Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

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.

Fatafehi Fakafānua in 2024
Fatafehi Fakafānua

Glossary

edit
  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

edit
  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

edit
  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

edit

Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...

edit
  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

edit
  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

edit

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Structure

edit

This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. Eight days of current nominations are maintained – older days are archived.

To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.



December 18

edit

December 17

edit

RD: Peter Arnett

edit
Article: Peter Arnett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: New Zealand-American journalist. Chess enjoyer (talk) 02:59, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Harry Roberts

edit
Article: Harry Roberts (criminal) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Murdered three police in 1966. The case was one of the most sensational in modern UK history and remains the subject of heated debate over sentencing as he escaped the gallows by about 8 months. He was released from prison in 2014. Article needs work. (Died on the 13th but was just announced.) -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2025 (UTC) Ad Orientem (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait for article improvement, the article needs a lot of improvements before it goes to the main page. Scooglers (talk) 13:55, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 16

edit

RD: Norman Podhoretz

edit
Article: Norman Podhoretz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: American conservative writer. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 04:48, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Nuno F. Loureiro

edit
Article: Nuno F. Loureiro (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News BBC News
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyStaraction (talk · contribs) 04:41, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is a very sad story, but I don't know how I feel about featuring someone whose page was only created in the last 24 hours. Guz13 (talk) 04:48, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Guz13 I don't know of any policy reasons why such a page would not be suitable for inclusion on ITN. If the article did not meet a critical guideline, such as WP:V or WP:N, it would be a different matter, but why should new pages be excluded? Staraction (talk · contribs) 06:27, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Almost all the references are about his death. It would fall under WP:BLP1E. Guz13 (talk) 16:18, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Guz13 If you think WP:BLP1E applies here, then nominate the article for deletion. I personally would disagree; WP:BLP1E writes that If the article's subject has done more than one notable thing, even if the rest of it is far overshadowed by the primary event, BLP1E does not apply. From a cursory glance, Loureiro's academic work might also be considered notable, under WP:NPROF criteria 1. Regardless, I don't know how WP:BLP1E relates to the article's date of creation. Staraction (talk · contribs) 18:02, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't feel strongly either way, which is why I left a comment and not a vote. I said it is a sad story and I hope they catch the killer as soon as possible. But again, I don't know how it fits into Wikipedia's policies.
And I don't know his field, I don't know how important he was. But his death was definitely a huge loss for the world. Guz13 (talk) 21:05, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks adequately sourced and notable even without the manner of death. Age of article is not relevant. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 08:32, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Article has a few cn tags and I feel the career section is a tad short. Perhaps adding the awards mentioned into the award section to the career body would be a good start such as “In 2018, he was given the x award for his work relating to y” for instance.
TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:05, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: William J. Bauer

edit
Article: William J. Bauer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:25, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:24, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Shân Legge-Bourke

edit
Article: Shân Legge-Bourke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News People
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Former lady-in-waiting to Anne, Princess Royal and close friend of the British Royal Family and the mother of Tiggy Legge-Bourke former nanny to William, Prince of Wales and Prince Harry, Duke of SussexItsShandog (talk) 16:55, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oppose for now article is too short. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: Tanko Muhammad

edit
Article: Tanko Muhammad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

 Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 12:54, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2025

edit

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: Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2025 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Lou Deleuze of France wins the JESC 2025 (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ France wins JESC with Lou De Lenzee
News source(s): https://junioreurovision.tv/story/lou-deleuze-wins-junior-eurovision-2025-france
Credits:
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Biggest junior song contest article is ok
Neutral on notability, oppose on quality The junior contest isn't ITNR, but it could be found sufficiently notable if there is a consensus among editors that it is notable. However, the article's voting results section is currently unsourced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:29, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not ITN/R and we've never posted the junior event before. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:29, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not notable. Guz13 (talk) 04:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'd say the main Eurovision is ITN-worthy, but the junior one—not as much. Trepang2 (talk) 05:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: There is no significant notability that impacts the world; it is more of a contest that only interests a specific audience. Also, if the voting results section is unsourced, it's not worth it. --Aubree Jo (talk) 05:14, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Minor event, most of the major Eurovision countries don't even participate. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 15

edit

RD: Somachandra de Silva

edit
Article: Somachandra de Silva (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Ada Derana Daily News
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Sri Lanka's prominent spinner during its pre-test arena before Sri Lanka gaining it's long awaited test status from the International Cricket Council in 1981. He had featured at 1975 Cricket World Cup, 1979 Cricket World Cup and 1983 Cricket World Cup tournaments as a playing member of Sri Lanka. I have significantly expanded the article way back in 2021 to make it readable like an encyclopedia entry. Abishe (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Joe Ely

edit
Article: Joe Ely (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

 Mooonswimmer 03:20, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Rachael Carpani

edit
Article: Rachael Carpani (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2], [3]
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

 Happily888 (talk) 03:12, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) Jimmy Lai

edit
Article: Jimmy Lai (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Hong Kong High Court finds Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai (pictured) guilty of foreign collusion and sedition. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Hong Kong High Court finds media tycoon Jimmy Lai (pictured) guilty of foreign collusion and sedition.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In Hong Kong, the High Court finds media tycoon Jimmy Lai (pictured) guilty of foreign collusion and sedition, while the pro-democracy camp–affiliated Democratic Party is dissolved.
News source(s): CNN SCMP
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Being widely described as a landmark case by CNN, SCMP, AP, Reuters, and others. If the blurb below for the Democratic Party's dissolution is not posted, this story is getting even more media attention and comments from international politicians. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 16:42, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) New Tongan prime minister

edit
Article: 2025 Tongan general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Fatafehi Fakafānua (pictured) is elected prime minister of Tonga. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Fatafehi Fakafānua (pictured) is elected prime minister by the Legislative Assembly of Tonga.
News source(s): Pacific Media Network
Credits:

Article updated
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: First member of the nobility to be elected prime minister in over a decade, marks a significant shift in Tongan politics. N Panama 84534 🏝️🥥 11:33, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Well-written article, good length, sourced. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 14:39, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted blurb) Blurb/RD: Rob Reiner

edit
Article: Rob Reiner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Filmmaker and actor Rob Reiner and his wife are stabbed to death in Los Angeles (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Filmmaker and actor Rob Reiner and his wife are murdered at their home in Los Angeles
Alternative blurb II: ​ Actor and filmmaker Rob Reiner and his wife are found murdered in their Los Angeles home.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Actor and director Rob Reiner and his wife are found fatally stabbed at their home in Los Angeles.
News source(s): Variety, USA Today
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

 elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 03:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support blurb, oppose on quality An Emmy Award winning actor and filmmaker is found stabbed to death with his wife with their deaths being investigated as a homicide is very blurb worthy. This is also a pro-argument where their deaths are the story as well. Seeing notable Hollywood filmmakers and actors stabbed to death in their LA mansions isn’t common either. Articles quality needs to be beefed up a bit but that won’t be a problem with coming obits. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:00, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well sourced, and also a homocide investigation of a celebrity is big news. Julesucks (talk) 04:00, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment — I did not originally propose this as a blurb and I officially oppose one. Reiner, while notable, did not significantly affect the film industry. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 04:03, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The argument wouldn’t be death by natural causes or old age, the blurb argument here is their possible murder/circumstance of their deaths. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If he had died of natural causes then yes I wouldn’t support a blurb since he didn’t impact the movie industry but in this case the circumstances of his death is what’s driving the news articles and in this case his death is the story. As per my rationale if this is a double homicide that includes an Emmy award winning actor and filmmaker then that’s very rare so to speak TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:08, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know if we post murders unless in the most shocking of cases. Can someone here at the time of XXXTentacion's murder confirm whether that was blurbed?
Update: Yeah it wasn’t, just RD. This should be just RD too then. Ezlo Jeslan (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still undecided on a blurb, but XXXTentacion's murder not being blurbed is not dispositive. Reiner was a significantly more prominent figure in his field. Dr Fell (talk) 04:16, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, he’s what pops up in my mind as I was a big fan of that music scene. Any better examples? Ezlo Jeslan (talk) 04:26, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm saying it must be looked at holistically: the stature of the victim and the newsworthiness of the death itself. This is breaking news, so it's unsurprising there isn't enough information on the death itself to properly assess. But in terms of stature, Reiner and XXXTentacion are chalk and cheese. Dr Fell (talk) 04:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“Rob Reiner is one of the most significant figures in the history of film and television", according to Sean Astin, president of SAG-AFTRA [4]. BilboBeggins (talk) 12:17, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CNN literally has an article near the top of their page titled, "How Rob Reiner changed movies forever". BD2412 T 15:27, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So this needs to be actually in our article and not just pointed to and making claims about it. Masem (t) 15:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb, per ElijahPepe. Ezlo Jeslan (talk) 04:05, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Double homicide of the director of some of the most widely-know films. It's implausible to suggest that This Is Spinal Tap, The Princess Bride, and A Few Good Men were not highly influential films in each of their genres. BD2412 T 04:42, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Strongly disagree with the above discussion; he absolutely had industry and cultural impact. Three films in the National Film Registry, two commercially successful and critically lauded Stephen King adaptations (Stand by Me, Misery), the first mainstream mockumentary with Spinal Tap, cofounded Castle Rock Entertainment which produced Seinfeld, major role in All in the Family which is one of the most groundbreaking and successful sitcoms of all time... This plus the unusual circumstances around his death merit a blurb. DigitalIceAge (talk) 04:43, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose anything at this point due to quality, the article is far too unsourced throughout, not only career but all most of the filmography section (most specifically, TV appearances and awards). It's going to take a lot of time for that to even get close to RD, by which point we may have more details on the homocide to better determine if a blurb is warranted (on the basis of unusual death). Mind you, I think there's potential to also consider a blurb as a major figure, but nothing in the article establishes that either at this point, so that's a ways off as well. Masem (t) 04:45, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masem: Article quality has been improved. No more cn/unsourced statements. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Everything now looks great (was expecting the filmography section to have still been as issue but that is fully sourced) and since there is a strong legacy section and that this also qualifies under unusual death Support blurb Masem (t) 22:26, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb when article is in better shape. Besides “Death as the story”, Reiner was a director of many well known movies, including three at the National Film Registry at the Library of Congress as mentioned. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 04:58, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not Ready Referencing is quite poor. This is going to require some work before it can be posted even to RD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:08, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ad Orientem: Article quality has been improved. No more cn/unsourced statements. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD Neutral on blurb. Article quality and referencing are vastly improved. Well done to all who worked on it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb with no comment on article quality, though my support is (as always) contingent upon the article being adequately written and sourced. The violent murder of a very successful and influential director alongside his wife is a major news story, and in my opinion, merits being on the main page. Kurtis (talk) 05:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I created Draft:Death of Rob Reiner. Thriley (talk) 05:20, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Once article is updated. The knife murder/assassination of a well-known celebrity is a rare occurrence, and it is gathering a breadth of significant coverage across global sources. As such, the manner of death makes this notable regardless of arguments about his impact in the field of acting or etc. FlipandFlopped 05:28, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Assassination seems to be a very inappropriate word for family violence, @Flipandflopped. Nfitz (talk) 05:58, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You say “family violence”. I might say “patricidal knife murder”, which has a rarer more shocking ring than even “assassination”. One can make it sound more or less shocking depending on spin. Fortunately, we don’t base notability on either of us choose to spin a death. We go on whether the reliable sources are covering it in a more in depth or substantive way than the average celebrity death - and here, they clearly are. FlipandFlopped 12:43, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You could indeed go with patricidal knife murder; I was objecting to the word assassination - which I've never heard in this kind of context. I wasn't discussing notability, just wording. A wording that would I think reduce the weight of your argument. Nfitz (talk) 01:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb In addition to his behind the camera credits, his portrayal as liberal-leaning Michael Stivic was legendary and was the perfect foil for Archie Bunker in a TV series that changed telvision. CoatCheck (talk) 05:48, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I see no confirmation that this was a murder or stabbing in the article/sources; the police are investigating it as such but that would not make either the blurbs apt or fulfill the death as a story criteria for now. Transformative is also weak here and so is the article shape. The article needs to be worked on, police need to give confirmation and the legacy needs to established within the article for a valid assessment to be given. Gotitbro (talk) 05:56, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There's certainly other sources that clearly say that Carl Rob's son stabbed them. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't wait a bit for things to settle down. Nfitz (talk) 06:02, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There are a lot of rumors flying around in the news; RD is certainly merited and a blurb might be, but I recommend slowing this down for at least a day or so until more facts emerge about the deaths of the Reiners. KConWiki (talk) 06:20, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Very far from being top of the field in both acting and directing. The fact he was stabbed to death (if confirmed) doesn’t really change too much.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:35, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The fact that he was killed changes everything. BilboBeggins (talk) 12:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Absolute nonsense. It changes a lot. A natural death of an elderly person isn't particularly newsworthy, but a double-murder of a prominent director who had a household-name television role and his wife is a story in itself, which is why it's being covered by major outlets as front-page news with, at times, up-to-the-minute updates. WP Ludicer (talk) 12:58, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BilboBeggins and WP Ludicer: I disagree. If his killing were notable enough, we'd have a stand-alone article documenting the event (notable examples include 2015 Villa Castelli mid-air collision, 2020 Calabasas helicopter crash and 2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash). This is comparable to Diogo Jota's death in a car accident earlier this year, which also received front-page coverage and was posted only to RD, hence a resounding no for a blurb.