(Posted) RD: Mavis Pusey

Nominator's comments: Just created. Will expand. She died on April 20 but the first obituary in the news was not published until April 30 in NYT and Artforum. There were obits in minor media sources on museum websites from April 25. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:32, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:06, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 11:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Ready. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:47, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 02:27, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted as ongoing) 2019 Venezuela coup attempt

Nominator's comments: Went ahead and nominated article which is in the news in all major news channels. Sherenk1 (talk) 16:40, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait leaning support once this becomes clearer. This is being covered, but reports are conflicting and I'd like to get a clearer picture before we put a story on the main page. Our article is developing well and is well referenced, and if those conditions hold with any future text this should be posted. However, the whole situation is too confusing, and I'd rather wait and get it right. --Jayron32 16:54, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree with Jayron, and a few hours more may lend some clarity as to the significance of today's events. (Certainly, that Leopoldo Lopez is free is significant, and could turn out to be today's main event.) Besides, there is a neutrality issue with the way the article is named. Also, the blurb proposed is entirely one-sided and POV. (The Spanish-language press has good coverage and journalists in the middle of the action, but English-language press is having a harder time keeping up. With the caveat that you will see people die, the hashtag where one can get a sense of what is happening on the ground is Instagram #30Abr ). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Use of the word "coup" seems NPOV under the circumstances. GreatCaesarsGhost 16:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• No, it is not "NPOV", it is just a description of the ongoing situation used by reliable media.

Examples:

1. The Guardian: Venezuela opposition leader claims coup is under way,
2. Sky News: Venezuela: Military vehicles drive into protesters amid 'attempted coup',
3. CNN: Oil prices briefly jump on attempted coup in Venezuela, etc.

The current situation in Venezuela resembles the 1945 Venezuelan coup d'etat in which military rebels and uprised civilians worked together to oust the government.

I understand that the media is using the term- I'm suggesting we don't make the same mistake. Coup is a contentious label which implies that Maduro is legitimate and Guaidó is not. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:43, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The word coup does not say that Guaido is not legitimate. A coup means that the military is being used to enact a change of government. It could very well be being used to enact a legitimate change of government. Or not. It's use makes no statement on whose side is "legitimate", it is merely describing an event which happens: that the military was used to effect the change. --Jayron32 17:55, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have continued this topic at the article talk page; it is interesting that I don't find most Spanish-language press describing it as a "coup", so this could be a WP:GLOBAL thing, reflecting a predisposed view of LatinAmerica (as opposed to Arab Spring uprising, for example). Perhaps better to discuss at article talk. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:16, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I said to wait. Coup may be the correct word. Or it may not. --Jayron32 18:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose until the story crystallises a little. Right now it certainly appears (from the mainstream news sources I see) to be a well-orchestrated media-fuelled attempt by a small number of people to make a difference. If this turns properly bad or significant, we can reconsider. Reposo. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• I agree that nothing significant enough has happened yet to warrant a blurb. I also think that "Venezuelan presidential crisis", which has been on the main page for 3 months, is a very misleading way to summarise it. It is interesting that it has now disappeared with this coup attempt! I would go for "Venezuelan political instability", although really I would have dropped it from the front page a long time ago. There is vast amounts of disinformation about Venezuela, unfortunately, and the anglophone Venezuelans are overwhelmingly anti-government, so it is hardly surprising that an encyclopedia reflects that.62.239.159.69 (talk) 17:25, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment interesting that when Maduro was attacked with exploding drones, the overwhelming consensus (including by some who are now supporting this story) was that it was a "dubious claim" and "Wikipedia is WP:NOT the propaganda outlet of dictators or strongmen". Whatever is happening now, Maduro is calling it a "coup attempt" and there is no factual accuracy orange tag on the article, no "alleged" in the title. Is Maduro a reliable source or not? Or is he only a reliable source when it fits a certain narrative? --LaserLegs (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  LaserLegs, see above where reliable sources are calling it a coup. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:58, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Please stop casting aspersions. No one has cited Maduro as a source in any article. Reliable news sources are being cited. You're inventing windmills to tilt at. Don't do that. We aren't here to pick sides. We're only trying to decide if we have a quality Wikipedia article to direct readers to. If people are seeing this story unfold in the news, and we have a good enough article to direct them to, the rest of this is smoke and mirrors. We aren't here to decide which side is correct. We're just here to report what reliable sources report. --Jayron32 17:59, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  The Sky news article "Government says it is confronting a small group of "military traitors" seeking to promote a coup". You're right though, Jayron, I'm probably being a bit pointy. Time to take a break. Cheers. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait just like below, the article is still very thin on verified details, scope, and outcome. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait for a better article (facts seem to be lacking, perhaps in part because parts of the internet, as well as BBC and CNN and other media, have apparently been shut down in Venezuela) but support as soon as possible, as it's echoing all over the media in a way that seems to make it obvious it's a major development of a crisis that's being widely followed. LjL (talk) 18:07, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment"Coup"? When Guairó is recognized by most nations and international organizations as the legitimate president of Venezuela.--SirEdimon (talk) 18:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  People, the outline of the Uprising article was ready for launch and being discussed in Sandbox when SamHolt6 put up the "coup" article; the discussion about changing the article title is at the article talk page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:09, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support but I'd prefer ongoing, or some other way to combine this with the presidential crisis article. Davey2116 (talk) 20:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait – Developing. [2] [3] "Don't speak too soon for the wheel's still in spin." – Sca (talk) 20:41, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait Though we can say "a government tank ran over civilians", which is obscene, that doesn't make a full ITN story - wait till they've stopped shooting at each other. Kingsif (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've seen, it wasn't a tank at all – More like an APC; comparisons with Tiananmen Square seem overdrawn. – Sca (talk) 01:42, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• • The government may have put the man in the tank, but we don't know that the government intended for the driver to run over civilians. Watch that footage, two or three APCs, one ramming attack ... does that look like a deliberate and coordinated effort by the government? I don't think so. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:47, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Question Is the coup attempt still ongoing or did it fail? There have been protests in Venezuela for years now, so we can't call whatever marches happen tomorrow as part of the "uprising". --LaserLegs (talk) 00:47, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support The uprising is ongoing, and it's an incredibly significant event. (Also, the article has now been renamed to reflect it is an "uprising" rather than a "coup".) 84percent (talk) 01:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Er, that would be coup; a coupe (coupé) is a type of automobile. – Sca (talk) 01:48, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sca: thanks 84percent (talk) 02:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Needs a better blurb. Otherwise support on notability. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:59, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Blurb should be more definitive. Hrodvarsson (talk) 02:38, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Added ALT1 and ALT2. starship.paint ~ KO 02:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Advise editors who are advising to Support or Wait to approve Ongoing below in the meantime. starship.paint ~ KO 03:00, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment if this is such an important item, why is it not even mentioned anywhere on the BBC News homepage? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The link to BBC news has been provided in the blurb template above. The presence on the BBC homepage itself is not a requirement for posting. Brandmeister^talk 12:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is a meaningful gauge of how actual, main stream press is featuring the story. Missing from cbc.ca as well, and way below the fold at nytimes.com, BTW. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In fairness, there's a ton of continuing coverage out there. However, the situation remains confused, with neither side able to declare victory at this point. Sca (talk) 13:08, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say it was a requirement for posting, I was just surprised that, if indeed this is a genuinely a real story worthy of posting, that the BBC deemed it so insignificant that it didn't make the BBC News homepage in any shape or form. I think you already knew that Brandmeister, but I thought I should reiterate what I meant, for the avoidance of doubt. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support alt1 or alt2 Clearly notable, but the initial blurb is non-NPOV. StudiesWorld (talk) 14:43, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This uprising is an ongoing event and being renamed that reflect it is not a Coup or etc. AbDaryaee (talk) 16:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • And how is this latest "uprising" different from the Crisis in Venezuela which has been going on since 2010? --LaserLegs (talk) 17:22, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support this is changing the course of the entire crisis. funplussmart (talk) 23:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Guaido coup failed, Maduro is still in power and in control of the military. How is this "changing the course of the entire crisis" exactly? --LaserLegs (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support seems obvious, it's a big deal for the country. Banedon (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support for alt1 or alt2 , now that the article has been improved. --Jamez42 (talk) 08:47, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted as ongoing for the time being, the main article. Not a clear consensus for a blurb, or what the blurb should be at the moment. --Tone 11:32, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting comment – Today's coverage again substantiates the ongoing, inconclusive character of the situation. [4] [5] [6] – Sca (talk) 12:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting comment good thing we waited, the phony uprising never materialized. Maybe Venezuelan protests (2014–present) is a better target, since the protests have been going on since well before Guaido lost the election? --LaserLegs (talk) 12:12, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment wow, this whole article space is a rats nest of POV warriors, choosing terminology based on "rolls off the tongue easier", angrily deriding anyone who doesn't stick to the Guaido-supporting version of events. I'd orange tag the whole mess, but I would expect to be revered in seconds. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:18, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  "rats nest of POV warriors" remember to assume WP:GOODFAITH. Also sources have been completely overlooked to support a name change. --MaoGo (talk) 14:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Removed) Remove from ongoing: Mueller Report

