|
January 1, 2015 (2015-01-01) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
International relations
Law and crime
- Vietnam’s new marriage law goes into effect, abolishing regulations that “prohibit marriage between people of the same sex.” (Bloomberg)
Politics and elections
Eurasian Economic Union
Article: Eurasian Economic Union (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: The Eurasian Economic Union is established by Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia with Kyrgyzstan participating as an acceding state. (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
--Mentoroso (talk) 13:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support - an escalation of attempt by Russia to compete against EU (pathetic attempt but still).--BabbaQ (talk) 13:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose From what I see, the treaty was signed on 29 May 2014 and today that treaty just comes into force (don't remember whether we posted signing or not). It's comparable to posting presidential inaguration instead of election results. Brandmeister 14:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support It's not often that a continental union is formed and a treaty does not guarantee it's existence (in spacetime) (but it happening does). Heck, it could even be seen as a much looser USSR. Inaugurations are far more common in comparison. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- ЕАЭС is the new CCCP. Nergaal (talk) 20:44, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. I feel like I should be supporting this, but I'm noticing that the major news outlets seem to be ignoring it (even Russia Today!) and, from reading our article, I am not able to work out how it differs much from the Eurasian Economic Community that existed yesterday. If it's mainly about ordering new business cards and letterheads, then I'm not sure we should post it. Is anyone able to enlighten me? Formerip (talk) 21:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Media outlets (especially Eurasian ones) have been covering it all year round, so there's really no reason for them to even more. The difference between the Community and the EEU is that the latter is a more integrated single market, with free movement of goods, capital, services and people (It's similar to the difference between the European Economic Community and the European Union, without the political components to it). Common transport, energy, agriculture and energy policies are also now in force. There are provisions to create a single currency, a parliament and deepening integration in the future. This is why I thought we could consider it.—Mentoroso (talk) 21:50, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
December 31
| Portal:Current events/2014 December 31
|
|
December 31, 2014 (2014-12-31) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
2014 Ibb bombing
Article: 2014 Ibb bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A suicide bombing in Yemen kills at least 49 people. (Post)
News source(s): Sydney Morning Herald, ABC News, Reuters
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Significant number of deaths, coverage around the world. --Everymorning talk 13:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
RD: Edward Herrmann
Article: Edward Herrmann (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Tribune,
Daily Mail
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support. I was coming here to nominate him as well. Rhodesisland (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose. His visual significance is Gilmore Girls. Other significance is just speaking for Dodge commercials and History Channel documentaries. --George Ho (talk) 04:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. I have to come down on the oppose side; one Emmy for a guest appearance and a Tony near the start of his career doesn't meet the RD criteria. Being well known doesn't make one important to their field. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support - One Emmy is one Emmy. I think this warrants a mention at RD. --BabbaQ (talk) 11:47, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose minor celebrity, certainly not top of his field and the article has multiple orange maintenance tags. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:39, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support Iconic actor and voice artist, active until his death. Any tags should be addressed, but given the holiday's and my uncle's death I won't be doing serious updating. μηδείς (talk) 22:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose per the other opposes. Neljack (talk) 22:08, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I've seriously tried to find evidence that this guy was in some way "top of his field" but there's nothing. This report comes close to agreeing that he played the role of an "iconic" person, but concedes that he was really just known for a role in the Gilmore Girls. Hardly someone you'd list alongside Lauren Bacall for instance. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Shanghai New Year crush
Article: 2014 Shanghai crush (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: At least 35 people are killed in a crush during a New Year's Eve celebration in Shanghai, China. (Post)
Alternative blurb: At least 35 people are crushed during a New Year's Eve celebration in Shanghai, China.