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:59, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is already draft for the article. BilboBeggins (talk) 13:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A suspected patricide is not equivalent to a car crash. And there is a Draft of a death article in the works, as mentioned above. GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 13:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If this is the draft article you're referring to, you shouldn't have mentioned it at all. That content is already summarised in his article, and there's absolutely no chance that the article would move to the namespace in that shape. So, please call me when there's a comprehensive article documenting his death in the namespace (until then, nothing sets his death apart from Diogo Jota's death), and please argue with 'confirmed' instead of 'suspected' actions (we're not dealing with speculations and unconfirmed news here).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your (Personal attack removed) in the face of the resoundingly obvious (a single-car collision is not the same as a double-homicide no matter how much you pretend otherwise) is noted. You confidently and condescendingly brush off other editors as if there's no serious discussion to be had, so there's no need to "call" you, as it's clear you're fundamentally in opposition and unwilling to engage. WP Ludicer (talk) 13:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WP Ludicer: I'm willing to engage with real arguments, and you can change my mind to support a blurb. Unfortunately, you failed to provide a single compelling argument why this death merits a blurb, what equates it to other incidental deaths that we posted in the past and what sets it apart from those that did not get a blurb. Instead, you're pretending that a 'suspected' domestic incident is way more notable as a manner of death than a car accident, mentioning other editors with their opinions in this discussion (totally irrelevant as editors vote and comment independently from others), and, the last and probably the most important one, sending personal insults like 'your obtuseness'. For your information, people typically resort to personal attacks when they run out of actual arguments, and it seems to be pretty much true in this case (but don't worry, I won't report you for violating WP:NPA). Fair enough.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support blurb 'The Bucket List' is a piece of art which still will be watched 150 years from this horrible day. I cannot get my head around this tragedy. So awful. Rest in peace... K. M. Skylark (talk) 06:47, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how this comment, or those by CoatCheck and DigitalIceAge above have any bearing on ITN notability. Being a part of/directing pop films and TV does not inherently make the person siginificantly important (inherited etc). Gotitbro (talk) 07:28, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We've had numerous death blurbs from people in the film/TV industry in the past. In recent memory, we blurbed Robert Redford, and he is a level-5 vital article just like Reiner. If you object to entertainer death blurbs on principle, fine, but to say that he had little to no industry impact like some are arguing is just not true. DigitalIceAge (talk) 07:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then add that to the article, legacy and "transformative" impact cannot be handwaved by allusions to pop culture fimography which is what is being done here.
And I see as mentioned by Nfitz above, he was likely killed by his son further lowering the bar for death as a story.
PS: Wikipedia internal organization and vital-levels have no bearing on notability. Gotitbro (talk) 09:17, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't disagree that the article needs work before it is ITN ready, and I expect a legacy section to be added soon as lengthy obits start to roll out. I disagree that the double-homicide of a household-name actor and director and his wife is somehow less newsworthy because their son is implicated. DigitalIceAge (talk) 09:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If anything, it makes it MORE newsworthy. Patricide is unusual and is more shocking, and drums up more news coverage, than a robbery gone wrong or being killed due to involvement in organized crime, etc. FlipandFlopped 12:46, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be employing "pop culture" as a snarl word. This is a very notable director (as well as a rather prominent political activist who was personally acquainted with major Democratic political figures) who was violently killed alongside his wife; the fact that his son is implicated makes it more notable, not less. Had he died of natural causes, it would be notable enough for a recent death notice (though not a blurb). The manner of his death and the coverage it has generated at the national and international level make it notable. WP Ludicer (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not a snarl at all, rather an opposition to the fandom supports here which don't establish anything for ITN policy.
And no, murder by the child makes it inherently a family dispute which simply isn't as significant. Gotitbro (talk) 17:35, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gotitbro, That last sentence is simply not true and there is no empirical evidence to support that claim. In fact, the exact opposite is true: the fact of parricide enhances enduring significance, relative to a killing for money, sexual gratification, drugs, etc. People who are killed in their home due to drug debts, organized crime, from a stalker, or by a robber gone wrong rarely get standalone Wikipedia articles. By contrast, when a child murders their parents (Parricide), that much more often generates enduring coverage and historical significance, and correspondingly tends to lead to an article even when the parental victims were not famous celebrities: see e.g. Lyle and Erik Menendez, Murders of Joel and Lisa Guy, Murders of Antonio Maso and Mariarosa Tessari, Murders of John and Lois McCullough. FlipandFlopped 21:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, no. Wikipedia coverage of internal family killings has no bearing on whether they are notable for ITN. We simply do not post them. Gotitbro (talk) 21:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let a dead horse die, but your premise was that a murder being committed by a child of a parent makes it less noteworthy or significant, relative to a stranger or friend. I debunked that premise, because it makes no sense and the opposite is clearly true. Nobody was claiming it is ITNR or some sort of ITN routine precedent to post things related to family violence, and in any event, “we haven’t posted family violence stories before” is not a policy based rationale to oppose. FlipandFlopped 17:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing was really debunked here as being a familal matter simply does not make it more notable for ITN, ITN precedent makes that very clear. You are conflating media frenzy of familal true crime to ITN notability, these are simply not conflatable. Gotitbro (talk) 21:10, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, I would edit the blurb to better reflect Rob's career and impact, mentioning his Emmy-winning and influence. Rob was not only an Emmy-winning actor and filmmaker but also a culturally significant figure whose work shaped modern television and film. The circumstances of his death, a violent homicide alongside his wife, are extremely rare for someone of his prominence and are the focus of major international coverage. Henderson Barbara (talk) 08:00, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oppose blurb obvious RD. Too many fringe figures going on blurb now.~2025-40362-90 (talk) 08:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Obvious" RD? He didn't die of natural causes, and his death is making major news headlines because of its violent nature. WP Ludicer (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. Many of his films were nominated for Oscar, the legend of Hollywood. This is Spinal Tap, Harry met Sally, A few good Men, Princess Bride, Stand by Me. It's schocking that he died like this, by homicide. BilboBeggins (talk) 09:38, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb We cannot include all “unnatural” deaths of famous people in ITN, especially when it is a murder in the private sphere (by his son). Rainer was well known and prestigious, but he is not at the top of his field. ITN is not a crime portal. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:08, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose blurb per above; the article still doesn't make the case that Reiner was especially transformative in his field. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 14:09, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are the numerous nominations for Emmys and Golden Globes not enough? His political activism? Sean Astin's statement? I agree the article should have some more info on why he's so acclaimed (his filmography is damn impressive), but he is definitely a transformative figure - he set the tone for mockumentaries, romantic comedies, AND coming-of-age stories. jolielover♥talk 14:16, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Simply being nominated is not enough. We can't assume readers know the significance of the films or awards, hence why there should be something in the article body to explain why he was a major figure in Hollywood. This should not be rocket science; this morning I was search to see the status of the investigation and saw numerous articles praising his career so those just need to be summarized in the article. Masem (t) 14:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If he is "definitely a transformative figure", then his article can easily be updated to reflect this legacy. And no, numerous Emmys and Golden Globes nominations are not especially convincing; most big names in his field will receive a nomination or two at some point in their careers. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 14:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He's received way more than a nomination or two. Anyway, a Legacy section is now in place. jolielover♥talk 18:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Rob Reiner may not be as big of a household name as he once was, but the guy is wildly well known. This is Spinal Tap wasn't the first mocumentary but it is one of the more influential ones. It pretty much launched Christopher Guest's mockumentary career and the mockumentary article even says that Rob Reiner helped popularize the term in the 90s. Then there's The Princess Bride. I'm just going to copy this from the lead of that article:
"After only having modest initial box office success, it has over time become a cult film and gained recognition as one of the greatest films of the 1980s as well as one of Reiner's best works. The film is number 50 on the Bravo's "100 Funniest Movies", number 88 on The American Film Institute's (AFI) "AFI's 100 Years...100 Passions" list of the 100 greatest film love stories, and 46 in Channel 4's 50 Greatest Comedy Films list. The film also won the 1988 Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation. The film also won the People's Choice Award at the 12th Toronto International Film Festival. In 2016, the film was selected by the Library of Congress for preservation in the United States National Film Registry as being "culturally, historically or aesthetically significant".
