Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
| Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
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.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossaryedit
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 stepsedit
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.
Headersedit
Voicing an opinion on an itemeditFormat 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
Please do not...edit
Suggesting updateseditThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Structure
editThis 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 18, 2025 (Thursday)
|
December 17
edit|
December 17, 2025 (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Peter Arnett
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Nominated by Chess enjoyer (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Delcoan (talk · give credit), Editrite! (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
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)
RD: Harry Roberts
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Ad Orientem (talk · give credit)
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)
- 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)
- Weak oppose Article has five cn tags but it’s pretty well sourced beyond that. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
December 16
edit|
December 16, 2025 (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Norman Podhoretz
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Rym071 (talk · give credit) and The Knowledge Pirate (talk · give credit)
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)
- Weak oppose Article has three cn tags and there’s 2/3 books in the bibliography section that aren’t linked or have an ISBN. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:57, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Nuno F. Loureiro
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News BBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Staraction (talk · give credit)
- Created by RabidTuberculosis (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Apandada1 (talk · give credit) and RabidTuberculosis (talk · give credit)
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 Technology. Staraction (talk · contribs) 04:41, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- @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)
- Almost all the references are about his death. It would fall under WP:BLP1E. Guz13 (talk) 16:18, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- @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)- 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)
- @Guz13 If you think WP:BLP1E applies here, then nominate the article for deletion. I personally would disagree; WP:BLP1E writes that
- Almost all the references are about his death. It would fall under WP:BLP1E. Guz13 (talk) 16:18, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- @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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: William J. Bauer
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune
Credits:
- Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Umutdyb (talk · give credit), Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:24, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Shân Legge-Bourke
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News People
Credits:
- Nominated by ItsShandog (talk · give credit)
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 Sussex. ItsShandog (talk) 16:55, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Needs expansion. The article is a stub at present. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 17:10, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- oppose for now article is too short. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Tanko Muhammad
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Nominated by SafariScribe (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support - Shortish but decently sourced. Jusdafax (talk) 16:27, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Guz13 (talk) 16:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Having retrieved an archive-url for a dead ref, that looked like close paraphrasing to me. See the article's talk page. Schwede66 00:44, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- I have replied there too. Thanks! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:16, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support One cn tags but that shouldn’t keep the otherwise sourced article from getting posted.TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:10, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- @TDKR Chicago 101, would you fancy changing your vote? I have addressed your concern. Thanks! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:44, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Great work! Re-reading the article now on my laptop and I'm noticing that the death section is larger than his career section. I acknowledge not a lot of source might be covering his judicial career hence the lack of extensive info but the article is in good shape. I'll keep my vote as a weak support still (which is not bad and shouldn't keep this from getting posted) TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:21, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- No problem. However if you would help out anyway in the article's expansion, even during your free time, it will be beneficial to the project. Cheers! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 17:08, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Great work! Re-reading the article now on my laptop and I'm noticing that the death section is larger than his career section. I acknowledge not a lot of source might be covering his judicial career hence the lack of extensive info but the article is in good shape. I'll keep my vote as a weak support still (which is not bad and shouldn't keep this from getting posted) TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:21, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- @TDKR Chicago 101, would you fancy changing your vote? I have addressed your concern. Thanks! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:44, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2025
editThe 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.
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:
- Nominated by Emperor Sheev Palpatine of Naboo (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Added subheading. I don't believe we post junior events though. --~2025-31615-11 (talk) 02:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- Oppose Not notable. Guz13 (talk) 04:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Opppose anc close per all above. Minor event, ladk of general importance. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:39, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
December 15
edit|
December 15, 2025 (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
|
RD: Somachandra de Silva
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Ada Derana Daily News
Credits:
- Nominated by Abishe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by I am bad at usernames (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit), Sammyrice (talk · give credit), Editrite! (talk · give credit) and Extended Cut (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support Article well sourced. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:53, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Joe Ely
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone
Credits:
- Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
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)
- Oppose: Appropriately orange tagged, though it could likely be changed to simply CN tags. Needs more sources before it can be posted. --The Robot Parade 19:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Rachael Carpani
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2], [3]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by HungryReptile (talk · give credit) and CAWylie (talk · give credit)
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)
(Ready) Jimmy Lai
editBlurb: 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:
- Nominated by Nice4What (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support mentioned in the HK Democratic Party nom that this would be more fitting as something to show the interference in Democratic traditions in HK by the PRC. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 16:55, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The current blurb at least, a CCP-controlled court finds a pro-democracy HK leader guilty of sedition shouldn't be framed in a manner that suggests actual criminal wrongdoing. If this can be merged with the banning of the last of the pro-dem parties (nominated below) and blurbed aptly, may support it. Gotitbro (talk) 17:31, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- But the language is factually true; the court found him guilty. Whether because the court is corrupt and he wasn't actually guilty is beyond scope for ITN, we are simply reporting a factual statement that the court arrived at this finding. Masem (t) 18:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- The context cannot be divorced, not every reader is aware of internal HK-CN politcal workings to know what is actually happening here. Posting it as is as basic an NPOV violation as it can get considering, either we add the necessary context or this stays off. Gotitbro (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- That's just not correct, as ITN here is not here to RGW. It's the same with posting of elections that we know are not truly democracy cratic, like Russia's. We should not be injecting, at ITN, commentary putting the result into doubt, as there's far too little space on ITN for that contect, though careful wording can avoid major issues liking saying "Putin was named the winner of..." instead of "Putin won..". Here, just stating the court found him guilty is about as neutral as we can be. Masem (t) 22:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- "...amid continued crackdown on democracy." How will that do? This leaves the main sentence untouched and factually correct as Masem insists, while providing the backdrop Gotitbro wants. MilkyDefer 02:57, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- That's adding a POV that needs more context than what ITN can provide. Masem (t) 03:07, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- RGW is not an issue here. Elections are ITNR, this isn't and the only reason this is receiving coverage/is notable for ITN stems from this being the death knell of democracy in HK. As basic a thing as that does not amount to editorializing. That one of the blurbs calls him a "tycoon" (not even valid anymore) another solid case of POV and that none of these list his pro-dem credentials, only establishes my point further. Gotitbro (talk) 05:29, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Explain how the use of media tycoon is a POV concern? I don't believe the term has any positive/negative connotations, and it's being used by many reliable sources:
- New York Times: Hong Kong Media Tycoon’s Conviction Was Years in the Making
- The Guardian: Trump urges Xi Jinping to free HK pro-democracy media tycoon Jimmy Lai
- CNN: Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai found guilty in landmark national security trial, faces possible life sentence
- Al Jazeera: Trump urges China’s Xi to free jailed Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai
- Le Monde: Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai convicted on national security charges
