decision strongly warned the Dept it likely will be able to succeed in such. And $85B is not something to sneeze at. Masem (t) 05:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose - As I've said before, the time to post this story is at its announcement when it's at the highest point of newsworthiness, not the completion of said deal. It's a bit late now. --WaltCip (talk) 09:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
We really should have an RFC or something to adjudicate this. If a sizeable contingent oppose at announcement and another at closure, we'll never have consensus to post something that all agree meets significance. ghost 11:30, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
There was an informal discussion where consensus seemed to be when announced. This particular story has some special circumstances. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:40, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Two things on this: First, the announcement of the deal was put up as a candidate here but failed to gain consensus to post [2]. Second, the most recent issue, the merger facing judicial oversight, has been in the news over the last few weeks. It does seem that any of this tens-of-billions deals involving telecom/entertainment companies will continue to be challenged by the gov't (if/when Fox chooses Comcast or Disney as its owner, with both >$50b offers, that will start the next judicial challenge to watch for). I would readily agree that we should post large deals when the companies involved have committed to following the action, but also see no issue that if the completion of that action is challenged, to post the result of that too when it happens. --Masem (t) 13:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment the deal was being held up by presidential vendetta which was only blocked by the courts a week ago. Item is very much "In the news". TL;DR so no !vote. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:05, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment What does "TL;DR so no !vote" mean? Chrisclear (talk) 05:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't !vote unless I've read the article(s), and these are "Too Long" so I "Didn't Read". --LaserLegs (talk) 15:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support There are solid arguments on both sides of the "when to post" discussion. The "it's too late" rationale would hold that the consummation of the deal would be a whimper compared to the announcement. In this case that is unequivocally untrue; my feeds are blowing up with this story (and meditations on its impact). ghost 14:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
If this deal is posted on ITN, then the emphasis has to be on the failure of the U.S. government to halt the merger, as that is where the true newsworthiness of the story seems to lie more so than the deal itself.--WaltCip (talk) 15:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
That's a bit POVish, but as I pointed out in my first blurb, I do think stating that they completed this following the ruling that cleared the merger should be mentioned, since the the gov't resistance to the merge is half the story. I just think its POV to say it was a failure of the gov't to stop it; they just didn't get the decision their way (Courts are not sporting areas, neutrally there are no "winners" or "losers") --Masem (t) 16:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment nomination when it was first announced. This level of interference from the US government in a corporate merger is unusual in modern times. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
    • So much of what's coming from the U.S. Government over the last 18 months is unusual. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:15, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
You mean like LRM noshes with the PGIC? Sca (talk) 13:42, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This is clearly notable, and it hasn't been posted yet. If not now, when? Davey2116 (talk) 00:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Given the attention the judge's ruling has gotten, I'd say the ruling qualifies as very much in the news. Plus, the first purpose blurb clearly states the reason for its inclusion in the "In the News" section. DJMcNiff (talk) 02:26, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
What judge? (That's just my smartarse way of saying that most of the world would not know of this judge and his ruling.) HiLo48 (talk) 03:12, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
It would be easy enough for the smart-arse to find out if they clicked the blue-linked judge's name, yes?--WaltCip (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support if this ends up not posted when it was announced "because it hasn't been confirmed yet" and then doesn't get posted when it's confirmed "because it's not sufficiently in the news", we have a fundamental problem on our hands. Banedon (talk) 03:16, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - now has to be the time to post, given the clear (imo) notability. Stormy clouds (talk) 10:00, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Basic story long since gone stale. Sca (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    • The merger following the judge's ruling is still clearly in the news (100+ articles in the last 24hr). Don't look stale to me. --Masem (t) 13:46, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Yes, notable, but neither article remotely approaches the standard required for the Main Page. Frankly, they're both awful. Black Kite (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on notability if/when articles are ready. Lepricavark (talk) 15:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment In case the first blurb is chosen, is it possible to clarify who Judge Leon is? For someone outside the United states he's probably unknown until his article is read. --Jamez42 (talk) 20:00, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

