Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here – discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header (dark green when in dark mode) appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Jannik Sinner
Jannik Sinner

Glossary

[edit source]
  • 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 featured in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

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

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

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

[edit source]
  • 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 items marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, post the item and change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, close the discussion section and change the header to (Closed). If the article's quality remains poor, leave a brief note explaining why to encourage and assist others in fixing it.
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

[edit source]

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

Please do...

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

Please do not...

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

Suggesting updates

[edit source]

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

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

Structure

[edit source]

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

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


July 18

[edit source]

US/Iran memorandum declared suspended

[edit source]
Articles: 2026 Iran war (talk · history · tag) and Islamabad Memorandum (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following US President Donald Trump, Iran declared the Islamabad Memorandum suspended amid renewed fighting. (Post)
News source(s): [1][2]
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Should never have posted it being still born (it was posted?), anyhoo, both sides say it is not active and it has been 7 (8 tonight) days of tit-for-tat attacks and reaction that has not been posted..Casualties in Iran (non-civilian) and usa. Iran also said it would upp the ante to yankees in the middle east. So far that is just rhetoric though. Psephguru (talk) 19:05, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Considering the fact that the original "deal" was not posted in June, I am not inclined to support it this time. Back then, the primary argument against posting was that it was just diplomatic posturing with little impact on the actual war and situation around Hormuz. The same is more or less true now. The war has all but restarted and both sides were shooting at each other well before this deal was called off. In effect, this suspension has little real impact on the war, and in all likelihood a new "deal" will be announced in the coming days. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 19:29, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose covered by ongoing. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

New World Record for fastest mile

[edit source]
Proposed image
Article: Josh Kerr (runner) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ British runner Josh Kerr runs the fastest mile in human history. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ British runner Josh Kerr breaks the mile run world record.
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: One of the most famous and prestigious records in running. Previous record was set in 1999 (potentially drug-enhanced) and stood for 27 years until today. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 16:00, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

July 17

[edit source]

RD: Moses Ali

[edit source]
Article: Moses Ali (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Ugandan deputy prime minister Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 15:25, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: Bohumil Vacík

[edit source]
Article: Bohumil Vacík (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Novinky.cz
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Vacík was a serial killer convicted of the murder of four people between 1994 and 1995. Fixer88 (talk) 17:07, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 22:55, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Blurb ready) RD/blurb: Garfield Sobers

[edit source]
Proposed image
Article: Garfield Sobers (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Cricketer Garry Sobers (pictured) dies at the age of 89. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Barbadian cricketer Garfield Sobers (pictured) dies at the age of 89.
News source(s): The Telegraph
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: He was the greatest all rounder in test cricket history with double of 8000 test runs and 200 test wickets and was in conversation for the greatest all rounder in test history levelled with Jacques KallisAbishe (talk) 15:23, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support blurb The subject is vital and a credible candidate for Greatest of All Time in his field. The article looks good too. I'm loving his full name now I see it too: "The Right Excellent Sir Garfield St Aubrun Sobers". It's a shame the article doesn't have a picture showing him at bat though so I'll see what more is out there. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:42, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sobers in 2012
Sobers in 2012
For the record, note that the blurb was first suggested with the lead image at the time, which showed the subject in 2012 (pictured). That seemed quite a good photo but it has been switched in the article for the B&W image showing the subject 56 years earlier. I don't have strong feelings about this myself but we should show the history of nomination versions for clarity. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:56, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I didn't initially think of going for the blurb option before nominating. He was rated one of Wisden's five cricketers of the 20th century for his blistering test career. He was easily the greatest sportsperson to emerge from Barbados. His name and legacy has been etched in many honorary recognition lists including the test cricket series played between Sri Lanka and the West Indies which has been named after him and Michael Tissera as Sobers–Tissera Trophy. It was coinciding that the Sobers–Tissera Trophy was played not too long ago before the passing of Sir Garfield Sobers. Thank you @Andrew Davidson: for suggesting alternate option and I wonder whether this will get much notice at the time of 2026 FIFA World Cup where football takes center stage. Abishe (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    "If you don't ask, you don't get." I'm not much of a cricket fan but this guy was clearly one of the sport's greats and one of nature's gentlemen too, I gather.
I went through the article and only found one {{cn}} which I have resolved. It otherwise looked to be in great shape.
Andrew🐉(talk) 16:14, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That would only be valid if Babe Ruth had also been a top level pitcher. Sobers was better than that. HiLo48 (talk) 23:53, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
He was (speaking of Babe Ruth)? Ruth was a good-great pitcher before he switched to hitting exclusively. Natg 19 (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed; he was a star pitcher for the Boston Red Sox. There's another sort of all-rounder in baseball and that's the 5-tool player. Willie Mays is the archetype there but he didn't pitch. Sobers was the complete package as he could bat, bowl and field. He also played football for his country, making him comparable with Bo Jackson too. Andrew🐉(talk) 05:49, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Willie Mays is probably a better comparison. Best player of the latter half of the century, when the game was spreading more globally, with all-around talent. Babe Ruth is analogous to Don Bradman, consensus greatest ever who played in the first half of the century but with batting abilities well ahead of his time. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 19:55, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse blurb no issues seemingly with the article, figure is certainly top of their field and a national hero. Textbook RD blurb case. — Knightoftheswords 19:40, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Brenda Fricker

[edit source]
Article: Brenda Fricker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Irish actress best known for her Oscar‑winning role in My Left Foot. She also appeared in The Field, Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, So I Married an Axe Murderer, and Angels in the OutfieldItsShandog (talk) 13:09, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article is well sourced and comprehensive. Some claims in the introduction were uncited but sourced later in the article, so I cited them there.
Snosibsnob (talk) 18:04, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Andy Burnham becomes Labour Party leader

[edit source]

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.


Proposed image
Article: 2026 Labour Party leadership election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Andy Burnham becomes leader of the governing Labour Party, succeeding Keir Starmer. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Andy Burnham is elected unopposed as leader of the British Labour Party, succeeding Keir Starmer.
Alternative blurb 2: ​ The governing Labour Party names Andy Burnham as its new leader following the 2026 Labour Party leadership election.
News source(s): The Guardian CNN
Credits:
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Burnham was formally declared Labour leader after becoming the only candidate to satisfy the nomination requirements. He is the leader of the United Kingdom's governing party and is expected to succeed Starmer as prime minister on 20 July. A freely licensed official portrait is available. ItsMeGabeProductions (talk) 11:55, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until he is officially confirmed PM. NotKringe (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - per fact he becomes PM on Monday. Support on Monday in principle. Becoming leader of a party is not enough.BabbaQ (talk) 12:13, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wait and close until Monday. Per BabbaQ, what’s notable is Burnham becoming PM. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:47, 17 July 2026 (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.

July 16

[edit source]

RD: Enrique Bacigalupo

[edit source]
Article: Enrique Bacigalupo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3][4]
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Argentine lawyer, criminal law professor, and magistrate on the Supreme Court of Spain until 2011. I've still got a few details I'd like to expand on in the article, but I hope this is presentable GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 10:56, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]


RD: John Esposito

[edit source]
Article: John Esposito (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Quite a significant scholar VR 23:46, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose While at first glance it appears fully sourced, digging deeper I find issues with verifiability. In the "Life and career" section, paragraphs 2 and 3 are almost entirely unsupported by their references. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:21, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Nicaragua severs relations with Italy

[edit source]

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: Foreign relations of Nicaragua (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Nicaragua severs relations with Italy following Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani's demand for the extradition of the naturalized Nicaraguan alleged killer of Aldo Moro. (Post)
News source(s): [6]
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: De-recognization is not a common part of IR. Psephguru (talk) 21:49, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
snow close already. I don't know how to do it, ut some admin can.Psephguru (talk) 18:54, 18 July 2026 (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.

