Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:12, 17 December 2020

Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here.

In the news toolbox
Error reports Nominations History (Posts · Nominations) Discussion General criteria Death criteria Recurring items Admin guide Image protection Current events portal
v t e

• WP:ITN/C

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Azerbaijan Airlines aircraft Azerbaijan Airlines Flight 8243 (aircraft pictured) crashes near Aktau International Airport, Kazakhstan, killing 38 people. A multi-vehicle crash in Minas Gerais, Brazil, leaves 41 people dead. A car attack at a Christmas market in Magdeburg, Germany, kills five people and injures more than two hundred others. In France, Dominique Pelicot and 49 other men are convicted of the serial rape of his then-wife Gisèle Pelicot. Ongoing: Israel–Hamas war Israeli invasion of Lebanon Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: Slim Dunlap John Marsden James E. Malone Jr. Rickey Henderson Zakir Hussain Sigrid Kehl Nominate an article view — page history — related changes — edit

Archives

December 17

RD: R. N. Shetty

• Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Indian businessman. I have not read the article in detail. Surely some amount of rewrites will be required. Will get to it this evening. Posting this here in case someone wants to get started prior to me getting to it. Ktin (talk) 19:14, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Appeal of Russia doping case penalties

• Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: We posted the original WADA ruling last December where Russia was outright banned from the Olympics for four years. This appeal ruling drastically cuts that to still allow Russia to compete but as a "Neutral Athlete/Team" for a period of two years. Among other factors. Masem (t) 19:03, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment The news reports that they can appeal against this decision made on an accepted appeal (AP). Are we going to post it every time the penalties are reduced upon accepted appeals until the ban is lifted?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

RD: Saufatu Sopoanga

• Nominated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Mohamad Darilin (talk · give credit), Ser Amantio Di Nicolao (talk · give credit), Mewulwe (talk · give credit) and Artegia. (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Former PM of Tuvalu. Article seems good. Alsoriano97 (talk) 15:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Multiple missing citations, odd structuring, and some very weird grammar. Not to mention nothing on his death. Gex4pls (talk) 15:07, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

RD: Hennadiy Kernes

• Nominated by Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Artegia (talk · give credit) and Yulia Romero (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Mayor of Kharkiv. Article is quite decent. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 12:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support looks good --Tensa Februari (talk) 14:35, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Slight Oppose Article looks almost good, just the awards section needs more sources. Gex4pls (talk) 15:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support good article, seems to have a notable history other than as mayor as well. Albertaont (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment The business career section states that he's been described as a mini-oligarch. Shouldn't there be a citation for that claim? Scaramouche33 (talk) 18:01, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Great conjunction

• Nominated by Sagittarian Milky Way (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: (nominated early to ensure sufficient time if this barely wins) "great conjunction" is the technical astronomy term and astrologic mumbo for this rarest category of planetary alignment known before the discovery of Uranus. They occur on a c. 19.86 year cycle and this one's only 0.2 Moon diameters apart for most of the world. All longitudes and most latitudes can see, only early night or dusk. This is also the start of an air trigon mutation in astrology meaning the triangle is in air signs for awhile, two trigons ago the fire one starting in 1603 made people freak out about apocalypse causing a papal bull banning divination and mentions by Shakespeare, Bacon, Dante, Tycho and Kepler. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:05, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support in principle There's a lot of hype around the event in every astronomical community that I'm familiar with. While I'm not sure how famous the event is to the average Joe,it's nevertheless being reported in major news outlets and given the rarity of the event, I think it deserves a blurb. However, the target article has a lot of problems so oppose until that's fixed. Scaramouche33 (talk) 05:47, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support per Scaramouche33. But don't use the term win; we're not winning anything there. Several of my blurbs get rejected in the past and I don't consider it as a loss, just stale. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 07:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose tagged. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 11:38, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, despite being an astronomer myself. Although the event is underway, closest approach doesn't happen until 21 Dec. It's also pretty unimpressive to see and has zero scientific interest or value. Some amateur astronomy organisations are promoting it, but there's little-to-no interest among professionals. For the general public it's less impressive to look at than the Geminid meteor shower that's also happening right now. Whilst I like to see astronomy stories in ITN, I think general readers would see that blurb, think it was something dramatic like an eclipse, then be hugely disappointed to realise what's actually visible. We certainly shouldn't be promoting the pseudoscience of astrology on the Main Page. Modest Genius 11:56, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  It's great to have an actual astronomer here, it really helps us differentiate the important stuff from the trivia Scaramouche33 (talk) 12:05, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  To be honest I don't know at what point 2 points of light are close and similar enough to be visually impressive. If this was Venus (brightness about minus 4) and Jupiter (about minus 2) several arcminutes apart it would definitely be visually impressive, this is 6 arcminutes apart and only about magnitude 0 and minus 2. I won't guess if they will be or won't be close enough to impress the general public in a good telescope. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:19, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Support. The claims made above are absolute nonsense. The event will be impressive to see; both planets will be visible in the same field of view in a telescope (the second time this has happened since the invention of the telescope). The event is also of some scientific value: I know that some astronomers are using this event to study Jupiter's magnetosphere as Saturn passes through it as seen from Earth. QuantumPulsar2002 (talk) 17:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Huh you're right, I hadn't thought of that. Jupiter is I believe the only planet in the solar system who's magnetic field is long enough to "touch" another planet. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:55, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support I saw this covered on The Sky at Night yesterday and it looked quite special. I looked at the planets earlier in the year when out late observing the comet, which we blurbed. The planets were a lot brighter than the comet then and this conjunction will make them even more prominent. Unlike Brexit and other human affairs, this is quite a sure thing and it is good to give people advance notice so they have a chance to see it themselves.

Note also that we have had Nana Akufo-Addo as the picture blurb for an entire week now and it's embarassing to have such a low-impact story as our lead for so long. Like the comet, the conjunction will have plenty of good pictures for us to highlight and so we should make the most of them.

Andrew🐉(talk) 13:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment – How does this affect anyone on Earth? – Sca (talk) 13:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  People on earth are learning about it because media are covering it, and they are likely to be interested in a quality Misplaced Pages article on the topic. --Jayron32 13:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Answer: it doesn't. It's almost embarrassing to consider it encyclopedic. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 14:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Of course it doesn't, nothing really does except a direct hit by an asteroid. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:40, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Depends on where it lands.--WaltCip-(talk) 15:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Lol. Unless it's an even rarer huge one. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:08, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  ASTEROID STRIKES THE US, THOUSANDS CONFIRMED DEAD "Us centric" Gex4pls (talk) 15:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose in deference to Modest Genius and his credentials.--WaltCip-(talk) 13:54, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose – Per Modest. Not of general significance or impact. – Sca (talk) 14:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Is there a precedence of garden-variety total lunar eclipse nominations not being posted, that might help clarify minimum visual impressiveness for events that science has already learned all it could from as TLEs impress kids but are "eh I'll look but that's it" at best to astronomy PhDs and people who've had an astronomy hobby for long enough. I recommend collecting photographs of lunar eclipses with different skyscrapers or mountains or whatever to cure those repetitive doldrums. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:40, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Sagittarian Milky Way, Misplaced Pages:In_the_news/Candidates/July_2018#(Posted)_Longest_lunar_eclipse_of_the_21st_century appears to be the last time we posted a lunar eclipse. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support. It's an interesting and rare event. While it has no scientific value, that's also true for almost all other news stories. Count Iblis (talk) 14:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support per above. 108.41.121.223 (talk) 15:42, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose appears to be of astrological, rather than astronomical, importance per Modest. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Not quite, it's important in astrological mumbo jumbo but it's still the 2 most visually impressive planets in a telescope being unusually close (less than or about 10 Jupiter or Saturn diameters). They're only in the same telescope field of view once every few decades much less this close. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Fair enough, although I stand by my oppose as it doesn't seem as significant as, say, an eclipse. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:03, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose deferring to expertise of Modest Genius This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 17:02, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