RD: Matt "Guitar" Murphy

Article: Matt Murphy (blues guitarist) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): CNN
Nominator: Teemu08 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Blues guitarist. I think it makes sense to leave "Guitar" in the name even if its not in the article title as nearly every article refers to him this way. Still a little tinkering left to do with the article but I think its close. Teemu08 (talk) 14:45, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose those unlinked unreferenced album releases need sourcing. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:58, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, all now referenced. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:55, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

June 14

Portal:Current events/2018 June 14
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports

(Posted) RD: Shujaat Bukhari

Article: Shujaat Bukhari (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: EternalNomad (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Kashmir journalist who was murdered. EternalNomad (talk) 02:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support – short, but well referenced article. MBlaze Lightning talk 06:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Article has been majorly cleaned up.  Nixinova  T  C  07:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 08:32, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment This article seems to be on wrong title. The appropriate title of this article is "Death of Shujaat Bukhari" –Ammarpad (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. This is another example of an article created only after the subject's death, and therefore I don't think the presumption of notability that we normally have under the RD rules necessarily applies here.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:21, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
@Ammarpad and Pawnkingtree: While the article was created after the subject's death, the subject had a decent claim to notability before his death, as an influential journalist: he's written for the BBC and The Hindu, an Indian national daily; and his opinions have been cited in other major newspapers [3], [4]. So he's not slam-dunk notable, but he wasn't nobody before the assassination either. Vanamonde (talk) 07:00, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Note to clarify my comment. I am not actually opposing RD, but I am neither supporting. I read the links provided by Vanamonde93: The first two are his writings actually 'opinion pieces,' and one was co-written. The last link is "interview", in the earlier link he was mentioned among other redlinked editors because their papers were raided by army. –Ammarpad (talk) 08:28, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose The "wrong title" argument is accurate, but I believe we'd be okay posting this BLP as an RD, while using blurb-level significance criteria. To that, I'm not seeing any reason why this particular crime is notable. ghost 15:03, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support and marking Ready. Yet another journalist assassinated in India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.245.130.68 (talk)
  • De-marked as ready. You can support and mark as ready on the same "vote". Have some common decency. Howard the Duck (talk) 19:06, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment re-marked as ready. You can't fault duck logic! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment now ready for 24 hours, ANYONE HERE? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:56, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:54, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Jordan's new Prime Minister

Proposed image
Articles: Omar Razzaz (talk, history) and 2018 Jordanian protests (talk, history)
Blurb: Omar Razzaz becomes Prime Minister of Jordan, after his predecessor resigns following widespread protests against austerity measures.
Alternative blurb II: Jordan's new cabinet includes seven women, the largest political representation of females in the nation's history
News source(s): Reuters, The National
Nominator: Makeandtoss (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: I prefer the first blurb Makeandtoss (talk) 09:41, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@GreatCaesarsGhost: They were the largest protests in years. [5]
@Ammarpad: He was designate then and was only sworn in yesterday. Consensus can be changed, @Juxlos: recommended having more prose, which is the case now. Makeandtoss (talk) 17:35, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @GreatCaesarsGhost: Alternative blurb that includes a yellow person: "Responding to the largest protests the country has seen in years, King Abdullah of Jordan dissolves the government and issues a royal decree swearing in Omar Razzaz as the new Prime Minister." These protests (and their outcome) were covered by international as well as regional/local media, see here. Media outlets include NPR, the Guardian, Washington Post, and many more. Flycatchr 19:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support original blurb to avoid emphasizing gender. Changes in head of state are not common, and this one came after widespread protests too (meaning it dominates local news). Banedon (talk) 03:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    @Banedon: Just note: he's not head of state. –Ammarpad (talk) 05:14, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    Still head of a government of a sovereign nation who came due to widespread protests. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:14, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    I did not say he's not head of government, did I? I only say he is not head of state, is that not true?. 03:26, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
    They are remarkably common. On average, changes to a head of government/state occur about once a week. Aside from that, this "look at the size of the protest" refrain is becoming a leitmotif at ITN. Protests are just bigger these days. When the king abdicates, then you can tell me about the effectiveness of your protests. ghost 02:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@GreatCaesarsGhost: The last major protest in Jordan was 6 years ago in the Arab Spring. The recent protests received widespread coverage because of Jordan's context in the Arab World. I seriously do not understand how an American horse, which is now on Wikipedia's news, is more newsworthy than a country's unrest and change of government! If this is not a cultural bias, I don't know what is. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:05, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
a) I'm not the only editor here. The others are registering their opinion with their silence. b) The triple crown is an ITNR item. This means its significance is not debatable at ITNC. I wholeheartedly support the abolition on ITNR, as its assumptions of consensus are frequently fallacious, but my opinion is in the minority. c) debating the relative significance of sport and "real life" is a fools errand. 113 candidates for office in Mexico have been assassinated this election cycle,[6], but El Tri are up 1-0 on Germany! What's the bigger story? ghost 16:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@GreatCaesarsGhost: I don't see how the rest of Wikipedians should influence your personal opinion. I don't see either how you think comparing the significance of different news as a "fools errand", then ask me to do just that. Makeandtoss (talk) 17:03, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
I wasn't asking you; I was sarcastically pointing out how a stupid game is a thousand times more significant then the systematic obliteration of representative government in the 11th largest country on Earth. Which makes the makes the goings on in your country look like a town hall. WP:BIAS doesn't mean we rubber stamp everything that happens outside the US. ghost 17:54, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@GreatCaesarsGhost: Somehow, it conveniently means we rubber stamp everything happening inside the US. Makeandtoss (talk) 23:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose it's a small change in the big scheme of things. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: The protests also a small change in the big scheme of things? Makeandtoss (talk) 23:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Yup, the French have protests on a weekly basis that are larger than that. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: You're comparing a country of 67 million people to a country of 10 million... that's an unfair comparison. Do the French protests result in the reshuffling or resignation of Macron's government? This is a significant and unique event in the country's history. Flycatchr 13:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support original blurb. Change of head of government following popular protests is ITN material. -Zanhe (talk) 23:57, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you @Zanhe: please continue supporting this. Flycatchr 13:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