July 15

[edit source]

Beta Pictoris d discovered

[edit source]
Article: Beta Pictoris (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Astronomers discover the exoplanet Beta Pictoris d, making the first time moderate-resolution spectroscopy has been used to aid in the direct imaging discovery of a planet. (Post)
News source(s): Space.com
Credits:

 ArionStar (talk) 23:39, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral, leaning oppose - The article indicates that another team discovered it simultaneously using a more conventional technique. I'm also a little out of the loop on astrophotography and exoplanet detection these days, and so I'm not sure how significant (or how tightly defined) this 'first' is. GenevieveDEon (talk) 05:56, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, leaning support, I think the article section is long and good enough to be featured, however I think the blurb is currently a bit too jargony to be meaningful to most readers. ~2026-40459-11 (talk) 21:55, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose I could see this perhaps being significant but the blurb as written is far too dense and does not convey this effectively. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 22:07, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Hal Williams

[edit source]
Article: Hal Williams (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Needs a few more citations (and/or pruning of credits) Funcrunch (talk) 19:47, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

New species of monkey discovered

[edit source]
Proposed image
Articles: Likweli (talk · history · tag) and Black-and-white colobus (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ New species of colobus monkey, the Likweli, discovered in the Lomami National Park, Democratic Republic of Congo. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A new species of black-and-white colobus monkey, Colobus congoensis, is discovered in the Lomami National Park, Democratic Republic of Congo.
News source(s): BBC, CNN, SCINEWS, NYT, SCIENCE, PLOS
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: A new species of African monkey has been announced. (Article needs to be created, only edits I have performed are on Lomami National Park.) ~2026-40124-89 (talk) 14:44, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I'm sceptical about new species but this claim seems quite good. The article needs expansion but I expect that there will be plenty of interest in doing this quickly. I've made a start by uploading an image which shows the distinctive orange lips and adding it to the nomination along with a link to the PLOS paper. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:19, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose new species of animals are discovered frequently enough [7], and the only reason this seems to be getting extra attention is the fact it was found in the Congo where monkeys are actively hunted; there is no significant impact on our understanding kn evolution or the likely from this. Masem (t) 15:36, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I assume the reason it is getting extra attention is that it's a large cute mammal, a primate even, and such discoveries are comparatively rare. I completely fail to understand how our collective understanding of anything has any relevance to ITN. ~2026-40124-89 (talk) 18:16, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose While this is ITN worthy (While species discoveries occur regularly, monkeys in particular are far more rare as the article notes, and not every species discovery needs to impact our understanding of evolution to be significant), I feel like a blurb should at least have an article about the species its talking about, instead of linking to the article for its genus. Snosibsnob (talk) 15:54, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Routine. New species are being discovered everyday, that it is a monkey shouldn't change anything. Even if we were primate-centric [we aren't :) ] , it should be noted "New primate species continue to be discovered: over 25 species were described in the 2000s, 36 in the 2010s, and six in the 2020s". Gotitbro (talk) 16:48, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It is also a non-starter now that the Likweli article doesn't exist. Redirected by UtherSRG with the rationale Not a valid species per the Mammal WikiProject. Please wait until it is accepted at MDD, or multiple secondary sources. Gotitbro (talk) 16:51, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The MDD (Mammal Diversity Database) is updated twice a year. The project describes its rules as "Guidelines". As the secondary sources cited note, the study went into great depth to confirm the species is indeed new. ~2026-40124-89 (talk) 18:38, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and close Since the target article has been redirected, the nomination now fails ITNCRIT anyway. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as routine, even if I hadn't redirected the article. (I also asked the original author if they want their work moved to draft so it can be worked on until it is no longer WP:TOOSOON.) - In solidarity, UtherSRG (talk) 17:27, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I now support. The NCBI now lists the species in their database, so that is sufficient to merit an article being created. Of the attempts, the one at Colobus congoensis is quite thorough compared to the stub attempts at Likweli. I have requested, at WP:RMTM, for the article to be moved to the common name. I have also tweaked the "blurb" in the proposal. - In solidarity, UtherSRG (talk) 14:31, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nominator: Opposition based on the fact that countless new species are discovered all the time is simply ridiculous. Only a very select few seem to attract attention beyond the scientists involved, let alone the popular media in general. There seem to be about 50 new mammal species identified a year. But ITN has done new species discoveries before: the Olinguito on 15 August 2013. (Also new dinosaurs!)
  • As for my personal involvement, I do not have the time, and probably not the skill, to contribute to a proper article. ~2026-40124-89 (talk) 18:10, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you the original author? Please log in to comment and edit. - In solidarity, UtherSRG (talk) 18:13, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I am simply the nominator, and did some quicky edits on Lomami National Park, nothing more. Just continuing this conversation is more time than I have to spare. ~2026-40124-89 (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle. I actually don't understand the opposes... "new species are discovered all the time"... are they, though? New species the size of a monkey? That make it into the news? That don't just result from DNA testing known populations and finding out "they were different species all along!"? This seems like a genuine discovery, and I believe worthy of posting. HOWEVER, all that being said, Oppose while there is no article to link to. Khuft (talk) 19:17, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle but Oppose until an article is created While yes, new species are discovered all the time, few are so prominent and garner such large media attention as this has. However our blurb will look rather silly without an article to link to, and our readers (myself included) will not be able to find the relevant information until one is created. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 19:38, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I now fully Support following the creation of a pretty good article. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 14:41, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Also I don't think a blurb from 13 years ago is a good precedent given the much lower standard back then. NotKringe (talk) 19:44, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. The Kip (contribs) 20:32, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, oppose on lack of article. I do think this is a good candidate, because new species of a large mammal are rare, and primates get broader attention than (say) beetles or moths. Likweli and colobus congoensis are just redirects to the genus, which has only a single sentence of update. Someone needs to write an article before we could possibly post this. I don't think that needs to wait until an external body approves the species - there are multiple reliable independent sources listed in the nomination, so this passes WP:GNG. And this is undisputedly a separate species, it's not going to become mired in an argument about genetics. Modest Genius talk 13:56, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The article has been written and seems in good shape, switching to full support. Are we confident in the copyright status of the infobox image? If so, that could be worth posting in the ITN box too. Modest Genius talk 18:46, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The infobox image is cropped from the image I uploaded and put in the nomination and genus article. That was cropped from a collage in the PLOS paper and so seems to be CC0. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:31, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Canadian wildfires