December 16

RD: Anthony Casso

• Nominated by Poydoo (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Vaselineeeeeeee (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: High-profile mobster. Death from COVID. Poydoo can talk and edit 22:11, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment The "Big money" section seems undercited. Would support if those and a few other uncited paragraphs got citations. Mlb96 (talk) 23:27, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose too much unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 11:36, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Flavio Cotti

• Nominated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Sandstein (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Former President of the Swiss Confederation. Dies from COVID-19. The article is...quite insufficient Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:19, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Weak oppose Seems like a stub but fully cited. Needs expansion. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 23:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Undersourced stub. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support now that I've expanded the article. Sandstein 10:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support now it's long enough for RD. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 12:42, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:28, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jack Steinberger

• Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Espresso Addict (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Physics Nobel prize winner. Death announced today 12/16 in English Media, and yesterday, 12/15 in German media. Article requires some amount of work in referencing. Added tags in case someone wants to give it a go in the next couple of hours. Completed the referencing. If someone finds any other edits that are required, let me know. I will be up for the next three hours. Ktin (talk) 20:10, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support I think it's good to go, although one question. Isn't the term married to his wife a bit tautological? Scaramouche33 (talk) 04:35, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Scaramouche33, done. Fixed this one. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 05:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment. The lead could do with expansion to include his major positions held and a summary in layperson's terms of the impact of his research. I also noticed that several claims in the text are only supported by primary sources or later reviews authored by Steinberger -- all of this needs to be sourced independently. Espresso Addict (talk) 06:42, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

  Espresso Addict, while the lede can be expanded, can you be specific about the latter comment? The nature of research papers is that the papers themselves are the sources. I will not claim to be an expert on this topic, but, reading the article, it didn't jump out as something that I would rush to change. Ktin (talk) 06:48, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Not a physicist, but my understanding is that one can state "scientist researched x topic" with a primary source, but one can't state "scientist discovered x, proved y, or demonstrated z", or the like, without a secondary source. Espresso Addict (talk) 06:56, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

It's also a bit lacking in dates; I tried to construct a list of where he was when but there isn't precise enough info in most cases. In particular, the retirement date from CERN is missing. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Espresso Addict, Added the retirement date from CERN. Added the other sources that you'd wanted. Anything else that I can help? Ktin (talk) 07:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Espresso Addict, don't get me wrong, but, you've got to be more specific than this. The statement It's also a bit lacking in dates doesn't give me anything to work with, particularly when the article is littered with dates. Ktin (talk) 07:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment. Alright folks, I am calling it a night. I think the article as it stands is good to go to homepage / RD. Above feedback is good, but, to the extent that specific feedback has been provided, those have been incorporated. With this, I believe we should be good to go. Ktin (talk) 08:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support good enough. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 11:30, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Awesome Again

• Nominated by Joseywales1961 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Canadian Hall of Fame Racehorse, article in surprisingly better condition than a lot of human BLPs JW 1961 Talk 18:33, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support - You're right, that is a good article. Poydoo can talk and edit 19:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Horse article is good article. Gex4pls (talk) 20:31, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

 Posted – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:43, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Chang'e 5

• Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Please note this has not happened yet but the return vessel is in the final approach stages to land in Inner Mongolia real soon now (next few hours of writing this). As confirmed by the Space News link, the return capsule has been successfully recovered. Since I've been one heavily cautioning about posting this until this point, I figure I will be one to get this going since this is the point I've said we should make ITN. Masem (t) 18:18, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Should we be using a CGI of the lander, maybe of the return capsule instead? Landing was confirmed by Spacenews and CNet. Albertaont (talk) 19:06, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Replaced image with one which shows the lunar lander, lunar ascender, and return to earth modules.

• Support. I have healthy scepticism of anything reported in Chinese state media, and the BBC and Guardian both caveat the news with 'Xinhua said' or similar, but there's no particular reason to doubt that the capsule has arrived in some form. We should probably avoid explicitly saying it was a success until there's independent confirmation. This is the right point to post this story and the article seems in good enough shape. I've added an altblurb. Modest Genius 20:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • PS. There seems to be some back-and-forth reverting of the article regarding whether the capsule recovery has a reliable source. Maybe wait a few hours for that to settle down before posting. Modest Genius 20:05, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Good news organizations, if they can't have eyes on the actual event, nearly always use "According to (source), this happened..." and this is well beyond anything China related. I know we need to be cautious around China + state-sponsored media, but let's not go overboard here. --Masem (t) 00:31, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support As promised. Gex4pls (talk) 20:19, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Quality and referencing is good.  Nixinova   T   C   00:16, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment. In the UK, the BBC now seems to be stating in its own voice, while The Guardian is still quoting Xinhua. It would be nice to get two independent non-Chinese sources stating success directly. An alternative would be to post the main blurb, deleting the word "successfully". Espresso Addict (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • There are times where we should be cautious of the China-state sponsored media for what they report, but their space program is not one of those things they seem to "make up" compared to other factors related to governance. The fact that the Guardian and AP take Xinhua at their word should be sufficient for us here. --Masem (t) 00:30, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • NYT is even showing videos now, can also find the pictures everywhere. Albertaont (talk) 03:27, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Support. I think there's adequate confirmation and update now. Espresso Addict (talk) 06:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

@Masem: Aren't you an admin? You should've been able to insert it yourself considering the consensus now. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 07:35, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

It's considered a conflict of interest for an admin to post their own nom, even with consensus.-- P-K3 (talk) 19:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

This. The only time (I recall) I posted my own nom was a clear SNOW support for the death of Stephen Hawking. This nom wasn't a clear SNOW due to source questioning. --Masem (t) 19:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Posted, as no-one seems to have objected. Espresso Addict (talk) 08:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• I have listed File:Change-5.png at CMP, but I think a version without captions would be better because they will be too small to read — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

RD: Leticia Lee

• Nominated by Feminist (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit) and Citobun (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Known for anti-gay, pro-police activism in Hong Kong and as an opponent of the city's pro-democracy movement. feminist (talk) 12:50, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Needs a bit of work. None of the information mentioned in the lead is cited or mentioned in the main article - Dumelow (talk) 13:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm working on it - feminist (talk) 13:08, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Can take another look now. feminist (talk) 04:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment. The lead now needs expanding again. I haven't looked in detail at the sourcing, but is it possible to find a different source for Ref. 24, about her son? The title of the current one appears unduly negative about a living person. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

December 15

RD: Donald Fowler

• Nominated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit) and Williamsdoritos (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Former DNC chair, leukemia. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - Lots of cn tags. Poydoo can talk and edit 19:29, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment I have reduced it to two citation needed tags. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 09:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support @Poydoo: All citation needed tags have been fixed. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 13:19, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

December 14

(Posted) RD: Ann Reinking

• Updated and nominated by Gobonobo (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Aoba47 (talk · give credit)

 gobonobo 00:07, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Seeing uncited sentences here and there; the credits section needs a lot more sources and the awards are completely unsourced. Gotitbro (talk) 00:58, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @Gotitbro: Sources have been added, thanks to User:Aoba47. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Support Looks good to me now. Gotitbro (talk) 06:26, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support I believe everything is cited Scaramouche33 (talk) 06:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support I'm not sure how standard some of the table formatting is, but everything is cited. Looks like we can confirm Playbill archives for Broadway credits. Kingsif (talk) 17:27, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Article well-referenced. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 02:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 12:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Totilas