News source(s): BBC NYTimes
Credits:
Article needs updating The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
| Discussion of the article's tile has been deferred to Talk:2014 Shanghai crush#"Stampede" vs, "crush", where it belongs. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
|
- Comment Is there any support for the article & blurb to be renamed to stampede (as used in the NY Times article I just linked)? 'Crush' used in this context is unique to British English, while 'stampede' is more well-understood. (honestly, as an american, I didn't even know exactly what 'crush' meant at first). Mamyles (talk) 22:26, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sure, it's not really that important what it's called, the issue at hand is whether the item itself is significant enough for ITN. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- The quality of the updated content is a criteria for posting. While I think this event is significant enough to post, the article still needs a lot of work before I would give my support. Mamyles (talk) 22:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think there's any doubt that we won't post a stub to the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- I've moved the page to 2014 Shanghai stampede, to conform with other recent articles like 2014 Mumbai stampede. Mamyles (talk) 22:42, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Mamyles, "crush" sounds horribly disrespectful. --AmaryllisGardener 22:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- That's complete nonsense, as evidenced by dozens of RS, but if it makes you personally feel happier to see "stampede" rather than "crush" then all good. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- It was a stampede, not a "crush". I cringed when I saw "Shanghai crush", and it isn't used most of the time. --AmaryllisGardener 22:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, but the people weren't killed by "stampeding", they were killed by being "crushed". That's what many RS have said. In any case, it matters not a jot. The article has been moved so let's focus on deciding whether it should go onto ITN or not. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, but nope. --AmaryllisGardener 22:55, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Of course, Fox News is the answer to all things. Listen, get over it (e.g. this report uses "crush" eight times). As I said before, time to work out if it's worth posting to the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- If you refuse to call FN a RS: . BBC doesn't trump everything, just sayin'. --AmaryllisGardener 23:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, congrats, you've found some other sources that don't use "crush". The original point, that you suggested a "crush" was "horribly disrespectful" remains utterly untrue. Now move on. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:10, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Eg.: New Yorker article on crowd crushes from 2011. It's not a disrespectful term and seems more appropriate here than a stampede as it doesn't suggest there was running or panicking associated with the latter. --MASEM (t) 23:13, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- See Talk:2014 Shanghai crush#"Stampede" vs, "crush". --AmaryllisGardener 23:25, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
|
- Support The sadness of a story is no reason to overlook it, even during the festive season. The Boxing Day tsunami was extremely sad, but I don't think we would have served our readers well by declining to feature it for the that reason. Neljack (talk) 22:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support, getting back to the suitability for ITN this has, this is a very sad incident with many deaths, probably to be reported on much more. --AmaryllisGardener 22:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - once in a sufficient condition to meet ITN requirements: Despite the number of such gatherings at this time of year and the numbers of people attending, such accidents are quite rare. Mjroots (talk) 23:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support per above. --MASEM (t) 23:13, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Adding that this might have been something that some pranksters initiated by throwing fake cash or offers of it from atop a nearby building. . --MASEM (t) 03:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support per above. Miyagawa (talk) 23:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - clearly notable stampede. Post.--BabbaQ (talk) 02:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose this is a stampede, not a "crush" and not particularly notable for a stampede, however horrible for the victims and their families. Unless it leads to some legal consequence it has no encyclopedic importance. μηδείς (talk) 03:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support it is notable, but only if someone gets the word 'Crush' out of the article. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:05, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose This doesn't seem particularly noteworthy to me. If it were a terrorist event, or something else with political ramifications, then I'd probably have a different opinion. However, since this is probably going to be posted anyway, I'd support the use of the word 'crunch' as opposed to 'stampede.' I don't see how the former is disrespectful, and it strikes me as more accurate than 'stampede;' although that word in such a context is probably more familiar to American users, I'd rather go for a more descriptive and accurate term.-RHM22 (talk) 06:13, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
| The ITN blurb will reflect the article title. The article title should be discussed at Talk:2014 Shanghai crush#"Stampede" vs, "crush", not here. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
|
- I've added an alternative blurb that may prove less controversial.-RHM22 (talk) 06:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- NOw it sounds like they were celebrating inside a rock crusher or something. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:08, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Well, I guess you could just as easily say that 'stampede' suggests they were killed by a herd of cattle.-RHM22 (talk) 07:14, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Where did you arrive from? A stampede is when a large crowd runs amok and in the process run over each other as well. In India, stampedes are known to happen in temples and other places and animals were not involved at all. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, that's the point: no one would assume that 'stampede' means that animals were involved, just like no one would assume that people were killed inside of a rock crusher during New Year celebrations.-RHM22 (talk) 07:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- As a speaker of British English, I disagree - a stampede does imply to me that animals were involved. This was a crush of people. Please do not assume that what Americans say is somehow automatically correct. 5.179.100.129 (talk) 08:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- If the term is indeed confusing or unknown to British English-speakers, then I'd say that's even more reason to use the original blurb or my suggested alternative. No one has yet explained why "crush" or "crushed" is offensive. As far as I can tell, we don't even know yet whether or not it really was a 'stampede,' which is one of the reasons why I'd prefer the more generic term.-RHM22 (talk) 17:02, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
|