Even if none of his other films gained notice, this alone would merit him a blurb. The Hugo is pretty much the Emmy of the sci-fi/fantasy world and it received it for a film. And it won out over Predator, RoboCop, and Encounter at Farpoint, some of the most lauded pieces of media out there. I genuinely hope that this discussion never fully reaches the public eye because the amount of mockery we'd probably receive for there even being a debate over Rob Reiner's notability and impact would be sizeable. We should be debating how the blurb is written, not whether or not it should be listed at all. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 14:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, I'm not arguing that the page didn't need improvement. It absolutely did/does. What I'm flabbergasted about is that people are debating his legacy and impact. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 14:44, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. He revolutionarized three whole completely different genres! jolielover♥talk 18:19, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb. The manner of his death was unusual and tragic, but that doesn't make his career any more influential. Reiner was not a household name and not close to the Thatcher/Mandela standard for death blurbs. We can't post every murder victim who has a Wikipedia article. Article quality is now sufficient for RD. Modest Genius talk 14:43, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb at this point literally every actor ever who dies gets nominated for a blurb but clearly not many of them at all deserve a blurb. This death doesn't matter anywhere near as much as a world leader or Steven Spielsburg or something. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:50, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure where I stand, but few here are discussing his blurb being because of his acting. He all but invented an entire genre of entertainment, @QueensanditsCrazy. As brillian as Spielberg is, he perfected existing genres. Nfitz (talk) 15:17, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I said actor I meant film-industry-person more broadly. I've never heard of Reiner, his page doesn't have a Legacy section, I can't see on his article which genre of film you're talking about, so I'm gonna double down and say this guy doesn't deserve a blurb. If he was really as transformative and deserving of a blurb then his article owuld make it obvious. Strong oppose blurb QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:36, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're expecting someone to have written a "Legacy" section less than 24 hours after his death? Good grief. Black Kite (talk) 16:09, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With how many obits and tributes coming in, absolutely reasonable to have a couple paragraphs speakers NG to his legacy in a short time frame. To not have something written about his legacy by this point shows poor quality for an article. Masem (t) 16:16, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true. I've been updating his article by adding sources (which is #1 priority right now, not a legacy section, to even get this to RD, blurb or not) but it takes a lot of time. I've already put hours into it at breakneck speed and it's not done. There's also the concerns of edit-warring - I much prefer editing when the article is stable, not when information changes every second and there's the chance someone else is doing the exact same thing... jolielover♥talk 17:09, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Masem up to his usual cantankerous tricks. ~2025-41027-05 (talk) 21:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I expect someone to have a legacy page while they're still alive, in fact. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 16:33, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. The transformative aspect that people are relying on isn't established by listing well known films or saying that it is so, it is by showing the significance of the person in their industry (i.e. film here) either through sources or more properly the article itself. I haven't seen any of it yet. Gotitbro (talk) 17:44, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just added a legacy section. Happy? I'll expand it and add more sources with time. jolielover♥talk 17:48, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's much better! QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mockumentary. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am neutral on that, so was just letting the posting admin make that decision. Natg 19 (talk) 00:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
support blurb, per ReaderofthePack ~2025-40044-88 (talk) 00:31, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is, quite obviously, a rationale that the closing admin would dismiss immediately. One blurb does not necessitate nor negate the need for another blurb. -- Kicking222 (talk) 01:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The fact that Stoppard is mentioned by multiple people in completely unrelated discussion will indicate admins that how absurd was the dicision blurbing Stoppard and will hopefully make them not repeat the same mistake. Didgogns (talk) 08:56, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support blurb, almost neutral. "The Princess Bride" is my favorite film ever, full-stop. This is a tragedy and sucks. HOWEVER, he was not transformative in his field- he won zero Oscars (and was only nominated for one), and nobody would ever put him in a critical list of the top twenty directors in film history- and I have a high standard for death blurbs. HOWEVER HOWEVER, the sad nature of his death and its media coverage make me lean support. I'm not at all swayed by any of the arguments above that he merits a death blurb in usual circumstances, but being murdered along with his wife, and allegedly by his son, along with the reactions to the killing are just enough for me. -- Kicking222 (talk) 01:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Isn't @Kicking222, This Is Spinal Tap transformative, which he directed and co-wrote? Not the first Mockumentary, but surely the film that popularized it - and set the template that so many have followed. Nfitz (talk) 01:43, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per above, NTRUMP This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is very much not related to Trump (sure he did make an inflammatory statement), but is more of an RD/blurb "major figure" discussion. Though we know your well-established position of OLDMANDIES. Natg 19 (talk) 02:04, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a lazy argument at best, if any wouldn’t this fit your “story is the death” argument? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:45, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's marginal, I would understand people's argument here at least. But as a general rule I will oppose American actors getting deathblurbs, there are plenty of people here to make the case for it This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:31, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But as a general rule I will oppose American actors getting deathblurbs Opposing stuff solely for the sakes of it is POINTy and teeters on the edge of battleground behaviour as well. And no, there are almost certainly not plenty of people here to make the case for it. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 13:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That actually strikes me as a bit illogical. Does that mean you'd support Reiner getting a blurb if he'd been, say, Canadian? Yes, there are Americentric issues on ITN, like the sporting thing where American college and amateur sport somehow gets a pass for ITN, but that from no other country does. But nationality of someone who has died doesn't seem relevant. Black Kite (talk) 13:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The general point is that we're far too generous with media figures (as compared to much more impactful people in politics, business, law, etc) for deathblurbs, because of their cultural visibility, Hollywood people particularly so This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 08:30, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb on WP:ITNRDBLURB criteria as "the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident". No opinion on notability, as it shouldn't even be a factor. -insert valid name here- (talk) 02:22, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb As above, the death is the story here. His status as a director just serves as extra foundation. Obviously qualifies for a blurb with the article improvements that were made. Parabolist (talk) 02:24, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Filmmaker and actor Rob Reiner (pictured) and his wife, Michele, are found stabbed to death in their Los Angeles home. K. M. Skylark (talk) 17:47, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That article is absolutley unnecessary because all the details are covered in Reiner's article already since it appears to be a quickly shut case, and the stuff related to Trump is not about Reiner but about Trump's social media posting, and should be covered there. Masem (t) 17:58, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the statement of Muboshgu: 'The death is the story', so it is strange for me that the article completely dedicated to the killing shouldn't be mentioned, even if it is short. K. M. Skylark (talk) 18:33, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But the article is not covering anything not already covered on Reiner's bio page. A unusual death does not require a separate page, for example, Robin Williams' suicide, including responses and aftermath, is covered entirely on his page. If anything, if the coverage of Reiner's death becomes larger, then the right step is to move his filmography to a separate article (lowest level of detail per Summary Style) and keep all the deaths and tributes on his bio page. The only thing that should not be covered in death is the reactions to Trump's message on his death, because that's using Reiner's page to coatrack criticism of Trump. Masem (t) 18:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Needless WP:Content fork. And social media use by Donald Trump is that way. Gotitbro (talk) 19:17, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two article can cover part of the same ground from different angles. There should absolutely be an article on the murder, and the subsequent judicial process and its outcome. BD2412 T 16:32, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Zulfiqar Ahmad Naqshbandi