RD: Fazlullah (militant leader)

Article: Fazlullah (militant leader) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan chief Fazlullah is killed in a US drone strike in Kunar, Afghanistan.
News source(s): [7] [8] [9] [10]
Nominator: Nixinova (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Pakistani Taliban leader, killed in US drone strike.  Nixinova  T  C  06:02, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Pakistan's most-wanted militant.. --Saqib (talk) 11:24, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I added a blurb because I think its blurb-worthy just like OBL was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.245.130.68 (talk) 14:01, June 16, 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment article is good. But since he was once already claimed killed in 2015, what makes this any different? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:52, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
    • Well he's been reported dead and we shouldn't jump to conclusions -- Wikipedia just parrots the facts; we don't need to inject our thoughts otherwise. Since he's reported dead, he's dead.  Nixinova  T  C  07:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
      • Not really. We didn't post the Ukrainian reporter (thankfully). I'm just curous as to why this time is different from last time? And no, Wikipedia doesn't just "parrot facts", it applies editorial judgement (in most cases) before publication. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
      • On a point of order; if he's reported dead by the AP, he's dead. If he's reported dead by the U.S. military, that may be insufficient. Not to get Pythonesque, but here the RS are reporting that he is reportedly dead. In doing so, they are injecting their own journalistic skepticism. We could post a blurb saying he's reportedly dead (assuming consensus on significance), but I'm a wait on the RD. ghost 11:12, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Where is his corpse? This Nigerian militant was reported dead multiple times by these reliable sources, if we had been posting that he would've like 5 RDs in the last few years. Also note; Aljazeera uses ('killed in drone attack',) in quote so as to express explicit doubt since they can't independently verify that. Times of India uses reportedly, another mild way of expressing doubt. But they made it clear "This isn't the first time it has been reported that a US drone strike has killed Fazlullah" so the possibility of another "official US drone killing" next year cannot be ruled out here. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:57, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • OpposeWhat Ammarpad says.WBGconverse 16:14, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

June 13

Portal:Current events/2018 June 13
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports

(Posted) RD: Arkangel de la Muerte

Article: Arkangel de la Muerte (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Medio Tiempo sports magazine
Nominator and updater: MPJ-DK (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article well sourced.  MPJ-DK  00:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Nice little article, decently referenced, no issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support looks fine, good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Sourcing is solid, prose looks good, table completely sourced. Challenger l (talk) 08:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment this has been ready to go for about 12 hours now, anyone around? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 21:06, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Georgian PM resigns

