This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared.
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.
Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o
Kenyan writer and activist Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o(pictured) dies at the age of 87.
Flooding submerges the town of Mokwa, Nigeria, leaving more than 200 people dead.
Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.
Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.
Russia and Ukraine hold further negotiations in Istanbul, Turkey, resulting in an agreement for a prisoner of warexchange. Officials confirm that all sick and severely wounded prisoners of war, along with those younger than 25, will be exchanged. Russia and Ukraine also exchanged ceasefire proposals during the negotiations. (BBC)
At least 31 Palestinians are killed and 170 others are injured while thousands of people went to receive aid from an American-funded humanitarian aid distribution centre in Gaza City, Gaza Strip. Israel strongly denies its responsibility and releases drone footage showing armed, masked men firing at civilians attempting to collect humanitarian aid. (AP)(BBC News)
Nationwide elections are held to elect over 2,700 members of the Mexicanjudiciary branch in the first ever judicial election in the country's history. (Reuters)
Nominator's comments: It is notable, but it might be too regional. Still it has implications bigger than banglam as a legal Islamist party in light of Syria in the last 6 months and the general rise of legal Islamism that was once banned for violence. Let's see what consnsus suggests. Sportsnut24 (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is there any other sources other than Gulf or South Asian media outlets? On that point, the references should include some indication of the location of the source. It would be nice to have some wider perspective. Eg., which "Daily Star"? There are hundreds. On the surface this sounds significant, and even concerning. But when you did into the target article, the party previously had status for much of the nation's history, so not ground breaking (from a very shallow examination). Nfitz (talk) 22:12, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Oppose as of my last check, this had 1,036 characters of prose, with 1,500 the limit for a stub. As per the short length, it jumps from a lengthy lead (presumably the page as it was before) and then another section for the death. I'm sure there will be more sources on his life and career, given the interest that many outlets have in Native American representation in the media. Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that it's still too stubby. Setting "article updated" to "no" for now. We are starting to get some better-quality sources reporting on his death: NBC, IGN, Forbes, San Antonio local news though they more or less only contain information that can already be found in the article. Hopefully you're right and we get sources useful for expanding the page in the near future. Vanilla Wizard 💙18:33, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changing my vote to Support. Article surpasses 1,500 characters and has a clear structure. Not a GA quality, but that's not what we're asking for. Unknown Temptation (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Early release of the exit poll showing the result were too close to call. However, as the counting continues, it become clear who is elected as the President of Poland, given that the current vote count is 76%. I'm also not sure if this is ITNR or not, so anyone feel free for updating the blurb. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This isn't an ITN/R item. Note that WP:ITNR states Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at List of current heads of state and government except when that change was already posted as part of a general election., and Poland is clearly a country where the executive power is administered by the prime minister.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:40, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Except in Poland the President has veto power over legislation, and Prime Minister Tusk doesn’t have a required supermajority of 60% to override a veto. Here’s the BBC source on that fact. The Polish Presidency is a bit more than ceremonial, and add the surprising nature of Nawrocki’s close victory, the impact this will have on EU and NATO, and the headline coverage the election has worldwide, and you have a no-brainer ITN blurb, ITN/R or not… in my view. Jusdafax (talk) 09:05, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ITNR links to List of current heads of state and government where only the prime minister of Poland is coloured in green, which indicates that the leader constitutionally administers the executive of their respective state/government. If you think there's a mistake and you have evidence to support it, you're encouraged to correct the list. This cannot be considered ITN/R until the list is corrected or another article that states otherwise is linked from WP:ITN/R.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:40, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There should be a big "citation needed" tag on the whole color coding in that list. The president of France is a de facto executive leader whose office lacks de jure constitutional power? What kind of drivel is this? — Kpalion(talk)15:49, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then, you should propose to change the wording on WP:ITNR and remove the link to that list. Anyway, this isn’t procedurally an ITN/R item until that happens.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:55, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Although Poland is a semi-presidential republic, it is not comparable to the French system and would be considered a "weak" semi-presidential model. In France, the model is more strong and dualistic, and, to make a notable difference, while the French president presides over the government during periods of cohabitation, the Polish president cannot do so. Frankly, I don't consider it to be ITNR. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Does not matter whether it is ITN/R or not, but this presidential election result may have a significant impact either in Poland, European Union, or internationally (IMO it is more qualified as ITNR than regular ITN). In meantime, we can expect a more significant deadlock between the President from PiS and Donald Tusk's government from the opposiite party (Civic Platform) than we seen currently, especially regarding controversial laws related to the EU. Remember, the President can veto any legislation that didn't appease him/his party. Regarding the blurb, i'm nominate Altblurb to be posted. 2404:8000:1037:587:E085:E954:9F16:91E7 (talk) 09:31, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Might be a sobering result to Brussels, and the tight race in addition makes it highly worthy of posting. Added Altblurb2 to give a bit more information. Might also suggest the picture in the thumbnail Alternative picture as an alternative picture. Looks more neutral and cleaner, making it visually more appealing in my eyes. TheRoyalOne06 (talk) 16:32, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support it can be confusing just how political each president in Europe is, but I believe this is a major event, if we see sources. They are mentioning how the president is of a different party to the prime minister and government, and can veto the more liberal and pro-EU policies of the latter. BBC: "As Poland's new president, Nawrocki is likely to continue to use his presidential power of veto to block Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk's pro-EU programme". [2] Al Jazeera: "Nawrocki has been deeply critical of the Tusk administration. The president has the ability to veto legislation and influence military and foreign policy decisions." [3] To use one example, the president of Ireland wouldn't be able to do that. [4]Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:39, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support irrespective of ITNR status. The coverage it's getting in international news is testimony to that. It also already had an additional impact on Poland itself, with PM Tusk announcing a vote of confidence in the parliament. Article looks very complete now. Would prefer atlblurb1 for brevity. Khuft (talk) 20:51, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Important and major event for multiple reasons: his victory, supported by Trump, has been described as another signal of growing support for right-wing governments in the E.U.; his presidency, due to Poland's significant military role on NATO's Eastern Flank and his role as commander in chief of the Polish Armed Forces, will have a direct impact on the fraught geopolitical situation in the region, possibly as a continuation of Duda's policies, though his stance on Ukraine is markedly different and he is openly opposed to Ukraine joining NATO; in terms of Polish politics, Nawrocki's narrow but decisive victory is already perceived as a looming threat for the current governing coalition going into 2027. Per Exemplum22:04, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Closed) Ongoing: Timeline of the Gaza war (16 May 2025 – present)
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.