• Updated and nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: I've added the death, just working on referencing elsewhere - Dumelow (talk) 07:44, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Article is good enough for RD. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 11:10, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 12:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Roddam Narasimha

• Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Espresso Addict (talk · give credit) and Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Indian scientist. Padma Vibhushan awardee. I have not looked at the article in detail. But, will do so in a bit. Clear reasons to look at the article in detail (read below). Anyways, a thorough rewrite has been done. Here's the link to Earvig Copyvio . Ktin (talk) 07:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Looks fine to me. Gotitbro (talk) 12:42, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment bare URLs need fixing. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:45, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

  The Rambling Man, thanks for the catch. Fixed them. In addition, some links were dead / returning 404s, replaced them as well. Ktin (talk) 18:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Article well-referenced. Note on the last book in the "Book" section: it would be better if someone gives a translation to the title. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 02:06, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

  Jeromi Mikhael, Done. Good idea. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 03:35, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment. I was considering posting this but it looks like much of the article was orginally a cut & paste from his profile . Espresso Addict (talk) 04:06, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

  Espresso Addict, Eikes. Let me have a look once I get back. Ktin (talk) 04:23, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

In addition to needing the copied material on his career and awards rewritten and replaced, little of it seems to be cited to proper independent sources; usually all awards need a proper source, not just the academic bio. The material on his research that I removed as a copyvio was cut and pasted from the bio, and so was not an independent appraisal of its significance. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Espresso Addict, please have a look now, have given this one a thorough rewrite. Happy to make any edits. I will be awake for the next hour. Ktin (talk) 05:54, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

@Ktin: Sorry, my internet went down shortly after I commented, and now I'm headed offline for the day. Will take a look once I'm back, if it isn't posted before then. Espresso Addict (talk) 09:57, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Posted - it looks OK from my angle, thanks to Ktin's rewrites. Espresso Addict if you do see any further issues then please let me know or remove it directly. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 12:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

  Amakuru, I love the new template with comma separated values for updater names. Thanks to the folks who enabled that one. Very nice touch. Ktin (talk) 15:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

  @Ktin: as far as I can gather, we can mainly thank MSGJ for this nice improvement to the templates. Plus maybe others behind the scenes. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 23:27, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

  MSGJ, thanks Martin! Very nice touch. Ktin (talk) 00:00, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Herman Asaribab

• Updated and nominated by Jeromi Mikhael (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Second highest officeholder in the Indonesian Army (sort of). Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 07:02, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Looks good. Gotitbro (talk) 12:42, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• cricket noises
• Support Seems cited fine enough, though there's a bit of odd grammar in "Enembe remarked that 'Papuans should be reach the rank of general, either in the police or in the armed forces'". I'm not sure if that's translation error or just a mistake on his behalf, so I'm not willing to remove it. Gex4pls (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • I have fixed the grammar. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 01:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done Fixed the quote. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 01:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Note to admin please decide the fate of this RD nom; otherwise it would be stale and not recent anymore.Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 05:33, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 12:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Benjamin Abeles

• Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Artegia (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Czech physicist. Article looks OK - Dumelow (talk) 15:22, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Barely long enough for RD and well-referenced. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 16:48, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment from a duplicated nomination: Austrian physicist. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the news in English media. Article is a tad small in size, but is start-class. Article seems to pass hygiene requirements for homepage / RD. I did not have to make any edits. But, if there are any edits required, I can give it a go, albeit with Google Translate as my aide. Ktin (talk) 03:43, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. Very stubby on his career and research. The lead is inappropriate in its focus, and material appears there that is not expounded in the body. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:31, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support, notwithstanding the above comment which is reasonable, I do think it is acceptable for RD. —Brigade Piron (talk) 21:48, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Meets minimal standards. Items in the lead are sourced in the body, though not explained in detail any further.—Bagumba (talk) 08:57, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:41, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Sudan's removal from U.S. SST

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.

• Nominated by 98.116.113.164 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Ed Poor (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Thepharoah17 (talk · give credit)

• Comment Wasn't this linked to relations with Israel of Sudan? Also this is stale now, was already known/"in the news" a few weeks back; this is just procedural. Gotitbro (talk) 00:55, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Create altblurb 2 Its important to note how Sudan was removed from the list. Albertaont (talk) 03:04, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose it seems we're nominating US foreign policy announcements on a near-daily basis. This is not interesting. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:34, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Not notable event. --cyrfaw (talk) 13:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Many countries have some kind of list like this. It just happens that one big country took a country off their list. Gex4pls (talk) 13:39, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Quoting GreatCaesarsGhost: AGF and all, but this is why we get accused of thinking this is US-pedia. This is such a small story it shouldn't even get an article, let alone be on ITN.Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 13:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

  Well, I think this one warrants an article, but it's abundantly clear the SST label is political BS. Witness Iraq being removed only for the length of their war with Iran. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:14, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose We need to be wary of any policy decision that is being made during the lame duck period of Trump's presidency, as all are subject to change subsequent to Biden taking office in January.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:08, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose – Per Walt. Quack! – Sca (talk) 14:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose as the US State Sponsors of Terrorism list is not notable enough for ITN, no matter who the president is. NorthernFalcon (talk) 16:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

This user gets it! 😊 Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 16:34, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Total solar eclipse

• Nominated by Brandmeister (talk · give credit)

 Brandmeister 18:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality. Article is really bare bones at the moment. The lead needs expanding to actually cover the details of this eclipse (it is mostly about eclipses in general right now). And the "Visibility" section has no refs at all.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality - for now. Ping me when improved/expanded.BabbaQ (talk) 22:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Per above. Needs sources and better/more prose. Gotitbro (talk) 00:52, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: the article is poorly referenced and has minimal prose. Given that most observing events were cancelled due to COVID, there might not be much to say about this particular eclipse, which is a shame. I'd be surprised if there aren't at least a dozen popular news stories though. Modest Genius 12:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality little more than a stub, and poorly referenced. Particularly the sections on Argentina and Chile- though that may be due to the pandemic. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:18, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Comment – Ephemeral event. – Sca (talk) 14:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment As stated in the proposal, this is covered by WP:ITN/R, so please restrict opposition to article quality issues only. 73.81.117.35 (talk) 16:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

pokes IP editor Who are you, IP editor? Jeromi Mikhael 02:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Gérard Houllier

• Updated and nominated by Amakuru (talk · give credit)
• Created by Arwel Parry (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit) and Messi R9 R10 CR7 Thiago LFC (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: French football manager, who was in charge of Liverpool, amongst others  — Amakuru (talk) 10:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Weak support that "award section" needs a ref otherwise ok. RIP. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Weak oppose "Return to the French national team" and "Awards" sections and one paragraph of the Liverpool section is unsourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  @Joseph2302: the sections you mention are now fully cited I believe. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Weak oppose the update is not sufficient. Any cause of death? Related to his heart problems?-- P-K3 (talk) 15:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  Update is all we have. No RS that I have seen do anything more than you have done, i.e. speculate. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:03, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  There you go: "... following a heart operation." added. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 16:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  That's better, thanks.-- P-K3 (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment "Return to French..." and "Honors" sections need sources. Gotitbro (talk) 17:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support now well sourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:39, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support per above JW 1961 Talk 21:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Looks good. Tradedia 22:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment - this one looks ready, if anyone's around to post it!  — Amakuru (talk) 08:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment. I haven't looked at sourcing but the tone veers out of encyclopedic in several places, there's no section on his personal life (marriage, children?), and his activities after retiring in 2011 only seem to be mentioned in the lead. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:50, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