Articles: Giorgi Kvirikashvili (talk, history) and Prime Minister of Georgia (talk, history)
Blurb: Prime Minister of Georgia Giorgi Kvirikashvili resigns due to anti-government protests.
News source(s): RFERL, Georgia Today
Nominator: Brandmeister (talk • give credit)

Both articles need updating

Nominator's comments: Going to sleep now, someone else may update the article. I can join tomorrow. Brandmeistertalk 21:16, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Wait Article is pretty bare bones for a head of government and needs updating. Also it is probably better to post when we can name the new PM in the blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:20, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment according to the list, the PM has no real administrative authority, and according to Prime Minister of Georgia the position is appointed by the president. Not really seeing this "in the news" either, but maybe that's because of my locale. Would be nice if the protests had an article. --LaserLegs (talk) 11:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) Antarctica is melting 3 times as fast today compared to 2012

No consensus to post. Stephen 03:40, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Global warming in Antarctica (talk, history)
Blurb: Antarctica is melting 3 times as fast as it did in 2012
News source(s): BBC, Nature (published report)
Nominator: Count Iblis (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: "Satellites monitoring the state of the White Continent indicate some 200 billion tonnes a year are now being lost to the ocean as a result of melting. This is pushing up global sea levels by 0.6mm annually - a three-fold increase since 2012 when the last such assessment was undertaken." Count Iblis (talk) 18:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - This is a very, very big deal. More people need to know about this. Yes, I know, WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, but this is your future. WP:IAR.--WaltCip (talk) 19:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
The fossil fuels melt a cubic kilometer of Antarctica every 40 hours? Wow. 107.242.117.7 (talk) 23:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose' top science news today, but the target article is crap. A wall of proseline from a position statement last updated in 2002, no other meaningful info, and no update for the current news as far as I could see. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I have (scientific) faith that this article will be seeing some rapid and valuable updates as of now. If we are to pretend to have any genuine educational value remaining here, this is something which our readers should be directed towards. 165.225.0.96 (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose as LaserLegs notes, the target article is not in its best shape, nor does it mention the update (yet). Also, while it is getting decent coverage from BBC and the Washington Post, the fact is this is something many people around the world have been obviously aware of for years, if not decades. This is more-or-less an update on something that will likely fade from media within the next day or two. Python Dan (talk) 21:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Then, if during that two day period, readers come here seeking relevant and updated information on the topic (and find it), we have done our job. It's a good reminder that there's more to the world than sports and politics. 165.225.0.96 (talk) 21:58, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I've added the Nature article that is the journal report supporting this. No immediate comment on ITN-ness here, just that this is based on a peer-reviewed study. --Masem (t) 21:30, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose per Python Dan, its a significant, but otherwise mundane issue that no one can really do about it. Long term impact is certain, but the full (or at least noticeable) result will not occur for a coon’s age at minimum. Also, Wikipedia is not a place to predict a speculative future, even if evidence is provided from scholarly sources. Kirliator (talk) 22:12, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per WaltCip, but the article appears not to be updated. Davey2116 (talk) 02:58, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose solely on article quality per LaserLegs. It's in bad need of an update and expansion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:14, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose May re-visit when article is actually updated.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Both on article quality and importance, as 0.6 mm per year in sea level rise is not enough to be of concern for years; therefore, WP:CRYSTAL applies, as the main significance would be in long term impact. WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS also. Gluons12 | 23:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC).

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

(Posted) Ongoing: 2018 World Cup

Article: 2018 FIFA World Cup (talk, history)
Ongoing item nomination
Nominator: Masem (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: "Ongoing" was developed in mind with the World Cup and Olympic events (short term and fixed endpoints). Technically the event does not start until tomorrow, but by the time this is !voted on and consensus, it likely will be tomorrow. Main article seems in good shape. Masem (t) 17:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