Nominator's comments: I think it is hypocritical that the timeline article exists, yet is not there, yet for Ukraina and Sudan is. I am not saying hello, I am not accusing you not to do it, and I think the quickest way is to add it onto the page. Literally created this acc to complain (talk) 20:34, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the creator of this nomination has already been indefinitely banned for impersonation - their user page and talk page were direct copies of other users'. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:30, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: She was one of the lead soviet dissidents amongst the Crimean Tatars, who even got to meet President Ronald Reagan for her actions on the rights of her people as herself a victim of the deportation during her childhood. Her life is emblematic of an interesting if starting to be forgotten civil rights activism era. Plus actuality bonus points given this is Crimea we're talking about. 142.170.60.244 (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: The strategic bomber fleet of a superpower like the old Soviet Union was part of the nuclear triad, and Ukraine likely just destroyed/disabled 1/3 of this triad leg. These bombers are expensive (I have seen the damage for this attack estimated at $7 billion), Russia will struggle to replace them. I have seen the (not unreasonable) claim that this surprise attack did Pearl Harbor level damage to Russia's airforce. And it was done by 100+ FPV drones, remote controlled and likely costing less than $10'000 each, hitting 1'000s of km from Ukraine. This unprecedented attack is going into the history books of warfare. Thue (talk) 08:50, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per 83.187.182.13. There's a fair few attacks going on in the Russia-Ukraine war right now, and this one doesn't seem to be particularly standout in long-term significance. Covered by ongoing. — Amakuru (talk) 11:48, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What goes on at other wikis is irrelevant to this wiki; our standards are completely different. — EF514:13, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This seems strategically significant in showing the power of cheap drones to strike over distances of thousands of miles. Hugely expensive manned aircraft like the B-21 and F-47 are looking increasingly like battleships in the 20th century -- too expensive and vulnerable. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:42, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Besides the concerns that this is covered by ongoing, it seems like the claim of 34% of the fleet destroyed is a Ukrainian claim and it has not been independently verified by outside sources. Natg 19 (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While we don't know if it is exactly 34%, there is plenty of video online showing a lot of Russian bombers burning. So it is a significant number. Thue (talk) 18:16, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait or oppose; this seems to have more prominence than the daily war reports, but the boldest Ukrainian claims are not verified yet by any other source. This doesn't seem to have impacted the ongoing peace talks. The verified claims aren't enough to justify a blurb in addition to the Ongoing. 217.180.228.155 (talk) 19:19, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle - this will reverberate beyond the Russia-Ukraine war as countries from US to China will scramble to better protect their bomber fleets. Also: the Russian nuclear triad was impacted. Saying this is just standard, ongoing warfare is downplaying the significance of this. All that being said: Wait until we have more precise information on the actual damage (e.g. via satellite photos). Blurb needs to be reworded too. Khuft (talk) 21:09, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
strong oppose it's a battle in a war with one hyper-patisan side's mer claim. Also Pak shootig down indian jets was not posted (and it is confirmed by both sides and China).Sportsnut24 (talk) 21:28, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's certainly significant, but I think ongoing is good enough. I'm not sure if it's even as significant as the recent accelerating Russian advanced through Ukraine. If that accelerates and it looks like Ukraine may fall, then I'd support. Nfitz (talk) 22:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An explosion causes a bridge to collapse onto a passenger train with 379 occupants in Bryansk Oblast, Russia, killing at least seven and injuring 70 others, one seriously, including three children. The incident is being probed as an act of terrorism. (BBC)
More than 60 United Nations offices and agencies are requested to propose staff cuts of 20% by mid-June due to a funding shortfall, affecting around 14,000 positions. This includes staff from humanitarian offices, agencies supporting refugees, and other critical sectors. (AP)
Disasters and accidents
Twenty-two people are killed, including athletes, coaches and officials, and several others are seriously injured in a road accident as people returned from the National Sports Festival in Kano State, Nigeria. (CNN)
Thirteen people are injured, including one critically, when a 93-year-old man falls ill and drives into a restaurant terrace in Narbonne, Occitanie, France. (Midi Libre)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Comment The article needs significant work before posting, a post-match section needs to be added while expansion is required for the route to the final and pre-match. The background section is also largely unsoured. S.A. Julio (talk) 21:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article not ready Some section is lacking in content. Conditional strong support once article is ready.INeedSupport:321:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is certainly ITN-worthy, but I agree with others that the article is not yet ready.Some section is lacking in content. Jeong seolah (talk) 05:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Always loves the fact Abcmaxx always WP:IDHT, adds the final score of the match, and some stupid trivia (if applicable) about the match instead of suggesting the usual boring blurb formula we use for such events. Howard the Duck (talk) 22:35, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is the score not relevant or what is your point? You're always free to add an altblurb, I've added the most standard blurb here possible. I would say 5–0 in a CL final is highly unusual. Theres no rule saying I have to propose a blurb to your liking, but thanks for the unconstructive criticism. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:12, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We have posted the UCL for a decade now without the score. You have not added "the most standard blurb here possible". Suggesting, as the nominator of a blurb that will never, ever be used lengthens discussion. I hope this puts to end your practice. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:23, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a WP:ITNSPORTSBLURB I'm not aware of? Arguably the score is the most important aspect of a sports match surely Abcmaxx (talk) 15:09, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The aspect of the score that is the result is important, and is noted. This is nothing unique to sports. US presidential elections have never been posted with electoral college scores, even though that is definitely part of the coverage. I had half a recollection that Super Bowl LI was posted with the fact that it was the first to go to overtime, but I was wrong, it was posted with the score for 44 minutes. [5]Unknown Temptation (talk) 16:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The women's final article requires significant expansion before posting. If someone's willing to do it then great, otherwise it shouldn't prevent the men's final from being posted, which is ITN/R. S.A. Julio (talk) 18:37, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@History6042: There's no background, pre-match or post-match sections, at least some additional prose should be added before posting. The result was quite an upset, it would be nice if this were explained in the article. S.A. Julio (talk) 09:24, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready - men's final has three citation needed sections, and there aren't nearly enough refs in the summary section currently. — Amakuru (talk) 16:18, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(ready??) Josep-Lluís Serrano Pentinat becomes new Andorran co-prince
Support A change in the position of the co-prince of Andorra is rare, and this change roughly occurs every two to three decades. CastleFort1 (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This probably should not be ITNR, as the co-prince is not the position that administers the executive of the govt per our table. Masem (t) 15:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The 2 princes are heads of state (1278 treaty Bishop of Urgell and Count of Foix then Count of Foix became King of France 1589 so inherited by French Crown then French Presidency) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The change in heads of state in systems where this figure does not have executive powers, such as the case of Andorra as the Co-Prince Episcopal refers to, is not ITNR. However, given that the last time such a succession occurred was 22 years ago and is not common (but ordinary), it might be ITN-interesting. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - As with other collective heads of state, such as in Switzerland and San Marino, I understand some editors' caution in posting these stories. But changes of head of state are by and large extremely significant, and are arguably one of the most significant peaceful events in small nations like Andorra. And there are very few ecclesiastical ehads of state left, so this story is unusual in that respect. It's already noted above how rarely the episcopal co-prince changes; and when the secular co-prince changes, we usually just bill that as the presidency of the French Republic. GenevieveDEon (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For example, the lead says "He became Spain's youngest bishop." This claim does not appear in the article's body and it is not sourced. And it appears that there have been other, younger bishops such as Xavier Novell. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support head of state, and Andorra is quirky and interesting. I think highlight the bishop aspect, although this is potentially getting into DYK territory. Secretlondon (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Balochistan Liberation Army briefly seizes control of a high-security area in Sorab in southwestern Pakistan, killing a government official and looting a bank before fleeing. (AP)
The death toll from heavy flooding that submerged the market town of Mokwa in Niger State, Nigeria, on Wednesday, rises to at least 117. Thousands of homes have been destroyed and a nearby dam collapsed. (Al Jazeera)(Sky News)(DW)
At least 17 people are killed, at least twelve others are injured, including six seriously, and eight people are missing when a stone quarry collapses in Cirebon, West Java, Indonesia. (AP)(CTV News)
U.S. president Donald Trump accuses China of violating the temporal suspension of tariffs accorded two weeks ago, while China accuses Trump of discriminatory restrictions against the country. (BBC News)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: French scientist known as the “father” of the abortion pill. Article needs a little more referencing but overall in good shape. Innisfree987 (talk) 05:58, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support Even with high casualties and is pretty notable. Seems to be mostly well cited. BoomBoxBuddy (talk) 3:05, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
