Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:17, 30 August 2022

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.

Joseph Aoun Joseph Aoun (pictured) is elected president of Lebanon after a two-year vacancy. An attack on the presidential palace in N'Djamena, Chad, results in 19 deaths. A series of wildfires in Southern California, United States, leaves at least 24 people dead and destroys more than 12,000 structures. A 7.1-magnitude earthquake hits Tingri County in the Tibet Autonomous Region, China, leaving at least 126 people dead. Ongoing: Israel–Hamas war Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: Jean-Marie Le Pen John S. Hunkin Bob Veale Charles M. Roessel Mike Rinder Peter Yarrow Nominate an article view — page history — related changes — edit

Archives

August 30

August 29

RD: Ernie Zampese

• Nominated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by JasonH1978 (talk · give credit)

 BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose At a minimum the stats tables are unsourced (and possibly also WP:UNDUE/uncommon for assistant coaches).—Bagumba (talk) 21:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(Removed, reinstated) Ongoing Removal: COVID-19

Nominator's comments: COVID-19 has been going on for years now and it will do so probably for all of our lifetimes (much like MERS and HIV/AIDS). It cannot be in ongoing indefinitely. Would it be suitable, for example, to put car crashes into ongoing? It's also become a very broad topic (from lockdowns, supply chain issues, human migration, political consequences, etc) spot news events (like China lockdown) related to COVID-19 do not illustrate the general topic. LaserLegs (talk) 13:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose; in countries still tracking Covid-19 in a reasonable way, the statistics are still high. The US reported approximately 500 daily deaths over the last week. It's also still in the news, much more so than car accidents or flu or cancer or any of our other shared ills. Vanamonde (Talk) 13:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  And it will likely be in the news for the next 10 years as the world calculates the social, economic and health cost of Covid and assess global/regional responses. 193.119.98.23 (talk) 14:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support I would challenge anyone to cite a COVID-related event/occurrence/fact that has happened in the last six months that is of interest to anyone. We know that people continue to get it, we know that people continue to die. Simply updating the metrics is not a reason to retain this forever. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment It seems like debates on these are becoming more frequent while we still don't know how long an item can be considered ongoing, so I opened up a discussion on the talk page to clarify some things if possible.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose it is still causing widespread effects in China which still having downstream effects on world markets. Masem (t) 14:06, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support I was on the fence last time because the world was seeing a bit of a wave from the latest subvariant but seeing how almost no major jurisdiction made any changes to their public health policy, except continue to remove covid-era restrictions, covid as it stands now is firmly in the past. Apart from news outlets reporting readily available stats, like a stock ticker, there hasn't been any notable developments in months. 193.119.98.23 (talk) 14:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support – In the past month, there has only been one substantial update to the article, and this update was not related to current events (such as direct impact). If the article is no longer actively seeing news-related updates, we should indeed remove it from our ITN box. This is not related to how much impact the pandemic is still having. The issue is that we are not covering the impact in the linked article. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:23, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  I will note, for example, that quite a few "as of ..." sentences are dated to 2020 or 2021. We might need to be concerned about the article being outdated. I have no idea if this is an actual issue for the article, but it doesn't feel suitable for ITN. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:28, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support. We cannot have it on ITN forever and, as mentioned above, there are no day-to-day updates to the articles as typically required for ongoing items. Yes, it made sense to have it on for way longer than any other ongoing item, but at some point we should drop it. Our readers know to use the search box if they need info. --Tone 14:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – S-o-o-o long-term is this topic that I'm not sure Ongoing matters much. OTOH, it does provide a hot button for a topic that affects everyone. On the fence. – Sca (talk) 15:06, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support Restrictions are continuing to fall, infections have been falling, not much in terms of substantial updates at the article. Noah 15:09, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support - We can't just wait up for China indefinitely. Monkeypox seems to have become the more dominant health story in the news (at least if Portal:Current events is anything to go by).--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:57, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• I don't see a single covid item at Portal:Current events/August 2022 that would have gotten a blurb had this not been in ongoing, and only one (on August 15) that wouldn't have gotten snow-opposed. We have to go all the way back to July 6 for an item that we even might have blurbed. Support. —Cryptic 16:10, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support – same reasons as why don't we put climate change to ongoing. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 16:12, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment. Clickstream data for the month of August is not available as of yet, and will be available on September 15 / 16. I would recommend having a look at that data before acting one way or the other here. Good luck. Ktin (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Much like the Invasion of Ukraine, it's not in the news as much but that doesn't mean it's done or over with. MyriadSims (talk) 16:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Merely "it's still happening" isn't enough for a slot in Ongoing, and the second bullet point at the documentation at WP:ONGOING addresses this explicitly. —Cryptic 16:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support not really "in the news" much anymore is it? It is endemic now in many places. No longer the crisis it was, now others have taken over. Polyamorph (talk) 16:25, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support, I think at this point in time we can remove it from ongoing. Sir Joseph 16:37, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support It's time. If there is a really major development, we can deal with that on a case by case basis. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC) signed belatedly