- That is just your opinion. And now, thanks to you airing it, we all have that image. I don't see how this helps. AlexTiefling (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- As a US-ian that's exactly what I thought a fatal crush was (the skin failing at one or more points causing bleeding to death, enough bone breaking to cause death, bruising to death, or any combination of non-fatal amounts of those thereof. It was only later that I learned that I found out it's thankfully not as quite as horrible but generally compressive asphyxiation, as said at the human stampede article. As cases of hundreds dead have existed, that is a misleading picture. I have heard that most students in China are taught English, and that it's American English, so let's not make it harder on readers who might've known the "crushed" than it has to be. It's much worse to picture that image if it was your wife or something. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I'm not discussing the article title; I'm discussing the wording of the blurb. Please do take note before condensing my comments in the future. There are many, many ITN items in which the article title isn't used (did everyone forget about the CIA 'torture' report?), so I don't see why the choice here is apparently very obvious.-RHM22 (talk) 17:30, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I have also added a bit about the Fake currency from a Reuters article. I guess maybe it could be added to the blurb? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose based mainly on article quality, but also because I think it would be good for ITN to make a resolution to be less deathy during 2015. Agree that "stampede" would be a bit insensitive. Formerip (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality. Event seems notable enough though, this sort of thing doesn't happen often. There shouldn't, however, be any censorship of this based on what the event is. 331dot (talk) 12:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support Front page news on international news sites. High death toll. Not sure why we should try and make bad news look nicer. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support — Partly as a counter to EWP's perceived Anglo-European-centrism. Re terminology, I note that our article on the Khodynka Tragedy begins, "The Khodynka Tragedy was a human stampede...." IMO, the phrase human stampede best describes what happened (on a smaller but no less tragic scale) in Shanghai. Sca (talk) 15:32, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support as long as the article is improved. Mass fatalities like this at New Year's events are unusual enough to begin with—I don't think anything like this has ever happened at Times or Red Square. Having it occur in the main tourist area of the largest city of the world's most populous country exponentially increases its news value. Daniel Case (talk) 15:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
| Irrelevant discussion
|
- This is because Times Square separates the crowd into pens surrounded by empty space that bear an opening and presumably aren't so hard to dismantle that no one could make an extra opening quickly. The safety-unconscious Third World should look into that. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:41, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- China is not a third-world country by just about every economic measure, and its health and safety regulations and protocols for an all manner of things (such as crow-control and food standards) is improving with time (but these are just laws and protocols, the health and safety culture out there is still filled with complacency and downright laziness!)--Somchai Sun (talk) 17:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- My relatives always called their country a third world country and they barely have less GDP per capita than China. The Shanghai Tower, Shanghai Maglev and continental length Mach 0.3 trains make the first world jealous but it's still a $7,000 US/year country. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Your second-hand accounts of your relatives in some other country that's not China are not a reliable source. Do you have any reliable sources, or are you just trying to confuse the issue with unnecessary linguistic quibbles? AlexTiefling (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Well third world country, second paragraph, first sentence says the term isn't well defined. And older people like my relatives/parents actually remember the Cold War and gave me my preferred term for levels of country poorness. Americans my age think it's nitpicking that older people say a third world country can't be communist. Why don't we be more accurate and call them a 2½ world country?.. I wasn't intentionally obsfucating. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 19
- 42, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
|
- Historical footnote: This sort of thing did happen in Moscow 60+ years ago: On March 9, 1953, in Red Square, outside the hall where Josef Stalin's body lay in state, "hundreds" of people were crushed or smothered to death in a human stampede, according to various unofficial sources (never officially confirmed). Sca (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Lithuania adopts the euro
Article: Lithuania and the euro (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Lithuania becomes the 19th member of the Eurozone. (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
Article updated Formerip (talk) 19:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- AFAICT, that's at 10 pm UTC. Formerip (talk) 20:07, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- A country changing its currency seems notable to me, but I wonder if we have posted any other steps in the process(such as them being approved to do so) or other countries doing so. 331dot (talk) 19:55, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'm sure you can find out the answer to this if you can be bothered to do it. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- If you don't want to be helpful(which is perfectly fine for anyone to be), you could just say nothing. I wasn't even really asking for help, more posting a thought. I'm well aware of how to find something like that out. 331dot (talk) 12:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Support I agree that this seems notable, and it is also receiving significant coverage around the world. I think that given both of these criteria, whether or not we posted other countries entering the eurozone is of little relevance. Mamyles (talk) 19:58, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support article isn't brilliant but sufficient enough to carry an ITN story. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support I think the coverage and the notability of the change would seem sufficient to carry on ITN. Miyagawa (talk) 23:52, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - notable. Covered by world media.--BabbaQ (talk) 02:55, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
New Year's Honours
No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:36, 31 December 2014 (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.
Articles: Joan Collins (talk · history · tag) and Mary Quant (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Former Dynasty actress Joan Collins and fashion designer Mary Quant have both been made dames in the 2015 New Year's Honours. The actor John Hurt is to become Sir John Hurt. (Post)
News source(s): ITV news The Guardian (full honours list)
Credits:
--The Vintage Feminist (talk) 12:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Happy New Year to them too (oppose). As far as I know, we don't post knightings, just like many other recognitions. Brandmeister 16:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- What a shame they never cast Hurt and Collins as Avon and Servalan in a Blake's Seven movie. μηδείς (talk) 18:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - There are dozens of these, on two occasions each year. Far too commonplace, I'm afraid. AlexTiefling (talk) 18:52, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Uncertain oppose - wasn't that Mary the real founder of Quantum mechanics? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:04, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Certain oppose dozens, if not hundreds are honoured every year. Not notable. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. Plenty of countries award similar honors; we don't post them. -- Calidum 19:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per all of the above comments. Thank you for the nomination though - we often don't get enough here. Mamyles (talk) 22:05, 31 December 2014 (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.