Support per nom and BoomBoxBuddy. Unusually high casualties, with evidence of widespread global coverage. I think the article has also been sufficiently improved by the nominator to meet our minimum standards. FlipandFlopped㋡16:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. This event is clearly notable due to the high number of casualties and widespread media coverage. The article seems well-referenced and appropriate for the "In the News" section. LookatmiWiki (talk) 2 June 2025 (UTC)
South Korea’s central bank cuts its key interest rate by a quarter percentage point to 2.5%, marking its fourth cut since October, and sharply lowered its 2025 growth forecast to 0.8%, nearly halving the previous projection of 1.5% announced in February after a monetary policy meeting. Share prices rise following the report, with the Kospi gaining 1.7%. (AP)
The health ministry of Khartoum State in Sudan reports a cholera outbreak in the state, with 2,119 cases and 242 deaths in the past week and this week, including 70 in the last two days. (News Central TV)
A court in Germany rejects a lawsuit filed by a Peruvian farmer against German energy firm RWE. Saúl Luciano Lliuya alleged that the firm's global emissions contributed to the melting of glaciers in Peru, threatening his hometown of Huaraz with flooding. (BBC News)
A court in Argentina nullifies the ongoing trial of Diego Maradona's former medical personnel accused of malpractice following the removal of one of the trial's judges for alleged lack of impartiality. (CNN)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Designer of the Jarvik Hearts. All statements are cited to reliable source at first glance. RIP. Hugoaway (talk) 14:16, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American harpist, influential teacher in Bloomington for decades, active in organizations around the harp. Article was there but references missing. More detail possible. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Oppose As much as I love M*A*S*H, this article has way too many unsourced statements for the main page. Ping me if this issue gets fixed, because I would be happy to support once that happens. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:13, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not Ready for the usual reason. I was going to nominate this last night, but when I looked at the article I realized it's in really rough shape as far as referencing goes. There are entire sections w/o any sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:54, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
A few citations needed, and hopefully those one-sentence "Military" and "Private sector" subsections can be expanded or combined. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Obviously a triple crown is a de facto big deal in any sport, but this one has come as quite the development in the ongoing battle for dominance in darts between 30 year old Luke Humphries (world number one) and 18 year old Luke Littler (current world champion). With the latter having been favourite to win the Premier League this year after setting numerous tournament records including his 45 point winning total, Humphries trailed in a distant second (34 points), but still far ahead of the rest of the field (26 amd below). All other players at this elite world level, including multiple former world champions and one of the other three Triple Crown winners, are currently, and perhaps for a very long time yet, frankly just spectators to this Lukeopoly. 2A02:C7C:DA04:1200:F642:9179:DA3A:29EA (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The 'Triple Crown' isn't a thing in Darts. I don't know if the PDC are trying to market it as such, but there are several other tournaments which are considered to be more prestigious that the PL, which is a glorified exbo with only a few invited participants. Effy Midwinter (talk) 00:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sports things that aren't listed at ITNR doesn't mean that an ITNC can still be discussed, but the importance has to stand on its own. The fact we have an article on the triple crown for darts suggests the achievement is notable. Masem (t) 15:13, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If a sporting event isn't ITNR, it's probably not ITN-worthy. And having an article doesn't mean it deserves it either. At no point have I said that it cannot be discussed. Humphries is the "fourth" player to win the Triple Crown, not even the first; darts is a very minority sport, and this achievement has barely received any coverage from the international sports press. Perhaps that's appropriate for DYK, but nothing more. _-_Alsor (talk) 17:16, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
A Cambodiansoldier is killed in an exchange of fire with a Thaisoldier. Cambodia initially said that the Thai soldier opened fire, but Thailand denied this citing a misunderstanding when the Cambodian soldier crossed the border during a routine operation. (AP)
A boat carrying over 100 migrants capsizes within reach of the shores of the El Hierro island in the SpanishCanary Islands. Four women and three girls are found drowned, while a medical helicopter evacuates two other children in critical condition to a nearby hospital. (AP)
Five people are killed, including the perpetrator, and four others are injured, including one critically, when a drunk 17-year-old goes on a mass stabbing rampage before killing himself in an arson attack at a house during a birthday party in Irkutsk, Irkutsk Oblast, Russia. (The Moscow Times)
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio says his department will start revoking visas for Chinese students and increase scrutiny on all future visa applications from China and Hong Kong. (Associated Press)
In sumo, Ōnosato Daiki is promoted and becomes the sport's 75th yokozuna. Ōnosato reached the highest rank of yokozuna faster than anyone in the modern history of sumo, achieving the promotion in 13 tournaments and never posting a losing record during a tournament. (Kyodo News)
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.