• Support, endemic disease by now. --Soman (talk) 16:46, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Removed Consensus for removal; lack of regular updates to article as required for Ongoing items. Spencer 16:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  updates for a topic as big as COVID will be in the sub articles. this will be a similar issue for the Ukraine war. Masem (t) 16:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  I considered this. The issue is that we're not featuring these sub-articles on the front page. Such an indirect way of "featuring" the work of people editing articles like (for example) Chinese government response to COVID-19 (which of course isn't even linked in the main article) is not really reasonable in my opinion. It doesn't serve our readers or our community. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment I’m here to remind you that COVID-19 will be endemic when the WHO declares it so, not when you say so. It’s still a pandemic. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:05, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  If we were to go wholly by the WHO’s definition of events, we would still have the AIDS pandemic listed. Sometimes it’s best to go by the practical reality. The Kip (talk) 02:33, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose and reinstate - The pandemic is still ongoing, and it continues to make the news. Pulling it from Ongoing with less than four hours' discussion is much too quick in any case. GenevieveDEon (talk) 18:37, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support It should not stay up indefinitely, and it is no longer receiving the regular updates required for Ongoing.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support I personally think it is time to remove as other events have taken far more media coverage and it should not stay perpetually. -- FictiousLibrarian (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Endorse removal - It is clear that restrictions are easing almost everywhere in the world. COVID will likely be with us for a while now, but not to the point that it is affecting everyday life. Interstellarity (talk) 19:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Post-Removal Support Pandemic will continue, but continuous updates have not. DarkSide830 (talk) 21:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Request to reinstate The pandemic has not ceased to drive news, nor is it an inherently open-ended event (a charge reasonably used elsewhere here to say climate change shouldn't be listed). I believe the decision to remove it from "ongoing" was premature, and that it should be reinstated. Tisnec (talk) 00:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  CBC News doesn't fully reflect the global journalistic scene, of course, but insofar as it does, the pandemic really has ceased to drive. The top health story (currently top overall) is about how much weekly drinking scientists say is too much this week. The only COVID-related homepage headline is about normality's inevitable comeback. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Request to reinstate This isn't just premature. While COVID pandemic will go on as a part of our lives, there's an ongoing big wave of COVID in Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and Vietnam (all of which are in around East/Southeast Asia), and while the monkeypox is now a bigger news than COVID, it is not growing that much in Asia as of now. I feel COVID-19 should be considered as ongoing until these waves are put under control and growth of monkeypox in Asia becomes definite. MarioJump83 (talk) 01:34, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose, reinstate until better consensus is achieved The discussion ended before I could vote on the original proposal. For something like this that has been repeatedly re-litigated on this page over the past several months, I feel like we could stand to get more opinions before making such a contentious change. On substantive grounds, the pandemic is still active, I'm still seeing stuff in the news, and I feel adverse to calling this endemic before the WHO does. Certainly, World War II managed to stay in the news for a good 6 years; what's 2.5 years to COVID? -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 02:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Reinstate. Four hours isn't enough time to develop a consensus; item should be reinstated until the discussion has had sufficient time to run its course. For the moment, I oppose removal, per Vanamonde93 and the fact that while the target article is not seeing regular significant updates, the child articles of the target article are, and I believe that is sufficient for the criteria for ongoing to be met. BilledMammal (talk) 02:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Post-removal support The practical reality stands that besides China, which is attempting the likely-untenable goal of zero-COVID, the world has moved on. Cases, deaths, and restrictions are a small fraction of what once was, and restrictions have for the most part been rolled back. It’s an acceptable time for removal. The Kip (talk) 02:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment/lean reinstate Only 20.9% of people in low-income countries have received at least one dose of a Covid vaccine. (See ref for more stats) In many parts of the world, we're not out of the woods. -TenorTwelve (talk) 04:00, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support After two years of reminding people about it, yes, the pandemic and its articles still exist and everyone knows where to find them. That was the point, awareness. We thoroughly and completely helped raise it. We did not put an end to death, disease and socioeconomic turmoil. We were never supposed to. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:52, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support removal, as I did last time. The article has received precisely zero meaningful content updates in the last month - Dumelow (talk) 07:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support Who knows when the pandemic ends, it has been in "current events" for so long. Nythar 07:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Post-removal support (since apparently some are calling for reinstatement). It's long overdue, the article is no longer receiving substantial update to warrant keeping it in Ongoing. – Ammarpad (talk) 07:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Reinstate. As stated above, four hours is simply not enough time to build a reasonable consensus. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  And as restated immediately above, this new resolution and realization is long overdue, following months of trial proposals, similar discussion and (nonbinding) alternative results. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Reinstate we can remove this when Covid-19 becomes endemic, which it hasn't, yet. In the meantime, one would be hard-pressed to find any news outlets without daily Covid-related news. Banedon (talk) 08:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  You'd also really have to look for one that doesn't treat it as another bottomless mundane category of news, beside Politics/Government, Weather/Climate and Indigenous/Sports. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:50, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  Many countries are already treating it as endemic in any case. Polyamorph (talk) 09:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  They're treating the literal virality as endemic. I'd like to think we're focusing on how they're treating the transmission of COVID news. This isn't In The Public Health Sector/C, after all. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  Quite. Although I was responding to the OP who I think was referring to the virus. Polyamorph (talk) 10:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  We must remain vigilant, referring to misindentation. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:36, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  Soz. Yes, Stay alert! Polyamorph (talk) 13:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Reinstate. This was a woefully brief discussion which should not have been closed so quickly. The pandemic is still ongoing, it is killing thousands per week, and several countries (most notably China) still have lockdowns in place. Much of the world population is still unvaccinated. Updates are occurring in the sub-articles and it's still receiving mainstream media coverage even in places where legal restrictions have been lifted. The Covid pandemic isn't over, no matter how much people like to pretend it is. Modest Genius 11:25, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - Those calling on ITN to wait until the virus is declared endemic are forgetting that this section is called "in the news". The criteria for remaining an ongoing item is the determination that there are still regular updates to the target article, and the item has to be pervasively in the news. Those are the only criteria, nothing to do with what the WHO says the virus is or isn't. At this time, these criteria are not being met. The discussion should be closed without reinstatement. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 11:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• REINSTATED - The removal was done very soon after the request was posted, which is very unusual for ITN, given it was not close to SNOW support. Many voices have asked for it to be reinstated, so it should revert back to its default state while further discussion happens. - Fuzheado | Talk 12:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  Fuzheado strikes again! 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 12:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  Or rather, a decision made in poor faith less than 4 hours after a proposal was posted has been reset so that a clearer and more fair consensus can be determined. - Fuzheado | Talk 13:06, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  Can you point to the guidelines which stipulate a minimum wait for taking action or what compelling "keep" justification (other than 'too fast') necessitated a re-post? --LaserLegs (talk) 13:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  I'm sorry, but this is not the first time that you've made a decision on ITN that in my view appears to go against a clear consensus. It's difficult not to have a knee-jerk reaction. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 13:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  @Fuzheado: Whoa, hold on. "poor faith"?! You can't possibly mean that. At the risk of sounding self-important, could everyone just chill a little bit? No one is acting in poor faith, no one is "misusing" the admin bit, we're just (as usual) kind of stumbling towards a solution because the wikipedia way is inherently messy. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:17, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose reinstatement, pull - Just for the record, although I did note that I supported removing this from ongoing earlier. I think Fuzheado acted against consensus, even if the previous removal was technically a bit early.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 12:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Pull It is sadly clear that most governments and the majority of people don't give a stuff anymore (this coming from a person who voluntarily wears masks everywhere still), and the reinstatement was basically just another the personal preference of a higher authority driving by to put us plebs in place again Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose reinstatement, pull. Per WaltCip. Yes, the original pull was a little hasty, but we're a day in now and consensus for pulling seems fairly clear in the discussion above so I'm unsure why it was reinstated. I have been reticent to remove covid from ongoing in the past, but the nominator rationale above is sound, and in most parts of the world the ongoing newsworthiness and daily updates are not there. We can always put it back if the pandemic flares up again, and we are not obliged to wait for the WHO. @Fuzheado: please reconsider, because it will be difficult for any other admin to reverse your decision now. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 12:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  I don't think reinstatement makes it harder to reverse. It makes it hard to reverse right away, but if the discussion is open a while longer and there's clear consensus for removal, then by definition it isn't wheel warring to reinstate a contested admin action that has broad consensus. It's been on the main page for years, we can afford to let the discussion run a little longer. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Pull reinstating was an abuse of admin priviledge, there was clear consensus against doing so. Polyamorph (talk) 13:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(Closed) Ongoing: Climate Change

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 Cashewnøtt (talk · give credit)

• Support per nom. The Western US drought is a major threat to global food security as well. --LaserLegs (talk) 09:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Climate change has been affecting people for years now and it will do so probably for all of our lifetimes. There is no point in adding something to ITN as ongoing if we already know it will never be removed because that's not what ITN is for. Regards SoWhy 09:56, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose This is like the third time an ongoing for CC has been suggested, but it fails as it would be ongoing indefinitely. --Masem (t) 10:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - I know this year new things have happened as climate change becomes more severe, but climate change has been ongoing for years and will probably continue into the future. Would it be suitable, for example, to put car crashes on ITN/Ongoing? EditMaker Me (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – Per Masem. Too broad a topic. Spot news events related to CC would not illustrate the general topic. – Sca (talk) 12:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

(Cancelled) Artemis 1

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 CactiStaccingCrane (talk · give credit)

• Support because, if successful, it will be the start of further moon exploration and more moon landings. Also, Artemis has a huge impact on other future space missions, such as missions containing extensive exploration of other planets, as finally completing lunar exploration and establishing bases can be a huge help in setting the first foot on Mars. But in general, it is a major event in the history of human exploration of space, since the last moon landing dates back to the early 1970s. --CDE34RFV (talk) 11:50, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support - Clearly notable and the article is in good shape. Wait until it's actually launched though. EditMaker Me (talk) 11:46, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Wait - Many things may happen at and during launch. Wait until it's launched and we have a status report added. Cambalachero (talk) 11:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Wait until launched. After, support. Anarchyte (talk) 12:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – Troubleshooting of Engine 3 continued as of 12:00. About an hour remains in launch window. – Sca (talk) 12:27, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  Scrubbed. Oof. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:36, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Launch has been scrubbed. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 12:37, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

August 28

(Closed) Liverpool 9-0 Bournemouth

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 EditMaker Me (talk · give credit)

• Oppose ephemera and probably could/should be deleted Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

  All previous PL 9-0 results have their own articles. That said, unless it actually broke the record it shouldn’t be making FP. The Kip (talk) 13:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose – Per previous. Meh. – Sca (talk) 12:53, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
• Unlike Manchester United F.C. 9–0 Ipswich Town F.C., which is an FA, the current nom is a mini-stub with next to no contents. There is currently so little prose and so much blank space. This is not a viable ITN candidate at this time. --PFHLai (talk) 13:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose WP:ROUTINE, normal league match. Not even that rare a scoreline by now. Also we would set a problematic precedent if we start posting normal league matches every time someone gets heavily defeated. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:44, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment Celtic just beat Dundee United 9-0 away. Match report from The Guardian. Perfect illustration of my point. Abcmaxx (talk) 14:39, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Also today Montpellier HSC beat Stade Brestois 7-0 away (L'Équipe report) and Union Berlin beat Schalke 04 6-1 away yesterday (Kicker report). This all in one weekend! High score; yes, but out of ordinary; definitely not. Abcmaxx (talk) 15:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose despite the huge margin of victory, a single match isn't notable enough for this, especially when the scoreline has been achieved four times in the last 20 years. Additionally, this would set a bad precent where any game in any sport that sets a league or competition record for margin of victory could be nominated. AryKun (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

• Far better as a DYK, of expanded.

Masem (t) 14:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per Abcmaxx.  Hamza Ali Shah  15:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

August 27

(Posted) 2022 Pakistan floods

• Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Quake1234 (talk · give credit)

 Ainty Painty (talk) 01:05, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment I support this in principle but there are two concerns. First a couple cites needed (tags added). Secondly, we need to clarify that this is an ongoing disaster that is currently "in the news." Would be good if we could add a little meat to the article, but it is adequate in length if the other issues are resolved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support Goes without saying that this is notable thanks to the high number of fatalities. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:22, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support - Super high number of fatalities CR-1-AB (talk) 02:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Strong support and perhaps even ongoing? EditMaker Me (talk) 05:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support Not seeing any major issues here, article looks good to me. Gotitbro (talk) 06:10, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The article starts by telling us that this started in June, which is when the annual monsoon starts. The bulk of the deaths seem to have occurred in June/July. The article seems to be a ragbag of incidents across a wide area and period of time. Perhaps this might work as an ongoing item but this is essentially the southwest monsoon which causes heavy rain and flooding every year and so is routine weather. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:36, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

  About half the people had been killed in the past two months, the floods have rapidly increased only in the last week with the death toll doubling to the present one and a state of emergency being declared now. The sources in the article make this amply clear. While a routine meteorological event, I am pretty sure a thousand people dying would stand out in any region; also considering that they are the worst floods in over a decade in the country. Gotitbro (talk) 08:10, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Timely for ITN right now, and definitely notable enough. –Jiaminglimjm (talk) 09:59, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support - Clearly timely, due to the signficant increase in severity recently, and the attendant state of emergency being declared. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality issues... Article needs better sourcing and structure..hard to follow why now is the time for ITN. Masem (t) 10:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – Widely and fairly prominently covered, with fatals totaling about 1,000. – Sca (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support This is a global disaster and should be on the front page. 3skandar (talk) 13:23, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Not just a major disaster, but Scientific American says this is a foreshadow of extreme weather events to come as a result of climate change.VR _talk 15:59, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• The extreme weather events have already been in evidence all over the world this year. The Scientific American article has a reasonably global perspective, "...But scientists at the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in Geneva say there's no doubt that higher Atlantic Ocean temperatures contributed to the disaster begun late last month. Atmospheric anomalies that led to the floods are also directly related to the same weather phenomena that a caused the record heat wave in Russia and flooding and mudslides in western China...". But our article doesn't say anything about the Atlantic, Russia or China. It doesn't even mention India, which naturally has monsoon flooding too. It's presented purely as provincial incidents rather than as a global weather pattern. Proseline rather than a coherent global narrative. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment I'd support since this is clearly ITN; however, the blurb statement about a national state of emergency does currently not seem to be in the article? I'd think we need at least clarification on that. Currently it's clear to me that this should be ITN right now, but from external sources, not really from the article. --LordPeterII (talk) 16:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Nevermind, a source on that was already in the article, just no prose. I've added a sentence to the lede, and am now supporting. --LordPeterII (talk) 16:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Notable disaster, notable death toll, article is in good shape. The Kip (talk) 18:21, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support – An adequate 865-word article with a half-dozen geographical sections. – Sca (talk) 19:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted – I've posted Alt2. Schwede66 19:35, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose the article is an incoherent mess outlining an event going on for two months without a single date in the scant article body. Almost none of the supports addressed the article quality. It's regrettable that this was posted. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

  The declaration of the state of emergency is the event that has led to the nom, so I don't see any issue of eligiblity. The article quality seems acceptable to me, there is enough detail and just one cite tag.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

  No, it's a collection of factoids that do not tell a coherent narrative. "At least 402 people have been killed and 1,055 have been injured by floods in Sindh." Since when? Until when? "Among the fatalities were three young children, who lost their lives when the roof of their house collapsed in Kandhkot." Tragic, but who cares? Really. "The city of Karachi has not been affected yet by the renewed flooding, but had been affected previously." cool, so not flooded. The whole thing is like that. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Post-posting support Major disaster. -TenorTwelve (talk) 04:06, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

August 26

RD: Aldo Mirate

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: 79, Italian politician, deputy (1972–1979). Abcmaxx (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

• A three-sentence stub? Come on! --PFHLai (talk) 11:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  • The point of nominating isn't always to post straight away. It's to highlight and improve articles. I'm sure there are Italian speakers who can help, there are sources on Italian wiki. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:33, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
    • While I am generally supportive of efforts to bring attention to potential candidates here, I'm afraid this one is a little too far off. The article on the Italian wiki is also a stub. --PFHLai (talk) 13:43, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
      • It can happen. Example: When I nominated Janusz Kupcewicz. It was expanded from almost nothing to a pretty good article, far better than on pl-wiki too. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
        • Looking forward to seeing you repeat the feat here. Don't forget your other 4x RD noms below. -- PFHLai (talk) 14:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
          • Wasn't just me though, there were others helping too. There's nothing wrong with nominating articles that have potential to be improved; if they don't get posted they don't get posted, no harm done, better to nominate on the off chance someone will be able to add and improve then just leave it forever in that state. Abcmaxx (talk) 16:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

            Indeed. No harm was done, Abcmaxx. Please be encouraged to keep nominating. Please also be encouraged to be a bit more "picky". Thank you. -- PFHLai (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

            • you’re doing a good job, but it’s as important to nominate as it is to work on the items you nominate. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

RD: Espen Skjønberg

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: 98, Norwegian actor (One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, A Handful of Time, The Last Lieutenant). Orange tagged but there are plenty of sources and needs to be inputted into the career section. Filmography needs references. Otherwise the article is good. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

RD: Jalaluddin Umri

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: 87, Indian Islamic scholar, amir of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (2007–2019). Referenced and good enough to post, although unusual subsection headings. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

RD: Slavko Večerin

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: 65, Serbian Roman Catholic prelate, bishop of Subotica (since 2020). I believe article although not overly long is good enough to post. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

RD: Hana Zagorová

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: 75, Czech singer-songwriter and actress (The Hit, Hrubeš a Mareš jsou kamarádi do deště). Article is great at first glance but desperately needs a lot more references; orange tagged as a result. Filmography is incomplete as well. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:43, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

August 25

(Posted) RD: Joey DeFrancesco

• Updated by The Gnome (talk · give credit), Jazzanddarkmatter (talk · give credit), Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit) and Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: American jazz musician. --PFHLai (talk) 10:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support – article is well-referenced and meets minimum depth of coverage for ITN. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer 03:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Steven Hoffenberg

• Updated by Gobonobo (talk · give credit), Johndavies837 (talk · give credit) and 65.88.88.200 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: American businessman and fraudster. Former owner of the New York Post. Found dead on this day. --PFHLai (talk) 06:46, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support looks good to go. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Posted to RD. Spencer 19:44, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

(Ready) RD: Giles Radice

• Updated and nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit), ActivelyDisinterested (talk · give credit) and Black Kite (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: British politician. The "writing and political ideas" section needs more sources. Almost fully sourced. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 01:22, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment: At least one CN tag...—Brigade Piron (talk) 08:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support Now fully cited. Black Kite (talk) 08:33, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(PULL CALLED. Posted) 2022 Angolan general election

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: I realise I'm slightly early with the nomination but best to start tidying up now, with over 97% of votes counted, rather than having a lot to do later. I believe the article so far is very good: more background would be nice especially given the very long history of both the two biggest parties and the fears over potential vote rigging that were raised; once official results announced they need to be added and an aftermath section needs to be added too. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Probably should wait until results are formalized, but the election commisssion has stated they've effectively won. The Kip (talk) 22:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• In any case, let's not forget that the results section needs to have prose and include a section on reactions/aftermath. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support, but after the formal announcement per the blurb wording. (BTW, why that low-res image? If we want him grinning, there are other choices at commonscat:João Lourenço; the one in his article infobox more closely resembles his state photo and here is a similar, more closely cropped version.) —  AjaxSmack  00:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

  Too low-res? It seems fine on my (old and basic, i.e. cheap) monitor. This is fine. I was just looking for a more recent pic. This is another possibility, even more recent, but looks a bit too dark on my monitor. --PFHLai (talk) 03:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment what's there is fine, just need a paragraph in the results section, usual "reactions" and good to go. Nice. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support once updated per LaserLegs. EditMaker Me (talk) 05:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• Conditional support Once there's some referenced prosed in the 'Preliminary results' section, this gets my support. Schwede66 06:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – The Guardian puts MPLA ahead 52% over Unita's 42% – but results still "provisional." – Sca (talk) 12:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• Not ready. Needs at least a fully-referenced paragraph of prose discussing the results, reactions etc. I've added an altblurb. Modest Genius 14:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

  Also, it would be nice to state in the article that Angola does not have a prime minister and that the leader of the winning party becomes the president. Just to make it clear for the readers (the President of Angola explains this but it is a separate article so some digging is needed). Tone 15:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

  I've tried to make that clearer at 2022_Angolan_general_election#Electoral_system Modest Genius 16:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support after results confirmed and article updated. Angola is a major country and wikipedia should give more coverage to events in Africa.VR _talk 15:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

  For what it’s worth, we do consistently post sovereign state elections regardless of location. The top/most recent event on ITNR at the moment is the Kenyan presidential election. The Kip (talk) 18:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment – Is it worth noting that despite the MPLA's victory, it was their worst showing in an election in Angola? I'm not sure if there's a way to put that in there, but the MPLA's significant loss of seats and UNITA's significant gain of seats seems like it's somewhat noteworthy. TartarTorte 18:23, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted by Schwede66 - 20:34, 27 August 2022 (UTC) (diff)
• Pull article is not ready: there is no prose on the results and no section on reactions/aftermath. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:06, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• PULL! Article lacks prose results section. Also, when reposted, use alt blurb. The current blurb implies that the election is illegitimate. Rockphed (talk) 18:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment Nobody supported posting this, as all the Support votes were conditional. Yet, this was posted. It makes me pretty curious. 85.241.60.107 (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

  Yes, shouldn't have gone up without a prose summary of the results.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Compare (Pulled) 2021 Portuguese presidential election. 85.240.209.176 (talk) 06:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Pull. @Schwede66: why was this posted without any prose update in the article? It's still not ready. Modest Genius 11:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support pull – Too thin, mostly BG & electoral system. Not enough news. – Sca (talk) 12:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Robert E. Finnigan

• Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk · give credit) and Susmuffin (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: American engineer. Death announced in WP:RS on this date. Article might require an end-to-end read and some edits. I did not have to do any major edits. Article seems well built and seems ready for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 16:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 06:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 16:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