December 30
| Portal:Current events/2014 December 30
|
|
December 30, 2014 (2014-12-30) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
RD: Christine Cavanaugh
Older than the oldest RD. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:49, 1 January 2015 (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: Christine Cavanaugh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN The Guardian USA Today
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Voice actress who voiced Babe, Chuckie Finster in Rugrats, and Dexter in Dexter's Laboratory among numerous other roles. Andise1 (talk) 06:11, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose While as an animation fan, she will be missed, I don't think she meets RD here; if it was someone like June Foray, that might be different. (Also note, she passed away on Dec 22, the news is only just being picked up on). --MASEM (t) 06:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose no evidence this individual meets the criteria for RD. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support I don't understand the rationale stating June Foray can be mentioned in an RD, but not Cavanaugh. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:13, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. I believe we post RDs based on when the person died, meaning this cannot be posted as the 22nd has dropped off; am I correct? 331dot (talk) 11:48, 1 January 2015 (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.
Palestinian draft resolution fails in U.N. council
Articles: United Nations Security Council (talk · history · tag) and United Nations resolution (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: The United Nations Security Council rejects a Palestinian resolution calling for Israel to withdraw from Palestinian territories by late 2017. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Australia and the United States vote against a Palestinian resolution calling for Israel to withdraw from Palestinian territories by late 2017 in the UN Security Council.
News source(s): , ,
Credits:
Nominator's comments: UN votes down statehood for Palestine. --BabbaQ (talk) 23:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. It was a Jordanian resolution, not a Palestinian one. And I think we should talk in terms of it "failing" rather than being "rejected" or "voted against" - these expression may not be technically wrong, but they are a bit misleading given that more members voted in favour than against. Since no-one at all expected this to pass, I'm not sure it's really significant enough, in itself, for ITN (although I'm not quite unsure enough to vote oppose). Formerip (talk) 23:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is approximately the 42nd time in roughly forty years that the US has vetoed a resolution dealing with the Palestinians. There is no surprise here, including the fact that US told everyone that they were going to veto this one as well. If the US had actually agreed to pass something, then that might have been news, but the failure to pass anything just perpetuates the status quo and I don't really see how the failure to change is at the level of significance required for ITN. Dragons flight (talk) 23:55, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. An unsurprising result of pure political theater, as the US was certain to veto it. 331dot (talk) 23:57, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per Dragons flight. -- Calidum 01:37, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose anything against Israel will be rejected by the US etc, and even if it isn't, Israel pay no heed to UN mandates. Disappointingly, this is a non-starter. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:38, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support any support for rights-respecting classically liberal countries instead of fascist/leftist resolutions is so rare nowadays as to be worth noting as encyclopedic and simply amazing. μηδείς (talk) 23:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support Clearly this needs to be on the front page, because there seems to be widespread misconception. The resolution was not vetoed by the United States; the two opposing votes plus abstentions by the Britain, Lithuania, Rwanda, Nigeria and South Korea meant that it fell one vote short. It is the first and only time that Australia has opposed a resolution in its two-year term. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:22, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
- It would have been vetoed had it gotten the nine votes. That was a certainty, meaning that this was an exercise in political theater. I don't think Australia exercising its ability to oppose something is notable enough for posting. 331dot (talk) 11:47, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
RD: Luise Rainer
Article: Luise Rainer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Telegraph
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 09:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support highly notable, article is in quite good shape. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support Certainly the most famous death of the month, after Joe Cocker.--The Theosophist (talk) 13:17, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I think could be in Template:In the news. ArionEstar (talk) 13:29, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support notable actress, article in decent shape. --AmaryllisGardener 14:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support Would have actually nominated her myself - definitely notable, article is in good shape. Challenger l (talk) 15:08, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support for RD and article is in fine shape for posting. --MASEM (t) 17:15, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - notable enough for RD. post.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Typically blurbs are only posted for deaths where the death itself is an event, usually (but not always) a surprising death, or when the person was essentially at the tip-top of their field. I don't think either applies in this case. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
December 29
| Portal:Current events/2014 December 29
|
|
December 29, 2014 (2014-12-29) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
December 2014 Cameroon clashes
Articles: December 2014 Cameroon clashes (talk · history · tag) and Boko Haram (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: At least 83 people are killed, in the aftermath of clashes between the Cameroonian military and Boko Haram militants. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
Both articles updatedNominator's comments: An escalation of Boko Haram incursions into Cameroon, threatening to further destabilize the region. --Catlemur (talk) 23:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- I agree. This is an clear escalation.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:53, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I've un-marked this as ready for the time being. I think more discussion is needed. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:54, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- One more support since you unmarked it. Just to re-mark ;).--BabbaQ (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Admin note: The article's a bit short, and a few more comments would be welcome. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
December 28
| Portal:Current events/2014 December 28
|
|
December 28, 2014 (2014-12-28) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
Large expansion to Beijing Subway