- Feel free to suggest an altblurb that mentions Jimmy Lai's pro-democracy affiliation. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 06:25, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- I shouldn't really have to explain that "tycoon" is an editorialized label and has no place on an encyclopedia (regardless of editorialized headlines in newspapers). Moreover it is factually misleading, the label stems from his ownership of Apple Daily et. al. all defunct since the CCP takeover more than 4 years ago. Gotitbro (talk) 10:22, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Explain how the use of media tycoon is a POV concern? I don't believe the term has any positive/negative connotations, and it's being used by many reliable sources:
- "...amid continued crackdown on democracy." How will that do? This leaves the main sentence untouched and factually correct as Masem insists, while providing the backdrop Gotitbro wants. MilkyDefer 02:57, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- That's just not correct, as ITN here is not here to RGW. It's the same with posting of elections that we know are not truly democracy cratic, like Russia's. We should not be injecting, at ITN, commentary putting the result into doubt, as there's far too little space on ITN for that contect, though careful wording can avoid major issues liking saying "Putin was named the winner of..." instead of "Putin won..". Here, just stating the court found him guilty is about as neutral as we can be. Masem (t) 22:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- The context cannot be divorced, not every reader is aware of internal HK-CN politcal workings to know what is actually happening here. Posting it as is as basic an NPOV violation as it can get considering, either we add the necessary context or this stays off. Gotitbro (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- But the language is factually true; the court found him guilty. Whether because the court is corrupt and he wasn't actually guilty is beyond scope for ITN, we are simply reporting a factual statement that the court arrived at this finding. Masem (t) 18:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Major politcal/human rights event.–DMartin 04:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Alternative blurb is good. Guz13 (talk) 04:43, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support and we might consider working in this the other Hong Kong related news below. Tradediatalk 09:33, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Which Hong Kong story? Guz13 (talk) 16:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Democratic Party of Hong Kong. I agree with @Tradedia here. Gotitbro (talk) 19:14, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe a joint blurb? ArionStar (talk) 01:55, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Sure, why not. Gotitbro (talk) 04:26, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support a joint blurb Two important events happening in Hong Kong. ArionStar (talk) 12:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- It is very bad form and would be OR to try to join two disimilar stories only due to them being from the same region. It leads to suggesting causality between one and the other which is not at all the case here. Masem (t) 12:27, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support a joint blurb Two important events happening in Hong Kong. ArionStar (talk) 12:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Sure, why not. Gotitbro (talk) 04:26, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe a joint blurb? ArionStar (talk) 01:55, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Democratic Party of Hong Kong. I agree with @Tradedia here. Gotitbro (talk) 19:14, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Which Hong Kong story? Guz13 (talk) 16:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Major human rights event and evidence of Hong Kong not following the Sino-British Joint Declaration. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:35, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose fork found in kitchen This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:37, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) New Tongan prime minister
editBlurb: 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:
- Updated and nominated by N Panama 84534 (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support The bolded article is well-sourced and the article quality is fine. The article of the prime-minister designate is also sufficient in quality. CastleFort1 (talk) 14:07, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support – Well-written article, good length, sourced. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 14:39, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support As the general election was not posted before. I would nominate it too. ArionStar (talk) 14:51, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support per ArionStar. Article quality is good enough now, and there is a meaningful blurb. ~2025-35132-06 (talk) 15:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Whilst not the bolded article, the Fatafehi Fakafānua article needs a lot of work and it is the central figure of this election. Abcmaxx (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- If it is not bolded, you cannot oppose the nomination because the main article is the one about the election. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:56, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support since we didn't post the election when it happened, per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:00, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted ALT1. Nobody commented on which blurb is preferred. Given that the general election was held almost a month ago, I thought it better to include how the PM came to be elected at this point. And if somebody has time to update the Prime Minister of Tonga article, that would be good. Schwede66 00:13, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted blurb) Blurb/RD: Rob Reiner
editRecent 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:
- Nominated by ElijahPepe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jolielover (talk · give credit), ItsShandog (talk · give credit), Pristino (talk · give credit), Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support blurb,
oppose on qualityAn 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) - Support Well sourced, and also a homocide investigation of a celebrity is big news. Julesucks (talk) 04:00, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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?
- 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)
- Update: Yeah it wasn’t, just RD. This should be just RD too then. Ezlo Jeslan (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Update: Yeah it wasn’t, just RD. This should be just RD too then. Ezlo Jeslan (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- “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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Support RD, oppose blurb, per ElijahPepe. Ezlo Jeslan (talk) 04:05, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @Masem: Article quality has been improved. No more cn/unsourced statements. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- @Masem: Article quality has been improved. No more cn/unsourced statements. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
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)- @Ad Orientem: Article quality has been improved. No more cn/unsourced statements. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- Comment I created Draft:Death of Rob Reiner. Thriley (talk) 05:20, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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 ㋡ 05:28, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Assassination seems to be a very inappropriate word for family violence, @Flipandflopped. Nfitz (talk) 05:58, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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 ㋡ 12:43, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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 ㋡ 12:43, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Assassination seems to be a very inappropriate word for family violence, @Flipandflopped. Nfitz (talk) 05:58, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- There's certainly other sources that clearly say that
CarlRob'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)
- There's certainly other sources that clearly say that
- 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)
- 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)
- The fact that he was killed changes everything. BilboBeggins (talk) 12:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- @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)
- There is already draft for the article. BilboBeggins (talk) 13:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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 ㋡ 12:46, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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 ㋡ 21:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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 ㋡ 17:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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 ㋡ 17:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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 ㋡ 21:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- oppose blurb obvious RD. Too many fringe figures going on blurb now.~2025-40362-90 (talk) 08:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- "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)
- Strong support blurb Legendary film director with at least three films of his (This is Spinal Tap, The Princess Bride, and When Harry Met Sally...) being deemed culturally/historically significant enough to be selected for preservation by the Library of Congress's National Film Registry, which is one of the largest film preservation projects in the world. Once the article is updated, it should be blurbed. Mount Patagonia (talk • contributions) 08:52, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb The subject is vital and there's obviously a significant death-is-the-story aspect too. The quality of the article is above average, being graded B-class, and there's a good selection of free pictures. The main controversial issue is the identity of the killer but the section about the death seems as detailed as it can be currently and will no doubt continue to be watched closely. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:35, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support blurb three films in the National Film Registry is by no means an easy feat. Easily notable in his professional life, boosted by the unusual circumstances of his death; I personally support the first blurb. jolielover♥talk 10:00, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality I was going to post this as a consensus for a blurb, but I will not do so while there is a "more citations needed" reference tag on the article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:25, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Article quality has been improved. No more cn/unsourced statements. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb as both a major figure in the field of film/tv and the unusual death. Rhino131 (talk) 10:33, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment There is a Draft:Michele Singer Reiner started as well. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:57, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support when quality is sufficient Still a few unsourced sentences and the usual filmography. This death would have been borderline for a blurb in the normal way but the manner of death pushes it over the line quite easily, IMO; given the worldwide coverage no-one can claim it's not ITN. Black Kite (talk) 11:25, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Those that are supporting a blurb beyond the unusual death, there is nothing at all in the article that discusses why he was a major figure in film, so all those claims being made above are without any evidence in the article itself. Something like this should really be added because otherwise, there's a major quality problem here (beyond just the sourcing that's being worked on). Masem (t) 13:08, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Agreed. He revolutionarized three whole completely different genres! jolielover♥talk 18:19, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Masem up to his usual cantankerous tricks. ~2025-41027-05 (talk) 21:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- I expect someone to have a legacy page while they're still alive, in fact. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 16:33, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- That's much better! QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Mockumentary. BilboBeggins (talk) 17:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Strong support blurb when ready There're orange tags in his article. The death is the story and widely covered due to atypical circumstances (an Emmy-winner director and his spouse are stabbed to death). ArionStar (talk) 14:59, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Reiner's death, a violent one at that, isnt enough to get its own article, and thats close to the threshold that we use for blurbs. Besides, giving him a blurb would only confirm Wikipedia's US bias. ~2025-40941-13 (talk) 15:59, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- considering I learned about this from the german TV news, this seems like a criticism almost exclusively made by US editors — jonas (talk) 19:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
Oppose allon quality grounds at present. I would support a blurb when the quality aspect is sorted; this is largely due to the manner of death. - SchroCat (talk) 16:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC) Addendum: Tweaked now article quality is up to spec. - SchroCat (talk) 07:41, 16 December 2025 (UTC)- @SchroCat: Article quality has been improved. No more cn/unsourced statements. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb A clear case of "death is the story" which is one of the few times a blurb rather than RD is appropriate. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:30, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb primarily per our "death as the story" criterion. His transformative career as a director also strengthens the case for a blurb. The filmography section's orange tag should be addressed, of course; sincere appreciation to those who have been making progress on it. Davey2116 (talk) 18:42, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Even more ITN now ... Trump condemned for "disgusting" and "depraved" statement after deaths of Rob Reiner and wife Michele. Black Kite (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Arguably, that should not be covered in any depth on Reiner's page but somewhere on criticism of Trump. Masem (t) 19:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- It would be appropriate to include that in the aricle about death, of which there is draft now. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- A death article is absolutely not required here. The current article is short enough to include details of the event and the response (via way of legacy), it's not like some great unresolved mystery. Masem (t) 20:42, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- It would be appropriate to include that in the aricle about death, of which there is draft now. BilboBeggins (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- irrelevant for ITN _-_Alsor (talk) 19:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Is it though? The story was never, for example, at the top of the CBC website. But now Donald Trump has talked of his own link to Reiner's murder, it's now the headline - and is what flipped me to support. Nfitz (talk) 22:37, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- WP:TRUMPNEWS and all that. I hope this stays miles away from our article. Gotitbro (talk) 21:18, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- When wild American claims become international news it's ITN. If it was just the American reaction, I'd agree. But I was on the fence already. And this pushes it over, making the original story itself more prominent. Nfitz (talk) 23:11, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Not really. In the Trump-era every claim by Donald Trump is wild, most likely to be false/inflammatory and adept to seep into media domestically or intlly. We cannot be giving any time or weight to that nonsense at least for ITN notability. Gotitbro (talk) 05:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- It was already a huge story - before the American hostility against Reiner. Nfitz (talk) 06:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Not really. In the Trump-era every claim by Donald Trump is wild, most likely to be false/inflammatory and adept to seep into media domestically or intlly. We cannot be giving any time or weight to that nonsense at least for ITN notability. Gotitbro (talk) 05:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- When wild American claims become international news it's ITN. If it was just the American reaction, I'd agree. But I was on the fence already. And this pushes it over, making the original story itself more prominent. Nfitz (talk) 23:11, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Arguably, that should not be covered in any depth on Reiner's page but somewhere on criticism of Trump. Masem (t) 19:10, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb As to whether he's notable enough, the fact that he directed major cult films--from which several phrases have entered common use--is surely noteworthy. Up to eleven being the prime example. Quotes from The Princess Bride ("as you wish" and "inconceivable") don't show up as often, but they're nevertheless all over the place. And not just among geeks. Whenever musicians bumble or run into absurd situations, what's the standard thing to say? "This is a bit Spinal Tap." Snowgrouse (talk) 19:41, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment The article's quality has been improved. No more cn tags, orange tags or unsourced statements. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb Clear case of "death as the main story." WP:ITNRDBLURB even explicitly uses
the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident
as an example for this criterion. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:53, 15 December 2025 (UTC) - Support blurb - I was on the fence on this leaning oppose, but the story has gotten much bigger. It wasn't at the top of the headlines here - but with the most prominent Americans expressing hatred and taking credit in Reiner's death, it now has. Nfitz (talk) 22:40, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb. This is in my opinion much more ITN-worthy than the past blurbs about natural deaths of niche playwrights and architects. This is the man who made Standy by Me and This is Spinal Tap, which the average person is much more likely to have at least heard of, violently murdered (as it seems) along with his wife (edit: allegedly by their own son no less!). Having a dedicated article for the killing itself already would be ideal, but it already deserves a blurb as it stands. --DannyC55 (Talk ★ Contributions) 22:53, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- ITN's purpose is to illustrate high quality articles that are in the news, we don't put weight on fame or popularity. We'd like to focus on a wide range of major figures from all fields, so we do want to include playwrights and architects just as much as film directors. Masem (t) 22:57, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Marking as ready. At minimum, this is ready for RD. Natg 19 (talk) 23:44, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- I think there's a consensus to post as a blurb IMO, but we could give it another day's debate. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:51, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- I am neutral on that, so was just letting the posting admin make that decision. Natg 19 (talk) 00:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- support blurb, per ReaderofthePack ~2025-40044-88 (talk) 00:31, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Reiner had a significant impact on cinema, as documented by numerous reliable sources. If the currently proposed photo is used, it might be nice if someone edited it to remove the somewhat distracting mic headset. (The lead image for the article itself is currently under debate on the talk page.) Funcrunch (talk) 00:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support blurb If Stoppard made it into blurb, then Reiner (and Douglas-Hamilton) should be blurbed even if he died of natural cause. Didgogns (talk) 01:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Oppose blurb per above, NTRUMP This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
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 notplenty of people here to make the case for it
. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 13:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Support blurb - An impressive job has been done sourcing the article, including the massive filmography both acting and directing. Reiner’s an icon, and add the obviously tragic circumstances of his (and his wife’s) death, and you have a no-brainer ITN blurb, in my view. Suggest posting without further delay. My thanks to those updating and improving the article. Jusdafax (talk) 04:00, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted The consensus is clear. The death is the story, so Recent Deaths is insufficient. I'm going with the original blurb option but happy to change it. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:02, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- I think an image should be posted too. jolielover♥talk 04:09, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Image was added. Natg 19 (talk) 04:36, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Image protection takes a few minutes. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:18, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Wording change suggestion: Filmmaker and actor Rob Reiner (pictured) and his wife Michele are stabbed to death at their home in Los Angeles. (Add hyperlink to Los Angeles) DannyC55 (Talk ★ Contributions) 04:19, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Added home, as well as found (from ALT3), as much is still unknown about the circumstances. Not linking LA per MOS:OVERLINK.—Bagumba (talk) 08:15, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- I think an image should be posted too. jolielover♥talk 04:09, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting support - even as someone who would love to see ITNC post (many) more blurbs, I was surprised to see a blurb for Reiner. That thought was based purely on my personal knowledge. However, the level and prominence of coverage being devoted to the Reiners and the manner of their deaths make it clear that this is blurbable. E.g. the NYT appears to have published approximately twenty articles in the last 24 hours that focus on the Reiners and have featured it at/near the top of their homepage for all of that time. Ed [talk] [OMT] 05:49, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Outcome I just checked the readership for Rob Reiner and it was nearly 8 million yesterday, which is enormous as these things go, and easily dwarfing all other stories. Just about every other topic connected with him is getting big spikes in readership too. This confirms that blurbing was a sensible decision. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:24, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Unless you can show those counts were due to being at ITN, we care naught about page views here. Masem (t) 17:59, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- The blurb wasn't posted until the 16th so the 8 million views on the 15th were driven by the coverage. The views on the 16th then dropped to about 2 million so ITN's effect was not noticeable. The point is that these numbers are up there with other outstanding deaths that we blurbed such as the Queen and Kobe Bryant. Very few stories get this level of attention. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:56, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Unless you can show those counts were due to being at ITN, we care naught about page views here. Masem (t) 17:59, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, Muboshgu, for your posting. The creator of films, which had already become immortal, was assessed on merit… By the way, it would be marvellous if you (or someone else) could add the link to the recently created article of his death:
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Needless WP:Content fork. And social media use by Donald Trump is that way. Gotitbro (talk) 19:17, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Pull blurb – Notable figure but hardly a story of global significance. 5225C (talk • contributions) 08:37, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Zulfiqar Ahmad Naqshbandi
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Siasat Daily
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:35, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
December 14
edit|
December 14, 2025 (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Anthony Geary
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:
- Nominated by Mr. Lechkar (talk · give credit)
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 Hospital. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 22:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Not ready The Career and Filmography sections each need a few more sources. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Carl Carlton
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone, BET
Credits:
- Nominated by Golan1911 (talk · give credit)
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)- 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)
- All of those AllMusic citations were supported with other citations from the press or other websites Golan1911 (talk) 16:34, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- I made some edits to add citations to the AllMusic Golan1911 (talk) 17:32, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Good work! I've changed to support! --The Robot Parade 17:40, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 Chilean presidential election
editBlurb: 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:
- Nominated by Nice4What (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit), Miki1234568 (talk · give credit), Dmoroe6 (talk · give credit), Borgenland (talk · give credit) and RobertPlausible (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support alt feel like we need to include his party in the blurb. Scuba 22:31, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not necessarily opposed, but I don't believe parties are typically included in blurbs for presidential elections? Regardless, the country should be specified in the blurb; altblurb2 looks better than 1. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 22:53, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- That's what I was going to say. I don't think it's ever been added to the blurb about the party represented by the winner of a presidential election. In fact, I think it's unnecessary. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:03, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not necessarily opposed, but I don't believe parties are typically included in blurbs for presidential elections? Regardless, the country should be specified in the blurb; altblurb2 looks better than 1. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 22:53, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Alt II but Wait Landslide victory. Campaign section needs attention. Analysis in the Results section is limited to the first round and a bit hand wavy. Dr Fell (talk) 22:53, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support as long as the Republican Party is dubbed as far-right (which it is). --Bedivere (talk) 22:59, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- It is not necessary either, and has not been included in previous blurbs. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:04, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Election blurbs in past have not typically included candidate or party ideologies. I don't believe that is necessary. Goosedukeee (talk) 03:07, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Wait, then support alt blurb 2 Per Dr Fell, the campaign section needs expansion before the article can be posted on ITN. CastleFort1 (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Wait The Campaign section needs expansion, and the Results section also needs expansion and updating. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:32, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- I have added altblurb3 with the usual style we use in presidential elections. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- @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)
- Support alt blurb 2 Article issues have been fixed and is ready to post on ITN. CastleFort1 (talk) 19:07, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- @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)
- @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)
- @Alsoriano97 I think we're in good shape to post. Dr Fell (talk) 21:17, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- great, thanks! _-_Alsor (talk) 21:20, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Alsoriano97 I think we're in good shape to post. Dr Fell (talk) 21:17, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- @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)
- Support Altblurb3 The article could certainly be expanded but I'd say that it's in a good shape to be posted at ITN. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Vacant0 What do you think should be expanded further? _-_Alsor (talk) 17:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- The campaign and results sections. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Vacant0 What do you think should be expanded further? _-_Alsor (talk) 17:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Altblurb 3 or 4 Article in good shape for posting. Added an Altblurb4 given how this article is not just a presidential election but also a general election to elect senators and deputies in Congress.--TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- @TDKR Chicago 101 The National Congress elections took place in November, and there is no second round. So it would be stale. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:57, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Does the tag on Kast's article need to be cleaned up before this gets posted? I think changes in heads of state or government usually point at the new person's article and his is currently a mess. ~2025-39726-97 (talk) 23:08, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Nope. Only the bold-faced article matters. Schwede66 23:56, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted Alt3. Schwede66 23:56, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Schwede66 can you please give credit to the updaters? I have added them now; they were not included in the nomination at the time it was posted. Thanks! _-_Alsor (talk) 00:14, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Done Schwede66 00:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Gary Rowell
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
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)
- Not ready – Severe lack of sources. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 17:07, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Absolutely not ready orange tagged, lack of sources. Jalapeño (u t g) 08:40, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
Democratic Party of Hong Kong
editBlurb: 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Comment: Can you adjust the blurb to make it more clear on the significance of the event?
- 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)
- 'Oppose - Per User:Gotitbro. Kvinnen (talk) 17:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support per Nice4What. Significant (and grim) milestone. Would benefit from the broader awareness that ITN can offer. Added a pithier alt blurb. Dr Fell (talk) 23:18, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for your agreement!— though its worth noting that reliable sources call the Democratic Party the last major pro-democracy party left; there are a handful of remaining minor parties (see Pro-democracy camp (Hong Kong) § Current). Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:32, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strong support The end of last democratic party in whole China. ArionStar (talk) 00:50, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support per Nice4What and Dr Fell. Significant player in Hong Kong politics since Chinese annexation, de facto representative for democracy of both the 2014 Hong Kong protests and the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests and the related 2019 Hong Kong local elections.
- Support Definitely the major representative party for the pan-democrats for many decades, and it is particularly notable for being the last to be dissolved. I would agree with NotKringe that the blurbs are a bit oddly worded. Ornithoptera (talk) 04:56, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Thriley (talk) 05:14, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Altblurb2 Per above, although I do further agree that the blurbs are not ideally phrased. Alt2 seems the best of the bunch. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 05:31, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- The biggest issue I have with alt2 is that "the Democrats" is not the party's common name. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 15:40, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- I concur, it's much less commonly used. I'll propose an ALT3 accordingly to just adjust the wording. Ornithoptera (talk) 01:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- The biggest issue I have with alt2 is that "the Democrats" is not the party's common name. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 15:40, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support per SirPhilippines --EUPBR (talk) 07:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- oppose sub=national local politics.~2025-40362-90 (talk) 08:26, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Gotitbro. This has been a long time coming now, and is no longer major news at this time. Natg 19 (talk) 08:35, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose the conviction of Jimmy Lai would make a better story about democratic suppression by the CPC in HK. --GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 16:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support and we might consider working this news into the other Hong Kong related news above concerning Jimmy Lai. Tradediatalk 09:36, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, fork found in kitchen This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 19:29, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per GhostStalker.
(Posted) Bondi Beach shooting
editBlurb: 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:
News source(s): The Telegraph, BBC, Times of Israel, ABC News (Australia)
Credits:
- Nominated by Bakhos2010 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Nightmares26 (talk · give credit)
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)
- 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)
- Just merged the latter to the former. Jalapeño (u t g) 09:36, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
strong opposeper below. 2 vs. 3 is not so different.Psephguru (talk) 09:48, 14 December 2025 (UTC)- 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)
- 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)
- @Psephguru: The death toll is now at least 10 FWIW. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 10:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- support orginal blurbPsephguru (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Psephguru: The death toll is now at least 10 FWIW. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 10:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Support - Major mass shooting. -- Veggies (talk) 10:26, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)- The first two alt blurb is also fine, now that more information has emerged to ascertain its details. - Mailer Diablo 12:46, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Death toll now 12, designated a terrorist incident. Black Kite (talk) 11:22, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment – Added altblurb accounting for terror designation. 5225C (talk • contributions) 11:25, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- oppose NPOV is for the reactions, not ITN or led.Psephguru (talk) 11:31, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Weak Support Also I minor tweaked yours.Psephguru (talk) 11:32, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- No way Andre, no way. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:31, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support Alt blurb It is important to mention the Jewish connection. HillelAmadeus (talk) 11:35, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support alt blurb I. Mass shooting targetting Jews celebrating Hanukkah, extensive international coverage. Noon (talk) 11:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- I second that. 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) 15:45, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support - Rare Australian shooting and terrorist attack against a specific minority. Harizotoh9 (talk) 12:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support Article in good shape for what we know now and definitely seems like directed terrorism. Masem (t) 13:13, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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 ㋡ 14:29, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Major support. 11 dead in an anti-semetic terror attack!? Bloxzge 025 (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb 1 This is one of the worst terrorist attacks in Australian history. Guz13 (talk) 15:36, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:39, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strong support for alt blurb 1 - With the addition of the declaration as a terror attack. Kvinnen (talk) 15:47, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- It is already altblurb 1 that has been posted. Gotitbro (talk) 16:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
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)
- Post-Posting Support but blurb currently used is too passive. The attack wasn't during a Hanukkah celebration; it targeted the celebration. It wasn't merely a mass shooting; it was a terrorist attack. Dr Fell (talk) 17:54, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment – I agree with Lenny Marks that it'd be worth including the number of injuries as that toll is especially high. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:37, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Post-posting blurb wording request We should use the word anti-Semitic in there somewhere. Terrible terrorist attack. May their memories be a blessing. -TenorTwelve (talk) 03:56, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Agree with @TenorTwelve. HillelAmadeus (talk) 08:06, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Irrelevant POV pushing. Context is there.~2025-40362-90 (talk) 08:28, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- The precedent for that, when we already have a large fatality number, is also negligible. Gotitbro (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Okay. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- The precedent for that, when we already have a large fatality number, is also negligible. Gotitbro (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
(Withdrawn) 2025 Brown University shooting
editThe 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.
Blurb: A shooting at Brown University leaves 2 people dead. (Post)
News source(s): CNN NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by HwyNerd Mike (talk · give credit)
- Created by Red0ctober22 (talk · give credit)
- 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)
- This is not just another shooting, this is an Ivy League School. JaxsonR (talk) 03:37, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- This is not just another shooting, this is an Ivy League School. JaxsonR (talk) 03:37, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- But such shootings are quite frequent, even major ones with casaulties probably every month.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:03, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- If Trump didn't comment on something I would find it more unusual. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 04:07, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- Withdrawn HwyNerd Mike (t | c) 04:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
December 13
edit|
December 13, 2025 (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
(new) RD: Anda-Louise Bogza
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Forum Opera
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
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)
(Posted) RD: Bobby Rousseau
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NHL Gazette
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by The Robot Parade (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kaiser matias (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support: Well sourced, good for ITN. ROY is WAR Talk! 00:43, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:09, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 23:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Abraham Quintanilla
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Parade LA Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by The Robot Parade (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support nomination for ITN – jona ✉ 00:07, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose The Filmography is currently sourced only to IMDd, which is unreliable (WP:IMDB).—Bagumba (talk) 09:00, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Bagumba: Didn't notice that initially, my bad. Filmography section is now sourced. Had to cut a few things, but it should be good to go. --The Robot Parade 15:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm also concerned by Nice4What's below comment. —Bagumba (talk) 17:34, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Bagumba: Didn't notice that initially, my bad. Filmography section is now sourced. Had to cut a few things, but it should be good to go. --The Robot Parade 15:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- @Nice4What: I fixed this issue, I only listed the ones mentioned in the 1996 Patoski book. – jona ✉ 20:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Looks good! I added a note indicating that those are Los Dinos albums, not Quintanilla's. Support RD. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:59, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Nice4What: I fixed this issue, I only listed the ones mentioned in the 1996 Patoski book. – jona ✉ 20:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 23:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ra'ad Sa'ad
edit| The Arab–Israeli conflict is designated as a contentious topic with special editing restrictions. Editing and discussing this topic is restricted to extended confirmed users. You are not logged in, so you are not extended confirmed. Your account is extended confirmedis not extended confirmed, but you are an administrator, so your account is extended confirmed by default. |
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ToI WP
Credits:
- Nominated by The Robot Parade (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Chomik1129 (talk · give credit) and Pachu Kannan (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support – Article is well sourced, of a sufficient length, and updated. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:15, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Sufficient quality. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready. Thriley (talk) 05:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
OpposeOne-sentence lead is too short.—Bagumba (talk) 08:52, 15 December 2025 (UTC)- @Bagumba: Lead has now been expanded. --The Robot Parade 15:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. Struck.—Bagumba (talk) 17:35, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Bagumba: Lead has now been expanded. --The Robot Parade 15:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:43, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: José Bantolo
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBCP News
Credits:
- Nominated by QuicoleJR (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kataholos2025 (talk · give credit) and Kelisi (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support: Quality article, updated.–DMartin 02:37, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready. Thriley (talk) 05:16, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Article is basically only lists his roles, with no mention of acccomplishments. Doesn't meet WP:ITNQUALITY:
Articles should be a minimally comprehensive overview of the subject
—Bagumba (talk) 08:49, 15 December 2025 (UTC) - Weak support I think the article could be expanded a bit more but it does cover the basics and his roles mentioned in the article body does establish notability in my book. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:46, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Peter Greene
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline NBC news
Credits:
- Nominated by ItsShandog (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Strattonsmith (talk · give credit) and ItsShandog (talk · give credit)
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)
- Picture The name doesn't do it for me but a photo is immediately recognisable and we have a reasonably good free one. And I've already seen enough of Geoff Keighley, thank you. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:10, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I don't know what you haven't understood... _-_Alsor (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: What's the purpose of including a photo? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 21:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strange question but there's an answer at WP:IMGCONTENT,
The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people...
Andrew🐉(talk) 23:18, 13 December 2025 (UTC)- Strange answer, I figured there was enough context for you to understand that I meant in this particular instance, not pictures in general. To make it more clear: Why a photo for Greene's death, when it's unusual for RDs? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:43, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- As I indicated, the name Peter Green(e) is common and, to me, mainly suggests Peter Green (musician). The picture is a better clue in this case and there isn't a good blurb picture currently so it's a good opportunity to post an RD pic. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:59, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Although it's unlikely that people will believe that we are referring to the Fleetwood Mac musician, as if they've heard of him they're probably also aware that he died five years ago. Black Kite (talk) 00:04, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware of that. Notice that there's a big spike in the readership for the musician's article. This must be spillover from the actor as his article was the top read yesterday. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:40, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Which means ITN is really not needed for people to help locate the article, and hatnotes help with close matches. So a picture of an RD will not change that. Masem (t) 13:18, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware of that. Notice that there's a big spike in the readership for the musician's article. This must be spillover from the actor as his article was the top read yesterday. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:40, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Although it's unlikely that people will believe that we are referring to the Fleetwood Mac musician, as if they've heard of him they're probably also aware that he died five years ago. Black Kite (talk) 00:04, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- As I indicated, the name Peter Green(e) is common and, to me, mainly suggests Peter Green (musician). The picture is a better clue in this case and there isn't a good blurb picture currently so it's a good opportunity to post an RD pic. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:59, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strange answer, I figured there was enough context for you to understand that I meant in this particular instance, not pictures in general. To make it more clear: Why a photo for Greene's death, when it's unusual for RDs? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 23:43, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strange question but there's an answer at WP:IMGCONTENT,
- Comment If editors agree with Andrew's point about there being confusion on which Peter Green(e) is meant, an easy solution would be to post this to RD as "Peter Greene (actor)". Khuft (talk) 08:50, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- This is why we should look to talk about implementing the de.wiki style of short RDs (has been in some discussion but we should formalize an RFC towards that) that would include at least the profession to help distinguish. Masem (t) 13:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Not ready for RD – There are two unsourced claims in the "Early Life" section, and citations for minor films in the filmography are missing (not a deal breaker for major entries); once this is cleared up, article should be good to go. I oppose Andrew's proposal of adding a picture (I fear this idea will only delay this RD's posting, as have several of Andrew's recent blurb proposals) and that there's no need to distinguish
"actor"
since Peter Greene is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:13, 14 December 2025 (UTC)- I have cited the claims, I added as many citations as I could find for filmography section yesterday. ItsShandog (talk) 21:05, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
(Closed) Lionel Messi's 2025 India Tour
editThe 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.
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:
- Nominated by Raydann (talk · give credit)
- Oppose trivial. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose sports trivia This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose per others. Natg 19 (talk) 21:13, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
December 12
edit|
December 12, 2025 (Friday)
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
|
(Stale) Arrest of Narges Mohammadi
editThe 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.
Blurb: Iranian human rights activist Narges Mohammadi is arrested. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Bremps (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Fidjeri (talk · give credit)
- Just a simple arrest (even of a human right activist) is non-notable, though if it becomes something more then I would be willing to support. Natg 19 (talk) 05:29, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- I agree, it needs a much better hook the represents the events: second time hospitalized after violent arrest. News channels have noted this, otherwise it is really not the notable Fidjeri (talk) 12:36, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Paul Wiggin
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by The Robot Parade (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:02, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is well sourced.
- TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 13:44, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Magda Umer
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TVP World, Polish Radio
Credits:
- Nominated by EUPBR (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support and comment. Discography mostly sourced. Prose a bit on the short side. A terrible loss for Polish culture. --Ouro (blah blah) 13:32, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment. Expanded prose a bit w references from the corresponding Polish Wikipedia article. --Ouro (blah blah) 20:06, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose still orange tagged.--~2025-40941-13 (talk) 16:03, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: The prose is sparse, and doesn't contain any information on the studio albums she released throughout her career. It also does not discuss any information after the 1980s despite Umer working through that time. Needs to be seriously expanded. --The Robot Parade 19:32, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Joanna Trollope
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by ItsShandog (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mb2437 (talk · give credit) and ItsShandog (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support once the bibliography is cited. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 13:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Done. ItsShandog (talk) 15:38, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Yep, looks good. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 16:34, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Done. ItsShandog (talk) 15:38, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support. Article is well written and properly sourced. Baldwin de Toeni (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
Ongoing: US naval deployment in the Caribbean
editOngoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Created by Placeholderer (talk · give credit)
- Updated by SandyGeorgia (talk · give credit)
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)
- oppose There is no need to force this into ongoing. Beyond the attack on the crude oil tank, there has been no further development. I reiterate what has been said the five hundred times it has been nominated and has not been successful. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:38, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment The article title seems much longer than the other Ongoing entries and its scope seems rather vague. Other articles in the same space include Operation Southern Spear and 2025 United States military strikes on alleged drug traffickers so maybe we need more time for the topic to gel. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:20, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose At this stage, its far too slow of a news story. The US is not destroying or capturing boats each day, and while there is a lot of heated discussion during this last week, its not representative of the daily-type coverage that comparatively the Ukraine conflict is getting. Masem (t) 13:49, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Stalish per Masem and Alsor; agree with Andrew, last time I checked the topic about a week ago: multiple duplications and scattered content on the same thing in different articles. This is more of the same. Gotitbro (talk) 14:02, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Not receiving rolling coverage as is Ukraine This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 14:48, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support According to WP:ONGOING the criteria is that the target article is getting regular updates about a topic "frequently in the news", and individual events may not be blurb-worthy. Here the article has gotten regular updates since August, and we haven't been posting the boat strikes despite multiple casualties. If we're looking for a major war like the Ukraine invasion that's not required per the criteria. FallingGravity 15:32, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- The frequency should be on a near-daily basis, which what is happening with Venezuela is not really getting, there have been bursts that last a few days, but not routinely for a long period, yet. Masem (t) 15:48, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose as per others. If there is some escalation where troops are actually deployed to Venezuela, then sure. But right now, no. Khuft (talk) 21:22, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support The article is getting regular more-than-daily updates and is thus suitable for ongoing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:48, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose – As above. 5225C (talk • contributions) 03:40, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support - A logical ITN ongoing candidate, as I see it. Major international news, and the article is well-updated and maintained. Highly likely to remain an issue into the new year. Jusdafax (talk) 10:43, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I doubt it is "major", for if it were – a blurb candidate is where we should rest the case. All I see is flubber from the Trump camp for now (WP:NTRUMP and all that). Gotitbro (talk) 11:51, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- A blurb isn't necessary per WP:ONGOING: "
Generally, these are stories which may lack a blurb-worthy event, but which nonetheless are still getting regular updates to the relevant article.
" FallingGravity 05:57, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
- A blurb isn't necessary per WP:ONGOING: "
- I doubt it is "major", for if it were – a blurb candidate is where we should rest the case. All I see is flubber from the Trump camp for now (WP:NTRUMP and all that). Gotitbro (talk) 11:51, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support A topic that's always in the news. ArionStar (talk) 21:26, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose a topic that's rarely in the news. There's been a deployment to the Persian Gulf for the best part of a half-century now, with far more serious incidents over the years. Trump pulling his tiny taskforce out and waving it around for his own ego, isn't news. Nfitz (talk) 23:01, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Small in scale, narrowly focused and slow moving. Routine US deployment. Dr Fell (talk) 18:45, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose Just not important enough and not enough action at this point to justify "Ongoing". Tradediatalk 09:20, 16 December 2025 (UTC)
December 11
edit|
December 11, 2025 (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Stanley Baxter
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Drchriswilliams (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Goodreg3 (talk · give credit)
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)
- Oppose The sourcing needs a lot of work before this can be posted. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:10, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- @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)
(Posted) The Game Awards
editBlurb: 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:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Rhain (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support The article looks good and we really should add this to ITNR already. Mlb96 (talk) 04:15, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support clearly should be ITNR (and looks like it will indeed be added for next time). Article looks good. FunIsOptional (talk) (please use ping!) 04:50, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Added Altblurb that more closely mirrors other media/art awards like the Acadmey Awards, BAFTAS, Emmys, etc.–DMartin 04:52, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Except that the award for game direction is not given to an individual but to the game. The only individual award is the best actor on. Masem (t) 05:07, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support It's high time we get around to reporting on this.–DMartin 04:53, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Also Weak Support adding to ITNR, I'd personally prefer the D.I.C.E. Awards, as they more often descfribed as to as the "video game equivalent of the Academy Awards".[2][3][4], but we need some gaming award in ITNR.–DMartin 04:55, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Discussion of the ITNR should take place on the talk page, but I'll point out TGA also have been called the Oscars of video games, but also has the benefit of mainstream news coverage, whereas DICE awards tend to only get covered by gaming media. Masem (t) 05:29, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Also Weak Support adding to ITNR, I'd personally prefer the D.I.C.E. Awards, as they more often descfribed as to as the "video game equivalent of the Academy Awards".[2][3][4], but we need some gaming award in ITNR.–DMartin 04:55, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support but suggest that we need to kill one sports event if we want to add this to ITN/R This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 06:08, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Not relevant, there is enough space as it is Omnifalcon (talk) 17:42, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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. Added altblurb2 like in this format. 𝗠𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗷𝗮𝘆𝗮𝟲𝟳 (talk). 06:31, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Alt blurb 2 is the best. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:21, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Definite support per my comments on the talk page. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support: Alt blurb 1 is the best. KreamoNoBrainos/Kreamy/Fat Man (talk) 17:45, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Support Alt II Good article and (not officially) is regularly posted in ITN Scooglers (talk) 19:25, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support alt2 on conciseness. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- Posted Stephen 05:13, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Question I'm not opposed to the blurb, but is there any reason why Geoff Knightley, who is simply the host of the award, got the blurb image? Especially since the blurb is about the GOTY award and not the man himself. NotKringe (talk) 07:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- It's really the only suitable image available. The 2022 and 2023 blurbs had the GOTY winners' writer and director, respectively, but unfortunately we have no such photo this year. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 09:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I see. That's kinda unfortunate. NotKringe (talk) 09:50, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- The only other possible alternative is a photo of Jennifer English, the Expedition 33 actor who won Best Performance; I believe it's reserved as an alternate. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 10:03, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I like this choice, and am glad it's the one we went with. She actually won something, unlike Keighley, and it provides a nice opportunity to have the ITN picture be a woman, which is unfortunately quite rare at ITN. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:15, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- The only other possible alternative is a photo of Jennifer English, the Expedition 33 actor who won Best Performance; I believe it's reserved as an alternate. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 10:03, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- When the GDC awards come this next march, where it is expected the game to be nominated again, they have a free license photostream for nearly all of the nominees and winners of the GDC Awards, so expecting we'll be able to get one then, but right now, this team was well known until the game got released so not much we can pull now Masem (t) 13:19, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I see. That's kinda unfortunate. NotKringe (talk) 09:50, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I agree that the picture of Knightley is not encyclopedic; it seems unduly promotional as he's not a major figure. Above, I suggested running a famous face from RD (Peter Greene). Another option would be to show a map for the Yemen offensive blurb as the geography of that part of the world will be unfamiliar to most. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:27, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I also agree that a picture of Keighley is inappropriate—he is the host every year. If this becomes ITN/R, then we'd see Keighley every year on the front page, despite not achieving any award. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 21:37, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- It's happened thrice now, so I just wanted to add: it's Keighley, not Knightley. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:12, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- I also agree that a picture of Keighley is inappropriate—he is the host every year. If this becomes ITN/R, then we'd see Keighley every year on the front page, despite not achieving any award. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 21:37, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- It's really the only suitable image available. The 2022 and 2023 blurbs had the GOTY winners' writer and director, respectively, but unfortunately we have no such photo this year. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 09:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Via categorization there is a free image of the game's music composer (Lorien Testard) and one of the lead vocalists (Alice Deport-Percier) here File:Lorien Testard et Alice Duport-Percier lors du concert du ZEVENT 2025.jpg, and as the game also won for best music at TGA, this may be an appropriate substitue. Masem (t) 23:46, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- We also now have photos (awaiting VRT processing) of Guillaume Broche (the game's director and writer) and Nicholas Maxson-Francombe (art director), which should be suitable alternatives. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- They are rather poor quality. Stephen 03:17, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- They seem perfectly fine considering their display size, but fair enough if you have a higher bar for the Main Page; the Jennifer English photo is still a great choice. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:54, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- They are rather poor quality. Stephen 03:17, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- We also now have photos (awaiting VRT processing) of Guillaume Broche (the game's director and writer) and Nicholas Maxson-Francombe (art director), which should be suitable alternatives. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Question I'm not opposed to the blurb, but is there any reason why Geoff Knightley, who is simply the host of the award, got the blurb image? Especially since the blurb is about the GOTY award and not the man himself. NotKringe (talk) 07:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jenista Mhagama
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Citizen
Credits:
- Nominated by QuicoleJR (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Salumu Simba Omary (talk · give credit) and Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support - article meets requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 04:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: John Varley (author)
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Locus
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by emceeaich (talk · give credit)
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)
- Oppose: too many unsourced on this article. ROY is WAR Talk! 01:17, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Harold Wayne Nichols
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS News
Credits:
- Nominated by CoryGlee (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ~2025-39875-45 (talk · give credit) and Theallman (talk · give credit)
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)
- Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 12:50, 15 December 2025 (UTC)
(Posted) 2025 Bulgarian budget protests
editBlurb: 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:
- Nominated by VitoxxMass (talk · give credit)
Article updated
VitoxxMass (talk) 18:50, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support, propose altblurb Obviously major given the fall of the government, and article is in great shape. The Kip (contribs) 19:20, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support when ready article is pretty good but needs more on the resignation of the government. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 21:44, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:11, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support ArionStar (talk) 04:32, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- As mentioned to you by another editor last week, please review WP:NOTAVOTE. It would help to include your reasoning. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 06:19, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- The best blurb is alternative blurb I. ArionStar (talk) 16:58, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- As mentioned to you by another editor last week, please review WP:NOTAVOTE. It would help to include your reasoning. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 06:19, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support: sufficient or ITN. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:24, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support altblurb Sufficient enough to warrant ITN. --Mr. Lechkar (talk) 14:54, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support altblurb Another update to the current political crisis in Bulgaria. CastleFort1 (talk) 15:59, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support alt per above. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 03:11, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Posted – robertsky (talk) 05:30, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Jim Ward (voice actor)
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Kotaku
Credits:
- Nominated by Mr. Lechkar (talk · give credit)
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 Qwark. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 12:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
'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)
- 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)
- Support ... largely referenced, gaps are easily filled and contextualized. CoryGlee 21:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose: It's a rather short article, I would almost consider it a stub. There just isn't content on his life on the internet. Would need a lot more prose before its RD ready. ----The Robot Parade 22:19, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
(Stale) Earliest known fire-making evidence discovered
editThe 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.
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:
- Nominated by Jusdafax (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ryulong (talk · give credit)
- Updated by GreenC (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- 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)
- Update: Oppose — Nature 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- It's VERY suitable for this. KreamoNoBrainos/Kreamy/Fat Man (talk) 20:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Update: Oppose — Nature 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)
- (edit conflict) Comment –
Evidence 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) - 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)
Weak Support Seems interesting enough for a blurb... although it would be better if the evidence was more specificOppose per Natg19 Elisecars727 (talk) 04:09, 11 December 2025 (UTC)- 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)
- 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)
- Support – Either of the altblurbs. 5225C (talk • contributions) 10:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Very good ITN material of high encyclopaedic value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:28, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- The latter. Deliberate creation of fire versus use of naturally-created fire. Dr Fell (talk) 18:35, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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) - 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)
- 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)
- Oppose per the comments above about the dubious nature of the discovery. No prejudice against posting at a future date if the findings are better backed up. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:06, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strong support Highly encyclopedic and covered. ArionStar (talk) 23:03, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. DYK candidate This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 06:10, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose I would suggest everyone replying here read our article about this, us homo sapiens and our siblings gained the ability to create/control fire in the savannahs of Africa. This is evidence but not a new finding and as such the blurbs/reportage is misleading to say the least. I was already unconvinced of its significance but the fact that the evidence part is itself questionable, this is a firm no from me. Gotitbro (talk) 08:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Gotitbro. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:56, 12 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose per Natg and Gotitbro. I think this clears the ITN significance threshold and is notable per se, but I am opposing on quality concerns about the accuracy of the blurb's premise. We should not be relaying information in wikivoice on the main page if the sources are not on consensus. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 03:16, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Alt Blurb II Definitionally encyclopaedic. Alt II makes it clear to the reader that this is evidence for the earliest known deliberate creation of fire, dispensing with concerns about confusion with earlier uses of naturally-created fire. Dr Fell (talk) 18:41, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose - Because these are initial findings and it's years and years until something is settled enough in science. Initial findings shouldn't be treated as definitive no matter how tantalizing they seem. ITN should really just be for absolutely confirmed information. Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
RD: Arthur Konrad
editRecent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Liechtensteiner Vaterland
Credits:
- Created and nominated by TheBritinator (talk · give credit)
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)
- Oppose Article is too short. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:57, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- It's more than stub length, and that's fine enough for RD.–DMartin 06:33, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- With only 226 words of prose, this brand new wikibio is a bit stubby, IMO. DYK, our neighbour on MainPage, requires at least 1500 characters (~300 words). I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for the same minimum length. We want to showcase good contents on MainPage, where readers are expected to click and read. Stubby articles with fewer than 300 words are rarely taken to ITN. --PFHLai (talk) 21:57, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps worth mentioning that this length is more or less exhausted the available sources. TheBritinator (talk) 22:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- If I may suggest, can the bullet-points after the prose be converted into prose, with explanations on the occasions he received the honours and what he did to earn them? Also, did he lose the 1995 election to Ospelt or did he simply retire from the Mayor's office and leave? Any info on the re-elections over his 15 years as Mayor? Such prose should bring the wikibio comfortably into start class. BTW, any REFs for the specific dates in the infobox for his time in office as Mayor, please? And, the infobox states that he was born in Vaduz, but this is not mentioned in the prose with a footnote. Hope this helps. -- PFHLai (talk) 13:12, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback. I have expanded the article slightly to include some of this information. TheBritinator (talk) 20:47, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- If I may suggest, can the bullet-points after the prose be converted into prose, with explanations on the occasions he received the honours and what he did to earn them? Also, did he lose the 1995 election to Ospelt or did he simply retire from the Mayor's office and leave? Any info on the re-elections over his 15 years as Mayor? Such prose should bring the wikibio comfortably into start class. BTW, any REFs for the specific dates in the infobox for his time in office as Mayor, please? And, the infobox states that he was born in Vaduz, but this is not mentioned in the prose with a footnote. Hope this helps. -- PFHLai (talk) 13:12, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps worth mentioning that this length is more or less exhausted the available sources. TheBritinator (talk) 22:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Dmartin969: ITN typically enforces a minimum of 1500 bytes, just like DYK. This article does not meet that minimum. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- With only 226 words of prose, this brand new wikibio is a bit stubby, IMO. DYK, our neighbour on MainPage, requires at least 1500 characters (~300 words). I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for the same minimum length. We want to showcase good contents on MainPage, where readers are expected to click and read. Stubby articles with fewer than 300 words are rarely taken to ITN. --PFHLai (talk) 21:57, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- It's more than stub length, and that's fine enough for RD.–DMartin 06:33, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Support Quality article, I'd call this ready.–DMartin 06:34, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
- Weak support after some thinking I am going to support. I think that it is not so important to strictly enforce length limits, but more to look at how the article actually is. As @TheBritinator: points out, there just isn't much more to be written about him with the sources now. It's not the sort of blatant "this has one unreferenced sentence" stub that is unacceptable here. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 22:30, 11 December 2025 (UTC)
Opposeper WP:ITNQUALITY:Stub articles are never appropriate for the main page.
—Bagumba (talk) 08:39, 15 December 2025 (UTC)- @Bagumba @QuicoleJR, the prose size at 1780 bytes. This is above stub length. TheBritinator (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Strike per expansion.—Bagumba (talk) 07:37, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
References
editNominators 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:
- ^ "Pulitzer Prize-winning correspondent Peter Arnett, who reported from Vietnam and Gulf War, has died". Associated Press. 17 December 2025. Retrieved 17 December 2025.
- ^ "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.
- ^ "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.
- ^ "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.