edit
Article: Zulfiqar Ahmad Naqshbandi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Siasat Daily
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

 Ainty Painty (talk) 03:12, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 14

edit

RD: Anthony Geary

edit
Article: Anthony Geary (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: American actor known for appearing on General HospitalMr. Lechkar (talk) 22:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Carl Carlton

edit
Article: Carl Carlton (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone, BET
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Singer known for hits such as "She's a Bad Mama Jama" and "Everlasting Love" User:Golan1911

  • Weak oppose: Mostly sourced at this point, though the biggest issue is the overreliance on AllMusic citations. This should be easy to correct, but for now its a little too unreliable. --The Robot Parade 19:18, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support The article is overall well sourced but as The Robot Parade mentioned All Music is used ten times is a bit icky but seeing as how otherwise the article does use other sources, I don’t think that’s bad enough to keep this from getting posted. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:50, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All of those AllMusic citations were supported with other citations from the press or other websites Golan1911 (talk) 16:34, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I made some edits to add citations to the AllMusic Golan1911 (talk) 17:32, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2025 Chilean presidential election

edit
Article: 2025 Chilean general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: José Antonio Kast (pictured) wins the Chilean presidential election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: José Antonio Kast (pictured) of the Republican Party of Chile wins the presidential election runoff.
Alternative blurb II: José Antonio Kast (pictured) of the Republican Party wins the Chilean presidential election.
Alternative blurb III: José Antonio Kast (pictured) is elected president of Chile.
Alternative blurb IV: José Antonio Kast (pictured) is elected president of Chile with Unidad por Chile winning the most seats in the National Congress
Credits:
Article updated
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: Projected winner according to several Chilean media sources; article(s) updated. I'm sure Western media sources will be reporting on this shortly. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 22:29, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait The Campaign section needs expansion, and the Results section also needs expansion and updating. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:32, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added altblurb3 with the usual style we use in presidential elections. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr Fell @CastleFort1 I have been working on the article, expanding the sections you mentioned. I'm still polishing some aspects, but I think it is now complete enough and ready. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:18, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt blurb 2 Article issues have been fixed and is ready to post on ITN. CastleFort1 (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Alsoriano97@CastleFort1 Appreciate both your efforts. Below, I see Vacant has asked for additional expansion to the campaign and results sections. My only other concern is the second intro paragraph. Neither cited source describes Jara as 'center-left and pragmatic.' The FT says both Jara and Kast moved towards the center, and Jara describes her candidacy as center-left. Similar concern with the descriptions of their platforms. Looking at the article for the 2021 election, we can probably not include platforms in the intro at all. This paragraph should be more NPOV. Dr Fell (talk) 20:33, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr Fell I agree with your observation. I have fixed it, adding the definition used by NBC News and noting the 2021 elections as a precedent. I have also replaced the FT source with NBC to bring it in line with the content and because FT required a subscription. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:55, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Alsoriano97 I think we're in good shape to post. Dr Fell (talk) 21:17, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
great, thanks! _-_Alsor (talk) 21:20, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Gary Rowell

edit
Article: Gary Rowell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Needs a lot more sources but widely available Abcmaxx (talk) 13:53, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not ready – Severe lack of sources. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 17:07, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready there are sources in the box for his height, then his entire career is unsourced (including an alleged profane quote), then the next source is his death. I know WP:NOTCOMPULSORY but I haven't a clue why somebody would suggest an article as bad as this, knowing the posting criteria, without improving it first. Is it to get the award on the user talk page? You'd be much more likely to get one by improving a page to a reasonable state. Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:44, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BITE. The article is under-referenced but actually well-written. There have been much worse-shaped articles nominated before for much lesser known footballers which did get posted to RD. Given (as the article suggests) he was a key figure for Sunderland in the 70s, there are plenty of sources available and plenty of Wikipedians who enjoy editing football articles, and a nomination at ITN/RD is a chance to highlight and improve the article. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:47, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with this. Unsourced articles should not be brought to ITN per WP:ITNQUALITY. ITN is not used for cleanup. Natg 19 (talk) 22:46, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely not ready orange tagged, lack of sources.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 08:40, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Democratic Party of Hong Kong

edit
Article: Democratic Party (Hong Kong) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Democratic Party, Hong Kong's last pro-democracy camp, dissolves to end an era of city's opposition politics. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Hong Kong's main opposition party, the pro-democracy Democratic Party (former chairman Lo Kin-hei pictured), is dissolved.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Hong Kong's last remaining major party of the pro-democracy camp, the Democrats, is disbanded.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Hong Kong's last remaining major party of the pro-democracy camp, the Democratic Party, is disbanded.
News source(s): The Associated Press, Reuters
Article needs updating

 UCinternational (talk) 12:48, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the blurb is weirdly worded and sounded like some sort of news headline more than anything. NotKringe (talk) 12:59, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The entirety of the HK pro-dem movement has been dead since more than four years now. We posted the conviction and imprisonment of of most of its leaders not that long ago, something actually substantial. Gotitbro (talk) 14:36, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Can you adjust the blurb to make it more clear on the significance of the event?
Guz13 (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support – This was Hong Kong's main opposition party for decades (suggested altblurb1 to make this clear); its dissolution marks the formal "end of an era of [Hong Kong]'s once-diverse political landscape."—undoubtably a notable development that has received major international media attention since 2014. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 16:03, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'Oppose - Per User:Gotitbro. Kvinnen (talk) 17:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SirPhilippines (talk) 01:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oppose sub=national local politics.~2025-40362-90 (talk) 08:26, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per GhostStalker.
Guz13 (talk) 23:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Bondi Beach shooting