(Posted) Ongoing: 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis

Nominator's comments: This should be back in Ongoing. Recent developments - Guaido has called for a military uprising. Government calls it a coup. starship.paint ~ KO 14:23, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: Unfortunately I have to be off-wiki once I post this. If anyone wants to propose a blurb, please do go ahead and update the nomination. starship.paint ~ KO 14:29, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose if Guaido has called for a "military uprising" I don't see it in the target article. If there is a coup underway, that calls for a blurb, pending quality update. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:25, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Found the update. This is blurb, not ongoing. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • And looking more closely at the article, it appears to be more stagecraft and hyperbole. Guaido standing on the edge of some highway with a disgraced general bitching about Maduro, is that a coup? Sounds more like business as usual. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:29, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait We don't really have a clear picture of what is going on at the moment. If this does turn out to be a serious attempted coup it will likely justify a blurb. But until we get some clarity, there is nothing to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment If nothing else, Leopoldo Lopez has been freed, so that could be a blurb. Kingsif (talk) 14:49, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Blurb only If someone proposes a good blurb for the recent developments, AND has a properly updated article to highlight, do that please. This seems singular enough to merit directly describing it. --Jayron32 14:50, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait – Per LaserLegs, Orientem. So far it looks like more political theater. – Sca (talk) 14:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, it is major development. Notable enough to receive foreign heads of state and EU parliamentary reactions --MaoGo (talk) 15:16, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Still clearly a moving news target with the new military action today. --Masem (t) 15:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I understand that there's an article being worked about the movilization. I'd support the removal if a nomination of the new developments begins. --Jamez42 (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Placed another article. Need a blurb.----ZiaLater (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait So far the only thing real here is "At approximately 8:44 am, heavy gunfire erupted near La Carlota." (which is actually Generalissimo Francisco de Miranda Air Base). --LaserLegs (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – In hindsight, it is clear it should not have been removed. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 18:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It shouldn't have been removed from ongoing. However, if there's a way to combine a posting of this with the coup attempt article, I'd prefer that. Davey2116 (talk) 20:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Agree with Davey2116: it shouldn't have been removed. 84percent (talk) 10:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Support the ongoing placement of 2019 Venezuela uprising for now until a more definitive result occurs.----ZiaLater (talk) 10:52, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • LOL "Venezuelan uprising"? The POV warriors are out in force. Strong oppose posting this laughably POV title to the MP. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:05, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@LaserLegs:, what would you call it? StudiesWorld (talk) 14:47, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A failed coup at best, more likely just continuing political showmanship. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:58, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Apparently, pulling it was too soon. This should be maintained as ongoing until Venezuela has a definitive president. StudiesWorld (talk) 14:47, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It has one, Nicolás Maduro, the fact that some people can't handle it is awe inspiring. WP:ITN already has conditions for including an item in the ongoing section, and chief among them are continuous, pertinent updates. Oh well. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:01, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support returning the Presidential crisis to ongoing; the crucial issue is turning into focus on the Russia-Cuba-US relationship, and when military intervention is more seriously on the table now, with Monroe Doctrine focus, that's worldwide significant, and it is all over the news. The uprising yesterday was of lesser significance in the overall picture, and the big picture is covered at the Presidential crisis article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:08, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak support would prefer to blurb the coup attempt, and then consider putting this to ongoing when the coup attempt blurb rolls off. Banedon (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• It seems we have a consensus to return it to ongoing due to new developments (when I removed it, there had been an entire week without significant updates) while the blurb has less support. --Tone 11:24, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is some debate about whether or not there even is an uprising. If anything should be on the MP, it's this. Good pull, good post. Thanks Tone. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:06, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2019 UNCC shooting