  Not perfect, but good enough for RD — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Huang Zongying

• Updated and nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Chinese actress. Article is actually a GA already. Filmography needs citing though, looking at it now - Dumelow (talk) 09:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Article hasn't been updated to reflect her death and the filmography is completely unsourced. Gotitbro (talk) 10:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  Gotitbro, just done my first run through and think I've covered all the missing refs and updated tense etc - Dumelow (talk) 10:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  @Dumelow: Can you cite/remove the brother (Huang Zongluo) part from the lead/ib, isn't mentioned in the body as well. Gotitbro (talk) 10:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  Gotitbro, done - Dumelow (talk) 10:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Looks very good now. Gotitbro (talk) 12:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Indeed, looks good now.BabbaQ (talk) 18:03, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support looks good, I have marked as ready to go as well. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 18:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

December 13

(Closed) RD: Vasubahen

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.

• Updated and nominated by Nizil Shah (talk · give credit)

Nizil Shah, thanks for the nomination. Unfortunately, the carousel has already moved past December 13. Ktin (talk) 15:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

(Re-posted) Blurb/RD: Ambrose Mandvulo Dlamini

• Updated and nominated by Johndavies837 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Joofjoof (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Not sure if this would qualify for a blurb but he's a sitting head of government and the first to die of COVID-19. Unfortunately the article is pretty short at the moment. Johndavies837 (talk) 22:45, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Support RD once article is expanded beyond stub tier, and willing to support blurb on the significance of an incumbent head of government dying, especially being the first incumbent to die of COVID-19, despite the fact that Eswatini is officially a monarchy.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 01:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• support The article is well sourced and has enough information. Not only being the first incumbent world leader to die in office because of Covid, but Eswatini is notable for its traditions and status in the world as an absouloute monarchy. I would be willing to support a blurb as well Cavejohnson13 (talk) 02:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• OR Alert Before weighing significance, do any sources say COVID killed him? InedibleHulk (talk) 02:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• He died in a South African hospital while being treated for COVID-19, so the consensus among sources is that COVID is the assumed cause of death, but it's fair to say that this is still just an assumption unless or until Eswatini officials announce it. Nearly every result for the term "eswatini" in DuckDuckGo's news tab reads something along the lines of "dies after testing positive for COVID-19", but it's also true that his cause of death still remains unspecified for the time being. If he's notable enough for a blurb regardless of the cause of death, then we can post it without mentioning the cause of death and update the blurb once we get some sort of confirmation from Eswatini. Otherwise, if the cause of death being COVID is what makes the story notable, then we can post it to RD first and then move it to a blurb if it gets announced that he died of COVID.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 02:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Do any sources say he did anything except die after diagnosis? InedibleHulk (talk) 02:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

At the moment, no, which is why I agree with you that we shouldn't yet use a blurb that says he died of COVID.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 02:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Why would you support a blurb at all? If he did nothing, what's the impact, the loss, the effect? Not seeing it a bit. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Unclear what his corporation was called (two versions noted) and whether the redlinked deputy is the PM now, or nobody is. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:35, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Deputy shouldn't be redlinked because he has an article at Themba N. Masuku. I fixed it by creating a redirect. I assume he's acting PM now but I haven't seen any sources saying so.Johndavies837 (talk) 03:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Thanks. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Precedent His more successful predecessor was nommed in nearly identical circumstances two years ago and went stale after weak RD support, worth a link, I can't paste. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Weak support RD, per improvement. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD I don't mind changing this to blurb if a few more sources on his life and premiership can be added, right now I would say it is a "high-quality" stub. Albertaont (talk) 06:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Weakly support blurb in principle, as a deceased sitting head of government. If it turns out he died from Covid, we can (but by no means must) break the "no Covid blurbs until it's over" guideline and mention it in the blurb. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 06:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC) Oppose blurb per absolute monarchy. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 07:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Neither does the prime minister hold real power in Eswatini (the king does), nor is the article up to par for an RD let alone a blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 07:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Nor does Prime Minister of Eswatini have a standalone article; hard to be blurbworthy without general notability, one should think. Survivor Series (1989) is notable, and Zeus was the first from his match to die, of anything! Give him the presumptive COVID bump, if anyone. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support RD contingent on article's expansion and outright oppose for a blurb. I fail to see any significance of a prime minister, albeit sitting, in an absolute monarchy and the fact that the article is merely a stub at the time of his death tells a lot.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• oppose blurb I think we should blurb prime ministers from constitutional monarchies and parliamentary republics only ( and maybe semi-presidential republics as well),but since Eswatini is an absolute monarchy, I don't think he's blurb-worthy Scaramouche33 (talk) 07:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD only just about long enough for RD but what is there is decently referenced JW 1961 Talk 08:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Weak oppose RD only article is barely above stub, hardly a good summary of someone who purports to have held such a prominent position. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:33, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted to RD — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:46, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Pull / Oppose on quality. Article has no detail whatsoever on his tenure as PM, and is basically a glorified stub.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  There were several unaddressed opposes with this one even before posting, and it needs improvement before it would be ready for the main page. No detail on his premiership at all. Please can someone remove it. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 23:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Pulled. Per Amakuru, this is a stub with no information about his notable role as PM. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD Information about him as Prime Minister has been added by Joofjoof. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 04:00, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD - thanks to Joofjoof for the updates, it looks much better now. I think it can be re-posted.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
• Restored. Thanks everyone. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:16, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

December 12

(Closed) MLS Cup 2020

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.

• Nominated by The Kip (talk · give credit)
• Created by SounderBruce (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Mediocre Legacy (talk · give credit) and S.A. Julio (talk · give credit)

• Oppose. Leaving aside any notability concerns, literally the only coverage of this match in the article is The Columbus Crew won the match 3–0 to secure their second MLS Cup championship. And that's uncited. ‑ Iridescent 19:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• "Big 5" North American sports isn't an actual thing like the "Big Four" is. --Bongwarrior (talk) 19:51, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• @Bongwarrior: For what it’s worth, the MLS Cup 2019 was listed on the “current events” page for November 10, 2019; there’s precedence for it being notable enough. The Kip (talk) 20:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

  The Kip, that is not "precedence" for ITN/C. Anyone can edit the current events portal. I don't think the MLS Cup has ever been posted by ITN/C. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:28, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

  It's precedent to add this event to Portal:Current events/2020 December 12, which anyone is welcome to do. It's not precedent to list it in the ITN box on the Main Page. Modest Genius 14:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Footy is well covered by ITN/R, and some special reasoning would be needed to post another tournament that isn't on the list. MLS is widely considered an inferior league to the leagues that we do blurb. Iridescent is also correct that, while the article is substantive, the update is not. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:30, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• @Muboshgu: My mistake, carry on. Close this if you wish. -The Kip (talk) 20:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

  No need to, you made a good faith nomination and consensus can change. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose I've been a fan of the winning side since their inaugural season, & even I must acknowledge there is not "wide interest" in the MLS. GreatCaesarsGhost 21:15, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