Article: Beijing Subway (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Line 7 of the Beijing Subway and expansions of lines 6, 14, and 15 begin operation. (Post)
News source(s): CRI
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: 48 new metro stations opened on a single day is extremely rare anywhere in the world. We normally do not cover infrastructure articles, particularly positive ones that do not have to do with disasters, so this would be a welcome change to ITN. We posted a similar story about the Beijing Subway in December 2009 (or was it 2010) so there is precedent. --Colipon+(Talk) 21:47, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose we posted the BS story some time ago. "Large expansion" doesn't warrant an ITN blurb. Nergaal (talk) 23:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. Existing public infrastructure is quite often expanded; even more so with this subway which has been constantly expanded for the last 10-12 years and will be for many more. I'm not seeing a great deal of news coverage of this which might persuade me to weak support it. 331dot (talk) 02:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support 48 metro stations in a day. That needs to be mentioned in the blurb. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:57, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - when mentioned properly in the blurb.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with Nergaal and 311dot's reasoning - infrastructure expansion is a routine event. We have posted about train lines opening before, but we focused on their groundbreaking high-speed train technolog,y which is not the case here. Mamyles (talk) 15:16, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose I love trains, but this is just not notable enough for ITN. Legaleagle86 (talk) 15:57, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. Hasn't generated enough coverage to be on ITN. -- Calidum 01:39, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
NATO ends ISAF
Articles: International Security Assistance Force (talk · history · tag) and War in Afghanistan (2001–present) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: NATO officially ends 13 years of combat operations of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. (Post)
News source(s): DW, Al Jazeera, BBC and others
Credits:
--Jenda H. (talk) 13:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
-
-
- Whether you or anyone take him seriously is irrelevant; it is what it is. Most RS are phrasing this as the war being over. The troops remaining are not there to conduct a war. 331dot (talk) 12:55, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
-
- We're not talking about combat operations- in fact, most troops are actually gone now. Again, whether you believe those saying this is over or not is irrelevant. 331dot (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Also, wait until orange-tagged missing references are resolved on both bolded articles. Mamyles (talk) 19:02, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- I think the ISAF article is more accurate. --Jenda H. (talk) 17:24, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- I wasn't complaining about the blurb, but about the non-story. The Taliban is strong and resurgent, with the recent attack on the Pakistani school, Posting this would be like posting a superbowl headline, in overtime, loosing team takes ball and goes home. Of course that would probably be more newsworthy than an "end" of operations in Afghanistan. There's also the fact that other than here I haven't even seen the headline. Then look at our end of operations in Iraq. This is a policy announcement, not an historical event. μηδείς (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
MS Norman Atlantic
Article: MS Norman Atlantic (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Ten people are killed as the Italian ferry Norman Atlantic (pictured), carrying 466 people, catches fire in the Adriatic Sea. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News Online, BBC News Online
Credits:
Article updated --Mjroots (talk) 11:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Latest is that one person died, ferry under tow to an Albanian port. Mjroots (talk) 17:18, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- BBC News is reporting the rescue effort is complete, but 7 people have died. Bob talk 16:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Updated to 8 as per BBC News. Bob talk 17:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Official death toll has now risen to 10, but still some discrepancy between passenger manifest and survivor count. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:21, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Why does it need to be a "major disaster"? Surely the successful rescue of around 480 people is just as newsworthy? Mjroots (talk) 22:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- In a more just world, it would be. Sadly the reality is that this is out of the headlines pretty much already, whereas if it had sunk with mass loss of life it would dominate the news for weeks as did the Costa Concordia, for example. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:24, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose interesting, but not ITN-worthy, as usual it's a good candidate for DYK. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. While it's good many people were rescued, that also means it dropped out of the news. 331dot (talk) 02:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose The last major ferry disaster, the one in Korea, appeared benign in the first few hours but soon turned very deadly as they could not mount an effective rescue effort. Here, while the numbers of affected people are about the same, the rescue efforts are much more organized/larger in scale, and so far out from the initial event, only one affirmed death, and it doesn't seem likely that the death toll will go much higher. --MASEM (t) 02:42, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support. At least in the UK, this was quite heavily featured in the news, and rescuing 480 people from a burning ship in very bad weather seems quite an achievement. Not sure why only events causing x amount of deaths would only be considered of interest to Misplaced Pages readers. After all, ITN included the Chilean miners. Bob talk 09:51, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Might have been a major fire, but at the end of the day, one person died after jumping off, while others are said to be safe. Unless the rescue efforts had some daredevil stunts, I'd say this is as non-newsworthy as last weeks Sydney incident. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose The fact that almost all the passengers have been rescued makes it rather trivial. And as Rsrikanth05 points out, can be posted if the rescuers perform some Rajini style stunts.. Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle 13:27, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support This is a well-edited article about an interesting (though admittedly not groundbreaking) recent event. Mamyles (talk) 15:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support This is receiving coverage in the US and seems noteworthy enough for someone to want to come here to check on it. Dismas| 18:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose – Minor news, no WP:LASTING historical or encyclopaedic impact. RGloucester — ☎ 21:37, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- WP:LASTING seems to be more relevant to the existence of the article, which isn't what is being discussed here. People can also have good faith differences about what constitutes "encyclopedic impact"; obviously the nominator feels it does. 331dot (talk) 22:09, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- If we shouldn't have an article on a news story per NOTNEWS, LASTING, whatever, ITN should not be including that stor just because it is otherwise in the news. (Please note: I'm not saying this necessarily applies to the article here in this case - as most major mass transit/transportation accidents with death tolls get articles on WP). --MASEM (t) 22:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- IMHO, it is far too early to know if WP:LASTING will apply. What we have here is a five year old ship destroyed by fire, ten deaths and 450+ rescued. Mjroots (talk) 22:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- (ec)I agree with that, but the existence of the article is not at issue on this page. RGloucester should nominate the article for deletion, which would then be an issue to consider here. That said RGloucester does not have a crystal ball to know what impact this will have in the future or how it will be considered historically or encyclopedically(whatever that means). 331dot (talk) 22:26, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- I don't need a crystal ball. Ships sink. What else is new? RGloucester — ☎ 22:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, ships sink. Of many kinds. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, and unless the manner of sinking is significant, or the people onboard are significant, or the ship itself is significant, the sinking is not significant. None of those apply here. Fire breaks out on run-of-the-mill ferry in rough seas. Again, what else is new? RGloucester — ☎ 22:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Which is why I oppose posting it to ITN, but I think the article has merit. As I said, you are free to nominate it for deletion if you feel it does not merit an article. As Mjroots said it is far too early to know if LASTING applies here. Neither one of us knows. 331dot (talk) 22:40, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know why you are talking about deletion. I never used the word "deletion". I merely took advantage of one of the event criteria, as a way of demonstrating my reasons for opposing posting it to ITN. It isn't too early at all. RGloucester — ☎ 22:45, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- I am talking about deletion because WP:LASTING or any other notability issues are issues to be dealt with in a deletion discussion discussing the existence of the article. If a deletion discussion is open, that is certainly an issue here. 331dot (talk) 22:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- The article is very likely to survive an AfD nomination. Mjroots (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Again, no one even suggested an AfD nomination, so I don't understand why this is being discussed. RGloucester — ☎ 23:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Again, I am saying you should suggest one as the proper venue for your views. 331dot (talk) 23:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- I don't want the page deleted, so how is that my "view"? I merely don't want it posted to ITN. RGloucester — ☎ 23:56, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- You cited notability issues like WP:LASTING with this subject and said it had no "encyclopedic impact", which I presume means that you don't think it's notable enough for Misplaced Pages. If that is wrong, I apologize. 331dot (talk) 23:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- "People die. What else is new"? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - I wouldn't exactly call this minor, but I understand the hesitation. It's not as significant as an airplane crash (which we normally post), but it's more significant than a bus crash (which we usually don't). Death toll in the (low) double-digits, plus a sizable and mostly successful rescue operation. I say post. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - I say post. Per the sizable rescue efforts, media attention and still a few deaths.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:50, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support It's been very much in the news, and it's a sizable rescue operation. We've btw posted a similar story (burning ship in that area) a few years ago, though that rescue operation had greater success. Narayanese (talk) 09:12, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'm boldly marking this as ready. I think that there is enough support to override the objectors (reasons, not quantity). The article itself is in a good shape. Needs an independent review and a decision. Mjroots (talk) 10:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Good. This should be posted.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:27, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose — Although it's been a dramatic story, I have to agree with those who oppose this as lacking sufficient significance on the global scale of events. (Anyhow, it's all over but the shouting.) Sca (talk) 14:51, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment, I think the death of two salvage workers, after all the surviving passengers had been rescued, increases the notability of this accident. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:39, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, and it seems like they carried a high number of illegal immigrants that are still uncounted for. --BabbaQ (talk) 18:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Posted. I agree that the support overcomes the opposition by strength of argument even if not numerical superiority. I note that several of the opposes were made while the story was still breaking, and that the story has—possibly against expectations—continued to develop since then, which appears to be the reason that the majority of the more recent comments are in support of posting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Pull obviously no consensus, and 10 deaths in a ferry accident is rather small, considering their frequency and number of passengers. Very similar to the December 2013 Spuyten Duyvil derailment which was rightfully not posted. There's no indication of any log term effects beyond the deaths, like a criminal prosecution or bankruptcy. μηδείς (talk) 19:26, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- While I did post support of this above, I agree with Medeis that (in the future) it is preferable to wait for stronger consensus, even if that means a blurb does not get posted. Mamyles (talk) 21:24, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- There was a full two days of discussion, story development, and article development. I marked the story as "ready" to give indicate that it eas time for a decision to be made. Consensus is not merely a !vote count. The strength of the arguments for and against posting should be taken in to account. The first comment was "Wait", I had no problem with that. Waiting was the correct thing to do in this case. We waited, the situation became clearer, the article made it to the MP. Had HJ Mitchell said the the article was not to be posted, then I would have accepted his decision without whining about it. Editors must realise that there are some you win, some you lose; and move on whichever way the result goes. Mjroots (talk) 22:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501
Article: Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501 (pictured) goes missing en route to Juanda International Airport in Malaysia (Post)
Alternative blurb: Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501 (pictured) goes missing en route to Singapore with 162 passengers and crew aboard.
News source(s): CBC, NBC News and others
Credits:
--Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support after expansion, surprised I haven't heard about this yet here in the US. Very likely to be a big story, but wait for a bit of expansion before posting. --AmaryllisGardener 04:03, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support upon expansion. We don't need to rush to post this, but once we get enough information I think this merits posting. 331dot (talk) 04:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Moved page from AirAsia Flight 8501 to Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501. Updated blurb. OhanaUnited 04:19, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support when the article is better updated/expanded. Note I also proposed the altblurb, which states how many are aboard the plane. Also, the blurb proposed here says the destination was Malaysia, but the article and sources say Singapore. -- Calidum 04:32, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support the alternative blurb. Article needs some working on. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support the alt blurb ƬheStrikeΣagle 05:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support the alternative blurb. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 06:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think we're waiting for the plane to be found, and the article looks ready to me. Anyone agree/disagree? --Bongwarrior (talk) 07:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Posted - Thanks to everyone for the quick improvements. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:24, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- I presume this will be re-blurbed and bumped to the top when the plane is found. Hopefully this won't turn out to be another Flight 370 scenario. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Indonesia's search and rescue agency head has said they are 95% sure the debris is from the plane. 331dot (talk) 08:22, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- . Think we should update the blurb to state that "Wreckage of the missing Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501 (pictured), carrying over 160 people, is found in the Java Sea in Indonesia." --MASEM (t) 17:20, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Just a note that the blurb was updated today through a message on WP:ERRORS. Mamyles (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
December 27
| Portal:Current events/2014 December 27
|
|
December 27, 2014 (2014-12-27) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
2014 Southeast Asian floods
Article: 2014 Southeast Asian floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: More than 200,000 had been evacuated in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand in the 2014 Southeast Asian floods. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, The Straits Times
Credits:
--Muffin Wizard 09:56, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sure, I agree with that. :) ~ Muffin Wizard 01:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for the improvements, David Levy. I've added your name to the updater list above. Mamyles (talk) 22:58, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you, and I apologize for not noticing those issues. I did see that the article was well referenced, and I was a little blinded by that. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks guys, and especially to David Levy for making copy-edit to the article. ~ Muffin Wizard 00:36, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
RD: Tomaž Šalamun
Article: Tomaž Šalamun (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): RTVSlo RTVSlo Huffington post Poetry Foundation Delo
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. --Tone 17:12, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- As of now, there are no reports on the reason of death, I checked several sources. I don't think more information will appear. --Tone 16:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'm satisfied with what is there now, especially if it seems unlikely more information will come out. 331dot (talk) 02:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose but simply because the person in question isn't really "in the news", perhaps telling that we have no sources in the nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:10, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- This is from the Slovakian equivalent of the US's NPR. Not getting any English hits but should not be a show stopper as long as we can write it in English. --MASEM (t) 02:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Wow, if that's the best we can do for RS, then forget this nomination altogether. That link has about a hundred adverts and a few words on the subject matter. Poor work. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Seems that the international media have picked up the news now. Huffington post, among others. Some sources added above, both in Slovene and English. Ready? --Tone 23:26, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support - clearlt notable enough for RD mention. post.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support Meets the criteria for inclusion in RD. This is ready to post. Mamyles (talk) 01:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Posted The Rambling Man (talk) 22:42, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Six-party agreement on budget (averted crisis and snap election)
Article: 2014 Swedish Cabinet crisis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Sweden avoids a snap election in 2015 after the two political blocks comes to an agreement following a six-party talks on future . (Post)
Alternative blurb: Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven announces that there will be no snap election in 2015 after the two political blocks comes to an agreement following a six-party talk on future .