  • I believe we did post the World Cup four years ago, and while I still maintain that Ongoing is not appropriate for single-sport events in progress, this would be one exception in my opinion. 331dot (talk) 17:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
    • FWIW, reviewing the history, the 2014 WC was boldly added to ongoing as we appeared to have just finished the trial of "Ongoing". The bold action was not disputed (see [11] on June 12) in a !vote related to posting the start of the event. --Masem (t) 17:37, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support because it's going to be both Ongoing and major international news for a month. Lepricavark (talk) 17:43, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support same as above Mkwia (talk) 17:47, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support we don't ongoing the NBA, or the NHL or literally any other single sport tournament, and the opening is not ITN/R no matter how much the OP may wish it was, there is about to be a wall of people showing up here screaming about how soccer is the most important thing in the world, so probably best to just speedy post and get the inevitable over with. When Lionel Messi breaks the record for most opening goals kicked in a second half on even numbered days in a world cup - or whatever other irrelevant piece of sports trivia that'll be passed off as "significant" while this thing runs -- you don't get a blurb. You get ongoing, you get a blurb when it's done, that's enough soccer. #twocents. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The comparisons to the NHL and the NBA are apples to oranges, as you probably realize. Lepricavark (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, yes, I know, soccer is the most important thing in the world and in all time past and present the Cretaceous–Paleogene extiction pales in comparison to this silly pageant. I supported it, you won. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:58, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Nah, it's actually an extremely boring sport... in my opinion. But I'm not !voting based on my opinion of soccer/football. This is a clearcut case for ongoing and I really don't see your point. Lepricavark (talk) 19:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per above.--WaltCip (talk) 18:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support post it up at kick-off tomorrow, take it down when we post the final result as a blurb. —LukeSurl t c 18:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support There's wide interest in this sport, worldwide. Its significance is obvious. –Ammarpad (talk) 18:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Updates? In which article are we going to see daily updates? That should be the page that should be highlighted. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:37, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
The articles are split by group and knockout stage, so there isn't one article to point to. 2018 FIFA World Cup is the index to all of that. Modest Genius talk 18:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
I think the current linked article would have it. It has tables of the overall performance of each team during the first part of the cup. When we get to the knockout stage on June 30, we can change that link to 2018 FIFA World Cup knockout stage. --Masem (t) 18:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
I've randomly checked and it appears that 2014 FIFA World Cup Group A was updated in time. If this is the case this shouldn't be a problem, but if people are looking for updates on the main article and they found nothing, then that's another matter. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
It looks like 2018 FIFA World Cup Group A has zero updates as of yet. If this continues... meh, it won't be removed from ongoing, anyway... Howard the Duck (talk) 05:28, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
The box table is updated (right now, only one game total has been played it looks like). I am pretty confident the FOOTY project is all over this. --Masem (t) 05:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
To be clear, when updates, I'm referring to the extensive prose updates an Ongoing link has to have at least everyday. We have rightfully rejected articles with league tables all over with no prose at all. Howard the Duck (talk) 06:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. This and the Olympics are the only sporting events that I think merit being in Ongoing the entire time. As mentioned by LukeSurl, we should post this when the first match kicks off tomorrow. Modest Genius talk 18:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Most watched sporting event in the world, no-brainer really. Black Kite (talk) 18:48, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support truly global. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - clearly a worthy candidate for ongoing given its significance to a large global audience. Stormy clouds (talk) 22:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
    • It hasn't started yet! You were about 16 hours too early. I guess it would now look even weirder to take it down for a few hours. Modest Genius talk 10:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
      • No, on this occasion, it's just fine. The prelude is well under way, teams have arrived, walkabouts and training sessions in situ have started. As an overall event, it's definitely started. It's all over the news, Wikipedians will be looking for information on what's led up to the tournament, not just how it's going once the first ball is kicked. I didn't see any readers complaining about this posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:44, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
        • Look out world—TRM and I agree on something! ;-) More seriously, what TRM said, plus there were only two votes above that were in favor of waiting. It's a model we could explore more, within reason. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
NEWS FLASH: Russia 5, Saudi Arabia 0. — Sca (talk) 21:20, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

(Removed) Remove Turkish currency and debt crisis from ongoing

Article: Turkish currency and debt crisis, 2018 (talk, history)
Ongoing item removal
Nominator: GreatCaesarsGhost (talk)