Nominator's comments: Trophy win on its own is not significant, but the context of being the first team ever to win all UEFA European club competitions makes it a worthy ITN candidate. Others can suggest alternative blurbs. Heatrave (talk) 21:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the blurb makes it seem like more of an achievement than it is, it’s the third tier of European football, most top teams want to avoid it. Seems more like a novelty than an achievement. Interesting but maybe not ITN worthy Kowal2701 (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably because Real Madrid and Bayern Munich will never finish low enough in their domestic leagues to even play in the Conference League. This isn't the flex that people think it is. Unknown Temptation (talk) 08:11, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong SupportAlternative blurb cheers to Chelsea!! They're first club in history to win every European major honour. Congratulations CFCQalasQalas (talk) 01:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose largely per Masem, not seeing any evidence that this particular combination of achievements has much standalone enduring notability, and the nomination statement even concedes that the Trophy win on its own is not significant. According to NYT/The Athletic, this tournament has only been around four years (also meaning this combination of achievements has only been possible in the last four years), which is far less than what is typically seen of those at WP:ITNR#Sports. Left guide (talk) 02:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If Jaga or Djurgården had won it it would have been a major achievement. But a middling Super League Premier League team against an average La Liga side where the sides from the top 5 leagues already hover up all the money and best players, including the Champions League and Europa League, this third-tier cup is even less notable than the Intertoto at this point. Chelsea winning a new cup that's added every few years or so is no more than trivia. Abcmaxx (talk) 05:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But this is an ever growing list of irrelevant cups, and Chelsea won most of their trophies whilst being bankrolled by a very shady Russian billionaire. They only won this particular cup because it was a cup designed to bridge the gap between the top leagues and give some other clubs from other nations a chance, such as NK Celje for example. The competition was intentionally weaker, and Chelsea's league position shows that this season they would have only been able to compete for lesser trophies. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is not a new achievement. Four clubs (Juventus, Manchester United, Ajax, and Bayern Munich) have won all three previous iterations of the tournaments (European Cup/Champions League, UEFA Cup, UEFA Cup Winners' Cup). Our article is misleading here, because effectively the Conference League is a rebranding of the Cup-winners Cup. The Europa Conference League has only existed for four years (and one could argue that the Europa League has as well, though that was a rebranding). Indeed, there can't be that many teams that have even played in all three current tournaments. Black Kite (talk)08:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Europe's third-tier football competition, for clubs who finished 6th or 7th in their domestic leagues, or were eliminated in qualifiers for bigger competitions. I just saw that Chelsea's prize money for this whole tournament was only marginally more than Slovan Bratislava, who lost all eight of their games in the Champions League. So not even UEFA see this as a big deal. Looking at how mediocre you have to be to even get into this competition, I'm sorry but this achievement is as trivial as Coventry City being the only team to have played in every English league division in history (including Third Division North and South) Unknown Temptation (talk) 08:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The claim that they're the first club with wins in all four major European competitions is factually incorrect. Juventus did the same by winning the UEFA Intertoto Cup in 1999 after they had previously won trophies in the UEFA Champions League, UEFA Cup and UEFA Cup Winners' Cup.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. If we count that one, Valencia have also won trophies in four different European competitions, but I didn't mention it because they've never won the European Champion Clubs' Cup/UEFA Champions League as top-flight European competition.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not a major European competition and the fact that Chelsea is the first club to win all four "major" European trophies is something more appropiate for DYK than ITN. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Haven't had a chance to assess on notability, but oppose on quality - much of the "Awards and honours" section is uncited, and some of the "Publications" section is as well. TheKip(contribs)20:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose rd on sourcing and tags. I can squint between the lines and see why there's interest in a blurb but I strongly recommend having one clear section of the article to gather the various isolated statements about importance into one place in the article so the reader can clearly see that importance without squinting. Masem (t) 21:17, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb in terms of notability. Titanic figure in African literature, in particular due to his promotion of writing in local languages. Quality may need a final polish, but article overall looks good. Khuft (talk) 21:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD Unsure if the African figure has an important figure similar to President or other head of state regarding his/her death, but the posting as RD makes it more necessary for me. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 21:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'The African figure'? 'his/her death'? Try actually reading the article before commenting, so that you are aware of basic facts like the subject's name and gender. GenevieveDEon (talk) 22:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support blurb I've never heard of this person before but based on the article he appears decently important. The article is fully cited, although it is a bit short for a blurb biography. --SpectralIon02:39, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb He is a Level 4 vital article, which means that he is very important by community consensus. I think that he is important enough to blurb. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:50, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Article is clearly influential in his field, the article reflects his impact on literature and is in good shape (albeit the 4 cn tags). --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb The claim in the opening paragraph of the article, that he was the greatest East African novelist ever, appears to check out. As such, despite his lack of a Nobel Prize in Literature, he probably deserves a blurb. NorthernFalcon (talk) 05:46, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just would like to see the article give significant expansion to this. A one sentence summary trying to indicating why they are a major figure is not really a sign of a quality article for a blurb. Masem (t) 12:04, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb At the top of his field and clearly had a major impact. Also a chance for us to spotlight a major public figure from Africa and counteract systemic bias. FlipandFlopped㋡15:14, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"an elderly person dying" is probably not much of a headline. But this particular death, as often when such crude remarks are made here, was not that of just "an elderly person". ---Sluzzelintalk01:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remember that ITN is not about reporting the news, but featuring quality articles that happen to be in the news. This death made the news, and the article is of representative quality, as well as demonstrating significance as a major figure; all the checkboxes are ticked. Masem (t) 01:30, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support blurb. The Wikipedia article and published obituaries out there make it very clear that he reached the top of the literary field. Ed[talk][OMT]19:57, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment: I came to nominate after updating a bit. Above, I added two names of editors who made this article what it is: fine quality. I also added an obit in English above (because more people will be able to read it than German or Danish). The composer was one of the giants in classical music. His works should have better articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Support - Promotion to yokozuna has for a long time been our standard story for sumo, and one of the only wrestling- or martial-arts related stories we regularly run. It provincial in a similar sense to the 'World' Series, but it's still highly significant. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support 75th Yokozuna of all time. Promotions are extremely rare and this is Japan's national sport. Following up on the World Series analogy there have been 120 World Series champions and only 75 Yokazuna in the last ~250 years. BHC (talk) 18:46, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At least five people are killed, nineteen others are injured and six are reported missing after an explosion at a chemical plant in Gaomi, Shandong, China. (Reuters)
SpaceX's first flight to reuse a Super Heavy Booster ends without achieving its goal, originally planned for Flights 7 and 8, which both failed, while losing the previously retrieved booster. (Reuters)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Death announced 27 May. Needs a few more citations but other than that the article is good. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:30, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
I respect your view, but this is (a) not about Trump (and the coverage is mostly not about him), and (b) not routine. The last time the Monarch gave a speech from the Throne in Canada was 50 years ago, and the last time a King or Queen visited was 2010. Its not a frequent occurrence. TimeEngineer (talk) 09:00, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean about Trump, that's my fault as I mostly consume american news. I nevertheless think that the first clause is a reason enough to oppose. It seems more likely to fall under "huh, that's interesing" rather than "this will have long-term conseuqences". It might make a good DYK though. –DMartin09:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Twice a century for the King of Canada to do this? I'd hardly call that routine. Heck, it's the first time a King has done it - the other two were by the Queen. Nfitz (talk) 22:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose notable? Like any visit by a Head of State to another country, especially if it is by a monarch. Routine? Also, it is one of the functions that HoS should perform. It's not ITN-worthy just because of the latter and if it has anything to do with Trump it's totally irrelevant and just another part of the political drama of his administration's bid to annex Canada. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:26, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The visit is certainly in the news but it's still ongoing and the King opens the Canadian parliament today, which is the main event. Updates to the article are needed as the plans turn into history. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:39, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support, but as blurb because it is basically already over. With respect, many of the oppose rationales are not policy-based, and likely come from editors who are simply associating the visit with Trump as opposed to fully appreciating the once in a lifetime nature of the event. In my view, it surpasses the notability threshold for two reasons: (a) even in spite of the Trump aspect, it is a historic, once in a lifetime type of thing (the last time this happened was in 1977, so claims above that it is 'routine' are objectively incorrect) and (b) it is getting objectively widespread, in depth coverage amongst global reliable sources: from publications in the UK, Australia, the USA, China, France, Germany, I could go on. Very little of this coverage is 100% focused on Trump, and he is not even involved in the event, so WP:NTRUMP does not apply. FlipandFlopped㋡18:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeWP:NTRUMP also applies to any public figure or institution that is influential enough to the point that the press reports their every single movement. Completely non-notable visit. — EF518:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Above, I hyperlinked publications like the New York Times, the South China Morning Post, Le Monde, and Spiegel, who each have indepth reporting on this visit. Do you have evidence to back your claim that they "report on the every single movement" of King Charles III? The opposite seems true to me - many of those outlets rarely report on King Charles's goings-on, but this is so notable that they have made an exception. FlipandFlopped㋡18:49, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Flipandflopped, I'll formulate a response shortly, but I highly suggest you strike the and likely come from Americans who are simply associating the visit with Trump as opposed to fully appreciating the once in a lifetime nature of the event part of your statement. It's completely inappropriate to discount votes because they are of a certain demographic and speculating on the nationality of editors can constitute WP:OUTING. — EF519:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's turn down the temperature a bit. In no conceivable way did I violate WP:OUTING, and I never said anyone's votes should be discounted. I respectfully stated an opinion that the WP:NTRUMP rationales were coming from an overly American perspective, which was not intended to be derogatory at all. FlipandFlopped㋡19:27, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You did not say that WP:NTRUMP rationales were coming from an overly American perspective, you said the editors themselves are Americans who are simply associating the visit with Trump, which is assuming every oppose voter is American and is, as I stated, inappropriate. Thank you for changing it, though. — EF519:38, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A visit of the King of Canada to Canada isn't a foreign visit. For the same reason that Canada doesn't have an embassy in the UK. Nfitz (talk) 22:34, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose as unimportant national-level address. If NTRUMP doesn't apply, then this was not notable to begin with. The relevant essay would be NCHARLES, correct? Departure– (talk) 19:40, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to add that I don't see how this is notable in of itself. The real story here is the opening of the Canadian parliament, but that's not ITNR and a done deal given the election.
To clarify my other reason, I take it that this is getting a lot of coverage due to the context that this is taking place during Trump's second coming, but a lot of the folks I see giving rationales on coverage also reject NTRUMP having any bearing. It's established that it's only an essay, but the underlying truth is still there, and that is that material can be substantially overreported on occasion, and given how this has to do with both the King of England and Donald Trump, this easily is covered by it. Simply put, if Trump was not involved, at least for context, then there would be substantially less coverage and this would likely not have been nominated, let alone posted.
I can't see how this is any more notable than any other "rare" event. Just because something hasn't happened in a while doesn't automatically make it notable. I'm really not seeing how this is notable; Charles made a speech, and that was that. Departure– (talk) 23:10, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such person as the King of England, and there hasn't been since William III died. There is, however, such a person as the King of Canada, and this story is about him. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:51, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The visit has been completed, widely reported and the article updated. Essays are irrelevant per WP:ESSAY, "Essays have no official status and do not speak for the Wikipedia community..." Andrew🐉(talk) 22:53, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not seeing why this deserves a blurb. Heads of state visit other countries all the time, and we almost never post them, so what makes this one so much more important that it deserves to be posted? QuicoleJR (talk) 23:59, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe grounds for a future DYK, but ultimately it’s just a head of state visiting part of their realm. Not remotely newsworthy internationally any more so than if the Danish monarch visited Greenland, the Japanese emperor visited the Ryukyus, or the French President visited Guadeloupe. RPH (talk) 01:12, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support it is a momentous occasion for the country to have the monarch open Parliament as King of Canada - the first King (male sovereign) to do so and only the third time in the country's history; Canada has a long and complicated relationship with the monarchy, and this move is a clear and decisive statement that Canada will be taking a turn away from the "post-national state" towards embracing a nationalist model of "three founding peoples: indigenous, French, and British", as PM Carney indicated in his inaugural speech. Most people are surprised to learn that Canada is a kingdom, this was not the visit of a foreign head of state as some are saying. This is a deciding point in the country's national narrative and evolution, as the previous two throne speeches by Elizabeth were. There is a throne speech at every new Parliament - meaning there have been 45 throne speeches in the country's history, 42 of which were delivered by Governors General. This is not just another royal visit but rather notable because the King is filling a constitutional role rather than merely meeting and greeting. The country is at an inflection point with new separatist movements rising in the West, meanwhile there is a kind of realignment apparently happening in Quebec after decades of separatism there. It is a chance to shine a light on this pivotal moment in the country's history, and there will likely be a "before" and an "after" for this historic constitutional, identitarian, and political moment-Larineso (talk) 05:02, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose un-elected head of state with no de facto power flies over on a tax-funded private jet for a formality and is present only due to a historical anachronism. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:57, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the monarchy neglected this aspect doesn't make it untrue. If anything it shows how little they matter politically given this fact. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:04, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, leaning oppose - There's a lot of misleading commentary about this. It's significant, and I don't want to dismiss it out of hand, but we don't generally report on, say, the State of the Union address. GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This event was highly unusual and very significant for a number of reasons. To quote the Guardian of 29 May....
"This week, however, the modern British monarchy has stood up and demanded to be counted, doing something new and perhaps genuinely consequential."
"No monarch had bothered to make this trip for nearly 50 years."
[The speech had a] "far looser and more personal format than the Westminster version ... allowed the king to speak words that clearly mattered to him, and by which he will be judged."
"The larger point, however, is that this was a willed act by the king. Charles did not have to travel and did not have to make the speech. But he did both, even while continuing to be treated for cancer.....The contrast with his mother is impossible to miss. Elizabeth II’s hallmark throughout her 70-year reign was a studied neutrality on public affairs. She was much praised for it during her lifetime, leading some commentators to assume that neutrality was now a precondition for monarchy’s survival"
"So far, Charles has gotten away with it. Public concern for his own health, and for that of his family, has probably helped him. So has public sympathy over the behaviour of the Sussexes. To criticise Trump is also popular rather than risky. Amid all this, the public has cut Charles enough slack to be more himself. Those who warned that his more committed approach to public affairs could threaten the monarchy and boost republicanism have, at least at this stage, been proved wrong."
"Charles’s role carries risks which, when faced with a less patient public mood or different circumstances, could cause trouble for him and for the monarchy. Assuming that Charles remains in good health for years to come, how might he handle a change of government? If the current feeding frenzy about a Nigel Farage prime ministership really came to pass in 2028-29, Charles could be faced with a government that might embrace a Maga president in Washington, abandon European alliances, dismiss the net zero agenda, and go out of its way to antagonise Scotland and Wales."
In summary, the Government of Canada and the King of Canada together chose to turn what has for decades been a ceremonial and scripted study of constitutional neutrality into an overtly political and personal act in response to Trump's rhetoric. Potentially changing the nature of the monarchy in the United Kingdom forever, even though the UK government (in all likelihood) had zero input into this whole affair; certainly having no powers of veto on grounds of their own national interest.
On the flip side, it *was* just a speech and it *was* basically about Trump (even though he wasn't even mentioned in it).
Hopefully that clears things up for all those above who seem to be wholly misinformed on the importance and significance angles of this event. Or indeed didn't even seem to understand the (admittedly complex) relationship between the British Monarchy and the democratically elected governments of the United Kingdom, Canada, and all their associated nations, provinces and territories.
In short, the unelected monarch King Charles III is still the Head of State of Canada, as ridiculous as that sounds to many people. And rather than shy away from it, the de facto Head of State of the very clearly sovereign democratic country of Canada has decided to lean into this historical anachronism to defend Canada's enduring sovereignty against the equally ridiculous territorial claims of the United States. In the process potentially causing various domestic and international difficulties for the very country in which King Charles III spends most of his time in.