Leopoldo López

Nominator's comments: Covered almost as much and as important as the recent uprising/coup, Leopoldo López got out of house arrest after almost five years. I would like to nominate this before it gets stale in sight of the lack of consensus on how to name the 30 April events. Jamez42 (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose mainly because the presidential crisis is already ongoing, and this falls under the general umbrella. One or the other, but not both. Banedon (talk) 00:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ellen Tauscher

Nominator's comments: American politician, former member of the U.S. House and former U.S. Under Secretary of State, dies at age 67. Davey2116 (talk) 20:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose too many unreferenced claims and a few inline external links which need fixing. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: John Singleton

Nominator's comments: The family has confirmed that his life support will be taken off. His death is being reported by some media outlets and will be likely confirmed by the family in the next coming hours. SirEdimon (talk) 18:47, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for now. No cited text in article says he's actually dead. There was one, uncited, sentence that said what you said above, but we need scrupulously referenced text before we can post something like this. An uncited sentence in the article is not good enough. We can wait until this is confirmed AND our article has been properly updated. Furthermore, even when he dies, the article needs a lot of work to be up to the quality needed for the main page. Lots of unreferenced text is in there currently. --Jayron32 18:58, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Death has been confirmed, but other objections still stand until they are fixed. --Jayron32 12:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose premature nomination, article way too under-referenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  It appears this individual's death has been confirmed but the article is still way too poor to put onto the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose for now on quality. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 22:54, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. I've just hidden/removed some obvious BLP violations but a lot of work is needed on the remainder. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:31, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Josef Šural

Nominator's comments: Czech international striker. Article looks stubby but referenced, expect it to be updated. Sherenk1 (talk) 09:33, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose stub. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:35, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - stub.BabbaQ (talk) 00:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Stevie Chalmers

Nominator's comments: Scottish Football Hall of Fame inductee; scored the winning goal in the 1967 European Cup Final. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose a few unverifiable claims (and per another nom here, where is infobox data referenced?) The Rambling Man (talk) 08:31, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Main claims have been addressed.yorkshiresky (talk) 20:01, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• support - seems ready to go.BabbaQ (talk) 00:20, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Marking ready.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Looks ok to me. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 02:14, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sylvia Bretschneider

Nominator's comments: Speaker of state parliament in German state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern from 2002, for the longest of any in Germany that is. - Fine article by Charles01. There could be more detail, from the obits. Died too soon. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satisfactory. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - good to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 07:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 13:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Poway synagogue shooting

(Posted) 2019 Spanish general election

Nominator's comments: Preliminary results show that the best chance to form a government is by a coalition led by incumbent Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. Davey2116 (talk) 19:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose incomplete article, no blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:15, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Just needs a summary of the results in prose. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:43, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Altblurb proposed. Results now in intro. Time for a second look? Moscow Mule (talk) 22:59, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. The article looks good enough for me, and full results are included. The 'timeline' and 'aftermath' sections could do with some work, but I don't think they should preclude posting. Modest Genius ^talk 12:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Looks good to go now.BabbaQ (talk) 00:32, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:56, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Richard Lugar

Nominator's comments: Former long-time U.S. Senator dies at age 87. Davey2116 (talk) 16:44, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose six citations required but in good nick otherwise. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support all citations dealt with, article updated --DannyS712 (talk) 21:03, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, cn tags have been taken care of, article looks to be in good shape now. Nsk92 (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Looks OK. Lugar was a household name in U.S. politics for decades. – Sca (talk) 23:00, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 23:31, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Michael Wolf (photographer)

(Posted) Cyclone Kenneth

Article: Cyclone Kenneth (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Flooding and winds from Cyclone Kenneth kill at least 45, injure more than 200 others, and cause serious damage in Mozambique and the Comoro Islands. (Post)
News source(s): Fox News Weather Channel Relief Web Aljazeera
Credits:

• Created and nominated by Hurricane Noah (talk · give credit)
• Updated by LightandDark2000 (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Kenneth only has 12 deaths thus far, but there is a serious flooding event underway that is anticipated to drop about 30 inches of rain or more over the next 10 days. Additionally, there were some pretty serious impacts from winds and rains where the storm hit while at peak intensity (200+ injured... preliminary). This is impacting some of the areas already hit by Cyclone Idai in March. Noah^Talk 03:54, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support blurb, oppose ongoing. Not my area but quality looks adequate, the article appears updated, and it's in the news internationally. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:50, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose ongoing for a week old storm that already dissipating. Blurbs are in the box at least a week these days, blurb it now, or blurb it when it's done, and update the death toll. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:11, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support blurb - which would be appropriate.BabbaQ (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @Espresso Addict, LaserLegs, and BabbaQ: Switched to blurb. Noah^Talk 11:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdrawn by nominator Noah^Talk 18:37, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Reopened. I am not entirely sure why this was withdrawn; I do believe it was closed rather prematurely. 12 deaths and likely to increase across 3 different countries; this is a major cyclone. According to Bob Henson of Weather Underground, the Tanzania-Mozambique border region has never experienced a cyclone above tropical storm strength. In history, only 5 cyclones of major hurricane (SSHS) strength has hit mainland Africa; Idai was the fourth, Kenneth is the fifth. Given these reasons, I believe the storm is notable both for its death toll, and for historical regions. Per the above, I give this nom a strong support. 2607:FEA8:1DE0:7B4:7058:BE5D:BAB3:F93C (talk) 06:17, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator stated on my talk page: I have decided to withdraw any form of a nomination for Cyclone Kenneth. I have changed my mind on the worthiness of it. [12] We had not had any conversation (except here) on the topic. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support blurb - As above. Sherenk1 (talk) 06:46, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – Support in principle. However, the article seems very top heavy. Can we move some the material in the lead to the body? Is everything in the lead verifiable in the body? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 08:16, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Unfortunately, no moving can be done. A rundown of the met history is required in the leads for cyclones. I did condense the material as much as possible without compromising it though. Looks like I am being forced to go on with the nomination even though I officially withdrew it. Noah^Talk 10:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  You can strike your nomination if you want, whilst leaving the discussion open. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:37, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Espresso Addict: I will leave the nomination on there since it appears the death toll is rapidly climbing. The flooding is really killing people. Death toll increased from 5 in Mozambique to 38 this morning, with the addition of 7 in Comoros thus far. Sadly, looks like the toll will only increase from here (20 inches predicted in the next 5 days from remnant moisture) due to flooding and as more bodies are recovered from the wreckage caused by the winds. It now looks as if this could be another storm with hundreds dead. Noah^Talk 15:22, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Significant loss of life that has received substantial news coverage. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:33, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Significant enough and article quality is good (though I am suprised it doesn't mention this on the heels of Cyclone Idai last month, which has lingering effects that are expected to make Kenneth's potentially harsher. see [13]. But that's not ITN-stopping coverage) --Masem (t) 15:51, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 16:04, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Sri Lanka Easter bombings

(Posted) RD: Martin Kilson

Nominator's comments: I suspect systemic bias in Wikipedia and in the press. Obits are sure to follow but the death was, AFAIK, only first mentioned in the press today, in a CNN interview with Cornell West who lauded Kilson's work in political science as it relates to African Americans. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:28, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• CommentSupport. This isn't going to fly without more work, imo. Are you planning to do that, Coffeeandcrumbs, or are you puntingfloating it here in the hope that someone else will? Espresso Addict (talk) 01:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looking good now. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:00, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satisfactory, bizarre conversation.... The Rambling Man (talk) 10:49, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 12:06, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted - I've punted that one over to the main page.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:35, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And now we know what punting means wheresoever it may occur. – Sca (talk) 12:46, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ellen Schwiers

Nominator's comments: German actress with a career of almost 70 years, - was another sad one-liner. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I don't see any issues.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Quick commentSupport. Excellent expansion, Gerda Arendt, but there's some references missing eg in the infobox. I'll try to get round to reviewing this fully later but I'm honestly snowed under at the moment. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Nothing in the infobox needs a ref when sourced in the body. I dropped the relatives who are not mentioned there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 04:55, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Gerda Arendt: Sure, but eg the date of birth is neither mentioned nor cited in the text, nor is Daniel Jacob. Nor strictly is stage director, as she could have produced the play mentioned not directed. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:24, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  DOB is there now, and the son. "to stage" means "to direct", no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:38, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks. Not unambiguously, imo. I'd assume produced as the default, I think. It's not very idiomatic in English with a single person: theatres stage plays, people produce them or direct them. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Ready to to learn. German "inszenieren" = put a scene on. For me, "direct" sounds more ambiguous, but if you say so ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:12, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Gerda Arendt: Put on [a play] would usually mean produce but my German–English dictionary is translating inszenieren as direct [a play] or produce [radio/television]. On the other hand, it translates Inszenierung as production. Espresso Addict (talk) 06:33, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Marking ready; I will post later if no-one either objects or beats me to it. Espresso Addict (talk) 08:26, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:46, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 11:38, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Elina Bystritskaya

Nominator's comments: Notable Russian Actress. I have added more death citations. Still need some work. Thsmi002 (talk) 16:04, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Thanks for bringing this here, Thsmi002. I fear this is going to need quite a bit of work, especially on the referencing, but also expansion of the main biography, before it is suitable for the main page. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:29, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose too much unref. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Havlicek

Nominator's comments: All-time NBA great. I have resolved CN tags and added more death citations. May still need some work here and there. pbp 02:03, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• CommentOppose. Needs copy editing and fully referencing. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:59, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Needs referencing especially in the statistics section. Capitalistroadster (talk) 03:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References have been added to the statistics section, and there are no outstanding CN tags, so I reckon this is good to go. We ARE talking about one of the NBA's legends, after all. pbp 03:59, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• • Change to support. Referencing issues have been fixed. Capitalistroadster (talk) 05:33, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose multiple paragraphs without a single reference. Stephen 04:58, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention much of the infobox. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:57, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the information in the infobox is corroborated by the basketball-reference link near the bottom of the infobox or in the prose. pbp 13:09, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Still not referenced properly. See my previous note; just the first thing I checked, the place of birth, isn't even mentioned in the text, let alone sourced. Additionally, as is evident from the place of birth not even appearing, there's next to nothing on his personal life. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:57, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have added his place of birth to the Personal Life section (which is adequate in my opinion.) Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:45, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose there are even quotations in there without reference. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:11, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Note to everyone who said more citations were needed: I've gone and fixed up all of the CN tags and unreferenced paragraphs I could find. Please re-assess. Thanks! --Jayron32 12:39, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man:, @Espresso Addict:, @Capitalistroadster:, @Stephen: pbp 13:03, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Looks like everything has been referenced.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:35, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Additional references have been added. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:10, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 13:39, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Malaria vaccine pilot program

