Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

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

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

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.

Yahya Sinwar Yahya Sinwar (pictured), the leader of Hamas, is killed in a firefight with Israeli forces in Gaza. The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James A. Robinson for their comparative studies of prosperity between nations. The Europa Clipper spacecraft is launched to investigate Europa, an icy moon of Jupiter. Kenyan Ruth Chepng'etich breaks the women's marathon world record at the Chicago Marathon. The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded to the Japanese atomic bomb survivors group Nihon Hidankyo. Ongoing: Israel–Hamas war Israel–Hezbollah conflict Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: George Negus Philip Zimbardo Tylee Craft Tina Kaidanow Janet Nelson Nadeem al-Wajidi Nominate an article view — page history — related changes — edit

Nominator's comments: One of the most recognized and awarded Spanish actresses. The article is a mess, but I'm working on it with what little free time I have Alsoriano97 (talk) 11:10, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Stub. – Sca (talk) 13:04, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Now has selected filmography with citations, and some more referenced info throughout. PotentPotables (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, it is true that the article needs some improvements (like find a better photo). Nevertheless, Sarda was a very popular and recognized Spatnish actress and TV personality. Alexcalamaro (talk) 17:21, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: has been extended/updated, in particular by Alexcalamaro, and seems adequately sourced (although I have not checked in detail the mostly Spanish language sources). The current picture is poor, per Alexcalamaro, but good to have one at all. Perhaps some of what looks like a discussion of her importance from the 2018 El Pais article could be worked in by a reader of Spanish? Overall it seems quite satisfactory. -- PaulBetteridge (talk) 23:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Prime minister of Gabon until last year, died from an asthmatic crisis (but not Covid-19, apparently). Article looks fully sourced. Fram (talk) 08:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support decently referenced article JW 1961 Talk 12:40, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: the content that's there is good, but it's also incomplete. There's no mention of what he did as PM or why he left the role - the discussion of his career stops at 2016. Add a referenced paragraph on his term as PM and I'll support. Modest Genius ^talk 13:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Bloom6132 (talk) 19:10, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I don't see any issues; everything looks referenced.-- P-K3 (talk) 22:40, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Cuban American actress. - Indefensible (talk) 02:32, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support some claims in "Early life" section are unsourced; other than that I don't see any major referencing issues. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Popular singer for various generations in Spain. Death reported also in American, Italian, Portuguese newspapers. Article in good shape. - Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis and updated, but would be nice to expand if possible. Kingsif (talk) 22:30, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - needs improvement, discography in particular is not fully referenced. - Indefensible (talk) 23:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - refs have been added for most of the discography and some more sourced info added. PotentPotables (talk) 00:36, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support referencing looks fine to me. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:00, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Pierre Nkurunziza (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi dies of a heart attack. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Incumbent Burundi President Pierre Nkurunziza dies of a heart attack.
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-52984119
Credits:

• Nominated by KTC (talk · give credit)
• Created by Acntx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: No, the article is nowhere near acceptable. Nominating as sudden death of elected head of state. KTC (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose on quality. But I would probably say that we should support a blurb on this to avoid any bias : the death of a sitting elected head of state regardless of size should be mentioned as a blurb even if this is not going to be major news. --Masem (t) 14:48, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment A good ITN nomination but the article needs work, especially referencing issues. Gotitbro (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Now that the issues have been addressed. Though the article is a bit short it should suffice. Gotitbro (talk) 02:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Conditional Support, per Gotitbro. Nkurunziza was long-serving strong man and profoundly changed Burundi. He was also an important player in East African politics. —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:15, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• (edit conflict) Oppose currently on quality but would definitely support a blurb with some work. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:17, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Post-posting support article improvement is impressive, blurb is certainly the right move here. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:53, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support blurb in principle due only to being an incumbent. Oppose on quality per all. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:49, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb on principle of being incumbent state leader. Issues can be fixed later. --Varavour (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  No, we can't fix issues later, this is a WP:BLP. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 19:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Doesn't BLP only apply to living people? Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 21:27, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  We do not post articles with multiple orange tags. No-go. When fixed, blurb is a standard practice for heads of state who die in office. --Tone 21:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Read WP:BLP. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't disagree with that Tone, I was only questioning whether BLP applies to the recently deceased. In any case, WP:BDP, which I presume TRM is referencing, suggests that it does. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:04, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  BLP usually applies for up to six months after someone dies. Common. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 06:51, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per multiple orange banners which must be addressed. - Indefensible (talk) 19:27, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose blurb i think is more relevant to include this in RD instead because there are issues on quality. I Support it to include in RD. 180.244.147.63 (talk) 19:57, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support blurb As a relevant figure, he shouldn't be mentioned only in RD, but his article needs a lot of work.Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:09, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb, died young in office, posting as blurb is the consensus. Note also that Burundi has a population of 11 million. Abductive (reasoning) 21:18, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  It's tagged and shoddy. You support this??? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Getting it on the front page will spur improvement. Abductive (reasoning) 23:41, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Heh, good one. Something to remember next time anyone complains about the quality of any nomination here! The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:24, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Note - I have substantially rewritten the article and hope other users might add to it. —Brigade Piron (talk) 21:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb now that article has been rewritten. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:04, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Added a bunch of CN tags. The article relies heavily "Dictionary of African Biography" which is behind a paywall so I can't check it. The Burundian Civil War section is all backed by a dead BBC link. Lastly (but not critical) "military coup was attempted" should be reworded "an uprising as attempted" since that's how we brand coups around here. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:35, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for going through the article. I replaced the tags with citations, fixed the BBC ref, and replaced coup with uprising. Dictionary of African Biography is a book, but you can find the relevant pages on Google Books. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 00:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  And thanks for fixing the tags :). Weak Support Blurb only because the election was past and he was a lame duck, but we've posted every other sitting head so why not. Article is good enough for the box now. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support blurb. Per above. MSN12102001 (talk) 22:40, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Numerous citation needed tags, also a number of unsourced sentences that aren't tagged as well. Black Kite (talk) 23:42, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb It's good to elevate African stories on here.-TenorTwelve (talk) 02:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 04:02, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support. The article was a mess at the time of nomination, but the improvement since then has been impressive. The current version of the article is more than sufficient and the death of a sitting head of state is certainly significant enough to justify a blurb. Modest Genius ^talk 11:28, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Mexican artist. - Indefensible (talk) 05:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support On quality and significance as a national artist. Gotitbro (talk) 15:11, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - references look solid, looks good to me. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:18, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 17:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Long-serving Manchester United and Ireland footballer. Needs more work, which I'm going to look at now. Looks satisfactory now. Black Kite (talk) 23:03, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I was tidying up this article up to nominate, I have some more references on hold if you need them while you're using the page Black Kite leave a note on my talk page and I'll add them - good work on all your referencing JW 1961 Talk 23:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – well referenced; looks like it meets requirements. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:22, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:59, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Voice actor who dubbed Homer in the French version of The Simpsons. Bloom6132 (talk) 15:19, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Spencer, Stephen, and Black Kite: I think this may be ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:06, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support ready to go JW 1961 Talk 16:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support short but well-sourced, looks fine to me. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:03, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 23:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 00:39, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: American musician. - Indefensible (talk) 06:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:40, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above JW 1961 Talk 13:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - references look solid, looks good to me. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:19, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 01:24, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Died on June 5, but only reported on June 7. Bloom6132 (talk) 08:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks OK. – Ammarpad (talk) 13:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above comments JW 1961 Talk 13:31, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted --qedk (t 愛 c) 13:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is not going to form for this to be posted. Black Kite (talk) 22:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article: Statue of Edward Colston (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ During a Black Lives Matter protest, a statue of Edward Colston (pictured) is pulled down and thrown into the harbour at Bristol, United Kingdom. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ During global protests of the killing of George Floyd, a statue of Edward Colston (pictured) is pulled down and thrown into the harbour at Bristol, United Kingdom.
News source(s): BBC, CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)
• Created by Doublah (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Philip Cross (talk · give credit), Lopifalko (talk · give credit) and Ghmyrtle (talk · give credit)

Article updated

 Mjroots (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Article vastly improved from when I swung by earlier. It may seem like a small event within all the protests, but it's in the UK, where this sort of thing never happens (apologies, it's the 'spree shooting' argument). The Brits toppled a statue and threw it in the sea. It's unique and all over the news because of how shocking that is. Kingsif (talk) 02:59, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose I really doubt the notability of this single event. A statue got chucked, what repercussions (if any) will that have?  Nixinova   T   C   03:42, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Not sufficiently significant an event in itself for the main page. However, the reference to "Protests and riots break out across the United States...." should now clearly be changed to add "...and elsewhere" as this is a global protest movement. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC) PS: Blurb subsequently updated. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I've been bold and tweaked the blurb. Let's continue discussion of this nom here please, Mjroots (talk) 07:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Continuing to oppose alt blurb. It is the global protest movement that is important here. We are in danger of placing undue weight on the toppling of a single monument which, while unusual in the UK, is simply not that important in the overall scheme of things. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support while it is not more significant to include this in the ITN section, because this is a part of global protest movement that happened in US, It's unique and because of how shocking that is and no other incidents happened other than UK itself. 36.77.95.159 (talk) 07:26, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support updating the BLM protests blurb, per Ghmyrtle. While I'm on the fence as to whether the statue deserves its own blurb, the event clearly demonstrates that the protests can no longer be considered a US-only thing. The main blurb should be updated to reflect this. Rami R 07:32, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support it's a parochial story but it is rare as rocking horse shit to see an event like this in the UK, reminded me of when I watched Saddam's statue being pulled down and jumped on. Target article is well updated and in a good state. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - normally local news. Now part of a bigger context.BabbaQ (talk) 08:14, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Leading item in UK news sites. Propose merging with existing Floyd blurb. Alt blurb added.—Bagumba (talk) 08:24, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I would support the ALT blurb if it was bumped to the top story (ie. Support and bump). Mjroots (talk) 08:31, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• One of dozens. —Cryptic 09:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Those are all in America and somewhat underlines the point of the newsworthiness of this. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:05, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Local news that's not significant or notable enough. Clearly a DYK stuff. Guy in the Mall (talk) 10:20, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering how this is local news when this occurred as a result of a protest protesting an event in the United States. 331dot (talk) 10:27, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Black Lives Matter campaign is global, and predates George Floyd's death. The campaign against the Colston statue is also long-established in Bristol - for at least 25 years. So, it's disingenuous to link the toppling of the statue too closely with recent events in the US - the two campaigns have come together and of course are related to each other, but the toppling did not occur simply "as a result of" the US events. It's more complicated than that. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is more complicated than that, but it's a safe bet to conclude that this statue would not have been toppled and tossed into the harbour in this fashion were it not for the sad events in the US. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 11:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Stephen I would call destroying a statue and vandalizing another(the Winston Churchill statue in London) a riot. 331dot (talk) 11:09, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose: This is a news story of purely local interest dealing with a non-notable statute in a provincial city. There's an analogy to the painting of the "Black Lives Matter" slogan in Washington DC and is only part of a notable news story. Would we be having this discussion if a similarly anonymous statue was pulled down in Boulogne, Hamburg or Baltimore? —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brigade Piron If the statue is not notable, then you should propose the deletion of the article and also ask the BBC to stop covering it. This statue has a long history and efforts to remove it did not start with the BLM protests, but did end with it. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, that does not follow at all. I note the article for Statue of Edward Colston was created only yesterday and I very much doubt it would have met the WP:GNG if it had not been pulled down. As it happens, I do think that an article on the subject (as opposed to an entry elsewhere) is premature and an example of WP:RECENTISM. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's plenty of sources from years past already cited in the article. WP:BEFORE doesn't get much easier.—Bagumba (talk) 11:43, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The statue is clearly notable - not only because of yesterday's events, and not only because many Grade II listed buildings have articles, but also because of the controversy that has developed about the statue over several decades. But that does not necessarily mean that this story is sufficiently notable for the main page. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This sort of jaw-dropping mentality is exactly why British and American Wikipedians won't see eye-to-eye on ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 12:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@WaltCip: As it happens, I am a British Wikipedian but I am also very conscious of WP:BIAS. What is your point? —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:58, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. This is not a local story, it is related to the worldwide protests even though efforts to remove it are not new. I learned something about this subject and believe others will too. 331dot (talk) 11:21, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral - I don't see why the pulling down of statues in Boulogne, Hamburg or Baltimore would not be remarkable. The relative population of the locality isn't really the issue here, it's the significance and unusual nature of the event. In the context of the overall protest movement right now though, I can see the argument that this isn't the biggest thing going on, and there'd be a question over whether this story replaces or complements the protest blurb. Events in the US have probably been more significant than events in Bristol. I definitely support Mjroots update to the protests blurb to add "and elsewhere" though. The protests (and borderline riots too) in countries other than the US have reached ITN level in their own right.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This sort of stuff is a big deal. Imagine if Nelson's Column got pulled down. The outrage there would be staggering!--WaltCip (talk) 11:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scale and significance matter. A statue in Bristol does not equate to Nelson's Column. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the felling of this statue made the news is proof as to its significance. And it's a good article. What more is needed?--WaltCip (talk) 12:31, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not everything that makes a national news goes on the main page here, obviously. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Brigade Piron.Alsoriano97 (talk) 11:59, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose Seriously - this is part of the Floyd protests which are still up (and will go to ongoing), and mostly symbolic compared to the actual intent of the protests. In the States, numerous Confederate statues have been vandalized and taken down as well. And the fact that everyone was clear that the BLM Mural (which was a much more significant message in the larger picture) was quickly accessed as part of the protests at ITN (appropriately) but we're treating this as something special? BS. This wasn't the first major overseas even in support of the protests, won't be the last, and to try to call this out over a bunch of things that are more central to the core of why these protests are happening in the States right now is detracting terribly. --Masem (t) 12:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  BS? It is something special as adequately demonstrated above. And just because it wasn't in the US, it doesn't mean it's not central to the core of the issue at hand. That really is BS. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  It is BS that its losing focus on what this event is relative to the protests. It's great that it may be a quality article and in the news, but it is a part of the protests and a small aspect of it. We've not posted other separates of the protest, just as we've not posted other parts of the COVID situation. This feels like extreme bias judging by the comments, not seeing the forest through the trees of how this looks int he biggest picture of the protest event. --Masem (t) 15:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Interesting and unusual story in the news, and a decent new article to highlight. P-K3 (talk) 13:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Support I was all ready to oppose this, but then I remembered the primary purpose of the MP is to direct readers to quality articles. This is a very nice article, better than many we post at ITN. The significance is fine; my only concern is that the blurb make clear this is distinct from the Floyd protests, such that it is not a duplicate post. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose – Per Amakuru. Interesting but passing episode in the much larger gobal story. AFAIK, Edward Colston isn't a headline name. (If Oxford got rid of its Cecil Rhodes statue, that would be significant.) – Sca (talk) 14:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose really? We snow closed the painting of "Black lives matter" in enormous letters in the American capitol but are seriously considering the destruction of a 100 year old statue on the English coast? Really? Come on --LaserLegs (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Tangential point: Bristol is not on the coast. Modest Genius ^talk 20:09, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose – UK-bias within a global event ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 15:56, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, a blurb update to mention that the protests have become a global event could very well be warranted...but mentioning a single statue in the UK is not appropriate here, regardless of article quality. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 16:02, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That change ("...and elsewhere") was made earlier. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I missed that update, then. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 16:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's all there in the template's history. Mjroots (talk) 16:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment What about a blurb that states "thousands of idiots break COVID-19 lockdown restrictions to commit vandalism?" Would that help get this posted? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The only appropriate response to this insufferable drivel: ok boomer. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• As long as you snowflakes washed your hands afterwards, the virus won't get you! Good. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• They were all just collectively testing their vision to make sure they weren't suffering from symptoms.--WaltCip (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Age discrimination is prohibited by Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, and is logically invalid. – Sca (talk) 18:40, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Singling out a single event from this very long list doesn't make much sense to me. The fact that this instance is farther from the epicenter of the event which spurred all this, to me, makes the case even weaker, not stronger. The current blurb on the protests has already been altered to reflect the global scale. I would strongly oppose further altering it to the Alt blurb here, which would by its wording make THIS the primary story and not the broader movement. Kenmelken (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose meh. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Certainly an unusual event for the UK, but Kenmelken has convinced me this is just a small part of the bigger story. Modest Genius ^talk 20:02, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The idea is that you treat it like an individual event in the UK, as it is still that unusual and shocking thing and a story on its own. Kingsif (talk) 20:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Cyclonebiskit and Kenmelken. Banedon (talk) 22:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nominator's comments: notable Indian actor. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:19, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment needs references in "Early life" section and the filmography, will support when these are fixed JW 1961 Talk 19:47, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support now fixed, good work updating refs JW 1961 Talk 13:28, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose still lacking refs. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:40, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Refs have been added now. M4DU7 (talk) 10:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• SupportLooks ok. P-K3 (talk) 23:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Seems fine, but the career section needs to be expanded and the death section reduced (pretty big in relation to the overall article). Gotitbro (talk) 02:23, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment pinging The Rambling Man as his concern regarding refs has been addressed by M4DU7. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 14:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - article seems to meet the requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 02:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 03:06, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Unexpected, violent death. Article seems well-sourced but please check and tag where needed. I have given the name of the first updater (with sources), but many others contributed as well (I did not contribute, I only nominate this one). Fram (talk) 15:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose I've tag a few unsourced statements.—Bagumba (talk) 04:55, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Withdraw oppose after citations added.—Bagumba (talk) 01:49, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose While the cn's remain to be fixed JW 1961 Talk 13:34, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support now it's fixed - good work on improving PCN02WPS JW 1961 Talk 20:56, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - I have replaced cn tags with references. Pinging Bagumba and Joseywales1961. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks good to go. P-K3 (talk) 23:41, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Per above. Aria1561 (talk) 01:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - article seems to meet the requirements. Sad conclusion to a life. - Indefensible (talk) 02:23, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 03:02, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Significant SF Bay-Area based ceramicist and sculptor, main figure in Nut art movement, used recycled materials. --Wil540 art (talk) 11:48, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Very nearly stale, unfortunately. Some CE and tense things need changing. Awards and honors and Public collections are bereft of sources.130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Bishop of Youngstown, Ohio. Died at the age of 71 from leukemia. Bloom6132 (talk) 04:54, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support meets the requirements JW 1961 Talk 11:47, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Ready. – Ammarpad (talk) 18:34, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Still ready, 14 hours later. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 07:55, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• @Spencer, Stephen, and Black Kite: this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:27, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - indeed, ready.BabbaQ (talk) 10:10, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Posted It's okay, y'all, it's been about a day. --qedk (t 愛 c) 11:19, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus will not develop to post. Stephen 20:44, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Articles: Black Lives Matter (talk · history · tag) and 16th Street NW (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Large mural in support of Black Lives Matter painted on 16th Street NW in Washington, D.C. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Large mural in support of Black Lives Matter painted on 16th Street NW in Washington, D.C. at the direction of mayor Muriel Bowser.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Large mural in support of Black Lives Matter painted on 16th Street NW in Washington, D.C. at Lafayette Square.
News source(s): NBC Washington
Credits:

• Nominated by Annettet (talk · give credit)

Article updated

 Annettet (talk) 20:21, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose and close- Though I have no doubt this nomination was made in good faith, I don't believe this mural is a major a global story that is worthy of being prominently included in an update to the Black Lives Matter page. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:35, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose riots are already mentioned in the second blurb. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose good-faith nom that has no chance of passing. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:41, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Part of the protest story -- BUT if we can get a good larger free shot of it, that would be a good replacement image for ITN box --Masem (t) 20:41, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nominator's comments: Italian pianist, composer, director of conservatories, having toured 5 continents, still not quite as famous as brother Claudio Abbado. - The 10-year-old article had practically no references, but I found some for almost all facts (dropped minor things such as number of South America tours, - who cares?). Best in English: Ricordi, which I used only half, but need to go now. Help welcome, - much more detail in the sources. Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as what's there is satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:26, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above JW 1961 Talk 13:31, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Solid work as usual, @Gerda Arendt:. Spencer^T•C 20:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Seems a significant event in the civil war. The article is well referenced but mostly WP:PROSELINE. I've converted the relevant section to prose, but wonder if the rest of the article needs similar work before it could be posted. Modest Genius ^talk 12:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My conversion to prose was reverted, so it's back to proseline. I'll let others decide which format is more suitable. Modest Genius ^talk 12:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose – Possibly significant in the Libyan Civil War, but without broader import. – Sca (talk) 12:41, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment This seems to be more of an ongoing situation, like the wars in Syria, Yemen and elsewhere (pictured). Having skimmed the article, it seems that there's been a shift in the balance of power as Turkey is now providing military support for the GNA. But the war goes on and the article seems to need a lot of work. Many of the proseline date entries don't give the year and this makes it hard to navigate if you're coming to the article cold. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose pending an explanation of broader significance. If need be Libyan Civil War could be added back to Ongoing. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Notability seems clearcut to me: UN-backed government fully recaptures Tripoli, 14 month long battle for capital city ends. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I agree with Bzweebl. Clearcut.BabbaQ (talk) 22:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment- An altblurb suggestion: In the Libyan Civil War, the Government of National Accord recaptures Tripoli and agrees to a ceasefire with the Libyan National Army, ending a fourteen-month battle for control of the city. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:49, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The GNA didn't really 'recapture' Tripoli though; most of it was never lost, just the southern suburbs and the airport (if I'm understanding the article correctly). Modest Genius ^talk 12:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait The LNA wasn't really defeated at all - it seems like they are pulling back to negotiate for peace. [1][2]. THAT would clearly be postable. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:09, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose on quality grounds the target is a prose line disaster. Write three paragraphs about the "Siege of Tripoli" and I'll support easily. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:35, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Crime blotter. The article does not indicate the significance of its many proseline entries. It is not clear to a naïve reader why these details are important.130.233.2.170 (talk) 11:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. This is a potentially significant change in a major and long-lasting conflict. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: When COVID happened, the protests pretty much died out but once China lifted its quarantine, the protests restarted, and several times have been in the news lately related to HK (including the 31st anniversary of Tiananmem Square and the preparation of protests for that). The sub-article structure under this main one has been updated (eg June protests and obviously the 31st anniv. one.) That won't go away soon, particularly as the news is also coupling that with the George Floyd protests. Masem (t) 19:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Would have nominated this but the article has an orange banner currently, so not sure it is ready to be posted. - Indefensible (talk) 19:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two tags are size related. The first one is length but I get 103k prose length - that's probably the max we'd want and yes, a split is needed but its not too long. That tag could go. The lede thus actually seems right for those, but that could be reduced. Annoying, both tags appear to be "drive-by", no talk page discussion (until yours just now) on these, so I'd say that we can remove that or understand that those have little do with quality in contrast to the usual sourcing problems. --Masem (t) 19:52, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I think we kind of have to at this point.--WaltCip (talk) 19:48, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Probably the best target article for 'a lot of things building in Hong Kong'. Kingsif (talk) 20:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - now it is time to add this.BabbaQ (talk) 21:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The orange tags are only indicating that the article may be too lengthy, but this isn't a quality issue or a verification issue.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 21:48, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, support China's legislation being a blurb if/when it happens. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose orange tagged for quality and not one single update provides any meaningful stat about the size of the current protests. "The mass march on 24 May in Causeway Bay was the largest protest since the beginning of the pandemic" tells me nothing. However important you think this is, if it doesn't meaningfully inform our readers it has no place in the box. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:34, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yet again, as explained several times before, the protests have grown so large, the updates are in the summary-style sub-articles, and may not always filter up to the top article. As long as the structure of the summary style is clear and appearent to help readers navigate to where they need to go (which they are in this case). --Masem (t) 02:23, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The length is a problem, as the reader will be confused why this is exceeding long article about an exceedingly long event is in the box now. GreatCaesarsGhost 00:25, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Two of the last three blurb noms are for Hong Kong, and another two lower down, with the general response being 'HK should be in the box, but as ongoing'. It gets nommed for ongoing, and your argument is that readers won't know why it's in the box now - for such a complex situation, one article may not be so obvious, but it's the main article tying all the current events together. To make it clear why the protests have picked up again, we'd need about four blurbs. Can you see a circle? Just stick with the easy option - article with lots of relevant subpages (that are right by the top!) to ongoing. A reader will see 'Hong Kong protests' in ongoing and think 'ah, so the HK protests have started up again'. Kingsif (talk) 01:25, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - article may be too lengthy, but quality and significance are not issues here. RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 02:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to ongoing. The orange tags deal with editorial rather than sourcing issues, so OK to post. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:35, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting comment – Quality is always an issue. The recurring unrest in Hong Kong is a very significant in international politics, but this article's length, at 19,000 words, is obviously OTT. A good copy editor knowledgeable about the topic could shrink it by half. – Sca (talk) 12:54, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's just at the edge where some split is needed, but its not demanded. (I had 103k of readable prose). I dunno if it is more a copyedit moreso than a reflection on what's more important to be at the top level wth months now past for some of onset events and pushing details to the sub-articles, but its far less the type "quality" that we'd be worried about with other ITN candidates (poor sourcing , etc.) --Masem (t) 13:23, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I said "knowledgeable about the topic" – meaning one who could judge what the salient events were. We don't need to see every incremental detail of this long saga. – Sca (talk) 14:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

100% agree. Not here, somewhere else, we need to work on some type of system for when we get stuck in this type of "hyperreporting" mode (where editors are documenting details without thought to longevity, as to at least collect sources) so that editors go back to trim down to more essentials. These protests, the COVID pages, the Floyd protests, and many many more articles need this 20/20 hindsight fix. I would not penalize a topic at ongoing ITN for not having this done while it is actually still ongoing news in reality but it is a point to keep in mind as you say. --Masem (t) 15:21, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea if this story is "important" or not because this WP:COATRACK of an article is too busy giving WP:UNDUE weight to the agitators and not enough describing actual protests. Even the much lauded "sub articles" don't describe a single actual protest march in detail, but they do go on and on about various MPs, international response, and public statements from agitators. The article(s) are complete turds about something that's largely a non-event and these sorts of "hyper edits" are what's going to make it nearly impossible for me to crowbar this shit off the main page when every time I try POV warriors who otherwise ignore the box pop up out of the floor boards to exclaim "Keep - VERY IMPORTANT, updated yesterday, still in the news". Every single time without fail. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:49, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Post-posting comment Should have waited to see if this develops into a continuing protest rather than base it on a single event. Gotitbro (talk) 04:58, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article: 2020 Norilsk oil spill (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Vladimir Putin declares a state of emergency as melting permafrost causes a large diesel spill (satellite imagery pictured) in Norilsk. (Post)
News source(s): BBC; CNN; Guardian; Pravda
Credits:

• Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 2a00:23c6:3b82:8500:89a5:3b9c:fe1c:61a3 (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Melting permafrost is expected to be a significant result of climate change and this seems to be a notable example Andrew🐉(talk) 08:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Nice article, if only a light update. Adding Pravda source to nom.130.233.2.170 (talk) 09:25, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Suggest mentioning climate change in the blurb as a factor for the melting permafrost.--WaltCip (talk) 12:34, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Great job. Good article. Well referenced. MSN12102001 (talk) 12:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. That's an article about the city, not the oil spill. It has only one sentence of content on this event, with no more information than what's in the blurb. The article doesn't even mention permafrost or the cause of the accident. I do think this is an important enough event to merit a blurb, but we need some actual encyclopaedic content about it, not a one-sentence mention in a much more general article. Modest Genius ^talk 12:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support iff 2020 Norilsk oil spill is the bold link. That article is short but informative and meets our minimum criteria. Modest Genius ^talk 15:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I have expanded the details in the article. The Norilsk article seems the best place for this currently as it provides lots of context about this unusual place – notable as the mostly northerly city and also one of the most polluted places on the planet. The article also gives details of the previous spill in 2016 which turned another river red. The river system does not seem to be well covered on Wikipedia currently but I have made a start by creating Ambarnaya. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on principle - massive oil spill by all means - but Oppose that this probably could be expanded more than just beyond the current paragraph. Reading the BBC article alone gives more details to be added. --Masem (t) 13:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also corrected title, it is diesel oil, not fuel, which spilled. Doesn't affect newsworthiness, just precision of story. --Masem (t) 14:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually weird, BBC is the only one calling it "diesel oil", many others calling it "diesel fuel" but we can go with "diesel" until more details are known. It's obviously a heavy petroleum product that is bad for the environment. :P -Masem (t) 14:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just to note, diesel is just diesel. It can be called either "diesel oil" or "diesel fuel", but it's all the same stuff. See Diesel oil, which redirects to Diesel fuel. --Jayron32 16:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Only in America. In many parts of the world, "diesel fuel" means distillate, and "diesel oil" means fuel oil, which I think is what is meant here. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose Target article has a few referencing issues, and as noted by Masem, the single paragraph update is a bit weak. I'd still support it, though, if the referencing issues were fixed. --Jayron32 16:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment More than a paragraph about this event in the city's article would be UNDUE. A separate event article (which seems to be suggested) would be fine, as well. But we have a very decent article about a little-known locale in the Anglosphere, containing a thorough suitably-referenced update reported by RSs. I can't see the oppose angle to this. I am unsure what refencing issues there are because no one has placed any CNs and spot check looks good.130.233.2.170 (talk) 07:01, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Jayron32 placed some tags and I resolved them all so there are none now. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:11, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I have separated it into a separate article, 2020 Norilsk oil spill. The WWF is calling it Russia's second biggest spill, so it seems that it's worthy of a stub. Previously the content was spread across sereral articles - those of the city, the main river and the company. DieRadfahrerin (talk) 09:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• That separate article was created by cut/paste of the existing content without any attribution and that's a copyright violation, contrary to WP:PLAGIARISM. I reverted but the content has been put back. For ITN purposes, I reckon that the Norilsk article is still best because it is a substantial article with lots of good context. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't claim the text I copied over as my own work. Copying from one article on Wikipedia to another related article on Wikipedia to create a new article is pretty standard, it happens every day and is well with the rules AFAIK. It could be misconstrued as plagiarism, but we're all writing under Creative Commons here and the same references were kept in place. I'm sorry to have brushed you up the wrong way, I hope we can work together resulting in one central article that befits the gravity of the incident. DieRadfahrerin (talk) 10:21, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Andrew's right, a pure copy/paste is a violation of the Creative Commons licensing which requires correct attribution and when your edit introduces a bunch of text from another article and you don't allow that attribution to be determined, that's bad. It certainly is not "well within the rules". If I reuse text from other articles (even if I'm normally just about the sole author), I add something similar to what you find at Talk:The Boat Race 2019 by way of attribution, i.e. permalinks to the article from which the text was taken and the version of the article it was inserted into. Just plain manners if nothing else. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 12:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Points taken. I have added attribution in the edit history, and on the talk page as suggested. DieRadfahrerin (talk) 12:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment right we have a buggers' muddle now, a stub article about the event which is an unattributed copy/paste, no blurb which incorporates that article, and virtually the same text in the "parent" article which has various !votes cast. Messy. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 12:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The stub is now better attributed (see above), and has additional material. DieRadfahrerin (talk) 12:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose – The target article should be one about the oil spill, not a general one about features of the locality (its "cold, dark, and long" winters, for example). The Norilsk article contains one (1) paragraph about the spill. And as noted, the new, separate 2020 Norilsk oil spill article is a stub. – Sca (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support iff 2020 Norilsk oil spill, as suggested by Modest Genius is the bold link. The article is short but concise, and continues to evolve. DieRadfahrerin (talk) 17:47, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I've made the oil spill article the target, which is good enough to support for this. --Masem (t) 18:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment marking as ready but I'm not convinced that image is offering anything about the actual story really. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 19:18, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shame that the pictures of the oil-flooded rivers are all copyrighted. I agree that Putin staring at a monitor isn't a great main page replacement image. --Masem (t) 19:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The picture shows Putin holding a teleconference about the matter and so is directly relevant. It also seems quite topical in that such videoconferencing is the new normal now and it is interesting to see them being done in Russia too. They released the picture under a CC licence and we should encourage governments to do this as we are not spoilt for choice – it's quite hard to get good pictures for our articles. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support The List of oil spills shows that in the last fifty years since 1970 there have been ~40 as large as this, (1) including ~20 of such spills as large in the ninteen-seventies alone. However, such large spills have become less frequent, with only five other spills so large since the year 2000: the Prestige, the Tasman Spirit, the Jiyeh power station, the Deepwater Horizon, and the Sanchi. DougEMandy (talk) 19:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC) edit links DougEMandy (talk) 19:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dont think anyone is pointing out the largeness related to others here. It is a large spill; what is unique is that it was primarily inland , not from a tanker or other waterway issue, and a result from permafrost thaw (as currently being evaluated) from climate change. Even if it was a spill because a worker accidentally knocked out a support beam, we'd still be reporting on a spill this size. Its in the news. --Masem (t) 19:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Oppose Removing ready. Although there is consensus to support posting an item, article needs some more expansion: while it has the minimum three paragraphs, they are not fully complete/well-formed to meet minimum criteria. A reaction session may also be worthwhile. Spencer^T•C 19:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's currently 450 words of well-referenced prose (8 paragraphs with 15 sources), plus an infobox and animated image. That easily meets our minimum length and quality criteria. Modest Genius ^talk 12:46, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Given the seriously remote location of Norilsk, in Russia's far north, I question whether a diesel spill there has broad significance. This isn't 75 mi. from New Orleans in the Gulf of Mexico. – Sca (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The size of the spill is comparable with the Exxon Valdez oil spill which also took place in the far north and was thought to be a big deal. Also, it's not a one-off as Norilsk is routinely generating huge amounts of pollution of various kinds. Putin seems to think it's a big deal -- hence the state of emergency and imprisonment of the plant manager. As the Arctic thaws and opens to up to further exploitation, it seems sensible to highlight the consequences as they occur. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Note, though, that Norilsk (69 N. lat.) is farther north than Valdez (61 N. lat.), and more remote from main sea routes. – Sca (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I would also add to what Andrew has said by saying I think there is broad public interest globally both in human-caused environmental disasters in the Arctic Circle (and maybe the blurb should mention the event occured within that), and the effect of climate change on Siberia's permafrost, similarly to the global interest in the endangered rainforests. DieRadfahrerin (talk) 23:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oooh, that gives me an idea of an image though... --Masem (t) 23:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah, someone beat me to it: ESA satellite imagery here would be good. There's the animation in the article, looking for a good still though, as they actually caught the red-ness of the fuel in this. --Masem (t) 00:01, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. A major disaster, both because of its size and of the connection with global warming. The article is currently of sufficient length and quality for posting. Nsk92 (talk) 15:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – major news event, and the article appears to be adequately sourced. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:50, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:30, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Note - waiting for the image to be protected at Commons. Black Kite (talk) 12:35, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• And done. Black Kite (talk) 12:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

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