That's how I feel about UFC Flyweight Champion Deiveson Figueiredo's legit thrilling draw last night, not worth getting his record-breaking accomplishment yawned at, fighting ain't sportsmanlike here! InedibleHulk (talk) 04:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment Seems notable, but the article isn't great. Wouldn't know enough about soccer to oppose. –Cavejohnson13 (talk) 22:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose "Big 5" is not a thing, "Big 4" is. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Already have enough football/soccer leagues at ITNR no need to go outside of that. Gotitbro (talk) 07:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose but ONLY because I don't see a prose summary of the final. Also, I added an alt blurb per house style. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:39, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose as per TRM, not enough content about the match itself, which is what is expected from an article about a soccer final. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Even if we pretended if there was a Big Five (and NASCAR would probably be the 5th, so Big Six I guess), the other leagues are also the consensus top leagues in their respective sports while the MLS is not. Teemu08 (talk) 14:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. A minor competition in world football terms. We can't publish every country's champion, and sticking with those listed on ITNR is plenty of coverage. Modest Genius 14:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Charley Pride

• Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
• Updated by AleatoryPonderings (talk · give credit), Montanabw (talk · give credit) and Ktin (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: First black member of the Country Music HOF. Some sourcing issues but it is far closer than most RDs. Masem (t) 20:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment He seems like a popular figure. His death due to Covid is notable, as is the trend of his songs. I'm not quite supporting it because something is going on with the reference tag down at the bottom. –Cavejohnson13 (talk) 22:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment. Support.Will support once sourcing is complete for "Awards" and "Personal life and death". Joofjoof (talk) 00:32, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment will revisit in the morrning (my time) hopefully the references will be fixed by the US Country music editors, RIP Charley JW 1961 Talk 00:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment It was "complications related to" COVID, possibly better noted as a death following "Kiss an Angel Good Mornin'". InedibleHulk (talk) 01:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment. Support. I went in and added sources / citations for the awards section. The main article still has some tags if someone has a few cycles to source them. Cheers. . Nice stuff AleatoryPonderings in seeing this one through! Ktin (talk) 04:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support. It's pretty thoroughly reffed up now, and more comprehensive than many RDs I've seen. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 04:23, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support. This is a no brainer, there have been multiple recent RD's that were far worse but because they had 5 sentences with 5 references that somehow qualified them for RD since they were "well-referenced". Albertaont (talk) 04:35, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support. Article quality has improved. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted—Bagumba (talk) 08:48, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: U. A. Khader

• Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Malayala Sahityam (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Malayalam language writer. Sahitya Akademi Award winner. Article requires some work before going to homepage / RD. I will get to it this morning. Edits done. Article has shaped up to a clean C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations to go to homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 16:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support. Decent article. Ideally the "bibliography" would be cut down to reflect significant works only. —Brigade Piron (talk) 20:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Suitable for RD JW 1961 Talk 20:31, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• @Stephen, Spencer, Amakuru, Black Kite, and Dumelow:, pardon the intrusion. This article is good for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 02:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted RD) Blurb/RD: Ruhollah Zam

• Nominated by Sherenk1 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit) and Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Iranian journalist executed. Sherenk1 (talk) 16:40, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment. It's mostly there, I guess, but it is very stubby at present. Can't we have more information on the nature and stance of "Amadnews", for example? —Brigade Piron (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support blurb Just heard about it. Shame our media is silent about it, I guess Biden really is banking on renewing the nuclear deal. Anyhow, I think his death is highly unusual. Being executed for your journalist integrity under the charge of "corruption on Earth" after being lured into your country by an islamic extremist analogue of CIA/KGB? Now that doesn't happen every day. CoronaOneLove (talk) 00:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose This has gotten no coverage compared to the execution of the Iranian scientist, nor is this particularly noteworthy. Also more general concerns with article quality and the fact that it is a stub. Albertaont (talk) 01:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD, oppose blurb I think this is good enough for RD, but this got less coverage than the Mohsen Fakhrizadeh murder, so I don't think that this is worth a blurb. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:32, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support blurb The article looks good now. Quite unusual story. Tradedia 06:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb Capital punishment is not uncommon in Iran with several hundreds executions every year, so this is not a ruling with an extraordinary rare outcome. Also, the media report that the journalist was found guilty on corruption charges and, according to the Iranian law, such crimes usually end up with execution. As for the reactions, it's normal to see Reporters Without Borders and the media worldwide condemning the execution of their colleague but, frankly speaking, so much ado is done only in cases when the victims are journalists (they are not sacrosancts and cannot be pardoned for whatever they do).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:15, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb Don't see the coverage here. Meanwhile, the article claims his death was on both the 11th and the 12th December, and the blurb doesn't fit with "(The Islamic Guard) announced they had lured Zam back to Iran and arrested him, although according to other sources he had been arrested in Iraq". Black Kite (talk) 10:44, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD only just about enough in there for RD. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 11:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD only – Per TRM, Kiril. The execution was fairly widely covered, but was what one would expect from the Iranian theocracy. – Sca (talk) 13:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD, Oppose blurb. Article quality is decent. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 16:27, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD Numerous executions in Iran, don't think this is especially notable for a blurb. Barely passable for RD though. Gotitbro (talk) 18:01, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD only good enough for RD JW 1961 Talk 20:07, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality, oppose blurb Too short and a few uncited statements, just simply not important enough for a blurb per others. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 05:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  What's your threshold for length? And I can't see any uncited statements, care to point them out? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  That's obviously a know-it-when-I-see-it proposition, but the "Arrest and execution" section is only a paragraph long, and the "Reactions" section has only three reactions that are mostly straight quotes. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 08:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  Niche subject matter I suppose. And the missing refs? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: John le Carré

• Nominated by Drmab (talk · give credit)
• Updated by AleatoryPonderings (talk · give credit) and Ktin (talk · give credit)

 Drmab (talk) 22:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support. The article is in good shape. Alexcalamaro (talk) 22:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Multiple paragraphs and sections lacking a single reference. Stephen 23:39, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Done! All sourcing has been completed. @Stephen: have a look and let me know if you see any other misses, I am around for the next hour or so. Ktin (talk) 03:23, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support, with blurb. One of the most significant spy novel authors ever. BD2412 T 03:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
  • He doesn't readily meet blurb material. "spy novel authors" is rather a niche area of writing overall, so while he may have been a big name in that small part of that field, as an overall writer, he's not rather groundbreaking. --Masem (t) 03:50, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
    • I don't think it's fair to pigeonhole it by genre. There is limited information on his sales figures, but one source notes he sold 3.55 million books between 1998 and 2018 - already thirty years after his main period of prominence. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
    • I agree, it's nonsense. He was a "fiction writer", so that should be where he's judged. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
      • FWIW, Terry Pratchett sold 70 million books and didn't get a blurb. Modest Genius 14:48, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support blurb. He's a huge name in the UK at least; eg look at the index page of The Guardian atm: . Among the best-known popular novelists here. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD only - He's nowhere near blurb-worthy. This is what RD is for. 1779Days (talk) 05:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality, and absolutely not for a blurb if Chuck Yeager didn't get one. Still a few uncited statements blocking RD, although otherwise decent quality. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 05:53, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support blurb. As well as a major figure in English literature for almost a half-century, he was the emblematic writer of the Cold War in Europe. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD only I am revealing my ignorance here, but based on the comments I assumed this was the author of James Bond works. On reading through I was surprised to see that it's an author that only wrote two works that I can recall. I can't see how this should go up as a blurb.130.233.213.199 (talk) 08:46, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  Yes, certainly that's misguided thinking. Le Carré was a fine author, far superior to Fleming in every sense. And just because you can only recall two of his books, I'm not clear why that should influence whether this is a blurb or not. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