Nominator's comments: The updates for the last week or so are just normal economic reports that are continually published in any significant economy. It's not clear what standard we could use to remove this item, as the crisis will not have a clear end. Aside from that, is anyone seeing reporting on this without searching for it? ghost 11:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Agree that this is no longer 'ongoing'. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Where, elsewhere, has one seen this in the news? talk to !dave 10:44, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I had a look at Wikipedia:In_the_news#Ongoing_section and it does not appear to be in the news or being regularly updated with new and pertinent information.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:23, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support It's not being updated, and it's not in regular news coverage. Get rid of it. Ultimograph5 (talk) 23:20, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Removed Stephen 23:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) Battle of Hudaida (2018)

Article: Battle of Hudaida (2018) (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Saudi-backed forces have begun an assault on the key port of Hudaydah after Houthi rebels ignored a final deadline to withdraw
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Sherenk1 (talk • give credit)
Updater: Chilicheese22 (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Cabut.sidney (talk • give credit) and Panam2014 (talk • give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Article still needs to be updated. Notability due to "Aid agencies have warned of a humanitarian catastrophe if the city is attacked, with up to a quarter of a million casualties possible." Sherenk1 (talk) 04:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose, the offensive started last December, and the article has not been updated. Stephen 05:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
This is an entirely new offensive with a distinct goal: to push out Houthis from the city. The past ones were sporadic and only meant to cause damage. --Expectant of Light (talk) 20:44, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Stephen, this is an odd nomination given those issues. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:22, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose clearly old story, insufficient recent event/update to merit posting. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:28, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support the offensive in Hudaydah City began today. --Panam2014 (talk) 15:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose The target article isn't updated. I did hear about this on NPR this morning, hence the "weak" part of the oppose. If there's a sufficient update, I might support. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:16, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ammarpad, Stephen, and The Rambling Man: Battle of Hudaida (2018) have been created. --Panam2014 (talk) 02:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment - Article updated on blurb. Sherenk1 (talk) 03:38, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support The created article seems updated enough. I checked the Refs and many of them belonged to 13 and 14 June 2018. The incident is significant enough. --Mhhossein talk 18:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This is worthy of posting. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support* This is a news-worthy development in several ways such as a) the biggest battle since the war began in 2015, and b) taking place within the biggest humanitarian crisis in the world. This is why I also prefer a blurb that mentions the humanitarian crisis as this aspect has featured prominently in almost all news stories about the battle. --Expectant of Light (talk) 21:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - worthy of ITN. updated, refs checks.BabbaQ (talk) 23:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 23:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pull - Has an orange level tag, not suitable to be linked from Main Page. Should be pulled. Mjroots (talk) 19:20, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

(Posted) 2026 FIFA World Cup

Articles: 2026 FIFA World Cup (talk, history) and Canada–Mexico–United States 2026 FIFA World Cup bid (talk, history)
Blurb: 2026 FIFA World Cup hosting rights awarded to joint bid from the United States, Mexico and Canada
Alternative blurb: FIFA award hosting rights for the 2026 World Cup to a joint bid from Canada, Mexico, and the United States
News source(s): The Guardian New York Times
Nominator: Mkwia (talk • give credit)

 Mkwia (talk) 12:08, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

  • When ordering the countries, "Canada, Mexico, and the United States" is preferable, as this is the order in the bid title. --LukeSurl t c 12:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I know this will be posted because "OMG soccer" but this is actually a perfect DYK candidate. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose Announcement of the next host city/venue for Olympics or World Cup doesn't seem significant given how far off these events are. The only thing that makes this a weak oppose is that it seems that the joint hoisting of the event between three countries seems unique? DYK seems perfect here for this. --Masem (t) 13:22, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose – Ditto. Sca (talk) 14:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is eight years away and will be posted then. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support considering the clusterfuck of the previous selections, this is notable in being not dubious. Also, this will be the first tournament expanding from 32 to 48, which is probably the main reason triple hosts were ok. Nergaal (talk) 14:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not ITN worthy. May be suitable for DYK. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:31, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I think it's notable enough, and the articles are in very good shape. Davey2116 (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support between the two articles, we have a good coverage of an item that is major international news. --LukeSurl t c 15:31, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support It was posted last time. I think this the rare event where the announcement of the location is of wide interest. Naturally this time would be of even greater interest to our readers as roughly half of them live in one of the host countries. ghost 15:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Biggest sporting event in the world, decent article, and works nicely with the 2018 version starting tomorrow. Black Kite (talk) 18:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support truly global and about time we pushed the almost entirely US-centric news items currently listed down a bit. Oh, hang on.... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support per GreatCaesarsGhost. Lepricavark (talk) 19:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Significant event, in my opinion. talk to !dave 19:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - dominating news in my neck of the woods, and we probably won't even qualify. The biggest sporting event in the world, of major interest to our readers (especially given the hosts). Stormy clouds (talk) 22:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:14, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