That alone probably elevates this above the usual circus that surrounds Trump. It's certainly a unique reaction to Trump's Presidency, one that no other country can really make use of, except of course the 13 others who have Charles III as their Head of State. 2A02:C7C:DA04:1200:F642:9179:DA3A:29EA (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your post is far too long, but its premise is false anyway. King Charles doesn't carry any political risk apart from abolition of the monarchy. This non-event has been overreported, and going around and giving speeches is one of his core duties, but even then if he couldn't attend for whatever reason or simply didn't feel like it, he doesn't have to; there would be no real consequences either way. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:57, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"King Charles doesn't carry any political risk apart from abolition of the monarchy.". Well yes, that's the point. As is the fact he did bother this time. This was a significant and highly unusual move by both the Canadian government and the current head of a monarchy covering 16 nations. As such it inevitably became a much discussed reaction to one of Trump's most absurd talking points, rather than the non-attended act of bland ceremony it has usually been for nearly the last half century. You clearly don't like what I've just written for whatever reason, but nothing you’ve said in response changes the basic facts of the matter, as reflected by The Guardian, a major UK newspaper. 2A02:C7C:DA08:AB00:6B1A:93AA:7DCA:9B79 (talk) 08:59, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
I don't think EEng meant to be offensive, but was quoting a traditional journalism saying that is common in newsrooms and television studios. Happily, nobody was killed in what seems to be a very bad accident, and because it was an accident with no fatalities I'd oppose the good faith nomination. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:12, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just so. It surely should have been obvious that I didn't mean to be offensive, because had I wanted to be offensive I'd have made a much better job of it. EEng23:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)P.S., Randy: "If they're dead, it's widely read; if just hurt, it lies inert." Sorry, best I could do.[reply]
I am well aware of the common usage of the phrase (although many readers doubtless would not be). I have already said to you that I was sure you meant no offence, but I had hoped that in hindsight you would recognize the incredible bad taste of your attempted joke and reflect on whether it had any place here. Perhaps if you tried to reword it in plain English? Although I seriously doubt anyone here is unaware of the fact that tragic events such as this are considered newsworthy regardless of whether anyone actually died. 2A02:C7C:DA04:1200:F642:9179:DA3A:29EA (talk) 00:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And as I have already said to you, my post was not any kind of "attempted joke", so at long last please put a sock in it. As for the rest, see [11]. EEng04:35, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - If there weren’t an unfathomable number of casualties I would oppose, but the sheer number of injuries is enough to be notable. EF520:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't appear to be a terrorist incident, (thankfully) no deaths; 79 injured is a big number but 30 of those were minor injuries who didn't attend hospital, and the majority of those who did were discharged quickly. If this does get consensus to post, please don't combine it into the football blurb, they're two completely separate issues. Black Kite (talk)08:53, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Black Kite. I would add that we regularly decline to post mass killings of even dozens of people when they do not come from the Anglo world; to post this would be to collapse any sense of consistency and fairness in terms of how we treat the notability of mass casualty incidents. FlipandFlopped㋡15:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I could support this for the dangerous precedent it set regarding the police releasing the ethnicity of suspects to quell misinformation and prevent further race riots. It is also rather obviously a highly unusual event in the UK context, one that raises serious questions about the police's ability to actually prevent a mass casualty vehicular terrorist attack when there is a sufficiently large target area and a sufficiently complex set of countermeasures. If such events are banned or dramatically scaled back as a result, that would be a very big deal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7c:da04:1200:f642:9179:da3a:29ea (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think that the sheer number of injuries makes this notable enough to post. Don't combine it with the football blurb, though, if it does get posted. Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 11:23, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support I wanted to highlight that the GA is form 2011. With special attention to sourcing/content from after 2011, I still think the article looks good and is fit for ITN Czarking0 (talk) 16:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support and marking as ready, article quality is good to go. Not much to add other than what has already been said. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist800001:23, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Joint record 20th title with Manchester United. I posted this as a candidate on 26th April after they won the title, however some argued that it should be posted at conclusion of the season. yorkshiresky (talk) 22:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Conditionally support only if this original blurb also combined with recent incidents regarding Liverpool vehicle. Otherwise, it's a very good article. 182.1.232.170 (talk) 01:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't think we should attempt to shoehorn the collision article into the football blurb just because it happens to be related and has its own article; that could put undue emphasis on it. If the incident alone is significant enough to make it onto ITN on its own merits, then I think a combined blurb would be reasonable. FWIW, it seems that the vast majority of incidents at {{Road incidents in 2025}} and {{Road incidents in 2024}} haven't qualified for their own blurbs. Left guide (talk) 06:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait The nominated article has an orange cleanup tag and so needs work. And the parade incident needs time to establish the facts and correct language. Calling it a "vehicle collision" seems misleading and my impression is that it was more of a road rage incident. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:42, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Liverpool won the title a month ago. As many times before, failing to post this when they clinched the title makes this outdated, and we shouldn't give it a second chance if the article wasn't of sufficient quality when the winner was determined. Furthermore, WP:ITNSPORTS states In terms of timing, events are generally posted as soon as a winner is determined., so the conclusion of the season isn't really an ITNR item. The incident during the trophy parade is a separate event. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. WP:ITNR states "events are generally posted as soon as a winner is determined"(emphasis mine), which isn't a hard and fast rule that we can't wait until the end of season to post the winner. –DMartin08:56, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb The orange tag has been addressed by Black Kite. I see no issue with posting about it now, as Liverpool's victory continues to be in the news. However, I disagree with both of the alt blurbs - alt1 sounds a little too promotional, and alt2 groups in an event that I don't think meets the ITN notability criteria (nobody died, seems like a fluke incident as opposed to political/terrorism, etc). FlipandFlopped㋡19:55, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose alt2 as written - I have no opinion on inclusion of the incident, but it needs to be in the correct context, i.e. that it occured around / to the crowd at the trophy parade, rather than merely it happened after Liverpool won. -- KTC (talk) 07:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support the original blurb - the season has just ended, so the story is still ripe (if becoming a little over-ripe). Oppose alt-2, as the ramming incident, while tragic and significant, was not so severe that we would post it independently, and it lacks a clear semantic connection to the football title. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see nothing wrong with posting now, as the Premier League season has just ended. Technically Liverpool won on 4/27 but officially they won this past weekend, and that was also when their championship parade was. Natg 19 (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2025 (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:
In the news toolbox
.jpg?lang=en)
12:45 PM, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg?lang=en)
Done. Black Kite (talk) 17:25, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