Nominator's comments: Article could use further work. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:45, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Quick comment. This was in the news in the UK a few days ago, and I note that our article states the "trial" began on the 23rd. I looked into it then, and this isn't a clinical trial (a single phase III has already been completed) but a post-European Medicines Agency-approval essentially expanded-access programme which will report safety and feasibility of giving four doses in the context of Africa. The four doses together only give an estimated ~40% protection. As far as I recall, and from memory only, this or similar has been in development since the Stone Age, presumably because four doses are actually needed to provide a very marginal protection. I'm not aware of another approved vaccine with such unfavourable characteristics. None of this is to say oppose, as I personally found it very interesting, but the news coverage does not really reflect the situation. (COI note: I have consulted for GW infectious diseases, though not malaria, in the distant past.) Espresso Addict (talk) 23:22, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Espresso Addict: I'm happy to find different wording for a blurb. My understanding is quite similar to what you described; that this isn't a trial for efficacy of the vaccine as such, but for safety, feasibility, costs, etc. Even so, "trial" is the most neutral wording I could come up with that's still used by the sources; many others are calling it a "rollout", even though it's clearly not on the open market. Vanamonde (Talk) 01:33, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  It's not a trial in my understanding of the word. Expanded access program(me) is the usual term when the company supplies the intervention free or at cost with the aim of getting safety data. There's also the question of the ethics of using a vaccine that isn't (afaik) approved in Malawi. I don't know what ITN wants to do when most of the news sources are, well, wrong is the word that springs to mind. But I might be too close to the topic area to know what trial means in non-technical English in this context. Program(me) seems a neutral word. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:45, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've suggested an alternative (long) blurb. Note, I haven't yet reviewed RTS,S; also malaria vaccine is not fully updated and, from the state of the lead, looks as if it needs a copy edit; also I don't know which English variant is appropriate. Also the item should be moved to 23rd. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:33, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose (weak mainly because we seem to be in a slow news period, but perhaps also partly due to my lack of expertise and confidence when discussing this topic). Either our eventual blurb somehow unexpectedly manages to make it clear this is a not-exactly-trial of a not-very-promising low effectiveness vaccine which was basically only a (somewhat unimpressive) 'first' way back in 2015 (raising the question in our readers' minds of why it's on ITN, thus expecting them to somehow guess the unstated answer, which is presumably that it's a slow-news period), or else our blurb will tend to mislead our readers into thinking or expecting that something really new and important is happening now in 2019 (not 2015), thus making us look like ghastly clickbaiters, and thus damaging our reputation in areas such as accuracy, trustworthiness, quality, consideration for our readers, etc... Tlhslobus (talk) 11:56, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Well, I am an expert in the infectious disease field, and I literally don't know what to write in response to this. The reason this vaccine has been approved, even though its efficacy is low, is because a malaria vaccine has been the Holy Grail for at least four decades. Malaria is one of the most important infectious causes of death in the world, up there with HIV and tuberculosis as the biggest causes of death from infectious disease. According to the article "In 2016, there were 216 million cases of malaria worldwide resulting in an estimated 445,000 to 731,000 deaths." Espresso Addict (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtless everything you say is true, but I'm still quite unclear which of my above points you are trying to refute (all you seem to have done is give me reasons why a low-efficacy vaccine was approved in 2015, not reasons why ITN should be posting a related not-exactly-trial in 2019, and incidentally, merely the start of the not-exactly-trial, not its results). Tlhslobus (talk) 09:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un Meeting

No consensus to post. Stephen 23:28, 28 April 2019 (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: Kim–Putin meetings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russian Leader Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un meet for the first time. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Russian Leader Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un meet for the first time.
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by RockinJack18 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: First meeting between the two, first article better for subject but filled with citation needed, second one more vague and doesn't refer to the meeting as much but better cited. Rockin 12:02, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose – Stub. Anyway, no concrete results, just talk. – Sca (talk) 12:26, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Unless a notable agreement comes out of this meeting,(i.e. Putin convinces Kim to give up NK's nuclear weapons) it is just two world leaders talking to each other. Unlike Kim meeting Trump, it is not uncommon for the Russian leader to meet the North Korean leader(unlike Trump's meeting, which was the first one and also between two hostile countries). 331dot (talk) 12:28, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose As of now, no suitable text has been put in Wikipedia about this. Two targets are offered above: the first is the article Kim–Putin meetings which is such a small stub it contains next to no useful information. The second is the article North Korea–Russia relations, which the only update is a picture with a caption and has ZERO prose text about the meeting. Ping us when you have actual text to assess. There's nothing useful to link from the main page as yet. --Jayron32 12:45, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, per all of the above. 174.151.164.174 (talk) 13:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Prefer North Korea–Russia relations as it puts the event in context, but it has not been updated in favour of starting the (at present) useless stub Kim–Putin meetings. Not opposed in principle, mainly because we seem to be on a slow news cycle with events going back to the 18th, more than a week ago, and this is in the news internationally. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral (although oppose for now on quality and updates). I think it's incorrect to say this is less significant than the Trump-Kim meetings. Nothing concrete came out of those either, and it is the first time Putin and Kim have met. There's also geopolitical significance in that it ups the ante a bit, given that the prior US talks. It has also been covered quite significantly as Espresso Addict says. It's borderline IMHO.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:44, 27 April 2019 (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.

(Reposted to RD IAR-ily) Death of Lyra McKee to Ongoing

Nominator's comments: This is currently the 7th of 6 RDs because I IAR'd to leave it in place. Her funeral this afternoon was attended by the PM & President of Ireland, the PM & Opposition leader of the UK, and heads of parties from both sides in Northern Ireland. It has dominated the BBC index page all day. I am not proposing leaving this here for more than a day or so, but today does not seem to be the day to remove it. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as a special case - this does seem like the wrong time to remove. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:42, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose but see no problem IARing her to an earlier spot in RDs using today as the basis. It doesn't seem lik there's going to be a massive investigation to her death, or the type of death mourning we got with Mandela (week long ceremonies, most of country closed down, etc.) That is, there's never going to be a separate article for her death, at the present. --Masem (t) 22:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I have reinstated her as an IAR 7th RD entry at the head of the list, using funeral date, per Masem's comment above. This is in the news today, people will be looking for it, and this seems a sensible compromise given that ongoing isn't really the right place. If consensus is against this then it can be removed again.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:58, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I agree with Masem's solution. Thanks, Amakuru. ETA As RDs seem to be accumulating rapidly at the moment, I would not necessarily suggest leaving McKee at the funeral date for the full cycle; eg Hannelore Elsner has only just been posted and Monir Shahroudy Farmanfarmaian is rendered stale with hardly any consideration. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:59, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment if you're not seriously considering this for ongoing, please change the template. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:07, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't see the point of unpicking one template to substitute another? Suggest that for the next RD to be posted, the posting admin takes off McKee instead of the last, as the case is now off the BBC top index page. Espresso Addict (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Agree with re-dating the item, per Masem. At this point the ongoing coverage seems to be mainly in the UK, and it's fading. (A tragic loss, though.) – Sca (talk) 12:31, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've removed the RD item, as I thought the news had faded here too, although I now note the BBC is fronting its Northern Ireland index page with "Political talks plan for Northern Ireland expected ... in the wake of Lyra McKee murder". I'll leave this open for now in case anyone wishes to discuss ongoing further. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Nils John Nilsson

Nominator's comments: American computer scientist, pioneer of artificial intelligence, dies at age 86. Davey2116 (talk) 21:17, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Death needs to be mentioned in the body, not just a date in the lead. I'd also prefer a brief personal life section. The unique material in the infobox must be sourced, and there are other small referencing problems, such as the name of the chair he held and a barelink. It could also do with a selected publications, at minimum to list out his most-notable books. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose agree with EA above about death being noted in prose, could use some more beef in the article too. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:38, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support He was a giant in artificial intelligence. I've added a section regarding his personal life and death, and removed the barelink, which is not an RS anyway. I believe it now satisfies minimum ITN standards. -Zanhe (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as nominator. I believe it's ready now; pinging @Espresso Addict and The Rambling Man to please re-assess. Davey2116 (talk) 00:19, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 00:23, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Winters (choreographer)

Nominator's comments: There are quite a few untagged citations needed and the filmography is unsourced although a large majority of his films have articles about them. AllMovie should help with that. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:46, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Quick comment. Not checked this but on a quick skim there is indeed some untagged unsourced material (eg all the unique awards & other material only in the infobox), and some "timeline" problems (ie one-sentence paragraphs beginning in [date]). It could do with some kind of personal life section too, which jumps from 12 to death, though there could be some interleaved in the career that I'm missing. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:08, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is worse than I initially believed.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support well of course I am going to support the article that I massively worked on recently. I also really went out of my way to find citations on Newspapers.com. I apologize for the numerous inconveniences with the article I was in the process of correcting them, and it's not easy due to the length of his career and that Winters is a unique character all over the place, furthermore as of yet many of the stage shows aren't even in yet, I started them the day he died... For the records Winters started his career and studies at 12. I can put the agent spotting him in early life as well. Regarding his personal life one need to read his biography (which I will purchase shortly). All that I am aware is that all that is documented is his friendship with Alice Cooper and matching him with his wife, and that he was romantically involved with Linda Lovelace (I may be wrong about this). I also believe that TCM is now an acceptable citation, I started the conversation Reliable sources/Noticeboard. ThanksFilmman3000 (talk) 19:43, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - unreferenced material needs to be referenced.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It seems that a legitimate effort was ongoing to correct what the user above mentioned. And this effort is still ongoing HeavyMetalTheMovie (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose currently seeing 27 [citation needed] tags. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:20, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Quick comment The citations are down to 16 and the first 26 years of his career are covered. The subject had a lengthy career so 16 citations are like 5 five on another. I am still stumbling on stuff he got involved but would be hard work to add on short notice, mostly stage shows to be honest. Most of what need to be cited are Awards related to independent films he made and credits for projects which are either over 20 years old or obscure. Now its not a case where the subject need the extra credit to prove himself. Please reconsider.Filmman3000 (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jean, Grand Duke of Luxembourg

Nominator's comments: Ref issues and yellow tags. Sherenk1 (talk) 07:15, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Once all issues sorted out, perhaps propose a blurb. This guy was like, local version of king for 36 years. Kingsif (talk) 13:35, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment His titles and honors need references. The rest of the article is probably satisfactory for RD. As he abdicated a long time ago this is not ITNR and I don't think his importance justifies a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose inadequately referenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose as the titles and honors section needs referencing. Capitalistroadster (talk) 00:41, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Heather Harper

Nominator's comments: Internationally known soprano from Belfast, famous for stepping in for the world premiere of Britten's War Requiem, Grammy for recordings. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 22:30, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting comment. I was coming here to comment that it needed some more sources, but hopefully everything should be in the Guardian obituary. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Lê Đức Anh