June 12

Portal:Current events/2018 June 12
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
  • History of AT&T
  • Tesla announces that it intends to cut 3000 jobs in an attempt to improve profitability. Many of those workers will be offered alternative jobs under the same employer. (BBC)
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Politics and elections

(Stale) RD: Bhaiyyu Maharaj

Article: Bhaiyyu Maharaj (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Times of India
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article well sourced. Another tragic suicide. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:08, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Referenced okay but most are linked to the same references.  Nixinova  T  C  03:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Looks good. Sherenk1 (talk) 05:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose Referencing is okay, but there's some bad grammar, and a lot of unlinked and/or unexplained terms that would be very confusing to a reader unfamiliar with Indian politics. I'll try to clean this up, but I'm a bit busy at the moment; if somebody else could do it, that would be appreciated. Vanamonde (talk) 07:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose prose needs a complete copyedit, far from encyclopedic in tone right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @Vanamonde93: & @The Rambling Man:: Copy edited to fix the bad grammar. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The grammar has been improved, but it's still not perfect, and there are other issues with the prose; mostly a complete lack of context for much of the material, making it difficult to follow even for someone who works on South Asian politics, as I do. My !vote remains. Vanamonde (talk) 07:25, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) Northern Macedonia

Consensus will not develop for this to be posted at this time; a re-nomination after the planned national vote on the topic would be appropriate. power~enwiki (π, ν) 15:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Macedonia naming dispute (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The Republic of Macedonia announces an agreement with Greece to rename itself "Northern Macedonia", ending the 27-year Macedonia naming dispute.
News source(s): AP
Nominator: Smurrayinchester (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: A bit of a daft story, but one that ends a surprisingly significant dispute in the Balkans, and will hopefully fix relations between the two countries. The article currently has a yellow clean up tag, because the timeline should probably split into another article. Smurrayinchester 18:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - it's not a done deal. The BBC report this will need to be ratified by both Greece and Macedonia, including a plebiscite in the latter, and the outcome of these are not certain. The best timing would be when/if Macedonia actually changes its name. --LukeSurl t c 18:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per LukeSurl. This is an important story, but this is not the time to post it. Thryduulf (talk) 19:24, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per above comments. –Ammarpad (talk) 02:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I would align this with the current discussion on the talk page, where it likely will not be moved until the paperwork is signed, to speak. This would be ITN when that happens. --Masem (t) 04:08, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per the rest. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per the rest. Double sharp (talk) 10:58, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. Lepricavark (talk) 13:31, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