News source(s): , ,
Credits:
Article updated --BabbaQ (talk) 15:10, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - We didn't post the original crisis that this is the resolution to. As I understand it the head of government and most of the participating parties will remain the same. So I don't see this really going anywhere. However, if it is posted, the grammar of the blurb should be fixed. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:45, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - I thank the nominator for this suggestion but even if the blurb was acceptable, this falls short of an ITN-worthy news event in my view. Jusdafax 00:56, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. Something not happening (the snap election) due to standard political negotiating doesn't seem to meet the bar for me. 331dot (talk) 03:25, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- Is this similar to the debt ceiling issue a few months back which ITN had refused to post? –HTD 13:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
December 26
| Portal:Current events/2014 December 26
|
|
December 26, 2014 (2014-12-26) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Sports
RD: Leo Tindemans
Article: Leo Tindemans (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deredactie, BBC, Independent, Daily Mail
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:30, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
December 2014 Assam violence
Article: December 2014 Assam violence (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A militant attack on native tribal people and subsequent retaliations in Assam, India kills more than 85 people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Indian Government launches a major offensive after 85 native tribals are killed by Bodo militants in the North-eastern state of Assam.
News source(s): BBC India Today Hindustan Times The Times of India USA Today
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: More than 80 people selectively killed makes it a very significant event. Widely reported in India and internationally as well. Please note that the blurb can be modified if it seems badly written. Thanks, --ƬheStrikeΣagle 15:32, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support Extremely significant event, with an unfortunate number of casualties. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 15:53, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support Notable, The massacre got significant coverage. Both blurbs OK. Faizan 16:10, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support as government of India intensified counterattack and large number of casualties. And please link the article in blurb, there is no link to December 2014 Assam violence article. -Nizil (talk) 16:22, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support This meets the threshold for a newsworthy event. I'm leaning more toward the second blurb, but either is fine. I agree with Nizil Shah that the December 2014 Assam violence article should be linked. Mamyles (talk) 16:31, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- I believe it is linked. Millitant attack in 1, and are killed by Bodo millitants in 2. --17:50, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Rsrikanth05 I've linked the article after they raised it! :) Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle 17:53, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, ok. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:57, 26 December 2014 (UTC)`
December 25
| Portal:Current events/2014 December 25
|
|
December 25, 2014 (2014-12-25) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Businesses and economy
RD: David Ryall
Article: David Ryall (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (RFE)
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. doktorb words 08:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
RD: Gleb Yakunin
Article: Gleb Yakunin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (RFE)
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. --Bruzaholm (talk) 13:57, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- "Support major dissident, reformer and politician, but article needs more reference work. μηδείς (talk) 17:01, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Weak support I believe that he is of great significance in Russia. However, after reading both his article and the cited news source, I am not confident that he has significant recognition abroad. Nonetheless, his achievements/contributions are interesting and could be interpreted as being on-par with other recent names in the RD space. Mamyles (talk) 17:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Mamyles: Just FYI, though often helpful, there doesn't have to be recognition from abroad as long as the person meets the recent deaths criteria. 331dot (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Not to criticize you, but just to make it clear, the guidelines above address this: "please do not...complain about an event only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post..." Your statement was obviously in good faith, and you were not complaining, but the spirit of the guideline is clear — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medeis (talk • contribs)
- Fair point, thank you. I will keep that in mind when considering future RD nominations. (As an aside, I'm surprised at the limited number of submissions for RD given the liberal criteria.) Mamyles (talk) 19:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support upon article work per Medeis. Seems important to Russia. 331dot (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose, 1. He may be of importance in Russia, but I doubt he has any elsewhere. 2. His death was not a surprise (the article states that he suffered from an illness for a while before his death at 80 years old). 3. The article is not in a very good state, it doesn't have enough inline citations for verifying things like his early life and his wife and children. All of this combined tells me he shouldn't have a place at RD. --AmaryllisGardener 19:22, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
-
- @331dot: I read your discussion, and I said he "may" be of importance in Russia, I'm not sure of that, even. The not-surprising death is not a big thing, it just adds to my list. The most important one is number three. The article needs a bit of expanding also, IMO. --AmaryllisGardener 04:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- The not surprising death is why we have RD. Surprising deaths get full blurbs. Yakunin, a well known cleric, dissident, and reform politician certainly meets the prima facie requirements for an RD listing. μηδείς (talk) 04:21, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Ok, you're right. But like I just said above, not the biggest concern of mine. --AmaryllisGardener 04:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Wait a second. Per Medeis or by Medeis? JackofOz and Любослов Езыкин, among others, are fluent in proper Russian, I am not, and it is close to bedtime for me. I can look at English sources tomorrow if I am not busy in the real world. My Christmas guests are arriving Sunday. μηδείς (talk) 04:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Let me emphasize that (1) I am at my parents' in the New Jersey Pine Barrens for the week, and the DSL has been off 80% of the time, and (2) I am babysitting three children under 10 years of age, so I am quite busy, too busy to get to this article myself before it will be stale. μηδείς (talk) 04:15, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax 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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the news toolbox
Aftermath of the Magdeburg car attack
_(5).JPG)