[edit source]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 Canadian wildfires (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Toronto is ranked the worst in the world for air quality amid deadly wildfires across Canada (Post)
Alternative blurb: Toronto is placed under an uncommon orange alert due to smoke from wildfires across the country
Alternative blurb 2: ​ Over 800 active wildfires are reported and Toronto is ranked the worst in the world for air quality amid deadly wildfires across Canada
News source(s): CTV News Global News BBC News
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Toronto is ranked the worst for air quality in the world, with an orange alert in effect. The smoke is being compared to 2023. Smoke has drifted into not only Toronto, but U.S. states such as Michigan, New York, Wisconsin and Minnesota. AQI values in Saginaw are currently over 1,000. Article is also large, with over 60 sources and counting. Bloxzge 025 20:16, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose "world xxxst" is trivial. And only four deaths have been reported. Every summer, there’s the same debate about the fires in Canada... _-_Alsor (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It literally has the worst AQI in the world, even worst than D.R. Congo. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 21:05, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
So...? _-_Alsor (talk) 21:25, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with such superlatives is someone is always worst. GreatCaesarsGhost 21:39, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, it’s true that Toronto has the shittiest air right now due to many wildfires but unless the wildfires are very significant, then I don’t think this is suitable for itn. Vetrenarisisum (talk) 21:33, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Maybe The article doesn't emphasise the air quality in Toronto – the lead doesn't even mention it. My impression from browsing the article is:
  1. The fires have been burning since May
  2. There have been fires all over the country
  3. This year is not record-breaking and so is not special
Andrew🐉(talk) 21:45, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There. I mentioned it in the lead. Will expand on the mention as well. Also, the smoke is mentioned in the Ontario and International effects sections. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 23:08, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The international effects are getting my attention. It merits further discussion. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:55, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose and close--I'm not convinced an air quality deterioration event of the caliber this is deserves a feature. The fires themselves are impactful but seem about typical for a wildfire season, per the year-to-date article highlighted. The 2026 season seems in fact less damaging than the 2025 season (minus more fatalities). Bad air quality's perennial in this world, sadly. It's looking like the worst of this is the consistently newsworthy orange skies over a metro, and a few sporadic to widespread cancellations of outdoor events (and as far as I can tell, life goes on in Canada). Nominate again if impacts (deaths, destroyed structures, etc.) materialize. Departure– (talk) 01:26, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support great, another haze. Scuba 04:10, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reconsider This seems to be getting significantly worse as it's affecting the US too and threatening the World Cup final. We should keep the discussion open while its impacts continue to ramp up. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:54, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Don’t be swayed by sensationalism. There haven’t been any major impacts from the fires so far. Summer, climate change… it’s happening in Europe too. It is what it is. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:27, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The World Cup is depending on some rain to clear the air but that's not a sure thing. The point is that this is now impacting much of the continent, not just Toronto. ITN's top blurb is currently a single fire in a pub which killed 33 people and that's comparatively insignificant. Per this study, We estimate that 5,400 (3,400–7,400) acute deaths in North America and 64,300 (37,800–90,900) chronic deaths in North America and Europe were attributable to PM2.5 exposure to the 2023 Canadian wildfires. That's about 70,000 deaths from a similar fire season which is a lot more than 33. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:47, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you point to tangible effects beyond threats and WP:CRYSTAL suggestions of what might manifest later on? I haven't seen anything from that study reported on elsewhere, at least not here. Departure– (talk) 17:53, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gibraltar–Spain border fence

[edit source]
Article: Gibraltar–Spain border (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The fence at the Gibraltar–Spain border is removed, allowing free travel between Spain and the British overseas territory of Gibraltar. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, etc.
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Looks like a major milestone in bilateral relations and an issue that stayed unresolved from Brexit until 2025. Celebrations took place. Needs updating though. Brandmeister talk 16:35, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on quality--far too many uncited claims and cn tags for a feature. No comment on notability at this time. Departure– (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per @Andrew Davidson MrCryptoNerd (talk) 10:28, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Andrew Yakikaki (talk) 11:53, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability – Expansion of the Schengen Area (de facto), and we have posted such expansions in January 2023 and January 2025. Spain is also granted controls over customs during the long running Gibraltar dispute. Article will need work. Nice4What (talk · contribs) 01:58, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Guy Scott

[edit source]
Article: Guy Scott (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Mwebantu, AP
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Former acting President of Zambia and last white African leader  The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:31, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

July 14

[edit source]

(Posted) RD: Little Gerhard

[edit source]
Article: Little Gerhard (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [8]
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

 --BabbaQ (talk) 08:08, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:50, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Azad Kashmir protests

[edit source]
Article: 2026 Azad Kashmir protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Protests continue across Azad Kashmir as demonstrators demand the removal of 12 reserved seats for refugees in the legislative assembly. Several people have been killed in clashes with security forces, prompting authorities to impose a curfew and ban the main protest group. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Clashes erupt in Azad Kashmir as protesters demand the abolition of reserved legislative seats for non-resident refugees, resulting in multiple deaths and a government crackdown.
Alternative blurb 2: ​ In Pakistan-administered Azad Kashmir, protests demanding political reforms ahead the general election result in several deaths and arrests.
News source(s): * "Several killed as protests rage in Pakistan-administered Kashmir". Al Jazeera. 12 July 2026.
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Article has been significantly expanded with multiple reliable sources covering the background, Supreme Court ruling, clashes, and government response. WindSweet2003 (talk) 03:28, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lean support This seems significant enough, but the proposed blurbs are way too wordy. NotKringe (talk) 05:11, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternative blurb 2 ArionStar (talk) 05:57, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ArionStar: Do not !vote without including your reasons (WP:ITNCDONT). Nice4What (talk · contribs) 06:19, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The protests are partially over, according to reports. ArionStar (talk) 06:34, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Close – This is likely stale. The 2026 Azad Kashmir protests article focuses on events in June, and the two links provided by the nominator are non-existent. According to an actual Al Jazeera story, as of June 30, Kashmir has "return[ed] to daily life after deadly protests".[1] @NotKringe and ArionStar: You both quickly !voted in favor, but much of the article is unsourced. In the future, it would be worth visiting the article first and taking its quality into account in your reasonings. –Nice4What (talk · contribs) 06:35, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I was doing a revamped in the article. Wait as a march is set to happen tomorrow. ArionStar (talk) 08:41, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wait--while I initially thought this item stale, per others, upon checking it appears one of the involved parties in the protest has issued an ultimatum and is planning to march on Muzaffarabad on 15 July, which could be the update this item needs to become notable if it manifests. As of yet, though, the current protests appear to have mainly occurred in June, so if no big updates come tomorrow, I won't be supporting this item. Departure– (talk) 23:32, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This is a small event in the global perspective and not worthy of ITN. MrCryptoNerd (talk) 07:43, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MrCyptoNerd. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:26, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

July 13

[edit source]

Sugar detected in interstellar space

[edit source]
Articles: Sugar (talk · history · tag) and List of interstellar and circumstellar molecules (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Astronomers detect a erythrulose molecule inside a cloud of gas and dust near the center of the Milky Way, marking the first evidence of sugar in interstellar space. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Astronomers detect sugar in interstellar space for the first time.
News source(s): Nature
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Historical research. ArionStar (talk) 01:00, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose there is no target article for this discovery, we shouldn't just put 'Sugar' on ITN. Scuba 04:01, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? ArionStar (talk) 04:45, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Scuba, I think the topic is interesting but imo there should be a specific article about the subject in order to post to ITN. Vetrenarisisum (talk) 05:28, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Stand-alone articles are not required for ITN nominations. — Knightoftheswords 20:12, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Alternative blurb is confusing since it doesn't specifies which type of sugar was discovered. ArionStar (talk) 04:48, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why the specific type of sugar needs to be specified (headlines from Nature and news outlets don't specify erythrulose), and I believe the original blurb is too wordy. Nice4What (talk · contribs) 02:01, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Nice4What: to avoid misunderstanding, I've read people asking if it was cane sugar. ArionStar (talk) 03:47, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - If someone writes an article about this important discovery, it will be good for ITN. MrCryptoNerd (talk) 09:18, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support adequate update in the article (new section with two paragraphs). Such a discovery will serve as a major milestone in the search for ET life abd how life on Earth formed. WP:ITNUPDATE declares that non-standalone articles are permitted as long as there are substantive updates, so the arguments against citing a lack of a dedicated article are bogus and at odds with ITN policy. — Knightoftheswords 20:56, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Knightoftheswords. The discovery is quite significant; also, we often discuss about posting more scientific news to ITN - this one is spot on. Khuft (talk) 21:55, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support You know what, yes. We could use some milestone scientific/space discoveries on ITN. As Knightoftheswords stated, this is a significant discovery. It’d be nice to see more news like this. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:44, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support because this is exactly the sort of thing we should be posting more of, and the target article has been updated with a section about the event as pointed out by Knightoftheswords.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 01:46, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, assuming we put the target article as sugar#In_interstellar_space rather than just sugar (otherwise readers would have to see sugar canes, sugar-producing countries, and chemistry before reaching the actual subject). I agree that these scientific discoveries should be posted on ITN more often. Vetrenarisisum (talk) 05:25, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs Work This is (probably) notable for many in the life sciences and astronomy. ITN needs exciting scientific news instead of just a death and politics ticker. But there are two major issues in my opinion. First, this links to sugar. While Knight is right that is not a requirement, I don't see why this should be an exception to the practice of ITN blurbs having their own article. The biology side of this site is no stranger to giving relatively minor topics standalone pages. Second, the section discussing this on the sugar article is stub sized at best, does not have enough citations (major issue for a science blurb), and most likely to remain close to orphaned (What Links Here can not reveal the backlinks to it). If no article is to be made, at the very least I believe this part should be long enough that it could be a non-stub article, this is essentially the precedent for every nom I've seen over the past few years. It the very least would be good to see more reliable sources than just Nature, Nature articles alone are not notable just because it's a prestigious journal; NYT and AP are not scientific publications. ITN blurbs hinge on their parent article's quality first and foremost and I don't think this is up to it just yet. SmallTestAcount (talk) 19:28, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see why this should be an exception to the practice of ITN blurbs having their own article. It's already normal for blurbs to not always need their own articles... I recommend that you please look at how ITN template currently is. We have a blurb linking to the Russian Olympic Committee article; there was no standalone "2026 International Olympic Committee's provisional lifting of the Russian Olympic Committee's suspension" article created (and it would honestly be pointless to hold up that blurb for that reason). Nice4What (talk · contribs) 02:06, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, and the article was reported as "sugar in space", so sugar is the best target in this case. ArionStar (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It makes sense to have a dedicated article for extraterrestrial sugar or other organic compounds, it does not make sense to have an article just about the 2026 olympic lifting of the russian olympic committee suspension. If you're so adamant that this topic does not warrant a new dedicated article then I can think of many articles more specific than Sugar, which encompasses everything from economics to chemistry. SmallTestAcount (talk) 04:17, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, unimportant scientifically and to the readership, posting more science on ITN is just WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Abductive (reasoning) 12:40, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, though I welcome more science nominations. There are hundreds of interstellar molecules already known, including several that are larger and more complicated than this one. I'm not seeing anything particularly special about being the first sugar, rather than the first aromatic or first ketone. Sugars are already known in meteorites and asteroid samples. There is no biology in a molecular cloud. This is being reported by Nature because the research paper was in their subsidiary journal Nature Astronomy, so that's far from independent coverage; however there is an independent Guardian article. If this is posted, the target article should be erythrulose (not sugar), which is borderline for quality. Modest Genius talk 12:50, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Pedro Ignacio Calderón