Nominator's comments: Former head of state, helped defeat the Khmer Rouge. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 11:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose tagged for inadequate inline references. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2019 Luzon earthquake

 --- Coffeeandcrumbs 07:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Was going to nominate it myself. Article looks decent enough. Sherenk1 (talk) 07:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Seems good to go. And for ITN.BabbaQ (talk) 10:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - Not significant. Low death toll and magnitude Rockin 12:05, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support News sources are reporting this, and the article is of high enough quality. --Jayron32 12:09, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Altblurb to note two major quakes so far have been reported in the same. --Masem (t) 17:20, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I need to redact that. Apparently the second quake is not connected to the first one despite being in the same region and <24 hr later. I'm not seeing any deaths/injuries tied to the Visayas one, yet, so I wouldn't combined them. --Masem (t) 17:31, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think it might still be better. There have been 421 aftershocks. I have a sinking feeling there will be more.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 17:36, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • As long as those are the Luzon quake aftershocks, then that's fine. I had heard about the Visayas quake, but now that I know its not connected, that should be kept separate (and right now, 0 deaths == not an ITN thing). --Masem (t) 17:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Masem: Do you support posting now? I think the article is ready. The original blurb is fine by me. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:06, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Quality is good. --Masem (t) 05:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support notable and article is well cited. Marked as ready. -Zanhe (talk) 05:58, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 11:17, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Julio César Toresani

Nominator's comments: Argentinian football soccer player and manager. Played for three of the biggest teams in Argentina. He was depressed and committed suicide. Most of news about his death are in Spanish. --SirEdimon (talk) 04:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support it's not going to win any awards but it's just about ok. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Seems at least to need some referencing work. There seems to be no source at all for all the results in the infobox, and many teams mentioned there that aren't in the text, but I can't see how to tag that. I've tagged a few others that seem to be missing but I don't read Spanish so they might well be in the existing sources. Espresso Addict (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Espresso Addict I fixed all the ref issues and added a short summary of his career as a footballer.--SirEdimon (talk) 06:41, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • @SirEdimon: Thanks, that's much improved, but (unless I'm missing something) you still seem to need sources for the infobox stats on Senior career. Espresso Addict (talk) 11:36, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Espresso Addict Here. I included in the article.--SirEdimon (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • Unfortunately that doesn't look to be the source of the data; the club appearances are bundled, and the goals scored under Colón de Santa Fe are different. Perhaps someone who knows more about football than I do could help out? Espresso Addict (talk) 22:11, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
          • Espresso Addict They are different because they are shown in different ways. The source divides the appearances by teams while in the article the appearances are divided by time periods. For example, for Unión Santa Fé the source says 89 caps and 13 goals because it's covering his two periods at the team (1986-1989 and 1991). If you sum the numbers in the article, 56 apps (in 1986-1989) + 33 apps (for 1991) you gonna see that they match. For Cólon, the sources say 85 apps (for three periods of time: 1995-1996 / 1999-2000 / 2002-2003). If you sum the number of apps for Cólon shown in the article, you gonna see that they match exactly with what the sources say.--SirEdimon (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
            • I summed them all. The stat I mentioned did not add up. Possibly I made a mistake; I don't speak any Spanish and I don't follow any form of sport. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:53, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
              • Espresso Addict Let's see if I can help you. In the source, the "PJ" (partidas jugadas) is correspondent to the "apps" (appearances) in the article. The "Goles" is equal to "Gls" (Goals) in the article. The article says that, with Unión de Santa Fe, Toresani played 56 matches for the team between 1986 and 1989, scoring 7 goals and then, he again played for the Unión in the 1990/1991 season appearing in 33 matches and scoring 6 goals. The source says that Toresani played 89 matches for Unión scoring 13 goals in total. It means, all the matches he played and all the goals he scored for Union at the two periods of time he played for the team. If you sum, 56+33=89 apps, and 7+6=13 goals. The article says that, with Cólon, Toresani played 30 matches at the 1995/1996 season. Then, he played 25 matches at the 1999/2000 season and finally, Toresani played 30 matches at the season 2002/2003. The source says that he played 85 matches in total for Cólon in the three periods of the time which he was with the team. Then, if you sum 30+25+30=85. Understand?--SirEdimon (talk) 04:32, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                • I'm not an infant. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:58, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I didn't mean that. I meant to help, but I don't know how.--SirEdimon (talk) 05:03, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Ah, I see, you've fixed the error now. Excellent, thanks. The totals look to match up now. Although, being very pedantic, the individual stints at each club are still not sourced. @The Rambling Man: should be up soon, perhaps he could recheck and see if he thinks the stats sourcing is now adequate. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                      • As the individual stints aren't verifiable, they could be totalised per the source. Then there's no issue. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Billy McNeill

Nominator's comments: Scottish Football Hall of Fame member; record holder of most appearances for Celtic; captained the Celtic team that won the 1966–67 European Cup. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:17, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Oppose Support Went through it and several statements need referenced. Given iconic nature among Celtic fans am sure this will be done quickly.

Look fine now, nothing especially contentious I can see.yorkshiresky (talk) 09:56, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted --Jayron32 16:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Wu Yili

Nominator's comments: Death was reported on April 21. Zanhe (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as usual, good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I have not checked the Chinese-language sourcing. Couple of sources needed, in particular a more reliable statement for the idea that she was one of the world's oldest pianists at 87. (In my experience it is relatively common for pianists to continue into their eighties.) Some features of the personal life could be expanded, eg when did she marry (her husband suddenly comes out of nowhere), did she have children. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:37, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Espresso Addict: I've added the source for "Elaine Yi-Li Wu" (it's the name printed on the cover of her album). I've removed "one of the world's oldest pianists", that's what the source says but not essential to the article. It's not really wrong though, as "one of" makes the statement conveniently vague. The husband did not pop out of nowhere: it's clearly stated that he was the lead violinist of her orchestra, where they presumably met. None of the sources I've found mention any children of hers, but do not say she's childless either, so there's nothing I can add about that. And I'm not aware of any ITN rules that require such detailed information. Many RD articles, including Hansjörg Auer that you recently nominated and posted, have little or no information about their families. -Zanhe (talk) 08:08, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanhe: I'm one of the world's oldest pianists, for some sense of "old" and "pianist". ITN still requires "a minimally comprehensive overview of the subject, not omitting any major items", though this has been pushed under the carpet for some RDs of late. I believe Auer to have been unmarried because English-language sources did not mention any spouse, including some of the "personal account" variety that one would expect to end with a note about the grieving spouse, if there were one. There was some information about his mother surviving him, but that did not seem encyclopedic.

I'll take another look at Wu with a view to posting when I've gone through the enormous list of pings I got up to. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanhe: ETA. I realise that I did indeed miss the first mention of Wu's husband. Apologies, I was tired and trying to get through assessing this nomination before retiring. Thanks for adding the material on the Cultural Revolution. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:43, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Espresso Addict: No worries, and thank you for adding the info about her work on Guangdong music. -Zanhe (talk) 01:09, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:53, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Hannelore Elsner

Nominator's comments: German actress, a national institution with a career of 50 years, late (2000) international recognition. Article was a stub. There could be more, but on a funeral day in real life, and with another woman to cover, this is it for now. The list of films (which I found and left) could possibly be shortened. Help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support a dn needs resolving in (currently) ref 1, but otherwise this is satis. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: What's a dn? Ref 1 looks ok now. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

((dn)). The Rambling Man (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tagesschau went to a disambiguation page. I was so sure that was a primary topic, - well. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support seems well-referenced, and although she was probably internationally not as well-known as Bruno Ganz, she was one of Germany's most familiar actresses with a continuing presence until her death. --Clibenfoart (talk) 20:33, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Looking good, @Gerda Arendt:, but I'd like a source for her birthname of Elstner (or hide this text in lead & infobox) before posting. (There's also another minor sourcing issue tagged that need not hold up posting, imo.) Espresso Addict (talk) 21:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Birth name and marriages sourced. More obits over night, - anybody welcome to add. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Not seeing much in English; I'll take another look this evening. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you expect in English when all her films were in German? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian usually covers European film. They had good coverage of Agnès Varda, as I recall. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:03, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - good work. Mjroots (talk) 18:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Polly Higgins

Nominator's comments: Scottish lawyer, and pioneer of the ecocide recognition movement, dies at age 50. Article has sourcing problems. Davey2116 (talk) 05:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose until references are added for claims in this BLP. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Support good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:29, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. I've expanded and referenced, though I've only been able to find her organisation/personal site/PR material to support the honorary degree/professorship. That could perhaps be removed if necessary. Pinging @The Rambling Man: to take another look. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Comprehensive bio, well referenced. JennyOz (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Marking Ready. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted Stephen 22:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: David Lama

(Posted) 2019 Ukrainian presidential election

Articles: Volodymyr Zelensky (talk · history · tag) and 2019 Ukrainian presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Volodymyr Zelensky wins the Ukrainian presidential election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Comedian Volodymyr Zelensky wins the Ukrainian presidential election by a wide margin.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Political newcomer Volodymyr Zelensky, known for playing a comical president on TV, wins the Ukrainian presidential election.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Volodymyr Zelensky (pictured) wins the Ukrainian presidential election.
News source(s): BBC, AFP, Reuters, dpa, AP
Credits:

• Nominated by Funcrunch (talk · give credit)
• Created by Ehlla (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk · give credit)

One or both nominated events are 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: Open to suggestions on the blurb (this is my first ITN nomination). Funcrunch (talk) 22:01, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I've slightly copyedited the blurb per standard practice. Brandmeister^talk 22:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW I included the "political newcomer" bit in my suggested blurb because that seems to be what is most newsworthy. (Not only a newcomer, but a comedian known for playing the part on TV that he's now more or less replicating in real life.) Funcrunch (talk) 22:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Altblurb – Of five RS sources, one, AFP, declares Zelensky victor outright, while four say he's won "a landslide" but hedge with references to exit polls. AFP says he drew 73 percent to Poroshenko's 25.5 percent. (Four sources added above.) – Sca (talk) 22:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support not altblurb which is loaded like a tabloid, we're here to report facts, not spray journalese all over the place, how disgusting. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

• Comment – (a) "A wide margin" is not sensationalism at all. (b) All RS sources above – none of which is a tabloid – use more effusive terminology: "Wins presidency by landslide" (BBC), "Appears headed for landslide victory" (AP), "wins Ukrainian presidential race by landslide" (Reuters), "becomes president-elect in landslide win" (AFP), "drubs Poroshenko" (dpa).
  Regarding the snide comment, "Spray journalese all over the place, how disgusting," I'm getting tired of these kinds of disparaging, belittling comments, which violate WP:CIV and WP:AGF, among others. Please desist once and for all. – Sca (talk) 23:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  You're not making any sense. I commented on the content not the commentator. I don't even know who constructed the journalistic alt, nor does it matter. Give the threats a rest, boring. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support yes, this is an okay thing to happen. Kingsif (talk) 23:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak oppose. The filmography and TV appearances sections seem to be completely unreferenced. Support alt3 is these issues are fixed. Capitalistroadster (talk) 23:31, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Shouldn't the election article be the target here? ITN/R is for the election, not the candidate. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support original blurb. A comedian with no political experience winning a presidential election is funny, but I don't think it's necessary to highlight. ZettaComposer (talk) 00:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support original blurb The extra details in the other proposed blurbs are not consistent with our normal practice here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]