  For the record, I would support a blurb for Fleming. The fact that Tom Clancy didn't get a blurb either makes this further a non-starter in my book. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 08:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support RD definitely good enough right now, ambivalent on blurb, certainly a English-language literary giant, but as people are declaring "popular fiction" to be niche and the individual isn't American, I guess this is a non-starter. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The horrible Americans raise their ugly heads once again. Help! — Sca (talk) 14:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support RD came here to nominate this, but realised it was already nominated. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD Mjroots (talk) 13:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD only – While justly famous within his genre, Le Carre's historical fiction seems less than 'transformative' for English lit. – Sca (talk) 14:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support RD. Article looks fine to me - the two {{cn}} tags are unimportant. Well-loved author but not blurb level. Modest Genius 14:48, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

December 11

(Posted) RD: James Flynn (academic)

• Nominated by Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit)
• Updated by VeryRarelyStable (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: New Zealand intelligence researcher. Discoverer of Flynn effect. Article needs a few citations. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 09:57, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• weak support I think almost everything in the article is cited,but since this is a biography, shouldn't there be a section that talks about his personal life? Scaramouche33 (talk) 11:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support. Decent article. —Brigade Piron (talk) 20:24, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support. He is notable Hugo999 (talk) 23:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted—Bagumba (talk) 08:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Zodiac 340 Cipher

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.

• Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)

• Comment I found it hard to find mention of the solving in the article (it's in a text box in small print) perhaps it should be more prominently mentioned in the article, if that is where we are pointing readers to with the blurb. JW 1961 Talk 23:37, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose While quite interesting, I don't really see how people figuring out what a killer tried to say in one of many statements is news. Gex4pls (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose While this is news, it isn't very significant that someone decoded what a killed had to say. Send to DYK. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 00:08, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose but Comment I think this is perfect for DYK actually. Albertaont (talk) 00:17, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose but suggest a nomination for DYK This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 00:40, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• DYK. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:41, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, propose SNOW close. Interesting tidbit and good faith nom, but hardly making headlines or having lasting significance. Pretty much impossible to pass, anyway. Juxlos (talk) 01:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose If anything related to this was going to be posted should've been the arrest of the possible perpetrator. Gotitbro (talk) 03:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kim Ki-duk

• Nominated by UnladenSwallow (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Alexcalamaro (talk · give credit) and Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Famous South Korean film director and screenwriter — UnladenSwallow (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Filmography and awards almost entirely unsourced, will revisit if fixed JW 1961 Talk 18:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose At this time until improvements memtioned already above are complete. Ping me and I change.BabbaQ (talk) 23:52, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per the above, also not notable. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 01:54, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  @HurricaneTracker495: As mentioned in the template above notability is not a criteria for WP:ITN/R (recurring items) or WP:ITN/RD (recent deaths) only the articles need to be of competent quality, i.e., meet basic sourcing/size. Only blurbs should be debated be bated on their notability. Gotitbro (talk) 03:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  To be more clear, is a subject is notable enough to have a Misplaced Pages article it is notable for RD. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  @HurricaneTracker495: I suggest you strike the also not notable. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 14:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  Ok; let me be more clear; sorry if I wasn't clearer before; but if you went to a printed encyclopedia, would you ever find it on the main page? Generally, that's my criteria. --Hurricane Tracker 495 18:05, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  @HurricaneTracker495: You have clearly not seen the text on the ITN box nor have read the instructions. Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with their own 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.. If you cannot follow the instructions, I suggest you back away from ITN completely. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 19:07, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  @HurricaneTracker495: Misplaced Pages is not a paper encyclopedia. Your personal "criteria" does not reflect the Misplaced Pages consensus on notable content, nor on content for In the news. If you fail to understand this nor follow simple instructions and guidelines set in stone by many Misplaced Pages editors, you are bound to be accused of not being here to build an encyclopedia. Chlod (say hi!) 19:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Filmography, awards and a few paras need to be sourced. Gotitbro (talk) 03:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • I have added citations, now only the filmography needs citations. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 10:33, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Looks fine now, @Alexcalamaro: the refs should have their own row in filmography though (for better formatting). Gotitbro (talk) 00:49, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose clearly under-referenced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Weak oppose Almost there. Filmography needs a few more refs. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 14:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support I have added some references in the filmography section. I think it is ready. Alexcalamaro (talk) 23:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment better, but that "uncredited" Secret Reunion needs a source. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @The Rambling Man: Ok. I have added a source for that movie (I have found an article from 2013 in an Italian film magazine). Alexcalamaro (talk) 22:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment, I am pinging @Joseywales1961, BabbaQ, Destroyeraa, and Gotitbro: , maybe they could take a look at the article, now that is referenced, and maybe they want to change their !vote. Alexcalamaro (talk) 22:50, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support - change to support. Ready for posting. Sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 22:53, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Also changing to Support nice work tidying up the article Alexcalamaro JW 1961 Talk 23:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment. Pulling the above has potentially left a last-minute slot for this, but I'm uncomfortable posting an article where more than half of the text is controversy. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Nice work adding citations. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 02:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted, into 7th position — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:44, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Tommy Lister Jr.

• Nominated by 7&6=thirteen (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Wrestler, Well-known character actor 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:52, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose Barely sourced, entire sections almost go without refs. Gex4pls (talk) 14:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Not any longer. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support A verifiable story, just a bit unlikely. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose All film + TV appearances need sourcing. --Masem (t) 22:27, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - after everything is sourced. Ping me.BabbaQ (talk) 23:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Most looks fine but the filmography section needs sourcing. Gotitbro (talk) 03:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose huge number of claims unsourced. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose a editor copy and pasted a move and now the page history is split. the article is too much of a mess. so oppose for now. GuzzyG (talk) 10:51, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

"Tommy Tiny Lister filmography". Retrieved December 11, 2020. I had put it in, and one of our editors removed it. Perverse result. Not the first time. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:58, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I'd not consider that page a reliable source even though its likely true (the home page is "best online casinos".... --Masem (t) 16:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

The best online casinos aren't sketchy, that's their appeal. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

You disqualified Dr. John and Neil Peart because they were prolific, and didn't have the hundreds of citations that would satisfy you. The views by readers were to the contrary. Happening here, too. Oh well. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:28, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

ITN articles, as part of being the main page are supposed to highlight some of WP's best work. Lack of sourcing is not our best work. A highly questional RS to source films is not our best work. The problem is that these are BLPs before they died and are supposed to be in far better shape per BLP policy but people don't edit them appropriate when they add information. That's not ITN's fault that editors didn't do their jobs in the years before. --Masem (t) 18:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Your opinion. It still creates perverse results. That's my opinion. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

That ITN looks at article quality is not my opinion, that's the purpose of ITN. While what is "quality" is subjective for sourcing, the lack of quality sourcing for any of the filmography is clearly and objectively not appropriate. --Masem (t) 18:56, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate your work, if that counts (and added the Grantland feature in 2017). But wrestling's curse is strong here, and this actor got too close. That's my conclusion, if it counts. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:03, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

As for Masem, the idea that advertising a legal casino makes a source "highly questional" is where your opinion perverts appreciation of facts you admit are "likely true". In my opinion, you should stop distrusting casinos, they've gone mainstream. As a matter of fact, commercial media is questionable, not illegal. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I am just saying that a site that purports to describe the best online casinos and no other signs of reliability is a far cry for reliability for a BLP (of which Lister is still under). Just because the website name shares the same as Lister doesn't mean it has any association with him at all. --Masem (t) 05:06, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I will never understand how a hypothetically miscredited bit role (or even a few) is potentially harmful to a dead person's survivors. But it's just one source, among a now-ridiculous number. Relax the restrictiveness, I say. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Plenty of other Wikis out there, this is an encyclopedia, so no, do not relax exacting standards. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

What quality publication do you trust to safely support filmographies? InedibleHulk (talk) 09:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Tommy Lister, Jr. page views. The readers find it without you. More than 200 acting credits. "A look at 'Tiny' Lister's best acting roles" (Video). CNN. December 11, 2020. Contemporary Theatre, Film, and Television. United States: Gale Research Company. 2000. pp. 260–261.7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The alternate way to handle this is to entirely strike the individual filmography listings. I think that is Throw out the baby with the bathwater but it could be done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:57, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

The reason his page is getting page views is for being a character actor in a fair number of films. That would be inappropriate to remove that section. --Masem (t) 18:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I agree. But if that's what it takes to sway the naysayers... 200+ acting credits per CNN, and the list is incomplete. Sourcing every appearance is a Sisyphusian effort that I will not choose to do. Article is in my opinion otherwise well sourced. But butting my head against this wall is futile. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:55, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

It's not ITN's fault that editors failed to follow BLP's policy when they added his credits without sources in building up the article. --Masem (t) 19:09, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

It's not about fixing the blame. It is about fixing/solving the problem. This is a well sourced article about a prolific actor. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

], I am pinging @Stephen, MSGJ, and Amakuru: for their guidance since the carousel might move past this date anytime now. I think part of the problem is also because WP:IMDB is not allowed as a source for filmography, if that is allowed, it will solve a significant problem. I see IMDB has over 200+ entries for this subject. I also agree with Masem that some of these are beyond this group. Good luck. Ktin (talk) 20:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Stale - unfortunately it's now too late for this one. The oldest RD is currently from the 12 December. There do seem to have been a glut of them today, and more possibly on the way.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Yep. Self fulfilling prophecy. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

110,000 views as of today. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

So? ApLundell (talk) 22:50, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

December 10

(Posted) RD: Hasu Yajnik

• Updated and nominated by Nizil Shah (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Article might need some copyediting. Nizil (talk) 13:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Looks fine, could do well with a bibliography though. Gotitbro (talk) 18:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Though I feel like it could use more than 5 sources for it's length. Gex4pls (talk) 20:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Posted - Dumelow (talk) 09:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Garry Runciman, 3rd Viscount Runciman of Doxford

• Updated and nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: British academic. I've updated the article with his death and expanded somewhat - Dumelow (talk) 06:56, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Weak support ref 2 is showing perm-a-dead, but otherwise ok. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Looks okay to me, seeing a single dead link which shouldn't stop this from RD though if anyone can replace it please do so. Gotitbro (talk) 18:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Ref 2 is used only to support the relation to an uncle, which can be inferred by other references. What's the standard here? Is it enough to put two references that can infer the relationship logically (Garry is the son of Leslie and Leslie is the brother of Steven) or does there need to be an explicit statement from an RS (Garry is Steven's nephew)?130.233.213.199 (talk) 09:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

References such as the above would be sufficient - Dumelow (talk) 09:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Brandon Bernard

• Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk · give credit) and Shakehandsman (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: American criminal, death sentence carried out in controversial circumstances. Article looks to be in good shape - Dumelow (talk) 06:41, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:07, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Looks pretty fine. Gotitbro (talk) 18:07, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment ANYONE? 18 hours later.... The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support As pile-on, certainly should go up.130.233.213.199 (talk) 10:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Richard Corben

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.

• Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)

• Comment A lot of paras in the bio & awards sections are unreferenced. A long list of sources is given at the end but need inline cites. Could also do well with a biblio (if original works exist). Gotitbro (talk) 09:24, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose both image files were being used illegitimately (I removed them, no need to thank mee) and the article needs more sourcing. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Joseph Safra

• Nominated by SirEdimon (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Daveout (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Brazil's richest man. One of the richest man on Earth. --SirEdimon 03:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose A bit stubby for RD, can clearly be expanded and needs some additional sources. Gotitbro (talk) 04:41, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose lamentable article for "one of the richest men on Earth". The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  Support good work. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support The article seems ok as of now. Being "The richest banker in the world" makes him especially notable. Tradedia 21:40, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  Comment, there's still a "failed verification" claim up there. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

  Thanks for the heads-up. I just looked at the article now and the "failed verification" is gone and everything seems to have been referenced. Tradedia 17:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Barbara Windsor

• Nominated by Johndavies837 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Hanif Al Husaini (talk · give credit), Yorkshiresky (talk · give credit) and Michael Drew (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Well-known actress in the UK. Johndavies837 (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose There are several uncited statements. Please fix them. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 01:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Too many unsourced paras with the filmography being completely unsourced, also please find a more apt image for the infobox (at the peak of her career etc.) now that she is deceased. Gotitbro (talk) 04:44, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

  Surely the current image—from 2010, when she was the main character on the country's most-watched TV programme—was the peak of her career? Carry On was a vehicle for Sid James and Kenneth Williams; people tend to remember Windsor as more associated with them than she actually was, she didn't even appear in most of them. ‑ Iridescent 07:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

  Agreed. And that's not really a discussion for ITNC in any case. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 09:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment There's only a few TV shows without reference. If that's a showstopper then I'd just remove them. yorkshiresky (talk) 16:51, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support I have removed the filmography entries without references. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 06:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• Weak support some bare URLs in there but otherwise much improved. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 12:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
• @Gotitbro: The article has improved, would you change your position? Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:31, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) US policy Western Sahara

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.

• Nominated by Nice4What (talk · give credit)

• Comment It does appear important but I am conflicted as to how significant or headline grabbing this is when compared to the Israel recognitions. Gotitbro (talk) 23:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

  Looks like the Morocco recognition of Israel is linked to this which definitely makes it more significant. If the (now closed) blurb from below can be combined onto here that would be better reflection of the situation. Gotitbro (talk) 23:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

  I have proposed an altblurb to combine both. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 01:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Comment From what I am reading, it looks like no country recognizes the independence of Western Sahara. Not sure how the US move is therefore significant. Albertaont (talk) 00:07, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

  @Albertaont: Currently 40 UN member states recognize Western Saharan independence. The US is the first state to explicitly recognize Moroccan sovereignty over the entire territory. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 00:34, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Doesn't that mean that (X-40) UN member states implicitly recognize Moroccan sovereignty over W.S.? And besides, American policy on Western Sahara conflict section in the Morocco–US relations article seems to indicate that Trump's statement is simply an explicit restatement of existing policy that W.S. is sovereign Moroccan territory. Juxlos (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support on principle, oppose on quality. As noted earlier, I thought this was the more notable outcome of the Morocco/United States/Israel agreement. However, the target article currently lacks a number of citations, which must be fixed before it can be blurbed. NorthernFalcon (talk) 05:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose but would support if merged with Morocco's normalised relations with Israel. I don't see how recognising Morocco's claim over a territory that is also claimed by a state effectively recognised by only around 50 countries in the world is important. A vast najority of the UN member states (including all permanent member states of the Security Council) don't recognise SADR, which goes in favour of Morocco's claim over that territory. Additionally, the United States has never recognised SADR, so their support of Morocco's claim is not really big news.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• support alt blurb First country recognizing anything is generally significant to global politics as opposed to 163rd country doing so,however,I believe it's important to mention the full extent of the agreement Scaramouche33 (talk) 12:42, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• I honestly don't know: does the fact that this is being done by a lame duck president matter? Biden could revoke recognition in 40 days right? And normally state recognition is a domino game; that won't happen here. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

  Would Biden do that though? I don't see why the US would have any interest in supporting the SADR. Considering the US provided arms support to Morocco during the Western Sahara war, I think the recognition is here to stay. Has Biden ever made a statement about the dispute? Scaramouche33 (talk) 14:29, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose A country recognizing another country, and another country recognizing the former's disputed land as belonging to the former. Doesn't really seem important. Gex4pls (talk) 13:07, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

• Oppose – Per previous. Big wow. – Sca (talk) 14:16, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose same as below; the article update is insufficient. In the case of both of the bolded articles, there is a single, short sentence in the lead that is the total amount of information about the subject; even more important neither article currently discusses the deal itself. If you want this posted, you should include a lot more prose in the target article, so that we have something worthwhile for people to read. --Jayron32 14:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. I suspect that Biden will most likely ignore this recognition and hope people forget about it(doubtful he actually reverses this). 331dot (talk) 14:17, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. The "big wow" arguments aren't entirely fair, as by doing this the US is essentially sending a massive "fuck you" to the African Union (in African terms, this is roughly as inflammatory as formal US recognition of the Turkish occupation of northern Cyprus would be in terms of relationship with European institutions or that a US recognition of Pakistani claims to Kashmir would have on relations with India), but if you need a lengthy explanation before most readers can understand the significance, it's generally not suitable for a short-format ITN blurb. ‑ Iridescent 16:49, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Besides, we're not a DT-ticker. – Sca (talk) 19:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support. The first international recognition of the annexation of Western Sahara is a big deal in its own right. Coupled with Morocco's recognition, I think it is easily ITN-worthy in a way which the recognition of a Gulf states is not. Morocco is a serious regional power in its own right. —Brigade Piron (talk) 22:00, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose currently, 40 countries, never including the United States, recognize W.S.' independence. Implicitly this means that 150-160 countries recognize that the region is Moroccan sovereign territory, and as the US has never recognized WS the only other option is recognizing that the region is Moroccan. The United States seem to have a past stance which also sides with Morocco, too, and this announcement is just reiterating existing policy. Juxlos (talk) 22:54, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

• Sidenote: the AP source mentions nowhere the claim that the US was the first country to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over the region (the "first" is Morocco recognizing the US back in 1777) and I'm reasonably sure putting that blurb on ITN would count as a hoax. Juxlos (talk) 22:57, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
  • This Al Jazeera source mentions that "William Lawrence, a professor of political science and international affairs at the American University, said the move “makes the US … the first country in the entire world to recognise the Moroccan claim”." Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 04:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose transient, soon-to-be-overturned nonsense as the orange balloon chapter edges nearer to a welcome close. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:45, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
• This is interesting as Morocco was the first country to ally with USA, very soon after it declared independence and it has been an ally of America ever since. And though it makes far, far, far less human rights violations than Palestinians Western Sahara doesn't want to recognize Israel so it's hard to imagine why anyone would expect the US might recognize them. Unfortunate if you're Sahrawi when some less deserving governments are full UN members but they've got some bad luck. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  I imagine the shades of both the American and Moroccan troops killed during the the US invasion of Morocco in 1942 might somewhat dispute the "it has been an ally of America ever since" part. ‑ Iridescent 16:10, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  Maybe there's an asterisk somewhere like the US considered the Axis government they fought an illegitimate coup of the real Moroccan government? Like how the Polish government in exile was the real government and Hitler the fake one. Of course the Axis Moroccans would instead consider it the Moroccan patriots saving the country from things like the bad Moroccans with these German chaps conveniently here to bleed with us. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  I was always under the impression that Morocco viewed both the Third Republic and Vichy France to be oppressive,but being a French protectorate didn't give them much choice during the war.I do know that when Roosevelt met Sultan Mohammed V, he said that he was confident that Morocco would have an independent future,which further fuelled the liberation movement in the country. But I think we're going off topic here Scaramouche33 (talk) 18:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Moroccan recognition of Israel

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.

• Nominated by Dantheanimator (talk · give credit)
• Created by UpDownUp (talk · give credit)
• Updated by YaLindaHadad (talk · give credit)

• Oppose only because this is like "gay marriage" recognition - ITN can't support a nom from every country that acknowledges Israel here. --Masem (t) 17:42, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support only because it's a country from the Arab world. In fact, any normalisation of the diplomatic relations between Arab countries and Israel is big news.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:13, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Article update is shorter than the blurb. If THIS is all of the information that the highlighted article has on the topic, maybe we don't need to post it in ITN? --Jayron32 18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment I believe it is more notable that the United States has become the first nation to formally recognize Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, which it has done as part of this deal. Morocco becoming the fourth Arab state to recognize Israel is not as notable. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Comment We didn't post the last countries that normalized relations with Israel. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 19:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose At this point, not particularly notable. We correctly posted the normalization of ties with UAE, if there is normalization with Saudi Arabia, might be noteworthy too. Albertaont (talk) 19:32, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose The first recognitions might have been notable but as this point this is just headline grabbing point scoring. Gotitbro (talk) 21:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Snow close and quickly hide this under the rug. We can't have positive news being posted on ITN, especially if it makes a certain person which weallhate look good. 2601:602:9200:1310:2C6C:F13B:C2A2:4547 (talk) 21:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) RD: Yevgeny Shaposhnikov

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.

• Nominated by 85.249.41.201 (talk · give credit)
• Created by KNewman (talk · give credit)
• Updated by VLu (talk · give credit)

• Oppose It is a stub and is lacking inline citations. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 12:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Almost completely unsourced stub. Gotitbro (talk) 12:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Unsourced stub. LefcentrerightDiscuss 21:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Iman Budhi Santosa

• Updated and nominated by Crisco 1492 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Indonesian poet; article is C-class.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support The article looks good --Tensa Februari (talk) 11:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Article is good enough for RD. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 12:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Looks fine. Gotitbro (talk) 12:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• @Stephen, Spencer, Amakuru, Dumelow, and Black Kite:, pardon the intrusion. This is ready for posting onto homepage / RD. I was waiting for a bit to see if a couple of December 7 articles would move in, but, seems like they are not ready. Let's go ahead. Ktin (talk) 19:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Posted - Dumelow (talk) 19:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Astad Deboo

• Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
• Created by Ekabhishek (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Ekabhishek (talk · give credit) and Ktin (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Indian contemporary Kathak Kathakali dancer; Padma Shri and Sangeet Natak Akademi Award winner. Article looks good. Will give it a good look in a bit. Minor updates and content streamlining done. Well referenced. Looks good to go to homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 04:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support Article in good shape. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Article is good enough for RD. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 12:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Looks fine to me. Gotitbro (talk) 12:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• Support Well sourced and whatnot Gex4pls (talk) 15:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
• @Stephen, Spencer, Amakuru, Dumelow, and Black Kite:, pardon the intrusion. This is ready for posting onto homepage / RD. I was waiting for a bit to see if a couple of December 7 articles would move in, but, seems like they are not ready. Let's go ahead. Ktin (talk) 19:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Posted, there's one IMDB reference in there which should probably be replaced but I'll not hold it up for that - Dumelow (talk) 19:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Dumelow, Replaced. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2020 (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:

• Misplaced Pages In the news
• Main Page discussions