edit
Article: 2025 Bondi Beach shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A mass shooting at Bondi Beach, Australia, leaves eleven people dead. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ 11 people are killed in a mass shooting during a Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Eleven people are killed in a mass shooting, declared a terror attack by authorities.
Alternative blurb III: Mass shootings occur at Brown University in the US and Bondi Beach in Australia.
News source(s): The Telegraph, BBC, Times of Israel, ABC News (Australia)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Three deaths are tragic. We should wait for the article to became notable. Bakhos Let's talk! 09:25, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: There are currently two articles for the topic: Bondi Beach shooting and Bondi Beach shooting (2025). Mr rnddude (talk) 09:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just merged the latter to the former.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 09:36, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait situation is still developing, wait for it to cool down a bit since reports can be conflicting and can change in mere minutes.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 09:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Would note this is a rather significant event that happened on Hanukkah, and was targeted at a Hanukkah celebration event. Would suggest rewriting the blurb to reflect that.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 09:47, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
strong oppose per below. 2 vs. 3 is not so different.Psephguru (talk) 09:48, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At least 10 dead and may be related to ISIS/the Arab-Israeli conflict considering this happened during a Hanukkah celebration.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 09:55, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The blurb dint say that. Plus no sourcced connection thereof to the Arab attacks. Everything Jewish is not Arab.Psephguru (talk) 09:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Psephguru: The death toll is now at least 10 FWIW. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 10:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
support orginal blurbPsephguru (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait but Strong Support: Worst mass shooting in Australia since Port Arthur massacre (Australia). At least 10 dead; https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/gunshots-in-bondi-beach-as-police-urge-people-to-stay-away-20251214-p5nnks Nightmares26 (talk) 09:54, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support, once the article has settled down a bit. Estimated death toll is now at least ten, and may I remind international observers that this is extremely out of the ordinary in Australia. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 10:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alt blurb: ... people are killed in a mass shooting during a Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 10:12, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support this alt blurb, the nature of the event is significant here as it’s likely racially motivated. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 10:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the alt blurb as you mentioned. Currently the number seems to be 10 (9 victims, 1 perpetrator). Gust Justice (talk) 10:39, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait tied for second worst mass shooting in Australia alongside Hope Forest (Port Arthur being the worst), will change to support once the flurry of edits slows down a bit (I got three edit conflicts). Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 10:05, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait a couple hours for information to become clearer and article to become more stable. I’ll change to strong support then as this is an extremely significant and tragic massacre. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 10:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Major mass shooting. -- Veggies (talk) 10:26, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt blurb once the situation becomes more clear and the article can be expanded. Is being covered globally and by all the international news bureaus. Gust Justice (talk) 10:35, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb, more serious than the 2024 Westfield Bondi Junction incident (which passed ITN) and most serious incident since Port Arthur in 1996. - Mailer Diablo 10:38, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Death toll now 12, designated a terrorist incident. Black Kite (talk) 11:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Added altblurb accounting for terror designation. 5225C (talk • contributions) 11:25, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would support this Alt blurb II, but I think it should still include the location and potentially the context (if room). SnowyRiver28 (talk) 11:27, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oppose NPOV is for the reactions, not ITN or led.Psephguru (talk) 11:31, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Combine with Brown The shootings at Bondi and Brown U. seem to be getting similar levels of live coverage and so readers will be looking for both. And it would look odd to post one but not the other. A simple navigational blurb like Alt3, perhaps. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:29, 14 December 2025 (UTC) (edit conflict)[reply]
Weak Support Also I minor tweaked yours.Psephguru (talk) 11:32, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose two shootings occurring on opposite sides of the globe with seemingly no relation other than time doesn't really make sense to combine, especially when one seems substantially more notable than the other Jone425 (talk) 11:34, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose alt III, while two mass shootings on the same day is a horrible coincidence, that's apparently all they have in common. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 11:37, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's surely more than two "mass" shootings with more than one fatality in the last few days. All I see that ties these together is that they are in privileged elitist white anglophone settings, in (somewhat) functional liberal democracies. There was zero support for posting a blurb about 11 people killed in South Africa last week, with 3 out of 4 objections saying that people get shot in South Africa all the time, despite 3 being killed every day in that country. The shooting deaths of 3 in Mexico last weekend wasn't even raised here. (USA is about 130 a day; Australia is less than 1 a day). I'm appalled over some of the relatively minor events that get raised here in relation to rich countries - especially the USA. Obviously a terrorist targeting a specific ethnic group with 11 deaths is very, very different than two deaths in a local shooting with no indications of terrorism, or anything. Nfitz (talk) 17:47, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No way - There's zero connection between the two, and the Brown shooting was already decided to be non-suitable for a blurb. -- Veggies (talk) 11:40, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth the nominator of that one withdrew, but you are correct in that it did not get posted. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 11:50, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrew Davidson: This is probably one of the most absurd ideas I have heard, these two are events are not related in any way apart from the fact that they occurred a day apart. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 11:49, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hell no No connection between the two besides occurring on the same day, just a coincidence. The only time I've seen where 2 separate blurbs could have been combined is with the Belgrade school shooting and the Mladenovac and Smederevo shootings in 2023, with the former occurring 1 day before the latter in the same country, and otherwise not being connected.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 12:04, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No way Andre, no way. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, then support - clearly receiving quite widespread coverage internationally, and the most deadly shooting in the country's history for decades. however, the situation is still developing with details changing rapidly - we should at least wait until there isn't still ongoing panic at the scene Jone425 (talk) 11:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This event has received a vast amount of coverage from many worldwide media outlets such as BBC News, Reuters, The New York Times and others. I support alternative blurb 2 as the declaration by police that it is terror attack seems to now be a key detail. This is the sort of article that should get covered in this section. I agree with HillelAmadeus that mentioning the Jewish connection in alternative blurb 1 is important, but I like both proposed blurbs. Qwerty123M (talk) 11:38, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt blurb I High number of victims in a country unaccustomed to this type of violence, classified as terrorist and discriminatory in nature, it seems. Article looks ready. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Rare Australian shooting and terrorist attack against a specific minority. Harizotoh9 (talk) 12:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Major notability, rare occurrence, + it's a terrorist attack. Blurb 0 is best but needs that angle included also.  Nixinova  T ⁄ C  13:09, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article in good shape for what we know now and definitely seems like directed terrorism. Masem (t) 13:13, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support with the Alt blurb: 11 people are killed in a mass shooting during a Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach. It is the most accurate description of events. ShoBDin (talk) 13:29, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt blurb I The news here at present is going with this non-stop. This is the biggest mass shooting in Australia since the Port Arthur massacre. Police immediately declared this an act of terrorism and this is getting strong international coverage, which is not surprising given this sort of stuff just doesn't happen here. TarnishedPathtalk 14:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb I with alteration. At least 11 people are killed and 29 are injured in a mass shooting at a Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach. I think the blurb should make mention of the 29 hospitalized as many RSes are reporting. It's definitely significant that this was a Hanukkah celebration event. Multiple RSes have Australian PM and Primer calling it a terror attack targeted against the Jewish community. Would support adding mention of terror attack if that is done at ITN given that it has been confirmed now. -- Lenny Marks (talk) 14:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt blurb 1 Mass shootings with significant casualties are a rare event in Australia, and it being a targeted attack against a religious group makes it further significant. The blurb should not be combined with the Rhode Island shooting and it also should specify that the shooting took place at or in proximity to the Hanukkah celebrations. FlipandFlopped 14:29, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb 1 Major terror attack with a clear religious connection. Not sure if we have labelled items as "terror attacks" on ITN based on breaking news coverage (please guide me if such precedents exist), so avoiding alt blurb 2 for now. Gotitbro (talk) 14:46, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Major support. 11 dead in an anti-semetic terror attack!? Bloxzge 025 (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt blurb I. Mass shooting targetting Jews celebrating Hanukkah. It’s completely clear. Failing to acknowledge that Jews were targeted, or that the scene specifically targeted Hanukkah celebrations is simply ignoring the facts. ScottyNolan (talk) 15:52, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is already altblurb 1 that has been posted. Gotitbro (talk) 16:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Posting-Posting Support For all of the above reasons, but the blurb should label it as a terrorist attack, which it is. hungry (talk) 22:06, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: article has little stability, and there's endless back and forth on key elements on the lede such as whether to call it a mass shooting or terrorist attack. There's also an ever growing "reactions" section. Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:48, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant POV pushing. Context is there.~2025-40362-90 (talk) 08:28, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt we have ever blurbed motivations for terror attacks at ITN. With the when, where and how already satisfied and the blurb posted; ITN's job is done and editors should now focus on improving the article. Gotitbro (talk) 09:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that motive is rarely, if ever, including in ITN blurbs. However, I'd point out that beyond improving the article's quality, there's an ongoing discussion about including the number injured to the blurb (and if I understand correctly, that should be discussed here rather than WP:ERRORS). Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 15:50, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The precedent for that, when we already have a large fatality number, is also negligible. Gotitbro (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 23:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Withdrawn) 2025 Brown University shooting

edit

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: 2025 Brown University shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A shooting at Brown University leaves 2 people dead. (Post)
News source(s): CNN NYT
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Pretty notable, considering 2 people are left dead and there is overwhelming coverage. HwyNerd Mike (t | c) 03:23, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sadly there's too many school shootings in the United States to post all of them. 2 dead is not enough to post. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 03:29, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not just another shooting, this is an Ivy League School. JaxsonR (talk) 03:37, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can't even start to understand how what sports league that students play in has even the slightest bit of relevance in this. The shooting appears to be in an academic building, not a play area. Nfitz (talk) 04:11, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the US, "Ivy League" is generally understood to mean a very prominent, exclusive, or just really good school. The sports league part is often an afterthought. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 04:15, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what the link that @JaxsonR used says. It's predominantly about a local sports league - it's not even national! But if it's about elitism - how is that actually not worse? I simply can't believe such silliness. Nfitz (talk) 04:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The incident has received extensive national and international media coverage, resulted in multiple fatalities, involved a highly prominent institution, and prompted public comment from President Trump.akidfrombethany!(talk|contribs) 03:54, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But such shootings are quite frequent, even major ones with casaulties probably every month.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:03, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If Trump didn't comment on something I would find it more unusual. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 04:07, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While the shooting at an ivy college is not common, shootings are in the U.S. and the death toll doesn't make it one of the many deadliest shootings in the country. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 04:09, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - this nomination is completely absurd. Only two people dead? In that particular county there's regular incidents where a dozen or two are shot. And here we have a nomination for this? Do we nominate any time 2 people are killed in the world? This should be closed quickly with prejudice. Nfitz (talk) 04:18, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn HwyNerd Mike (t | c) 04:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 13

edit

(new) RD: Anda-Louise Bogza

edit
Article: Anda-Louise Bogza (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Forum Opera
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Romanian soprano who was based in Prague and performed Verdi's heriones from Paris to Tokyo. Most of the article was there, but missed inline citations. International obits now used, more detail possible but not now, help always welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bobby Rousseau

edit
Article: Bobby Rousseau (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NHL Gazette
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Canadian hockey player and notable Hall of Fame snub. Article is fully sourced and updated. --The Robot Parade 08:26, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Abraham Quintanilla

edit
Article: Abraham Quintanilla (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Parade LA Times
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Mexican-American record producer, known for being the father of Selena. Article has been fully sourced and updated. --The Robot Parade 07:20, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support nomination for ITN – jona 00:07, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The Filmography is currently sourced only to IMDd, which is unreliable (WP:IMDB).—Bagumba (talk) 09:00, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The source for the discography section is unusual. It cites a 2010 television program, and includes two "unknown" releases—how could that be the case? Discogs seems to indicate that these are Los Dinos albums, not Quintanilla's. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 16:28, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ra'ad Sa'ad

edit
Article: Ra'ad Sa'ad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ToI WP
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Palestinian militant for Hamas. Article is detailed and sourced, though death is only according to Israel forces. --The Robot Parade 07:20, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Article is well sourced, of a sufficient length, and updated. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 16:15, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: José Bantolo

edit
Article: José Bantolo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBCP News
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Filipino bishop. Article is long enough and fully sourced. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:49, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Peter Greene

edit
Article: Peter Greene (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline NBC news
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: American character actor best known for playing villains in films such as Pulp Fiction and The Mask ItsShandog (talk) 08:56, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Lionel Messi's 2025 India Tour

edit

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: Lionel Messi's 2025 India Tour (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Lionel Messi's India tour begins in Kolkata but descends into chaos as angry fans rip up seats and throw objects in protest at his brief appearance. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/dec/13/lionel-messi-india-tour-chaos-angry-fans-seats-pitch-kolkata, https://www.aljazeera.com/sports/2025/12/13/messis-tour-of-india-gets-off-to-chaotic-start-with-fans-throwing-bottles, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g66nll48do
Credits:
 ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 20:04, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose trivial. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sports trivia This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 12

edit

(Stale) Arrest of Narges Mohammadi

edit

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: Narges Mohammadi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Iranian human rights activist Narges Mohammadi is arrested. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Fluid situation. Preliminary reports indicate she has been seriously injured, which is blurbable if confirmed. Bremps... 20:45, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.

(Ready) RD: Paul Wiggin

edit
Article: Paul Wiggin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: American football player and coach in the College Football Hall of Fame. Article is in good shape, being fully sourced and updated. --The Robot Parade 16:30, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article is well sourced.
TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:44, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Magda Umer

edit
Article: Magda Umer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TVP World, Polish Radio
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

 EUPBR (talk) 19:35, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joanna Trollope

edit
Article: Joanna Trollope (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News The Guardian
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Bestselling British novelist. ItsShandog (talk) 13:08, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing: US naval deployment in the Caribbean

edit
Article: 2025 United States naval deployment in the Caribbean (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: As per User:FallingGravity's suggestion in the comments of the Skipper oil tanker seizure ITN nomination. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:44, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 11

edit

RD: Stanley Baxter

edit
Article: Stanley Baxter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Scottish actor and comedian. A star of British television for several decades, with peak of fame in 1970s Drchriswilliams (talk) 11:56, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The sourcing needs a lot of work before this can be posted. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:10, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm surprised to find that he was still living and suppose that his heyday is so long ago that many won't know him now. But he was quite a big TV star in his day and notice that he already has a legacy section. I'd be suggesting a blurb or photo posting but the fine image is not fully free yet, alas. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:27, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andrew Davidson: Did you review article quality at all? Early life and Career are both full of unsourced statements, which means this can't run yet. Since this is an RD nom, quality is the primary (read: only) concern, and that includes sourcing. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:11, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The nominator seems to be systematically adding citations. Myself, I'm more concerned with contentious issues as they are the priority per WP:V. I usually check the talk pages of nominated articles to see if there are such unresolved issues and I have been discussing one there. It's good for editors to look at articles from different perspectives as, if they all just focus on the same thing, then other things will be missed. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:05, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) The Game Awards

edit
Article: The Game Awards 2025 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In video games, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 wins nine awards including Game of the Year at The Game Awards. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At The Game Awards Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 wins game of the year, its director Guillaume Broche wins best game direction.
Alternative blurb II: Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 wins Game of the Year at the Game Awards.
Alternative blurb III: ​ At the Game Awards, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 wins Game of the Year
News source(s): Polygon, NYTimes, Variety
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This is not yet an ITNR but has been posted the last 5 times, and I had an ongoing talk page discussion to add it to ITNR. There was lots of pre-award coverage from more mainstream sources like NYTimes and Variety earlier today, so would expect to see that in the next 12-24hr to support this being in the news (and not just in video games). Masem (t) 04:09, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support This should be an INTR now, we post it every year. Article quality looks good to me. We should post the altblurb. hungry (talk) 05:33, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • What on earth have sports events got to do with this? Logically, if we really want to make room, we should cut an awards event. 10:39, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
Support: Alt blurb 1 is the best. KreamoNoBrainos/Kreamy/Fat Man (talk) 17:45, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alt1 is flat out wrong, because they do not award the best game direction to an individual but to the game itself (even if the director was the one that accepted it on stage) Masem (t) 19:05, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and I've added an alt3. This is the most widely reported 'game of the year' award out there, and should probably be on ITNR. The article is of high quality, with good referencing and as much prose as could realistically be written about an awards ceremony. Good work. Modest Genius talk 18:14, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article quality is sufficient and the main awards event in gaming is significant enough to post. I'm fine with any of the blurbs except the inaccurate alt1, with my first choice being alt2. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:24, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt II Good article and (not officially) is regularly posted in ITN Scooglers (talk) 19:25, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Already unofficially ITN/R and likely to be made official once the talk discussion is closed (it could honestly be SNOW closed right now). Article quality sufficient to post, topic is sufficiently in the news, etc. I support alt II but have no opposition to alt III & I would also support alt I if it's modified for accuracy per Masem's comment above.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:36, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt2 on conciseness. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Personally, I'd also support adding this to ITNR given that it's been posted every time in the previous five years. Gestrid (talk) 03:44, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jenista Mhagama

edit
Article: Jenista Mhagama (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Citizen
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Tanzanian politician. Article is long enough and fully sourced. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:50, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: John Varley (author)

edit
Article: John Varley (author) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Locus
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Hugo award winning SF writer, if anyone has improvements to his bio section to get it cleaned up for inclusion, that'd be kind Emceeaich (talk) 21:55, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Harold Wayne Nichols

edit
Article: Harold Wayne Nichols (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS News
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: American serial rapist and convicted murderer. On death row since May 1990 in Tennessee. CoryGlee 21:13, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2025 Bulgarian budget protests

edit
Article: 2025 Bulgarian budget protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ After several days of Gen-Z dominated protests, the Zhelyazkov Government in Bulgaria decided to resign. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Bulgaria, prime minister Rosen Zhelyazkov (pictured) and his government resign following weeks of protests.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Bulgarian Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov resigns after days of protests.
News source(s): POLITICO
Credits:

Article updated

 VitoxxMass (talk) 18:50, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:11, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jim Ward (voice actor)

edit
Article: Jim Ward (voice actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Kotaku
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Voice of Doug Dimmadome and Chet Ubetcha in The Fairly OddParents, as well as Captain QwarkMr. Lechkar (talk) 12:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