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

(Posted) 2018 North Korea–United States summit

Proposed image
Article: 2018 North Korea–United States summit (talk, history)
Blurb: President Donald Trump and Chairman Kim Jong-Un meet in Singapore.
Alternative blurb: President Donald Trump and Chairman Kim Jong-Un meet in Singapore, the first-ever meeting between a sitting U.S. President and a North Korean leader.
News source(s): CNN, CBS, BBC
Nominator: Davey2116 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Historic summit. Article has been in very good shape for days. Davey2116 (talk) 00:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Wait I'm sure we'll post it once the meeting happens, but that's a few hours off yet. Lepricavark (talk) 00:21, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment the "Proposed conditions by North Korea" has a single source: A Korean Huffpo article. I think we can do better. Also, the article makes no mention of Kim referring to Trump as a "dotard". --LaserLegs (talk) 00:35, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support The meeting will be underway in 15 minutes. Very notable as this is the first time the leaders of the US and DPRK have met.  Nixinova  T  C  00:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Meeting has begun.  Nixinova  T  C  01:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Meeting has begun. Nice4What (talk) 01:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. The article is not updated. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Ofcourse I support this, its a historic meeting in itself regardless of the outcome. The summit has already begun and is underway so I expect the article will have a lot of edits in the coming hours. Dragnadh (talk) 01:27, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support there will continue to be updates, but now is the time to post. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:15, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support as above, meeting has begun and event is extremely significant.— Crumpled Fire contribs 03:27, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Historical meeting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:53, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Good-sized and well-referenced. Agree that we should post now. Jusdafax (talk) 03:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Currently the tenses jump all over the place, the lede doesn't state they met, and there are more words about their lunch menu than about the meeting. Stephen 04:02, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Wait until substantive news is reported. Abductive (reasoning) 04:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This is an historic meeting on the level of "Nixon goes to China" level. There may certainly be even more noteworthy things that happen there, but if nothing major occurs, this meeting happening is groundbreaking news. We can update the blurb should an "interesting" result happen. --Masem (t) 04:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support meeting is well underway and this is a very historic event. Lepricavark (talk) 04:20, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support meeting is underway and already newsworthy. The picture of the two leaders shaking hands is groundbreaking since it's the first time a sitting United States president has ever met with a North Korea leader.S-1-5-7 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose wait until the summit is over, and then check to see if something substantive occurred. We waited until the end of the G7 summit before posting, we can wait on this one too. (NorthernFalcon (talk) 05:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC))
    • The G7 summit generally happens every year, so while important, we can wait to post what was resolved. This is the first meeting of the US President and the NK leader, and without an assurance it will happen again. There's a big difference in how these stories should be handled. --Masem (t) 05:54, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support this generated so much buzz before the event that it should be posted as soon as possible. Banedon (talk) 05:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posting. Alex Shih (talk) 05:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Propose the other photo: File:Kim and Trump shaking hands at the red carpet during the DPRK–USA Singapore Summit.jpg. wumbolo ^^^ 10:40, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree, that is a stronger image. The bold main link in the blurb, to the single word meet, also seems to me to be very bland and non-descriptive in terms of the historic signed agreement that resulted. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:50, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The image is very cluttered, looks like crap as a thumbnail. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:28, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • It's two tiny figures infront of a wall of color at 150px. Oh well, I guess it's better to just denigrate people right? --LaserLegs (talk) 13:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • With enemies like Donald, who need friends? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Trump is stating that a joint statement has been signed on de-nuclearization, and the U.S. is supposedly halting its military exercises. Whether or not we believe there's any veracity to this, this is a major development in the summit on top of the existence of the summit itself. I suggest we make this an ongoing item.--WaltCip (talk) 12:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Not constructive. TompaDompa (talk) 14:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
    • No need to make this ongoing, but if you want to change the blurb to "Donald Trump legitimizes the brutal regime of North Korea" I guess why not. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:27, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
      • Sure. Or why not have "Donald Trump hailed as peace-making savior of the world"? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
        • Well I think it needs to pass WP:V to be posted, and there is no verifability for that line of propaganda. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:16, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
          • Ok, you talked me into it.... stick with the "legitimizes brutal regime" one. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
        • Or perhaps "Two rich men sit down and nosh on lavish lunch and make empty promises to the world"?--WaltCip (talk) 12:32, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
On that, I think that once we know exactly what was signed/pledged/agreed to, we can update the blurb. Ongoing doesn't make sense for a rather short summit, barring a massive rush of new ITNC blurbs in the next 24 hrs. --Masem (t) 14:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

June 11

Portal:Current events/2018 June 11
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Science and technology
Sports

(Posted) RD: Victoria Kalima

Article: Victoria Kalima (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Diggers
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:11, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Support Short but very well referenced.  Nixinova  T  C  05:58, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Indeed, short but sufficient.BabbaQ (talk) 07:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Looks fine. ghost 11:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:33, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Neal E. Boyd

Stale; all oppose.  Nixinova  T  C  06:31, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Neal E. Boyd (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Variety
Nominator: TompaDompa (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: America's Got Talent winner. TompaDompa (talk) 20:33, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. Rather bare bones article, though not a stub. Referencing needs significant improvement. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose not good enough for a BLP, 12 [citation needed] need fixing as a minimum. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:25, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Too many citations needed. I may support it if/when that's fixed.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

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

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: