February 23, 2016 (2016-02-23) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
February 22
Portal:Current events/2016 February 22
|
February 22, 2016 (2016-02-22) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economics
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
RD: Douglas Slocombe
Article: Douglas Slocombe (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s): BBC, citing statement from family Credits:
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Eminent cinematographer, three-time BAFTA winner, three-time Oscar nominee. Probably best-known for the Indiana Jones films, but also shot many other classics. One of the last of his generation of filmmakers, dying at age 103. Blythwood (talk) 21:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support some tweaks needed to the article but notability is beyond doubt for RD. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support on notability -- I'm astonished at how many legendary films he was associated with -- but the article is going to need some work. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support with article improvements - Importance is very clear not only between volume of works but awards and the various titles he earned. I see on glaring CN (about his creativity) that one of these pending obit articles should easily fill in for. --MASEM (t) 21:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Article is, I think, basically ready now. I've gone through Google Books and found a real range of comments on his work, a photo, and a blockquote of his experience escaping the German blitzkrieg, which is really one heck of a story. Blythwood (talk) 23:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - not on par with Michael Ballhaus, Vadim Yusov, Sven Nykvist or other cinematographers who are at the top of their field. That's not the case with Mr Slocombe, who was a reliable cog in the wheel. That he never won the Academy Awards and was mainly involved in the production of schlockfest films (or what the editor above calls "legendary") speaks for itself. I am tempted to nominate Andrzej Żuławski for RD, just to see the massive difference nationality makes when it comes to ITN/C. 87.154.210.6 (talk) 21:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Please do but note that the nomination would become stale in two days time. It would have been better to nominate it five days ago. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nationality is irrelevant; I will support nominations that are shown to meet the criteria, are adequately updated, and are shown to be in the news. If that person qualifies, please nominate them. We can only discuss what we are given for nominations. 331dot (talk) 23:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- That's funny, I guess next Waltcip will post here and claim that he only edits when he is sober
February 21
Portal:Current events/2016 February 21
|
February 21, 2016 (2016-02-21) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
2016 Women's Bandy World Championship
Consensus against posting. --Tone 20:47, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: 2016 Women's Bandy World Championship (talk · history · tag) Blurb: Sweden defeats Russia to win its 7th workd championship title, in Roseville, Minnesota, USA. (Post) Credits:
- Oppose, many times over malformed nomination, incorrect blurb, appalling article quality. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Skogsvandraren suggest you edit the article so that it has some paragraphs describing the event. You also need to show that this event is being reported in mainstream media - is it reported by CNN news, or Yahoo news, or international sports news sites? MurielMary (talk) 08:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose As of right now, the entire article has 39 words of prose. That is not the best we can do. --Jayron32 13:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- To quote Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: "What is this?!"--WaltCip (talk) 13:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Or as a certain Teletype operator was wont to say to certain AP writers, "What is dis shit?" Sca (talk) 15:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- According to some people, prose had no place in an article like this. I don't agree myself, so I like the fact that I have found someone who agrees with me in that regard. As for the low quality of the article, please suggest improvements. Skogsvandraren (talk) 17:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Look at some other articles on annual international sports championships and notice what is included e.g. 2015 Rugby World Cup. MurielMary (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability and quality grounds. I had to go to the article on bandy to figure out what it is, so if you want to improve the article, context would help. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability and quality. I don't need to know anything about bandy to know that the article is of poor quality, and news coverage seems limited anywhere, even in the US(where this occurred). 331dot (talk) 20:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
2016 Daytona 500
Articles: 2016 Daytona 500 (talk · history · tag) and Denny Hamlin (talk · history · tag) Blurb: Denny Hamlin wins the 2016 Daytona 500 by 0.01 seconds, making it the closest margin in the race's history. (Post) Alternative blurb: In motorsport, Denny Hamlin wins the Daytona 500. News source(s): ESPN Sports Illustrated Credits:
Nominator's comments: The biggest and most prestigious event in the Sprint Cup Series. Andise1 (talk) 22:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Weak support with final updates - I note Daytona is not an ITNR within Motorsport, and there was discussion last year to add it to ITNR (see ). That said, the race article is in good shape, all that it needs is the full result table and a few sources to add to the existing description of the race, which will come within a few hours from RSes. On the other hand, Hamlin's article is far from good sourcing and really needs work. As long as the race article is the only one highlighted, that should be okay, but really the poor quality of Hamlin's could limit this nom. --MASEM (t) 22:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support the "Super Bowl of Stock Car Racing" is a notable recurring sporting event that should be on the main page every year. Dough4872 00:38, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support as last year's Daytona 500 ITN nominator, though I'd suggest possible change of the blurb to something simpler, perhaps: "In motorsport, Denny Hamlin wins NASCAR's Daytona 500" or something like that. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 01:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Stock car racing's biggest event of the year. The page just needs some finishing up on the standings and we should be good to go. Zappa24Mati 03:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose until all of the race section is referenced correctly. Otherwise it's a good article and can be considered a decent candidate for the main page. Traditional alt-blurb added. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose We already have 7 annual motorsport items at ITNR. If this is truly the Super Bowl of Stock Car Racing as claimed, we should remove the lesser NASCAR Sprint Cup Series (Drivers champion) from ITNR and replace it with the Daytona 500. Two blurbs in a year for Stock Car Racing (which is a US-only event completely unknown outside of the US) would be too many. LoveToLondon (talk) 13:40, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Who said anything about ITNR? This is not in ITNR, and this is not a proposal to add it to ITNR. --Jayron32 14:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- And not only that, but a discussion to add it to ITNR did not result in consensus to do so, so that isn't even an issue. Do you have any comment on the merits of this normal nomination? 331dot (talk) 14:09, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- I would further note that single-country objections("US only event, completely unknown outside of US") are not valid, as stated on this page. 331dot (talk) 14:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, and furthermore, "completely unknown outside of the US" is a farcical statement when even TRM himself has said he will support this item once the race section is properly referenced, to say nothing of the fact that NASCAR has 23 international broadcast partners.--WaltCip (talk) 14:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- The 23 international broadcast partners are various (often fringe) sports channels that show all kinds of sports from Darts to whatever else they can get the rights without paying much.
- This is a proposal to post a second blurb for an US-only motorsport series. Even for Formula 1, known worldwide and with races on all continents, the consensus was two months ago to post only one blurb per year. Is the most important title of the Sprint Cup Series the drivers champion or the Daytona 500? The most important one should be ITNR, and the lesser one not posted.
- LoveToLondon (talk) 14:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- That's still hardly "completely unknown". The subject you raise about which is important would seem to have been resolved in the discussion last year(see above), but that does not preclude regular nominations. Objections to posting something because it is not ITNR are also not valid, as stated on this page. 331dot (talk) 14:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Except for really fanatic motorsport fans you won't find anyone outside the US who knows what Daytona 500 is. The average person does not have the slightest clue, and the casual motorsport fan who follows Formula 1 will assume it is an IndyCar race like Indy 500.
- An objection to post two blurbs per year for a lesser-known series when consensus was to post only one blurb for the best-known series worldwide is a valid objection.
- I would not object changing which Sprint Cup Series item is listed at ITNR, but two blurbs per year is too much.
- LoveToLondon (talk) 14:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Please link to the consensus where a general policy was established to post "one blurb for the best-known series". We consider each item on its own merits here. You are saying that you object because there should be only be one ITNR item in NASCAR and this isn't the one you believe it should be, so it shouldn't be posted. I don't see any other way to interpret that other than you objecting because this item is not ITNR. An ITNR listing does not preclude other traditional ITNC nominations. Do you have any comments about the merits of this specific nomination? 331dot (talk) 14:47, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Again you are continuing to argue on the wavelength of this being a "single country event".--WaltCip (talk) 14:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Except for really fanatic motorsport fans you won't find anyone outside the US who knows what Daytona 500 is wrong, I'm far from a "fanatic" but I know what the Daytona 500 is. An objection to post two blurbs per year for a lesser-known series when consensus was to post only one blurb for the best-known series worldwide is a valid objection. wrong, there's no numerical limitation of blurbs relating to the same topic. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:52, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- You are saying that you object because there should be only be one ITNR item in NASCAR and this isn't the one you believe it should be, so it shouldn't be posted. No, this is not what I am saying. Perhaps you understand if I repeat bolded what I wrote directly above your incorrect claim: I would not object changing which Sprint Cup Series item is listed at ITNR, but two blurbs per year is too much.
- Again you are continuing to argue on the wavelength of this being a "single country event". Also wrong. I am arguing that we already have seven motorsport ITNR items, which is pretty huge compared to other sports. Consensus was not to post two Formula 1 blurbs every year, and the Sprint Cup Series has even less recognition worldwide for deserving two blurbs in one year.
- there's no numerical limitation of blurbs relating to the same topic There is the general question whether we want 7 or 15 or 70 motorsport blurbs every year. 7 are already listed at ITNR, and when Sprint Cup Series gets two blurbs more well-known series can't reasonably be denied more than one blurb per year.
- LoveToLondon (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- There is the general question whether we want 7 or 15 or 70 motorsport blurbs every year. Nonsense. If 70 articles gain consensus, and are of sufficient quality, 70 we post. We don't arbitrarily define a cut-off for how many we're posting, not if we're being sensible. This particular edition of NASCAR has made it into international news for being won by the smallest margin ever, so there's good grounds for considering it despite what you may be suggesting. Besides all that, as evidenced by the recent Grammys article, ITNR is no guarantee of posting, quality has to be there too, so even your numerical cut-off is rendered somewhat meaningless. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- @LoveToLondon: I understand that you wouldn't object to this being ITNR in place of the other one, but that only supports what I said, given the prior discussion on that issue. I did poorly word my post and I apologize. 331dot (talk) 15:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Regarding ITNR, NASCAR should only be featured twice a year: the Daytona 500 winner in February and the Sprint Cup Champion in November. For other motorsports, the most prestigious race and the champion are also worth mentioning. For IndyCar, this would be the Indianapolis 500 and the champion and for F1 this would be the Grand Prix of Monaco and the champion. Dough4872 16:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Please explain how this is not notable. 331dot (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- It would require nothing of the sort. Each nomination is evaluated on its own merits. If other races similar to this one got decent articles and news coverage, I would support those too. If they don't get decent updates, then they shouldn't. There are no arbitrary limits on any category of posts, nor should their be. 331dot (talk) 19:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- I agree that each nomination should be evaluated on its own merits but we cannot post everything that appears in the media. If this one gets posted, then others will come with recurrent events of similar importance, thus artificially inflating the number of posted blurbs and leaving no room for incidental events. Daytona 500 takes place on annual basis but scientific discoveries, natural disasters, presidential changes and economic news occur only once. That said, incidental events are much more valuable than recurrent and should always be given priority.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I will just say that it is one thing to say "we post too many NASCAR races" but another to say "we should only post one NASCAR story". What we post should be determined as I indicated and not be an arbitrary limit. 331dot (talk) 20:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Your opinion is just yours and please keep it with no indication. We do not have clear guidelines about what to post as we do not have a numerical cut-off for how many blurbs should be posted every year.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:17, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Read your own statement again. How are you opposed? Your opinion is just yours and there is no limit.Correctron (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support. I don't know if this should be posted every year, but this particular running of the race seems notable to post given the nature of the victory(whether or not the margin of victory is mentioned in the blurb; no opinion on that) Those opposing this seem to be doing so out of a desire to see some sort of arbitrary numerical limit on postings in auto racing. 331dot (talk) 19:49, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support Article is in pretty good shape with extensive prose updates for the race, and it has been covered in the news. Spencer 20:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Eric "Winkle" Brown
Article: Eric Brown (pilot) (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Notable test pilot, long and distinguished military and civil career. Mjroots (talk) 18:23, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support Notable in his field for sure.--86.135.159.20 (talk) 19:14, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support many firsts in aviation. Article is almost there. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:16, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support pending improvement to sourcing. Meets RD criteria, but large chunks of prose are without citations. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:20, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support on article improvements RD met, but as pointed out above, there's many sections and areas without inline cites. --MASEM (t) 20:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support It's in the news, e.g. top story on BBC. Andrew D. (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support described by the BBC as the Royal Navy's most decorated pilot and had a long and notable aviation career. --Bcp67 (talk) 21:32, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support. A legendary figure, most decorated Navy pilot and, as a test pilot, Guinness world record for most types flown and for most carrier landings. First carrier landing of a jet aircraft (also first of a twin-engine and with tricycle undercarriage). Appointed MBE, OBE and CBE. Survived 11 plane crashes and the sinking of HMS Audacity in 1941, was at the liberation of Bergen Belsen and subsequently interrogated some of the leading Nazis after the war, including Heinrich Himmler, Hermann Goering and Belsen's chief guards Josef Kramer and Irma Grese. A truly remarkable man. And actually so interesting I think a blurb would be valid. Guy (Help!) 00:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- FYI, this is currently on the front page of the BBC News website. Most RDs don't get that. Guy (Help!) 00:45, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment It is on the front page of the BBC News website - only if you trawl down through international/UK/England/Sussex. Which means it's on the front page of the regional website. Not the national or international. MurielMary (talk) 08:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- It's on the main UK page of the international website. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- UK and international sites, actually. I have no possible reason to look at the Sussex page. The BBC News website is, however, highly dynamic, and this may have changed since. Guy (Help!) 09:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Try reading the article and also his death was on the front page - just the day before you read the article. Is your comment an oppose or just a pointy comment?--86.135.159.20 (talk) 10:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- My point is the one that is clearly stated in the ITN criteria page - "Caution should be taken when assessing news sources for prominence, because most major news outlets provide individualized experiences for each user, based on geography and browsing history. What one user sees as a top headline may be buried for others, and vice versa. Do not assess whether a story is "prominent" or not based on where you see it reported on major news websites for this reason." I.e. what one person sees as "top" isn't necessarily what others see as "top". MurielMary (talk) 16:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- But your claim was incorrect, it was on the main page of the UK section of the international BBC website, you did not have to go down to the Sussex page at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Clearly meets RD; given what I can read in his article, much like Guy above I'm wondering if he would merit a blurb. He seems like one of the top people in his field, not just 'very important'. 331dot (talk) 11:49, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD (only). Certainly a top pilot, holding a string of records and aviation firsts. Modest Genius 12:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. Not ready yet; large sections remain largely uncited. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Posted to RD — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 17:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Recommend pulling RD The article quality is still lacking from what others have pointed out. We have unsourced direct quotes in the article in the first main section, to start, which is a major no-no. I normally wouldn't challenge an RD posted like this if the quality was just a bit lacking, but this is a failure of having to follow proper sourcing requirements, period, and should not be on the front page yet until met. --MASEM (t) 17:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support pulling, per my comment above. Espresso Addict (talk) 17:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose pulling, the fact is that the article is RD and not ITN. BabbaQ (talk) 17:30, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- While an RD does not need as strong sourcing as an ITN blurb, there are outright failures of required sourcing policy going on here. This should not be linked to from the front page until fixed because it is far from our best work. --MASEM (t) 17:47, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support A remarkable and unrecognised hero of aviation. Deserves wider recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demictetus123 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
UK EU Referendum
snow close, by longstanding tradition this will be posted when official results are reported μηδείς (talk) 05:41, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 (talk · history · tag) Blurb: A referendum to decide on the United Kingdom's membership of the EU is announced (Post) News source(s): BBC,Telegraph, Washington Post Credits:
Nominator's comments: I expect that this will be voted down as premature and to wait until the result in June. However this is the first time in 40 years that a referendum on the UK's membership has been announced and the impact of this decision is huge, regardless of the outcome. Clearly of international interest. 86.182.7.2 (talk) 16:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Wait until the referendum is held. Cameron has promised a referendum for some time; he has merely fulfilled that promise. 331dot (talk) 17:06, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- If we had an article on the EU summit, we could post that, but I can't find one. Smurrayinchester 17:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Wait until 24 June 2016, by which time the UK will have voted and a result will be declared. Mjroots (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Wait It's tempting to say post it, but it's essentially an announcement of something that is going to happen in a few months from now. Once the votes are counted in June, then post the result. And I'm sick of hearing about now TBH, so I've put my foot through my TV and sent Dave the bill. PS - do I get a fiver? Lugnuts 18:57, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Cyclone Winston
Article: Cyclone Winston (talk · history · tag) Blurb: Cyclone Winston (satellite image pictured), the strongest tropical cyclone on record to strike Fiji, causes extensive damage and prompts a nationwide curfew. (Post) Alternative blurb: Category 5 Cyclone Winston (satellite image pictured) becomes the strongest tropical cyclone on record to strike Fiji. Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: First Category 5 (on both Australian and Saffir-Simpson hurricane scales) to hit the main islands—Viti Levu and Vanua Levu—of Fiji on record. Contact has been lost with at least six islands and known damage is extensive. Landfall in Viti Levu is occurring as I type this. A nationwide curfew is also in place. Specifics on destruction will be slow to come due to severe disruption to communications. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 07:12, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Category fives that make landfall are essentially ITN/R, I would think. --Bongwarrior (talk) 07:16, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Wait leaning support I'd rather make sure we have some idea of the type of damage. I don't question it could be extensive, but that's also a bit of speculation. I would expect we'll know within a day here of how bad this was with rescue efforts likely already en route to help. --MASEM (t) 14:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support - category five. could need some more expansion before posting.BabbaQ (talk) 14:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support - As things stand Cat 5 landfalls are extremely rare and there is probably going to be a lot of damage from Winston in both Tonga and Fiji.Jason Rees (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support
Oppose until the article is thoroughly copy edited. It currently contains such jewels as "and gradually developed further within a favourable environment for further development" and "Ahead of Winston affecting Fiji for a second time". Someone familiar with the event Cyclonebiskit(?) could undertake this. μηδείς (talk) 21:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Fixed the two most outstanding issues, but not sure the rest of the article is that terrible. Might be difficult for me to tell though since I copyedited/wrote large portions of it. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Strong Support Exceeded by only one landfall known. (barely). 185 mph sustained. Hit the heart of the most populous Pacific country outside the Rim. Strongest Southern Hemisphere hurricane on record (whether landfalling or not). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:46, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Posted ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:02, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
February 20
Portal:Current events/2016 February 20
|
February 20, 2016 (2016-02-20) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Berlin International Film Festival
Article: 66th Berlin International Film Festival (talk · history · tag) Blurb: Italian documentary Fire at Sea wins the Golden Bear at the Berlin International Film Festival. (Post) News source(s): BBC, Variety, The Japan Times Credits:
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.Nominator's comments: Needs more prose. As a quality comparison, last year's article was posted but is still quite thin. Fuebaey (talk) 17:16, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
February 19
Portal:Current events/2016 February 19
|
February 19, 2016 (2016-02-19) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
RD: Samuel Willenberg
Article: Samuel Willenberg (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s): Credits:
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: former prisoner of Treblinka extermination camp and the last surviving member of its perilous prisoner revolt, a participant of the Warsaw Uprising. -- – HonorTheKing (talk) 10:52, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Moved to the correct date. LoveToLondon (talk) 14:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- support - definitely RD material. Could need some c/e etc before posting though.BabbaQ (talk) 14:10, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Weak Support on article improvements - Article could stand a few more inline cites in places and I see some tense issues to be fixed. Weak support otherwise, primarily that while just being a prisoner of such a camp (and the honors awarded as a result of survival) is not so much an element to celebrate, he appeared to help educate and document his experiences for benefit for all to make him stand out. --MASEM (t) 14:10, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Opppose "last surviving" is not an accomplishment, and he would not be notable enough for RD otherwise. I thought we should have had blurbs for Scalia, Lee and Eco, but even then I would question posting this nomination. μηδείς (talk) 22:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose, surviving to extreme old age is not an RD qualification. Abductive (reasoning) 04:03, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support, he is in news. --Jenda H. (talk) 22:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support on notability, seems to have used his experience to create notable artworks, however oppose on article quality. It's a very disjointed read e.g. the key sections on the Nazi invasion and Treblinka; the writing needs to be improved so that it's easier to follow. MurielMary (talk) 07:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whilst he seems to have been a worthy person, I don't see anything here that rises to the level of RD. Modest Genius 12:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Umberto Eco
Article: Umberto Eco (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s): Credits:
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Well-known academic and novelist who I feel was at the top of his field and is thus suitable as a recent death. Canadian Paul 00:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support on notability for RD - Massively influential in both academia and literature. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- ASAP I'd address the one or two issues that need citing, but my computer is running way too slow. μηδείς (talk) 01:26, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD pending cleanup - A handful of paragraphs in the bio sections lack inline citation, even discounting those that are just saying what works he wrote as non-contentious, but it should be easy to get to par. --MASEM (t) 02:05, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Strongly support - Don't wait for cleanup - Featuring this link on the front page will undoubtedly lead to many eyeballs on the article, and the faster this happens, the faster appropriate cleaning will occur. KConWiki (talk) 02:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that's not how the main page works. No one is stopping anyone here from fixing problems if they wish, but the main page is for highlighting quality Misplaced Pages work, not advertising stuff that has yet to be cleaned up, but needs to be. --Jayron32 03:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Strong support - if for no other reason that Harper Lee is already up there in RD, and the comparisons (and accusations of Anglocentrism) are inevitable. Geodyde (talk) 03:55, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Does that mean you've fixed the problems noted above? Because if you did, I'll post this... --Jayron32 03:57, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Article looks reasonably well referenced to me, given that brief synopses of his major publications are essentially self-referencing. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 04:12, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support blurb this novelist actually was well-known worldwide, unlike the US-centric Harper Lee. Nergaal (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb - International figure indeed, but his works aren't his global signatures. Therefore, his mere name is significant enough.
His only award was honorary doctorate, which doesn't top awards and honors more prestigious than this. --George Ho (talk) 07:46, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- You should ctrl+f "award" again. Nergaal (talk) 09:51, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- The awards should be in prose, not in only navigational templates. George Ho (talk) 11:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support blurb Eco was very popular worldwide and will surely remain remembered as one of the classics of 20th and 21st century world literature. Elaborating medieval philosophical topics combined with semiotic elements in his works, he established a new style of presenting events and personalities from the Middle Ages. I think he definitely merits a blurb.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:34, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb (support RD of course). He was a bestselling novelist and an important academic. RD is a no brainer of but certainly less worthy of a blurb than Lee below. Poeple have cited his global popularity--net's not confuse commercial popularity with influence. Definitely less significant than Harper Lee.--Johnsemlak (talk) 23:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support Blurb hugely influential author and literary scholar, a must read for literary majors regardless of language, adapted for film, and basically the literary equal of James Joyce or Jose Luis Borges. Before RD existed, he would have been doubtlessly blurbworthy. μηδείς (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb. We've had two borderline cases recently (Antonin Scalia and Harper Lee), and I fail to see how he is more blurb-worthy. Yes, he is more globally known, but then again both Scalia and Lee were more significant to the United States than Eco was to the world IMO, so in the end it's a wash. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:25, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support blurb
- An associate justice of a Supreme Court is definitely not more than RD, chances are that for every other country in the world many from the US-centric crowd here would even oppose an RD for a Chief justice of the Supreme Court - if an associate justice was borderline between RD and blurb, then a Chief Justice would be a clear case for a blurb.
- Harper Lee was borderline between RD and blurb, that makes Umberto Eco a clear blurb. Harper Lee had one famous (and until recently her only) book that was turned into a famous movie. Umberto Eco had one famous book that was turned into a famous movie. He also wrote several well-known books afterwards.
- In addition to his novels, the scientific work of Umberto Eco alone would already without a doubt be enough for RD.
- He got more than 30 honorary doctorates, which is a remarkable achievement itself and shows the huge amount of respect he had in the scientific com,munity. If anyone finds an RS (this link to his page unfortunately isn't, and the page also doesn't list the ones he got after 2008) please add that to the article.
- LoveToLondon (talk) 08:43, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Honorary doctorates aren't on the same level with medals or lifetime awards. Bill Cosby lost his honorary doctorates due to... well, you get the idea. --George Ho (talk) 08:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Please name some medals or lifetime awards that would make you support a blurb. LoveToLondon (talk) 08:52, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- I don't know how Austrian State Prize for European Literature would help. The awards page doesn't explain how prestigious it is. I know that he didn't win other lifetime achievements. George Ho (talk) 10:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- The problem is that you think of him only as a novelist. He was also a leading academic in his field, and a well-known public voice (at least in Europe). LoveToLondon (talk) 10:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
-
- How about around the level of the Nobel Prize for Literature? Stephen 10:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Unfortunately the Nobel Prize for Literature is not awarded for research in the field of Semiotics. LoveToLondon (talk) 14:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- That is unfortunate. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Post-posting strong support RD, oppose blurb. Now here's a truly influential author - and one who had a world-leading academic career as well. However this is still nowhere near my bar for a blurb, because his death has no major repercussions on current events. Perfect subject for RD. Modest Genius 11:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
-
- Or dies in office, or were such towering figures that diplomacy goes into overdrive (e.g. Nelson Mandela). Which is fine, as that's the level I think we should have for blurbs. Modest Genius 14:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Harper Lee
Posted to RD, no consensus for a full blurb. --Tone 10:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Harper Lee (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) Alternative blurb: Harper Lee, author of To Kill a Mockingbird, dies at 89. News source(s): NYT, Telegraph, Guardian Credits:
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. Smurrayinchester 15:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Strongest possible Support - American (and not Pakistani for example) and EXTREMELY important author (as in almost as famous as the Kardashians), so obviously anything below a blurb will not do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.215.95.177 (talk) 16:01, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Why does it matter that she was American and "not Pakistani"... -- Ashish-g55 16:14, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, please justify that comment, which is either very unclear or highly offensive. Modest Genius 17:13, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- It's obviously a dig at some of the recent RDs (e.g. the rapid posting then pulling of Abe Vigoda). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- (Have put up an RD for now while people discuss whether or not to have a blurb) Smurrayinchester 16:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Posted to RD; will leave this open for discussion about a blurb. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:09, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- (Looks like we both posted at the same time! Yours is the one that appears in the history though) Smurrayinchester 16:23, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Nor is her name Miley Cyrus, who gets a bloated 8,500 words on Wiki – more than twice as many as Harper Lee – but Harper is far more influential culturally. Sca (talk) 16:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Floq, fair enough. This is not sarcastic. It's hard to even see her as at the top of her field, with one book published (alright, two, but the second was a rehash of the first draft of the first book and I'm not sure it counts). Yes, it's a very influential book, but can someone be at the top of their field with only one performance in it? GoldenRing (talk) 16:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support blurb - was known only for one book, but that book was very well known indeed. Besides, the last item on ITN right now (Bad Aibling rail accident) is over a week old. Banedon (talk) 16:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- General comment Please don't be sarcastic; it will help the admin who decides on whether there's consensus for a blurb or not to do their job. I see one comment above I'm fairly sure is sarcastic, and two more that may or may not be. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:15, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- I think blurbs should be reserved for when the death is a major news story itself because of the how, why, and reactions (think Michael Jackson, Margaret Thatcher, Antonin Scalia, etc.) This doesn't appear to be having the same news effect so I oppose blurb, RD is just fine. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD, weak oppose blurb RD is no question and the article is in good shape (even though already posted, just making that clear). The issue for me for the blurb is that she only had one major work, even though it was one of the most groundbreaking works in modern literature, and was not a prolific writer. I recognize she's been decorated with appropriate literary prizes for it, and that's why I consider my oppose weak, but I don't think we're talking about a creative person as prolific as David Bowie or Christopher Lee. --MASEM (t) 16:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) • True, she wasn't prolific as a writer, but she was very influential with regard not only to Am. lit. (and film) but also, more importantly, to racism/civil rights, the elephant in the U.S. room for generations. Sca (talk) 16:41, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- While she was an important figure due to TKaM for civil rights, I'm not seeing significant participation there as, say, Rosa Parks after her refusal to give up the bus seat. Arguably, the book is more notable than the author here (but her death clearly remains RD worthy). --MASEM (t) 16:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support Blurb. Author of one of the most influential novels ever, and here much talked about sequal was only released within the past year.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:44, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb. Significant author, albeit for only one novel. Decent article. However, neither the author nor the manner of her death are anywhere near the significance required to justify a blurb. Modest Genius 16:45, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Post-posting support RD, but Oppose blurb. Her death is far from unexpected, and she'd been in failing health for years. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:47, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Still not really opposing or supporting One factor to consider is that a blurb would allow us to link an FA, To Kill a Mockingbird, at ITN. Not sure how much to value/discount that benefit, but it is a benefit, IMHO. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:56, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support blurb She may be a one-hit-wonder, but very few other authors have pulled off staying popular and current with reprints and having that one book quoted and referred to for an entire lifetime and beyond. That says something about her fame. w.carter-Talk 17:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb We need to keep some sense of perspective here - she is notable for one book and that in itself raises issues as to what extent notability is inherited by association. Circumstances of death do not appear to be remotely notable. This is the kind of thing RD is made for. 3142 (talk) 17:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb she published a single book that to my knowledge hasn't received much attention outside US. Nergaal (talk) 17:29, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support blurb because doing so allows us to link to a featured article and bumps a stale story from the main page. Calidum ¤ 17:32, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support blurb wrote one book, but a milestone one at that. We had a blurb for David Bowie, who died naturally at pensionable age, albeit 20 years younger, and Christopher Lee, four years older. '''tAD''' (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- In my opinion, both of those were mistakes which would have been better suited to RD. Regardless, they were both prolific artists who produced dozens of top works; Harper wrote one book. Modest Genius 18:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yes they were prolific, just like Shakespeare and Mozart. But prolific turnout is not equivalent to making a lasting mark on the world's culture. How many other works did the Four Evangelists contribute? '''tAD''' (talk) 19:04, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Well Bowie had influence not so much on earth, and we all know what our first Mars colony will be named... (this is humor jic) --MASEM (t) 19:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Luke the Evangelist wrote a sequel, which puts him on a par with Harper Lee, though I don't think he even got a mention at RD when he died Optimist on the run (talk) 19:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Perhaps Josephus or Plutarch gave them a passing mention, but didn't write him a full blurb since he didn't die under unusual circumstances.--WaltCip (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb - not at top of her field, only really known for the one book. Mjroots (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb I agree that she is not top of her field, though is especially notable for writing one outstanding book. Mamyles (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb what Calidum says feels like the only compelling reason to do so, and that would set a poor precedent. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:04, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb She is really only known for the one book. RD is sufficient. Canuck 21:22, February 19, 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb She is definitely known only for one book and has never even won any notable international award. In literature, candidates deserving a blurb would need to be notable approximately at the level of Gabriel García Márquez.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:52, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
- • "Harper Lee’s great book, To Kill a Mockingbird, was arguably the defining American novel of the 20th century." — Matthew Teague, Guardian.
- – Sca (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Hugely significant author, mandatory reading for all Americans (really, other countries ignore her as part of English literature?), beloved, respected, and adapted for cinema. Mentioning To Kill a Mockingbird in the blurb is much more informative than the name alone. μηδείς (talk) 00:36, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
February 18
Portal:Current events/2016 February 18
|
February 18, 2016 (2016-02-18) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
- At least 71 people are killed in a head-on collision between a bus and a truck in Ghana. (Sky News) (BBC)
Health
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Ugandan presidential election
Article: Ugandan general election, 2016 (talk · history · tag) Blurb: Yoweri Museveni (pictured) is elected to a fifth term as President of Uganda. (Post) Alternative blurb: Following a social media blackout, arrests of the country's opposition politicians and international condemnation Uganda's ruler for the past 30 years, Yoweri Museveni, claims victory in the country's Presidential elections. Alternative blurb II: Yoweri Museveni (pictured) claims a fifth term as President of Uganda, in an election some international observers have criticised as flawed. News source(s): CNN, Al Jazeera, The Independent Credits:
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.Nominator's comments: Thirty year incumbent remains in power. Article needs work - results section, with allegations of vote rigging/fraud, could be expanded. Parliamentary election results have yet to be announced but should not be a barrier to posting since both are on ITN/R. Fuebaey (talk) 01:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support ITNR LoveToLondon (talk) 02:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose With the opposition under arrest, this was not a genuine election and the results are not reliable. Andrew D. (talk) 08:53, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support The article now makes it clear that the election was not seen as free or fair by the international community. I have added an alt blurb which I think would work "Following a social media blackout, arrests of the country's opposition politicians and international condemnation Uganda's ruler for the past 30 years, Yoweri Museveni, claims victory in the country's Presidential elections."Monopoly31121993 (talk) 18:32, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support we're not here to right great wrongs. Article is clear, and reasonably updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support original blurb. Yes, clearly there's issues with that election but as TRM states, we're not here to try to correct them. It is a national election (ITNR), it is in the news, and the article is up to date. The altblurb is a bit too much begging for a front page post, though I could see added "controversial election" or the like simply to highlight that there were issues with it without going into any detail. --MASEM (t) 22:19, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment. This item seems ready but I am loathe to post either blurb. I've tried a compromise with alt 2, or can anyone else suggest something? Espresso Addict (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Posted with my suggested blurb, as no-one commented. Open to changing it if anyone has a better suggestion. Espresso Addict (talk) 20:41, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- Comment – Is this an election some international observers have criticised as flawed, or is it an election some international observers have criticised as fraud? (Sorry, just saw the blurb on the main page and came up with that couplet; I just couldn't resist posting it.) Kurtis 23:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Panicum effusum
Pretty clear where this is going ... this would be worth a shot on April 1 but that's still far. --Tone 16:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Panicum effusum (talk · history · tag) Blurb: The town of Wangaratta, Victoria, Australia is invaded by Hairy Panic (pictured). (Post) News source(s): BBC Credits:
Mjroots (talk) 12:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- And one can learn that panic can be hairy. Just like great tits... Brandmeister 15:38, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- As a pre-existing article, it's going to need a bit of expansion to meet DYK. Mjroots (talk) 15:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- Yep, but it's a stub so it's altogether possible. Just an idea. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:02, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- I wish we had something a bit like what the German Misplaced Pages has, where as well as blurbs for big news stories they also put a few links to smaller things that probably aren't blurb-worthy but are still in the news. This would be a good fit there. Smurrayinchester 09:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
February 17
Portal:Current events/2016 February 17
|
February 17, 2016 (2016-02-17) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
World indoor mile record broken
No consensus to post. Spencer 22:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Genzebe Dibaba (talk · history · tag) Blurb: In athletics, Genzebe Dibaba breaks the women's world record for the indoor mile (Post) News source(s): Google gives plenty, viz. , , Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: There is currently no sports item on ITN. Also the previous record was 26 years old, set in 1990; the margin by which it was beaten, 4 seconds, is also pretty big as far as athletics world records for this distance go. Notably though, only the indoor record was broken. Banedon (talk) 02:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose It is only the indoor record, and the non-Olympic mile is not a frequently run distance - it is only 100m longer than the Olympic 1500m competition. And Dibaba already improved the 2 mile record by 6 seconds in 2014. LoveToLondon (talk) 02:29, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose inadequate referencing for a main page quality BLP.--Jayron32 04:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
2016 Ankara bombing
Article: 2016 Ankara bombing (talk · history · tag) Blurb: At least 28 people are killed and 61 injured following a bombing in Ankara, Turkey. (Post) News source(s): BBC Credits:
Article needs updatingNominator's comments: Another terror attack on Turkey. Death and injury toll inevitably climbing every hour. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- oppose considering such incidents in Syria are dismissed as a byproduct of being part of a civil war, this country has been slipping into a civil war for a good couple of months now. Shelling on Kurds in Syria started 2-3 days ago, madman is saying that will continue despite an unanimous UNSC resolution ( 1-2 days ago) saying otherwise. Hence clear false flag.Lihaas (talk) 22:04, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Lihaas: False flag or not, this is a relevant news event. We should rather write an article about the Turkish shelling of Northern Syria, given that it has even been the topic of a Security Council meeting (don't know if there was a resolution though). --PanchoS (talk) 12:40, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- comment NOT updated with barely a few sentences on the bombing or alleged perpetrator. (of which there are currently two and radically change the reaction (although its clear which one the regime is goin with))Lihaas (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Where is the mythical update? Do yall bother to READ the article? Cause beyond the background there is barely a few sentences in the main sectionsLihaas (talk) 01:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- The article doesn't have to be exhaustive to be posted. There's enough content at present for it to be posted. It only just happened as well so expecting paragraphs upon paragraphs of information is a bit much. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 01:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- @Lihaas: As stated in WP:ITN, "a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient." Mamyles (talk) 02:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
- Plus, the whole article is the update. It wouldn't exist without the event having taken place. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:51, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
February 16
Portal:Current events/2016 February 16
|
February 16, 2016 (2016-02-16) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Per la ricuperata salute di Ofelia is discovered in Prague
Stale, having taken place three months ago. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Per la ricuperata salute di Ofelia (talk · history · tag) Blurb: Mozart's and Salieri's lost cantata Per la ricuperata salute di Ofelia is discovered in Prague. (Post) News source(s): (Reuters), (The Independent), (BBC) Credits:
Jenda H. (talk) 21:55, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose as unfortunately, the discovery was in Nov 2015, today it was played for the first time in a public performance. However, please consider WP:DYK as this article was just created today, so easily qualifies there. --MASEM (t) 22:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Boutros Boutros-Ghali
Article: Boutros Boutros-Ghali (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s): (BBC), (New York Times) Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Former Secretary-General of the United Nations (of which there have been just eight) The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support No brainer RD, update is there. Brandmeister 16:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support indeed, a no-brainer. Top of his field of diplomacy. Article needs some more citations before posting, though. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support pending article improvements RD importance is clearly met, but the article is lacking much inline sourcing with some entirely unsourced paragraphs. --MASEM (t) 16:17, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support RD (only) on importance. I'm surprised and disappointed that such an important figure has only a C-class article. Hopefully that won't take long to bring to post-able level. Modest Genius 16:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support. --bender235 (talk) 16:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- support when article is sufficiently improved. Exactly the sort of person RD was made for. Thryduulf (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Support. I would call the Secretary General the top of its field (international diplomacy) regardless, but Boutros-Ghali presided over several particularly high-profile incidents during his time and is probably the most notable holder of the office since Hammarskjold. GRAPPLE 16:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- And those were the times when blue UN helmets were a real force... Brandmeister 17:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Obvious Support - but is he not worth a blurb? Mjroots (talk) 18:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Not really. While he was a key figure in many situations during his time as UNSecGen, he wasn't as instrumental to resolution of those situations. Add to the fact that this article's quality is a far cry to even supporting an RD. If we had a well-developed feature article here, I might tend to agree a possible blurb, but that's going to take far too much effort. --MASEM (t) 19:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. Blurb discussion may continue, although consensus appears against it so far. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- RD yes, Blurb No he was not in office when he died unexpectedly=, he was not the longest serving Secretary, he was not credited for changing the direction of the UN, he failed to curtail the Rwandan genocide or broker a peaceful breakup of Yugoslavia.... μηδείς (talk) 21:35, 16 February 2016 (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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|