August 24

(Posted) RD: Man of the Hole

• Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Last known member of an uncontacted Amazon tribe. Body found 24th August Dumelow (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support. One unsourced line at the end but otherwise in good shape. Innisfree987 (talk) 17:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
  • I've reffed that from the same article as the previous sentence, though I'm not especially impressed that our article cites cracked.com (three times!). —Cryptic 18:22, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support RD. Would also support a blurb based on him being the last of his tribe, the presumed sole survivor of a genocide. ~ ONUnicornproblem solving 18:41, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support RD, neutral on blurb. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:43, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted RD Interesting, atypical for RD. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support - I actually came here to make this nomination and am gratified that somebody already did. The Man of the Hole is notable as the last member of his tribe, and the article about him, while short, has ample citations. Tisnec (talk) 00:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb because of Indigenous genocide. -TenorTwelve (talk) 03:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb the death of a people is an apocalypse in itself --Jiaminglimjm (talk) 05:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb but let's be careful with the wording. For example 'people' is better than 'tribe', which has derogatory connotations in English, and 'Man of the Hole' was not his name. How about the last surviving member of a people destroyed in the genocide of indigenous peoples in Brazil dies? – Joe (talk) 08:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Added altblurb2; Support altblurb2 Thank you Joe for your input. Respect is important. -TenorTwelve (talk) 09:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support No name, no age, no job description, just an entire forgotten culture, dead at last, seems inherently remarkable. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Support blurb – Sadly, this is hardly a unique situation, with so many thousands of communities wiped out throughout the Amazones. I am extremely appreciative of the way the article has been updated over the past few days, and I think this article is a very solid candidate for a blurb. I will note that Alt2 is a bit ambiguous, as it could be read as "the last survivor of the genocide of Indigenous peoples in Brazil." I don't have good suggestions for rewording it; perhaps "a group" or "a community." ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  I can see the potential for confusion, but it does say "last surviving member of a people destroyed in the genocide ..." The problem with replacing 'people' with 'group' or 'community' is that those would imply a subunit of a larger population, when this man was, as far as we know, the last living representative of an entire ethnic group, with no living relatives, genetic or cultural. – Joe (talk) 11:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb, RD is fine. The genocide occurred in the 1970s, and almost nothing is known about this person's life (not even their name). A strange and interesting article, but this death doesn't reach the Thatcher/Mandela standard for blurbing deaths in old age. Modest Genius 11:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  Technically the genocide began in the 1970s (or earlier) and ended last month, with this man's death. – Joe (talk) 11:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

  An act of genocide needs an actor, even allegedly. Whenever the intent stops, so does the genocide. Anyone left is a survivor, free to live till the end, by which time one might take comfort in joining those who didn't make it via self-feathered hammock, far from the whole manmade violent crime system. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Dorli Rainey

• Nominated by Innisfree987 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Silver seren (talk · give credit) and Thriley (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: American activist. Died Aug 12 but announced Aug 24. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:26, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Looks satisfactory. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 03:06, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Tim Page (photographer)

• Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit) and Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: British-Australian photographer and war correspondent. Wikibio still needs more footnotes, but it's getting there. --PFHLai (talk) 18:17, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support - comprehensive, well referenced, looks ready? JennyOz (talk) 08:56, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support – article is well-referenced and meets minimum depth of coverage for ITN. Marking ready. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:28, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 08:34, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Coradia iLint hydrail line

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: The world's first. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose, reads like advertising. Sandstein 12:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Stale / misleading blurb. According to both our hydrail article and the Al Jazeera article listed above, this technology has been in commercial operation since 2018. The news here is increasing the number of trains in service from 2 to 14. That's very different from the claim in the blurb, and far less significant. Modest Genius 12:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It was tested in 2018; not actually formally implemented.Abcmaxx (talk) 14:04, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

According to the DW link above, those two trains have been in passenger service for the entire four years, carrying fare-paying customers. That's not just a test, it's a small-scale deployment. Modest Genius 14:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Amended further to above comments Abcmaxx (talk) 14:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  Better, but there's one sentence update in the article. A better target would be a dedicated article, such as we have for metro lines in some big cities, for example. Tone 14:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support in principle, but agree with Tone that a dedicated article would make a better target. Altblurb II preferred. EditMaker Me (talk) 14:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The newsworthiness of the current event is somewhat debatable, requiring the quality of the current update to carry a lot of weight. That update does not yet exist, and it seems unlikely there is enough "there" there to justify an update of such quality and quantity to compensate. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – The CNN story says 14 "hydrogen trains powered by fuel-cell propulsion" will be deployed on a scenic route running to (or through?) Bremervörde, halfway between Bremerhaven and Hamburg, by the end of the year. Five of them began running Wednesday. The hydrogen units are to replace 15 diesel loc's. – Sca (talk) 15:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose as effectively stale by Modest Genius. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  Don't see how it can be stale if the first five started yesterday and the project will continue to be implemented during the rest of the year. -- Sca (talk) 15:41, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  The linked articles and the Hydrail page mentions they had trains in service as early as 2018. These sources indicate it was a trial, but that these trains were actually in service for two years. The train system will now completely be hydrogen-powered, but the line has already had hydrogen-powered trains run it it for commercial service. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  I'd still argue that there a huge difference between having two such trains among many as a test and somewhat novelty to having a whole line and fleet entirely running a service.Abcmaxx (talk) 17:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Interesting. However, given there is no dedicated article and given it is an expansion of service, i think it is not enough for ITN. Tradedia 18:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Nothing here yet – Is anyone planning on actually updating the article? looks like a great subject to feature if we would actually write about it. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
  • The target would be Coradia iLint, so I've modified the altblurb accordingly. Brandmeister 10:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
    • That's only a two-graf section of the article on France-based Alstom. This topic needs a separate article on the project now underway in Germany. -- Sca (talk) 12:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
    • Oh, this does look a little better. I was only looking at hydrail. I do still think it's too weak for an ITN blurb, but it's a lot better. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:49, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• Update There is now an article on the train: Coradia iLint. Therefore amended the blurbs and nomination accordingly.Abcmaxx (talk) 10:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – Suggested target text is still a two-paragraph section of the Alstom article. Timeliness fading. -- Sca (talk) 12:46, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Wayne Yates

• Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: First reported today (August 24); died on August 16. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Looks good, everything seems to be sourced. --Vacant0 (talk) 10:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Appears to be of sufficient quality for ITN. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support good to go. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 03:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kallistos (Ware)

• Nominated by Ad Orientem (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Extremely prominent theologian and bishop of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Article needs work on referencing. Memory eternal! Ad Orientem (talk) 01:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Support, Article is good enough for RD. Alex-h (talk) 08:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Orange-tagged, needs more sources. --Vacant0 (talk) 10:55, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality article is orange-tagged. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support - References have been added, and the orange tag removed. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Note One CN tag left, but it's not a minor one. I am looking around for a source. If one can't be found in a reasonable period of time, I will remove that section. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I think everything is now sourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 06:18, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Shalom Cohen

• Nominated by EditMaker Me (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Rabbi and spiritual head of the Zionist Shas political party. EditMaker Me (talk) 11:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Looks alright. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support looks good to go. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer 04:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Len Dawson

• Nominated by Sportsfangnome (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Bigmoe797 (talk · give credit) and BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: NFL player who is a Super Bowl MVP, first round draft pick, and Hall of Famer. Sportsfangnome (talk) 13:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

• Needs some more refs. RIP to one of the all-time NFL greats :( BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Currently working on the referencing. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:31, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
    • Support. All paragraphs now have a reference. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support, Article is good. Alex-h (talk) 15:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose A number of Cn's in the 1st two paragraphs of the college section. I'm wary that other large paragraphs with only one source at the end also have text not supported by the existing citations.—Bagumba (talk) 06:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  @Bagumba: How is the article now? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:33, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  Struck my oppose. There's remaining unsourced details here and there, but I don't have concerns that they are verifiable.—Bagumba (talk) 17:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

  Are we ready to post? Sportsfangnome (talk) 00:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

• Can we post this now? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted: No outstanding opposition.—Bagumba (talk) 19:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

August 23

(Posted) RD: Rolando Cubela Secades

• Updated and nominated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Cuban revolutionary who planned to assassinate Fidel Castro. Article looks good. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Appropriate depth of coverage, referenced. Spencer 19:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 23:23, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

RD: Vytjie Mentor

• Updated by Bobbyshabangu (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: South African politician. African National Congress's caucus chairperson (2004-2008). --PFHLai (talk) 07:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 17:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support A little more could be said about her political career beyond the controversies. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
• Weak oppose Insufficient depth of coverage of political career. Outside of "allegations", essentially no description of actions in the role or policy positions. Spencer 19:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Julian Robertson

• Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: American hedge fund manager. - Indefensible (talk) 17:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Solid article and decently sourced. G2G. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer 04:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

(Closed) Former Malaysian Prime Minister loses final appeal

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 Banedon (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Wilson C A 99 (talk · give credit)

• Oppose We posted his conviction two years ago, so no need to post the confirmation by a higher court. This would have been notable had the appeal been accepted, but this is just a routine consequence in the case.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Per Kiril. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose, I agree with Kiril. Modest Genius 13:17, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

  Twelve years in the slammer and a hefty fine. Was this a foregone conclusion? -- Sca (talk) 13:54, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

  He was sentenced in July 2020, when we previously posted this story. Modest Genius 14:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

What significant is that he was free on bail and never served his prison sentence until this case is finally heard in the Apex Court of Malaysia. Wilson C A 99 (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Per above. Alex-h (talk) 16:07, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per Kiril, recommending SNOW closure. The Kip (talk) 18:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Rahimuddin Khan

• Nominated by Buttoner (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Pakistani military chief, provincial governor, major role as peacemaker for Baloch insurgency Buttoner (talk) 00:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support Article fully referenced, covers subject's life and career with adequate depth. Spencer 19:02, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support. Looks good enough. – Ammarpad (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support I've added two more sources, it's good now. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer 21:50, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Tom Springfield

• Nominated by HiLo48 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Writer of songs that made The Seekers famous. Brother of Dusty Springfield. Died last month but only just announced. HiLo48 (talk) 00:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Wow, 52 years retired and living off radio-play royalties... nice. Could do with a source for the awards, otherwise pretty much there.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:57, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support I've added citations for the awards - @Pawnkingthree: please reevaluate or add cn tags where they're needed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 12:08, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support Thanks for the update.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:35, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Support Looks to be well referenced. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer 21:51, 24 August 2022 (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
• Current events