'support" needed citations have been added. 19:33 (UTC)

Oppose Sadly my nomination for Jeff Garcia was orange tagged and this one is too so. KreamoNoBrainos/Kreamy/Fat Man (talk) 17:14, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you not to vote based on what happened to your nomination, Kreamymate, that's a poor & quick judgement. CoryGlee 21:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support ... largely referenced, gaps are easily filled and contextualized. CoryGlee 21:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Stale) Earliest known fire-making evidence discovered

edit

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: Control of fire by early humans (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Evidence for the earliest-known example of prehistoric fire-making in the control of fire by early humans is discovered in England. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Evidence for the earliest-known example of prehistoric fire-making by early humans, dating back 350,000 years earlier than previously believed, is discovered in England.
Alternative blurb II: ​ A discovery in England shows that humans first made fire at least 350,000 years earlier than previously thought.
News source(s): BBC, NBC, Nature (peer-review article)
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Well-cited target article, updated, no tags. Evidence pushes back date from 50k to 400k years ago. Jusdafax (talk) 02:18, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – This is undoubtably interesting, but the article only has a single-sentence update with no indication as to why this discovery is noteworthy/significant. For the blurb: wouldn't stating that the evidence pushes the date back substantially (which should be stated in the article) be more interesting that saying it was discovered in England? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 03:05, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: OpposeNature article itself states that, though the evidence is ambiguous, there are sites in Kenya "dating to 1.6–1.4 million years ago", along with others in South Africa and Israel; and that in Europe, there was already "occasional signals of fire use from around 400 thousand years ago." One of the senior authors of the study even stated "I think many of us had a hunch that there was regular use of fire in Europe around 400,000 years ago. But we didn’t have the evidence." The new discovery does not suggest that the control of fire is earlier than believed (as the blurb states) as this was already largely suspected, it's just that this site in England is best/earliest evidence of it so far. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 16:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As I understand it, the discovery is not that humans began using fire, but that they began creating it. Here's a quote from the BBC article: "There is evidence that early humans learned to capture, maintain, and use natural wildfires as far back as 2 million years ago. But the ability to create it was the key development that accelerated our evolution, according to Prof Chris Stringer of the Natural History Museum. [...] Prof Stringer adds that creating fire at will was one of the main drivers of a virtuous and accelerating evolutionary cycle." CohenTheBohemian (talk) 16:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    A 2017 article written by two archeologists states: "Conventional thinking has long held that our human ancestors gained control of fire—including the ability to create it—very early in prehistory, long before Neanderthals came along some 250,000 years ago. ... It is hard to imagine that our ancestors could have left Africa and colonized the higher, and often much colder, latitudes of Europe and Asia without fire." No exact date given, but "long before" the year 50k demonstrated by the artifacts in France. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 17:49, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, and "Conventional thinking" is there is life elsewhere in the Universe. This concerns actual physical evidence with a set date and place and method. -- GreenC 20:24, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's VERY suitable for this. KreamoNoBrainos/Kreamy/Fat Man (talk) 20:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Then the blurb should simply state that what was found in England is the oldest "physical evidence with a set date and place and method", not that it has reshaped when researchers believe fire was first created. And with that in mind, the story might not be as significant as some have been led to believe. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 20:27, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) CommentEvidence pushes back date from 50k to 400k years ago Shouldn't that really be the focus of the blurb? More like "New discoveries in England show the earliest control of fire by humans occurred c. 400,000 years ago, 350,000 years earlier than previously thought." 5225C (talk • contributions) 03:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - As always, alt-blurb suggestions are welcome. As for the article, I’m sure it will be expanded in short order. Jusdafax (talk) 03:53, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Seems interesting enough for a blurb... although it would be better if the evidence was more specific Oppose per Natg19 Elisecars727 (talk) 04:09, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment—I've added an alt-blurb which mentions the fact that fire-making evidence dates back 350,000 years earlier than previously believed. Kurtis (talk) 07:57, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as human control of fire is a huge step in development and it's a big gap. Added an altblurb which I think states down the main points more succinctly. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 09:21, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Either of the altblurbs. 5225C (talk • contributions) 10:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Very good ITN material of high encyclopaedic value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:28, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Good ITN worthy. I do not know about this but it's interesting to me. ROY is WAR Talk! 12:23, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Article isn't appropriately updated; only the lede has been. There has been a mention of the 415,000 BP England site in the text cited to a source from 2006; it's very unclear from the article why this is in the news now. The article clearly states that hominids have been using fire for over a million years (see also the timeline), so I think it's extra important to make the significance and interest in this specific site very clear in the article. Needs work. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:00, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's a clarification needed in the lead. Of the three blurbs I prefer the third one, as it is not written in passive voice. Cambalachero (talk) 13:36, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The target article mentions 1 million year old evidence of fire from south Africa. Is this much younger evidence only being called notable because it was found in Europe instead of Africa? Or is this evidence of how fire was created (flint and pyrite, instead of saved over from a previous fire)? ~2025-39726-97 (talk) 14:38, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The latter. Deliberate creation of fire versus use of naturally-created fire. Dr Fell (talk) 18:35, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the blurb contradicts the body of the article; once the news-media glazing is removed I doubt there is a blurb-able update here. ~2025-35132-06 (talk) 16:09, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Definately a very interesting historical discovery that may reshape thinking on the prehistoric world. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is very speculative, and other researchers do not agree with the findings. Per the NBC source, Other outside researchers were less convinced. In an email, Wil Roebroeks, a professor emeritus of paleolithic archaeology at Leiden University in the Netherlands, wrote that much of the evidence here is “circumstantial.” There are other, earlier suggestions that human ancestors used fire in present-day South Africa, Israel and Kenya, but those examples are the subject of some debate and interpretation. Natg 19 (talk) 18:52, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Some oppose votes appear to be confusing the use of fire with the making of fire. They are different, and the lead section explains. Remember the movie Quest for Fire (film)? The opening scene they had fire, lost it in the swamp, and had to go on a quest to find it again ie. they didn't know how to make fire. On the quest, they learn how to make fire from another tribe, by rubbing sticks together. They didn't grab a burning stick from a wildfire lightning strike or from another tribe. Also, there will always be some minority of researchers who find a reason to oppose, but this was peer reviewed in the Nature, the highest caliber, I don't see much controversy. -- GreenC 20:19, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support because while yes this is notable however Natg 19 has a very good point that in the source it is disputed. KreamoNoBrainos/Kreamy/Fat Man (talk) 20:24, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.

RD: Arthur Konrad

edit
Article: Arthur Konrad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Liechtensteiner Vaterland
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Former mayor of Vaduz. TheBritinator (talk) 00:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

edit

Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents:

  1. ^ "Pulitzer Prize-winning correspondent Peter Arnett, who reported from Vietnam and Gulf War, has died". Associated Press. 17 December 2025. Retrieved 17 December 2025.
  2. ^ "The Last of Us takes the big prize (and many others) at the Oscars of video games". Digital Trends. February 7, 2014. Archived from the original on November 4, 2021. Retrieved November 4, 2021.
  3. ^ "DICE Awards turn 20: How gaming's Academy Awards have grown". VentureBeat. February 21, 2017. Archived from the original on October 25, 2020. Retrieved November 4, 2021.
  4. ^ "Control nominated for eight "video game Oscars" D.I.C.E. Awards and five GDC Awards". Remedy Entertainment. January 14, 2020. Archived from the original on November 6, 2021. Retrieved November 4, 2021.