[edit source]
Article: Pedro Ignacio Calderón (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [9][10][11]
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Argentine conductor; best known for his work with the Buenos Aires Philharmonic and the Argentine National Symphony Orchestra GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 06:49, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Nansun Shi

[edit source]
Article: Nansun Shi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Article well sourced and updated --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:36, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:56, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Willey (journalist)

[edit source]
Article: David Willey (journalist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): "David Willey, esteemed BBC foreign correspondent, dies aged 93". BBC News. 12 July 2026. Retrieved 12 July 2026.
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: British journalist GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 09:57, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, by uploading a non-free file. I really wish people would get themselves out of this habit of "oh, this person is dead, I can upload a non-free file of them the very next day and I'm not breaking WP:NFCC at all". Did you check to see if there were any free images available? Black Kite (talk) 13:13, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    In this case, I had heard some BBC coverage of the subject following his death and he sounded like a good chap so I was primed to respond to the nomination. When I checked the article, the most glaring issue was the lack of an image and I'm quite familiar with the process for fixing this. I checked the article's talk page which didn't say much. I then added the {{talk page}} template. This creates a standard search link for free images and that didn't find anything. So I searched for a suitable image, found one on a BBC tribute page, cropped it and uploaded it in the usual way.
    My view is that this is the best time to do this per adages such as "strike while the iron is hot" and "never leave for tomorrow that which can be done today". Such deaths usually generate a big spike in views and other activity such as ITN, the updates to Deaths in 2026 and the like. So, this is the best time to make a difference. The alternative would be to put off the task to some arbitrary date in the future but that would be a pointless delay. See WP:BOLD!
    Andrew🐉(talk) 17:18, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD/blurb: Sam Neill

[edit source]
Proposed image
Article: Sam Neill (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Actor Sam Neill (pictured) dies at the age of 78. (Post)Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Needs no introduction. Note that the French language Wikipedia has already posted this on their main page with a photo. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:16, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Added some cn tags, as multiple paragraphs in Career section are unsourced. Not ready yet for RD. Natg 19 (talk) 07:13, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The picture we have now is great as it shows the star in his prime and is very recognisable. Blurbing the subject is the surest way of getting this picture posted and so that would be much better than RD. Note that the English ITN has been running the same photo of a cricketer for six straight days now and that's not a good look. See WP:LUGO. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:39, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a very poor argument as it doesn't address the issues we have brought up, to just feature a good picture is not a valid reason to blurb a person.
Moreso, there are better ways replace an ITN images you feel are too old or stale, particularly relating to an ITN item that is about fall off, such as finding good free media relating to any of the other, more recent items on the ITN list, improving articles currently nominated (such as the Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani nomination from yesterday) to increase the chance that consensus is reached to post or nominating new prominent events with media. To avoid WP:Bludgeon, I will not reply further. ~2026-39558-43 (talk) 13:20, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have already posted support for a blurb for Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani but the usual suspects have turned out to obstruct that too. Ideally, we'd have posted at least six different pictures over those six days including other prominent deaths such as Bonnie Tyler, Ann Widdecombe and Lindsey Graham. We should be aiming to post a new picture every day, like every other main page section does. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:09, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support for RD MrCryptoNerd (talk) 07:29, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Do we really need to automatically blurb nominate and start a new blurb discussion every time a famous celebrity dies? I think having this discussion is starting to get rather repetitive at this point. Article is currently not ready due to sourcing issues. Oppose blurb since a) Just being a very prominent actor is not grounds for a blurb b) if another language Wikipedia has blurbed someone is irrelevant to the discussion. ~2026-39558-43 (talk) 07:51, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Have we to wait for a blurb rationale here or is this just based on nom whims? Gotitbro (talk) 08:09, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
'Andrew feels like it' is sadly the reason for far too much heat without light on this page. It's a significant deterrent to participation. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:55, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
So, all the many whimsical blurb advocacies in just one week. Now boosted by imbedded pictures to make the "point" in discussion threads. Why should this not be seen as disrupting the ITN process? Gotitbro (talk) 16:50, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can’t wait for ANI to inevitably insist there’s zero problems with his behavior yet again. The Kip (contribs) 17:10, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Some awards are non blue linked and thus will need sources (but arguably all pages should be treated as standalone per WP:V so that awards table needs to be sourced. Additionally, his filmography was split off with this news [12] so needs to be reviewed as well, and that is missing the sources for a number of non-blue linked cases. Masem (t) 11:31, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb Quite prolific but not on the "household names" level of notability. NotKringe (talk) 12:54, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Beg to Differ I would say he was a household name for Jurassic Park alone. As for the blurb discussion, you all figure it out. Ryan Reeder (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Being mostly known for a single film/role is a good sign that this belongs in RD rather than us needlessly dragging on a blurb discussion that'll inevitably end with a "No". Nice4What (talk · contribs) 21:10, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Neill has significant acting credits among other activities such as winemaking. The article has been looked after well with much attention provided following his death. Qwerty123M (talk) 13:44, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"Neill has significant acting credits among other activities such as winemaking."
What if any of this shows WP:ITNSIGNIFICANCE? Gotitbro (talk) 16:53, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The page you have cited does not have strict criteria for significance, it says that consensus must be in favour of including a recent death or news event, and that the event must be current. Qwerty123M (talk) 22:50, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Please read beyond the bullet points. Gotitbro (talk) 04:04, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Also see WP:ITNRDBLURB. Gotitbro (talk) 04:05, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Still some cn tags. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 16:18, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose RD due to missing citations. Oppose blurb per literally everyone above. The Kip (contribs) 17:11, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Neill was not a household name celebrity. He had a fourth of the pageviews of Brad Pitt yesterday. Elipticon (talk) 17:16, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    On the day of his death, he had over 180 times more page views than Brad Pitt. That was about 2.5 million making it the most read article on all of Wikipedia by a considerable margin − even more than Lindsey Graham, Ann Widdecombe or any of the World Cup articles. This confirms both that he was very much in the news and regarded as significant by the general readership. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:42, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, because he died. I'm sure if Brad Pitt died there would be even more pageviews. I'm referring to the ambient pageviews when neither of those individuals were doing much of anything notable. Elipticon (talk) 10:50, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The main point of In the News is to list topics which are in the news. Sam Neill is the centre of attention right now because he's in the news and Brad Pitt isn't. The primary purpose of ITN is To help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news. Its purpose is not to be a battleground over who's the Greatest of All Time. Brad Pitt will get his turn in due course. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:23, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    when we are arguing over blurbs, when we have the guaranteed RD line available, yes then these blurb arguments are often coming down to that. Dd blurbs are meant to be exceptional, and we should be looking for the top people in the field, disregarding popularity, fame or association with a famous work. We should always be seeking to assure the quality is there for RD abd not try yo push blurbs for one's that are clearly far below being an exceptional major figure. Masem (t) 12:57, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    While the English ITN argues, the readership ignores it and just goes to read the article as Sam Neill was the top read article on this Wikipedia for a second day. The English ITN is still showing a very stale picture of a cricketer which is on its 8th day now. That cricket match is now the bottom blurb and is getting next to no readers. The English ITN is broken beyond belief as it's so clearly failing to report what's in the news. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:31, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    For the bazillionth time, ITN is not there to increase viewcounts. Its to illustrate quality WP articles that are in the news to show WP's dynamic nature, which often aligns with articles that readers are interested in reading, but not always. "To help readers find..." is one of four goals, but those are equally weighted goals, and no one drives that much importance over the others to ignore the other three goals. Masem (t) 11:28, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, needs some citation work and then it is ready. Oppose Blurb, per above, we don't need to blurb every single celebrity that dies, that's why RD was created. He is not notable enough for a blurb, despite the fact that he was a somewhat well known actor. LuxembourgFan42 (talk) 18:17, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD once citations are taken care of. MidnightMayhem (talk) 18:30, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Old american dies This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:09, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    First sentence of the article makes it quite clear that he wasn't an American 👍 – Nice4What (talk · contribs) 21:11, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Orbitalbuzzsaw may I suggest amending this to "Old Kiwi dies"? Mackensen (talk) 12:09, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb We keep debating whether vital 5 celebrities should be blurbed. This persona isn't even vital 5, and is relatively unknown. There's nothing unusual about the nature of the death. If we blurb this, we might as well blurb anyone who dies with screen credits. Nfitz (talk) 19:20, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Um, no. I'm pretty sure the lead actor of a film that was the highest grossing film ever until Titanic came along is not "relatively unknown". Though I still don't think we should blurb him, it's not for want of worldwide recognisability. Black Kite (talk) 21:30, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Neil was not "relatively unknown". Have you never seen Jurassic Park? (If not, you really should.) voorts (talk/contributions) 21:47, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's no surprise that a person becomes "relatively unknown" when he does not achieve meaningful thing in 33 years. Didgogns (talk) 02:03, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
...and that's just a nonsensical comment, sorry. Black Kite (talk) 09:49, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I get that y'all are opposed to a blurb here, but you don't need to lie to make that point. Shit like this is why I avoid ITN. voorts (talk/contributions) 12:24, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, @Voorts, I've seen it. In the cinema when it came out, sometime last century. And I wouldn't have nominated him for any acting awards - or any of the rest of the cast. The visual effects were stunning for that era. The only Vital 5 actor in Jurrassic Park was Attenborough - and we didn't blurb him when he died - so why should we blurb a less significant figure! Nfitz (talk) 08:09, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say he deserved an award for his role in that film. I said he's not relatively unknown. A relatively unknown actor wouldn't have their death covered in many major newspapers. voorts (talk/contributions) 12:49, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nfitz, in fairness, Attenborough died when there was still a significance requirement for RDs, which meant the blurb standard was a bit higher at the time. In solidarity, QuicoleJR (talk) 13:33, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness, we had no problem blurbing Carrie Fisher shortly afterwards - who is also Vital 5. The simple answer is that Neill is too insignificant. If he was more significant, he would be Vital 5, like his co-star who predeceased him. Nfitz (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fisher was two years later IIRC. I'm not making the case that Neill should be blurbed, just that pre-2016 precedent doesn't really apply well for death blurb/RD decisions. In solidarity, QuicoleJR (talk) 15:02, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fame isn't a factor here, significance is (as ambigous that itself maybe). Specifically one which pertains to a BLPs fields of work. Gotitbro (talk) 14:10, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Sam Neill is a noteworthy actor who appeared in multiple countries' productions. His body of work spans five decades, covering both mainstream and more eclectic roles. Great Britain and New Zealand recognised his contributions with an OBE and a KNZM, respectively. Alexanderino (talk) 23:19, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    An OBE @Didgogns? What kind of criteria is that? UK alone gives out hundreds of OBEs a year, and has been giving them out for over a century. On average, more than one OBE recipient dies every day. If that meant anything, we could fill ITN with nothing but UK OBE deaths. Nfitz (talk) 07:42, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment OLDMANDIES is a weak argument since if we were to follow this line, Joe Biden will never be blurbed when he dies. ArionStar (talk) 05:26, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Joe Biden is a former US president. That's different from an actor. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:12, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    But you acknowledge implicitly that an "OLD MAN" who dies of natural causes can be notable if his underlying accomplishments and credentials are sufficient. We should just focus on analyzing those underlying factors instead of this constant insistence that old men dying can't ever be ITN-worthy. FlipandFlopped 13:53, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    To be honest I think most people are ignoring the OLDMANDIES "argument" now, especially when someone posts "Old American dies", thus showing they haven't even read the article of a British-born New Zealander. Black Kite (talk) 09:41, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A prominent actor with an international reputation and a lengthy career. The sourcing on the article looks fine. Yes, his major period of prominence was in the 1990s, but let's not hold that against him. Mackensen (talk) 11:53, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No one has addressed my concerns above - the "Awards and nominations received by Sam Neill" is only half sourced. Natg 19 (talk) 00:52, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It should be sufficiently sourced now. ItsShandog (talk) 12:49, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it is good enough. The standard is not (or ought not be) perfection. I have tagged ready for RD. FlipandFlopped 17:23, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2026 Bangkok pub fire

[edit source]
Article: 2026 Bangkok pub fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 33 people are killed and 70 others are injured in a fire at a pub in Bangkok, Thailand. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A fire at a pub in the Chatuchak District of Bangkok, Thailand, kills at least 33 people and injures more than 70 others.
Alternative blurb 2: ​ At least 33 people are killed after a fire engulfs the Rong Beer Na Lat Phrao pub in Bangkok, Thailand.
News source(s): AP Reuters via JPost RTÉ CNN
Credits:
Article updated

Nominator's comments: Major deadly fire in Bangkok. At least 27 people killed and over 60 injured at the Rong Beer Na Lat Phrao pub in Chatuchak District overnight. This is one of the deadliest pub fires in Thailand since the 2009 Santika Club fire and has received extensive international coverage. The article is new and has been updated with sources, so should be suitable for ITN. No free image yet for the aftermath, but the article itself meets notability. ItsMeGabeProductions (talk) 05:11, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, fire involving flammable soundproofing is a surprisingly common occurence. NotKringe (talk) 17:19, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support per all above. The current death toll is 32 according to Reuters MrCryptoNerd (talk) 07:36, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dudley Laufman

[edit source]
Article: Dudley Laufman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: One of the most important figures in American folk dance. Sdkbtalk 04:27, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet ready Discography is unsourced, and article is a stub. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:40, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have significantly expanded the article now and added citations. Sdkbtalk 20:00, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

July 12

[edit source]

Yulia Svyrydenko steps down as PM of Ukraine

[edit source]
Proposed image
Article: Yulia Svyrydenko (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Yulia Svyrydenko steps down as Prime Minister of Ukraine during a government reshuffle. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

 ArionStar (talk) 02:14, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Wimbledon

[edit source]
Article: 2026 Wimbledon Championships (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Wimbledon Championships at the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club (pictured) are concluded. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In tennis, Linda Nosková and Jannik Sinner (both pictured) win the women's and men's singles respectively at the Wimbledon Championships.
Alternative blurb 2: ​ In tennis, defending champion Jannik Sinner and first-time champion Linda Nosková win the men's and women's singles titles at the 2026 Wimbledon Championships, respectively.
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

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: Wimbledon is over now. There were 20 different championships and so it seems best to summarise the overall event. The pictures we have of the winners of the gentlemen's and ladies singles events don't seem suitable as they were taken elsewhere and they are not wearing white, as is required at this event. The nominated picture was actually taken at this year's championship and so seems the most appropriate of the few that we have, showing players in white on a grass court at the venue. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:54, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've added the standard altblurb. Somebody else will have to go through the effort to make the composite image of the two athletes. I really don't think the location of the event is blurbworthy. Also, in the last decade, the only time the article has been nominated and had good enough quality to post is in 2024. So... not unsurprisingly, this article doesn't yet have enough prose, oppose. 1brianm7 (talk) 21:09, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The article's prose has been expanded, summarizing every event with appropriate citations. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 17:35, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I have added another altblurb; one that is not associated with a picture as I doubt that appropriate non-free images that represent the recent champions at Wimbledon would be available anytime soon. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 17:43, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ? Both Noskova and Sinner have free images? 1brianm7 (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Linda Noskova does not have a free image where she is wearing all-white at Wimbledon. Sinner has one now. Is it really necessary to have them pictured wearing an all-white attire? Because if not, I can make the composite now. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 11:30, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I would say it's not necessary for them to be in all-white. IMO the important thing is the person who won the event, not the dress code at the event. Some people seem to disagree, however. 1brianm7 (talk) 12:24, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Linda Nosková and Jannik Sinner
Linda Nosková and Jannik Sinner
I have replaced the image with pictures of Noskova and Sinner. I believe it is the best and most appropriate choice given the resources we currently have. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 14:58, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Posted. Despite some earlier wrangling, I see a rough consensus on the talk page that the current updated prose version will be reasonably stable, resolving the basis of opposition here. Left guide (talk) 04:54, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What? Posted without a single support? First time I've seen it here. Again: ITN is poorly administered… ArionStar (talk) 05:27, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Please bear in mind WP:VOTE, which includes (emphasis in original):

Remember that Wikipedia is not a democracy; even when polls appear to be "votes", most decisions on Wikipedia are made on the basis of consensus, not on vote-counting or majority rule. In summary, polling is not a substitute for discussion.

Left guide (talk) 05:45, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Jannik Sinner
Jannik Sinner
Note also that this is WP:ITN/R and so the only issue that matters is quality. The only oppose was about the prose and that was hashed out at the article's talk page. The only other issue was the choice of picture and we have a good result in showing the picture of Sinner in white receiving the actual trophy at the actual event on the actual court. This was a good call; well done! Andrew🐉(talk) 05:52, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Andrew here. The only issue at hand was prose, and after TheVoicelessWriter added the prose, the article is good to go. Just because you are not getting what you want/expect does not mean ITN is poorly administered. Natg 19 (talk) 06:36, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A further point to note is that we currently seem to have a shortage of admin attention which is tending to make ITN stale and so we shouldn't bite admins who make an effort and take bold action to get something posted if it's uncontroversial. The main point of WP:ITN/R is to fast-track such items without a lot of fuss. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:03, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2026 Toronto shooting

[edit source]

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: 2026 Toronto shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: 2026 Toronto shooting: At least two people are killed and five others are injured in a mass shooting at the Salsa on St. Clair festival in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (Post)
Alternative blurb: 2026 Toronto shooting: A mass shooting at the Salsa on St. Clair festival in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, leaves at least two people dead and five others injured.
Alternative blurb 2: 2026 Toronto shooting: At least two people are killed and five others are injured in a shooting in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
News source(s): CBC News news.com.au
Credits:
Strong oppose Not convinced as to the true large-scale or long-lasting impact in Canada, or the effects for the wider region. I echo the concerns above about the true scope of this skirmish/shooting, and also concerns about the article's short length. Something this short would be suitable if we posted it an hour after it happened, but it's over 12 hours on from creation and it's still only this long, when more details should have been reported on and added to the article. Departure– (talk) 16:42, 12 July 2026 (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.

(Posted) RD: Lindsey Graham

[edit source]
Article: Lindsey Graham (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [15], CNN
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Notable US Senator. Onegreatjoke (talk) 06:16, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This should be a blurb instead. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 00:05, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support: the article is good and Graham was quite notable in US politics. TheChestertonian (talk) 01:12, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support - per above MrCryptoNerd (talk) 07:39, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

*Generally fine, but the sections about his committee assignments are lacking sources, so I added a {{refimprove}} tag. Natg 19 (talk) 07:59, 12 July 2026 (UTC) Section was removed. Natg 19 (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality and specifically with how much time is given on his relationship to Trump. It may be reasonably sourced (overall from the article's perspective), but this article explemifies the problem with lack of care of NPOV in the short term on figures that, from the implicit left-leading perspective we have from the reliable media and WP editors, takes a very overtly critical approach to him. Yes, he has shown a lot of support for Trump in this second admin, and that's definitely documentable, but its overkill here. Add that much of the rest of the page on his political leanings is a mismash of topics without any cohesive thought. I know we're only talking RD here, and the death was unexpected, but this is the type of BLP we needed to be doing much better on from the start. Masem (t) 11:55, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is a contentious topic as I suppose it's one of the battlegrounds for the US politics warriors. It's huge and has over 300 citations so working with it would be like trying to turn an oil tanker. It has been orange-tagged since 2021 and so the claims above that it's in good shape should be taken with a pinch of salt. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:08, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, its a good reminder this falls under WP:AP2 from ArbCom. Masem (t) 12:33, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support committee assignments seemed to be cited. Would support any blurb proposal, internationally known, influential US senator, whose death has received sustained coverage, but would be happy to know others thoughts, since he is kind of a borderline figure. — Knightoftheswords 16:10, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
CommentCan you name any non-US non-head of government non-head of state politicians who you would support for a blurb in the event of their death that was a result of natural causes? Chrisclear (talk) 04:14, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Simple: Chrystia Freeland, Ed Miliband, Gerry Adams, Melenchon, Le Pen, Weidel, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, Geert Wilders, Nigel Farage, Count Binface Ben Gvir, Preston Manning, Pauline Hanson, etc. to name a few. — Knightoftheswords 05:15, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking as an Australian, blurbing Hanson's death would be very strange indeed. Being a leader of a minor populist party does not warrant a blurb, and neither does being a notable US senator. Loytra 06:23, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking as someone on the other side of the world, I'm not sure who the current Australian PM is but I've heard of Pauline Hanson. My impression is that she is a feisty, larger-than-life battle-axe like Ann Widdecombe and so is of special interest. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:38, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't blurb Graham, he certainly had name recognition and was well-known for his hawkish foreign policy stances, but he wasn't exactly the most transformative figure and likely didn't leave much of a legacy behind. McCain was close to a blurb because of how big of a news story his death was, and the only other senate members I'd blurb are McConnell and probably also Sanders, but we'll cross those bridges when we get to them; the point I'm making here is just that Graham wasn't at the top of the list of most effective or influential legislators so it'd be too US-centric for us to blurb him.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 17:36, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Article in decently shape, being a polarizing figure has no bearing on an RD post. However, there's an orange expand section on the section of his house tenure, a broken ref at section Relationship with Donald Trump that needs someone more technical than I to fix, and I do roughly agree with Masem's concerns about the article's overemphasis on his relationship with Trump (though I haven't looked into it too much, I can tell something's not right as-is). Departure– (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin comment The section "Tenure" has been orange-tagged for the last five years. That tag needs to go before it's eligible for posting to the main page. Schwede66 18:31, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It appears that at this point, the nomination was unilaterally changed from "RD" to "RD/Blurb". This is obviously a problem because there is some ambiguity regarding what editors are expressing the support or opposition to above. Chrisclear (talk) 04:10, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb - we keep hearing that some lower level politicians and others should be blurbed because of the nature of their death. But here we have an old man who died of natural causes. The news is nothing about the nature of their death. We can't post every politican who dies of old age - even if they are controversial. Nfitz (talk) 01:30, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This isn't a GAR, the fact that it's "too focused on his relationship with Trump" does not disqualify it from RD. Fix the tags and it will be fine. And we all know a blurb isn't happening, so let's not waste our breaths discussing it. Mlb96 (talk) 03:14, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If there's too much obvious NPOV or NOR problems, that needs fixing. I'm not asking for a GA quality, but this still falls under BLP so there needs to be far more care on those quality issues even for an RD. This is an exceptional case for an RD, where normally we're begging for sources, but the rest of the article is fine. Here, sourcing is nearly there but the article begs many issues under BLP and NPOV that should be fixed even before posting as RD. Masem (t) 03:31, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Major news as it is, this is still textbook OLDMANDIES and NTRUMP This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:24, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Not a head of state, not a head of government, ergo not worthy of a blurb. Chrisclear (talk) 04:05, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Not noteworthy enough in an intermational context. Agree with Nfitz. Mir Novov (contribs | talk) 04:42, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support His death still does not have the full details, however the quality of the article is good enough. CatPerson987 (Talk) 06:27, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Sorry why is everyone hopping in to say "Oppose blurb"? It's not being nominated for a blurb, at the very least the people commenting "Oppose blurb" should at least add on they support recent deaths since it very much so should be featured there. TheFellaVB (talk) 07:15, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Because someone added it to the header without actually proposing a blurb, simply because a few people mentioned a blurb. I've removed it from the header now as there's no chance of a blurb. jcgoble3 (talk) 07:54, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, Oppose blurb, good enough shape for RD. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:26, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD as per above. Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:50, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • I won't vote because I know little about the requirements for RD/ITN, and don't intend to learn, but I must point out that he is one of the few US senators whose death could make it to the BBC news when most of the rest of the bulletin is taken up with the developments (or non-developments) in the Ann Widdecombe murder case. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:44, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I've not seen much coverage in the UK but notice that he was the top read article by a considerable margin yesterday with over 2.5 million views, which is huge as these things go. Looking at views in other languages, the biggest interest was in Russian and I suppose that's because he was a hawk about the Ukraine war. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:59, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb - He was simply a sitting member of the legislature, and while his death was sudden and unexpected, there's nothing to indicate that it was unusual beyond that. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:57, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD per others' arguments. It Is Me Here (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural Note As it stands, this is only an RD nomination and there has been no blurb proposal. When it is just an RD nom, !votes should be confined to whether the Lindsay Graham article meets minimum quality standards, as per WP:ITNRD. Supporting a blurb but not actually amending the nomination to include a proposed blurb results in confusion and makes the voting process less clear. In future, I'd respectfully suggest that if you want to expand an RD nom to include a blurb, write a blurb and add a field to the nomination template with the text of the proposed blurb. FlipandFlopped 15:57, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, some people commented that they would support a blurb if it was a blurb nomination, so a user added it to the header, then another removed it from the header, and then another reverted it and added it to the header, and then many editors opposed adding a blurb, and then jcgoble3 removed it from the header saying it was certain to fail, and now because a bunch of editors opposed a blurb now people are opposing it even though its been removed. A very confusing process indeed, even with the full context. Throughout the process, nobody did go to the effort of adding a blurb, though. Support RD, quality is fine (if a sprawling 13,000 words), and I think the comments about the Trump section being too large are incorrect, such coverage has made up the bulk of recent coverage in his life and we are probably underserving with our content given how much obits have focused on it. 1brianm7 (talk) 18:38, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Following the "Tenure" section expansion, I think safe to move forward on RD. The article holds enough weight for a RD as it stands. --Engineerchange (talk) 17:41, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Definitely up to RD standard now. BabbaQ (talk) 07:56, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD I agree with Masem in principal, but I don't think it makes sense to deny this one while we post an article like Reneta Ford if our intent is to showcase quality items. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:22, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Admins willing to post ITN: Nom is ready for RD. ~2026-39883-93 (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Glad to see that the House tenure section was expanded to address the orange tag, but honestly the section in question was already longer than equivalent sections for most other legislators who spent a similar amount of time in the House, so that shouldn't have been a deal-breaker that prevented us from posting. Also seconding what 1brianm7 said above: there is absolutely nothing wrong with having a fairly long section about his complicated relationship with the president when this is undoubtedly the main thing RS coverage of this politician focused on throughout the final decade of his life, clearly a very important part of the story of his political career, and the entire article is lengthy enough that this section isn't disproportionately long.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 16:11, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    except that section is all proseline. It makes it read as putting every possible instance where Graham and Trump are reported in the same news report is added (a common npov issue) and stands out like a sore thumb given the rest if the article avoids proseline. If it was written more narratively, not focused on individual events or quotes but the overall way it changed that would be far more appropriate for quality. Masem (t) 16:17, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I miss the old {{proseline}} template. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:23, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    stands out like a sore thumb given the rest if the article avoids proseline A quick skim of the page shows this isn't true. The "relationship with Trump" section looks no different from the rest of the page. You could argue that means the whole page is bad, but "too many sentences begin with a date" is at worst a "yellow tag" issue, not a problem so severe that it means the page isn't presentable for readers.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 16:32, 15 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Prominent senator; article in good shape for RD. Noon (talk) 11:39, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted RD. Black Kite (talk) 09:47, 17 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Muhammad Jamiruddin Sircar

[edit source]
Article: Muhammad Jamiruddin Sircar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Former acting president of Bangladesh. Article needs some work. Onegreatjoke (talk) 05:39, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Blurb posted) Blurb/RD: Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani

[edit source]
Proposed image
Article: Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Former Emir of Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani (pictured) dies at the age of 74. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Former Emir of Qatar. Article needs some work. Onegreatjoke (talk) 05:26, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Extremely notable recent death for a former ruler of a country Stunts1990 (talk) 06:58, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Article has some unsourced statements throughout the article. Would support blurb seeing how he was the country’s emir for nearly twenty years and based on the article he really did reshape the country’s global and financial presence to what it is today. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:22, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, assuming the article is adequately sourced. Hamad was a transformative figure for Qatar in so many ways that trying to enumerate them all would require more bandwidth than is reasonable for an ITN discussion. Kurtis (talk) 09:05, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb The subject is vital and clearly made quite an impact. The establishment of Al Jazeera was quite significant, for example, as it's one of the major news sources that I tend to check for ITN purposes. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:11, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Without prejudice to the possibility of a blurb, I'm bound to observe that the impact his work had on your life specifically (or mine, or any other individual wikipedian's) cannot be a credible criterion of significance. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:59, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose RD on quality Several sections unsourced. Oppose blurb as there is no clear indication given in the article how he was considered a major figure. Just being a former world leader isn't sufficient, we need to be clear what impact they had on their nation or on international politics if we're going to take that angle, and unless such is made very clear with sources, its hand-waving to make that claim for posting as a blurb. Masem (t) 12:35, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The lead of the article clearly indicates that he was a major figure who literally transformed his emirate into the richest country in the world (per capita), founded Al Jazeera and did much more besides. If the lead didn't make this clear then having a separate legacy section wouldn't help as the lead is supposed to summarise the key points of the entire article. The lead is also the part of the article that readers start with and they usually stop there. So, it's the lead that matters most. See WP:LEAD

    The typical Wikipedia visit is a few minutes long ... The lead is the first thing most people read upon arriving at an article, and may be the only portion of the article that they read. ... The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points ...

    Andrew🐉(talk) 12:51, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The only line that clearly gives some reason context for why he's significant is the line about raising incomes in the nation, and even then, that doesn't attribute the growth directly to his actions, only that it happened under its rule. All the other points particularly in the third lede paragraph are "Okay, and...?" with respect to context of why that makes him significant. I'm all for making sure the lede summarizes the article, but it should also summarize his legacy, which it does not do, both for the lack of such discussion in the article, and the lack of such specific wording in the lede. In other words, making the claim he was a major figure is currently presented as original research, given the current state of the article. Its fixable assuming the sources, particularly obits, provide this justification. Masem (t) 13:05, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masem: Article quality has been addressed and the legacy section and the article body itself does demonstrate how Hamad was a transformative ruler of the country. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:21, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    that legacy must have been added in the last 100some edits as I know it wasn't there when I first reviewed. That addresses my primary concern on demonstrating why we are blurbing him
    Sourcing seens fibe but harder for me to confirm right now. Masem (t) 18:50, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready for blurb (for now) per Masem. While Hamad could be considered transformative, the article currently does not make this clear. Yes, wealth increased under his rule, but how was this directly connected to his policies? Yes, he founded Al Jazeera, but the article fails to explain Al Jazeera's influence. Nice4What (talk · contribs) 14:16, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nice4What: Article issue have been fixed and the legacy section/article body itself does demonstrate his influence/impact. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb once article is improved As said above, he can definitely be seen as transformative for the country. However the article is definitely not ready for RD, let alone a blurb. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 16:44, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chorchapu: Article has been improved. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    In light of the quality improvements I am now happy to Support. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:00, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb when ready ArionStar (talk) 21:06, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb on notability. I think the article makes clear enough how Hamad was a major figure (and also "transformative", although ITNRDBLURB does not actually use that word). He was quite important to the history of Qatar and for international relations in the Arab world. FlipandFlopped 15:59, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - Quite a lot of recent work has brought the article quality to Main page standards and the notability is clear. Just post it. Jusdafax (talk) 19:32, 13 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Admins willing to post ITN: ~2026-39715-63 (talk) 10:41, 14 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If you have suggestions, you can make them on the talk page. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is a volunteer project. Natg 19 (talk) 19:15, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Natg 19 My comment isn't meant to go against the idea that Wikipedia is a place for volunteer collaboration (you only have to look at my work to see that), but when there are people who volunteer to take on the responsibilities of an admin on ITN (who do an extraordinary job) and we see that posting has been slowing down for some time now, which in turn slows down updates to the Main Page and some nominations may become stale, don't you think we should at least give it some thought? Especially if it’s the case that there are admins who, for whatever reasons which we must respect, unfortunately can’t be online. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:30, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if my comment to you was harsh or poorly worded. I do wonder what can be done, besides recruiting new admins to the project. If I was an admin here, I would definitely be more wary or cautious towards posting RD blurbs (and even some "regular" blurbs) as these can be contentious or face pushback. (Though consensus for Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani seems unanimous in favor for a blurb.) Natg 19 (talk) 21:08, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It’s fine ;) _-_Alsor (talk) 21:55, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would love to be able to help but currently if I applied for adminship I have no chance of passing. In all likelihood it will be over a year until I will be able to submit myself for admin ship and be able to help out in this regard. I observe that this is also maybe a casualty of our expectations at RfA being far too stringent. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 19:32, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Chorchapu, Alsor97, and Natg 19: We could always use more quality admins, here and elsewhere. If any of you have even the tiniest thought about running in the near future, I'd highly recommend posting at WP:ORCP and/or asking the willing prospective nominators. They're both friendly low-stress ways to get independent feedback gauging your chances, and for those with a realistic shot, you'll also get good mentoring, support, and preparation. Left guide (talk) 22:06, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I've seen ORCP before but perhaps I'll have a deeper look into it. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 22:09, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW Chorchapu, I think you'd make a great admin. In solidarity, QuicoleJR (talk) 23:37, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. I do unfortunately think that the folks over at RfA would think otherwise, but I have been working to change that. A big sticking point I presume would be my relatively short tenure of 1¾ years and similarly low editcount. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 23:44, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
thanks, gonna take a look on it. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:10, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I looked into this a few years ago and even tried an ORCP but was told that I do not meet the "qualifications" for getting the mop. And nowadays I don't think I even need it. Natg 19 (talk) 23:27, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Probably because they aren't English- or American-speaking. Nfitz (talk) 19:26, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That’s a bit of a bold claim, to my memory there have also been Anglosphere noms that sat delayed like this too. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 19:34, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
'American-speaking'? Come on, that's not appropriate. GenevieveDEon (talk) 19:39, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Nfitz: Not sure how you can say this when American senator Lindsey Graham is also waiting for his RD posting from the same day. In solidarity, QuicoleJR (talk) 19:47, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
How do I say it? I use the Reply button, and then the Source editor. Perhaps you mean why do I say it? Seriouly though - it did ping 30 hours later than this one. Though obviously there sarcasm here, and a systemic problem. Nfitz (talk) 19:54, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I get there's low admin numbers here but I'm seeing new RDs getting promoted. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
ITN is poorly administered. Slow posting. Fast posting before quorum. Consensus ignored… ArionStar (talk) 21:50, 16 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

July 11

[edit source]

(Posted) RD: Jayden Adams

[edit source]
Article: Jayden Adams (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: South African soccer player who died weeks after featuring for his country at the World Cup. ArionStar (talk) 19:43, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Peppino di Capri

[edit source]
Article: Peppino di Capri (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Italian musician. ArionStar (talk) 19:43, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Patricia Greene

[edit source]
Article: Patricia Greene (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Telegraph
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: English actress Goodbyebonnie (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:50, 12 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: S. Janaki

[edit source]
Article: S. Janaki (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New Indian Express
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: Renowned Indian playback singer. Nightingale of South Indian music industry Abishe (talk) 15:47, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, article needs a lot of work—most of the lead needs to be moved into the article, and many extraordinary and unsourced claims in the lead ("She is one of the greatest and most influential singers in the history of Indian music") aren't even mentioned in the article. Celjski Grad (talk) 16:15, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Multiple footnote-free paragraphs. Multiple strings of bullet-points with no sourcing. Please add more REFs. Time is running out for this nom. --PFHLai (talk) 13:44, 18 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Dermot Murnaghan

[edit source]
Article: Dermot Murnaghan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News Sky News
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.

Nominator's comments: British TV newsreader  The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 11:11, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing removal: Flamingo Revolution

[edit source]
Article: Flamingo Revolution (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: few updates to article in recent days HudecEmil (talk) 09:50, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose removal. This is not stale. The article is still receiving substantive updates, including full prose additions for events in July rather than only minor maintenance edits; the current July section already covers continuing daily protests through 10 July. The movement also remains a major issue in Albanian political discourse and among the Albanian diaspora, not merely a one-off environmental protest.
There is also still international coverage. Reuters published a new report on 11 July about SPAK case files concerning allegedly forged land deeds connected to the Kushner-linked resort land sale, which is directly relevant to the protests and to the article's background/legal sections.[16] Reuters also covered the controversy around the government's €4 million Kanye West concert funding on 8 July, another issue that has been raised in the protest context.[17] In addition, The Guardian published an editorial on the "flamingo revolution" on 8 July,[18] Democracy Now! covered it on 9 July,[19] and the Associated Press covered the 35th consecutive night of protests on 5 July.[20]
Given the continuing daily demonstrations, ongoing article expansion, active legal/political developments, and recent international coverage, I do not think this should be removed from ongoing at this stage. Matete Plays (talk) 11:09, 11 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit source]

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: