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 appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Winter Olympics opening ceremony
Winter Olympics opening ceremony

Glossary

[edit]
  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

[edit]
  • 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]
  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

[edit]

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]
  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]
  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]

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]

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.


February 9

[edit]

February 8

[edit]

Portuguese presidential election

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 Portuguese presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: António José Seguro (pictured) is elected as the president of Portugal. (Post)
Alternative blurb: António José Seguro (pictured) of the Socialist Party wins the 2026 runoff election for president of Portugal.
News source(s): PR '26
Credits:

 Chorchapu (talk | edits) 21:06, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support ITN/R. Scuba 21:09, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As ITNR votes should focus on quality. Just being ITNR doesn't mean it's automatically postable. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 21:11, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support once updated Per Alsor above, the results prose needs to be updated for the second round and a reaction section is also needed. CastleFort1 (talk) 22:18, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Thai general election

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 Thai general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Incumbent prime minister Anutin Charnvirakul (pictured) and his Bhumjaithai Party win the 2026 Thai general election (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the Thai general election, the Bhumjaithai Party, led by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul (pictured), wins the most seats.
News source(s): [1] [2] [3]
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Thai election is ITN/R. The results have come in and media around the world is reporting on it, but the article needs to be updated. Scuba 17:39, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the PM is officially appointed Even though Anutin is most likely to lead a coalition, he is not holding absolute majority yet (as his party's seat counts is not over 50%), so I think we should wait until he was named official PM just in case the messy situation like the 2023 Thai general election happens again. NotKringe (talk) 21:26, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The blurbs back then were:
Bagumba (talk) 22:05, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's no need to wait for a PM appointment. A blurb on the election result can be posted once the header of the article is updated. CastleFort1 (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. If a new Prime Minister other than the election winner is appointed, then there could indeed be a second blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:15, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support I updated the article by adding the election result to the header and by expanding the results prose. The article appears good to go for posting. CastleFort1 (talk) 22:49, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David J. Farber

[edit]
Article: David J. Farber (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [6]
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: Bell Labs researcher, "Grandfather of the Internet" engineering professor and academic computer scientist who taught several Internet technical pioneers throughout the infancy of the Internet. Created SNOBOL language and served on many Internet organizations' boards. Schoen (talk) 16:49, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article is orange tagged. Scuba 17:02, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Japanese general election

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 Japanese general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Incumbent prime minister Sanae Takaichi (pictured) and her Liberal Democratic Party win a supermajority in the 2026 Japanese general election (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Incumbent Japanese prime minister Sanae Takaichi (pictured) and her Liberal Democratic Party is re-elected with a landslide majority.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, AP, NBC, Reuters (sources which use the term 'supermajority')
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: Japanese election is ITN/R Scuba 15:32, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • The article would benefit by including reliable sources that use the term "supermajority", as there are varying definitions. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 15:36, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    hi yes this Reuters live articlehas an entry titled: Japan: Ruling coalition has now officially won a supermajority, as does this Al Jazeera article Scuba 15:38, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    These sources should be added to the article then; currently the use of "supermajority" is unsourced. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 15:46, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I missed this nom by perhaps 30 seconds, oh well. But it is not ready to post yet. It needs information on the results. (edit conflict) (edit conflict) Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:41, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment From someone who is actively working on this article - it may be prudent to wait a bit until the vote counting is mostly done. The ruling coalition currently has a supermajority (two-thirds), however the LDP is very close to outright winning a supermajority on its own. If we wait a bit longer we can accurately specify in the blurb that it is the LDP itself that won an outright supermajority. Basil the Bat Lord (talk) 15:43, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Update: It is now confirmed that the LDP has won an outright supermajority. Basil the Bat Lord (talk) 16:15, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Second update: It is now also confirmed that the total LDP-JIP coalition won three-fourths of the House of Representatives. CastleFort1 (talk) 17:28, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support when results expanded This nomination will receive my automatic support as soon as the results prose and tables are expanded and clarified upon. CastleFort1 (talk) 15:48, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Change to support The results prose and tables are now there. I now support this nomination. CastleFort1 (talk) 22:07, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Historic victory for the LDP. Election is being covered in global news. Results tables in article are good to go. MidnightMayhem (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. NHK also reported a 2/3 majority.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 01:50, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Removed) Iranian protests (remove from ongoing)

[edit]
Article: 2025–2026 Iranian protests (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: According to the article the last significant protest was in mid-January, it is misleading to have this article remain in the "ongoing" section - Dumelow (talk) 08:01, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support The protests are effectively over after the crackdown/massacres. What we have now is the aftermath of them and Trump threats to attack Iran not the protests. Gotitbro (talk) 13:07, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – The protests have long been suppressed and over. Keeping it in ongoing is an obvious POV decision. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 13:43, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Iran is still a hotbed with the potential Israel/US attacks that have been abuzz. Even if the protests were the catalysts for these attacks as a way to threaten the current leadership, I would now expect that if the attacks were to happen, that would be a wholly separate article now, and as others have said, whatever protests have happened appeared to have been quelled. Masem (t) 13:46, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
support the hat-trick of events are put down.Psephguru (talk) 13:56, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support protests have been over for weeks, current content is just reactions to them being crushed. Scuba 16:54, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Winter Olympics (temporary Ongoing removal)

[edit]
Article: 2026 Winter Olympics (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: The Ongoing section is currently extremely crowded, and it doesn't really make sense to have it there at the same time as a blurb for the opening ceremony. We can add it back once the opening blurb rolls off. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 03:49, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't been added until the Olympics blurb rolls off. Masem (t) 03:56, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question/weak oppose Has it been our precedent to add the olympics to ongoing only after the blurb rolls off? These winter olympics only last for two more weeks. Depending on how slow the next two news weeks are, it might not roll off at all. Unless there is a clear rule to the contrary, in these special circumstances, I might lean towards having the blurb and ongoing entry simultaneously. FlipandFlopped 05:42, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, precedent for ongoing in general is to not have them when a related blurb is up. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 05:55, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There’s some kind of a precedent from the last few Olympic Games. In the past, it was posted to ongoing alongside the blurb (this was a common practice even before ongoing had been introduced). However, the recent precedent isn’t a strict rule and can be safely disregarded for the good of our readers (even if it’s a rule, we have WP:IAR). --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:46, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wait The Olympics blurb will easily be pushed downwards due to election blurbs. There are three national elections on 8 February, which may be posted within the next one or two days. CastleFort1 (talk) 13:41, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We also have the ITNR Super Bowl today Masem (t) 17:26, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that makes four incoming blurbs, which will push the Olympics blurb off ITN. CastleFort1 (talk) 17:55, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait and keep imminent posting of election ITN/r blurbs would push opening ceremony blurb anyways.
Omnifalcon (talk) 19:01, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose removal per Omnifalcon. ITN/R and other backlogged blurbs will be pushing the ceremony blurb off soon. If we want to free up space, "Iranian protests" can (finally) be removed from Ongoing. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 19:39, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - seems a bit unnecessary and bureaucratic (though I don't know what policy supports this). Ongoing "blurbs" should be briefer thougy. Support simply changing this to "Olympics" and remove the timeline. Nfitz (talk) 19:49, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose/Keep - It makes sense now to keep it, because the opening blurb is going to fall off quickly with the Japanese & Thai elections and very likely the Super Bowl blurbs. 20:52, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

February 7

[edit]

Haitian presidential transition council fails

[edit]

Article: Transitional Presidential Council (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Transitional Presidential Council of Haiti dissolves without a successor. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Transitional Presidential Council of Haiti dissolves, transferring executive power to prime minister Alix Didier Fils-Aimé.
News source(s): https://www.rfi.fr/en/international/20260207-haiti-s-transitional-council-disbands-with-nothing-to-replace-it

https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20260207-haiti-transitional-council-transfers-power-prime-minister-fils-aim%C3%A9-us-gang-violence
Credits:
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Haiti's been struggling for a while now. The council was intended to facilitate a popular election for a president though that's not in the cards right now. Bremps... 00:33, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lean support Could count as ITN/R on a technicality. While the actual office of the presidency is vacant, the Transitional Presidential Council acted with the executive powers of Haiti, and then transferred to the Prime Minister. Only a lean support since there are some duplicate citations that need to be resolved first. Quality of the article looks sufficient for posting. CastleFort1 (talk) 00:55, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: Jeane Freeman

[edit]
Article: Jeane Freeman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Herald Scotland
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: Member of the Scottish Parliament who was Minister for Social Security 2016–2018 then Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport 2018–2021. Drchriswilliams (talk) 15:46, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've added three Cn tags. The article might be ready soon. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support good to go. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:37, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Chorchapu: On closer inspection, I agree- The STV and Times obituaries both only list birth month. The source in the article is Companies House which lists a month and year for people registered as directors etc. I've update the birth dates listed accordingly. Drchriswilliams (talk) 22:09, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Brad Arnold

[edit]
Article: Brad Arnold (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today TMZ Rolling Stone
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: Lead singer of the American rock band 3 Doors Down thrashbandicoot01 (talk) 20:13, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Issues fixed. Article is still a bit short, but isn't a stub. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 20:55, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Highly notable musician and article is well referenced and comprehensive. CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 09:48, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is still orange tagged. Scuba 17:02, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

February 6

[edit]

(Posted) RD: Terrance Gore

[edit]
Article: Terrance Gore (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [7]
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.

 – Muboshgu (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Three-time world series champion. Article is decently long and has no citation needed tags or issues. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:04, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shaea al-Zindani

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Shaea al-Zindani (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Shaea al-Zindani is inaugurated as prime minister of Yemen. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Yemeni prime minister Shaea al-Zindani assumes office with his cabinet.
News source(s): https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/6/new-yemen-government-formed-with-shaya-mohsin-al-zindani-as-prime-minister
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Yemen is split in twain but he's of the internationally recognized faction; hence no qualifiers. Bremps... 01:24, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Article is kind of short and in need of more refs. Bremps... 01:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality for now Article is a stub. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Soft support I wouldn't say his article is a stub, but it is definitely start class. Scuba 15:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
How's it look now? Hsnkn (talk) 05:54, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose current blurbs per Andrew, not neutral and misleading Kowal2701 (talk) 16:24, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
ah yes we must maintain our neutrality and pretend the Houthis are a legitimate government. Scuba 18:46, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We say not that the Houthis are legitimate but that there are other threats/claimants to the internationally recognised government's power and control. Presenting it as the government of Yemen is misleading and omits important nuance. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 22:27, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Because it is a government. JaxsonR (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Transnistria, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia are also governments but we don't omit changes in Moldovan or Georgian leadership because of that. Scuba 00:42, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That would be very different, the Houthis dont claim to be a seperate country. JaxsonR (talk) 00:45, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
so what's your point? the existence of the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic doesn't exclude Lukashenko making an appearances in ITN every time he rigs an election. Scuba 21:08, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Well actually, we did note the... irregularities in the 2025 blurb and the 2020 blurb. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 21:16, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"legitimate" is a value judgement, we're better off going with the de facto situation than pushing propaganda Kowal2701 (talk) 23:15, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I would also capitalize Prime Minister of Yemen. Hsnkn (talk) 05:54, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Shouldnt this be listed at ITN/R? JaxsonR (talk) 05:56, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe so. WP:ITNELECTIONS states: "Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government [...] as listed at List of current heads of state and government." According to that list, its the president of Yemen, not the prime minister, which holds executive power. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 15:41, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sonny Jurgensen

[edit]
Article: Sonny Jurgensen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
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.

 Looks good, but would prefer if other refs can be found for the early life section and the college section - they only have 1 ref supporting all those statements. Natg 19 (talk) 21:00, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Trial of former Republic of Artsakh leaders

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Trial of former Republic of Artsakh leaders (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former members of the military-political leadership of the unrecognized Republic of Artsakh, including three former presidents and one acting president, have been sentenced by an Azerbaijan court, five of them are sentenced to life imprisonment. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ An Azerbaijani court convicts former military and political leaders of the former unrecognized Republic of Artsakh, including four former presidents.
Alternative blurb II: ​ An Azerbaijani court convicts former military and political leaders of the breakaway Republic of Artsakh, including three Artsakhi presidents (Arayik Harutyunyan pictured).
News source(s): [8]
Credits:

 Wi1-ch (talk) 18:29, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support though it should be a little more clear than Artsakh no longer exists. Could be worded like "Leadership of the former Republic of Artsakh were sentenced" Ion.want.uu (talk) 18:48, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't the point that it never existed? 05:36, 7 February 2026 (UTC) Nfitz (talk) 05:36, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"Former unrecognized Republic of Artsakh" seems to convey the point neutrally enough. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:43, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Artsakh and other unrecognized countries aren't ITN material, we never included any of these presidents in ITN when they where elected, so why should we include them now that they've been sentenced? Scuba 15:26, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ITNATA: "Opposing a specific story merely because one opposes all stories of that type ... do not often generate agreement from the community." I wouldn't agree that "unrecognized countries aren't ITN material" considering that they are posted from time to time, such as Northern Cyprus recently. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 16:40, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Cyprus was a special case because the new president was pro-unification. as said in the discussion. Scuba 18:45, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
support notable decimation of a nations.Psephguru (talk) 13:54, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support, quality is good, everything cited at least, though the Verdict section could be expanded, and possibly an Aftermath/Reactions section created. Prefer ALT 2 Kowal2701 (talk) 21:25, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support article looks excellent. The condemnation of the high-ranking civil and military authorities of a former semi-sovereign nation is, I believe, ITN-worthy, especially when it is for war. In fact, I would even consider it to be a non-independent region. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:46, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2026 Winter Olympics

[edit]
Article: 2026 Winter Olympics (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milano/Cortina starts (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milano/Cortina opens
Alternative blurb II: ​ The 2026 Winter Olympics, held in Milan and Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, opens
Alternative blurb III: ​ The Winter Olympics open in Milan and Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy.
News source(s): [9]
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: Several sports are already two days into competition. BabbaQ (talk) 15:31, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Opening Ceremony article still needs a lot of improvement. Support Winter Olympics to Ongoing for now. Natg 19 (talk) 23:09, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Could support the current blurbs, which do not bold the opening ceremony. Natg 19 (talk) 23:20, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support the opening ceremony article is now ready. Good work Rushtheeditor! Natg 19 (talk) 05:00, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Tysm! Rushtheeditor (talk) 05:01, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt3 on conciseness. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:27, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The 2026 Winter Olympics opening ceremony

2026 Islamabad suicide bombing

[edit]
Article: 2026 Islamabad suicide bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A suicide attack at a mosque during Friday prayers killed at least 31 people and more than 150 were injured in Islamabad, Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, France 24, ABC News, CBS News, The Guardian
Credits:

 Ainty Painty (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Probably should not mention injuries though. JaxsonR (talk) 14:39, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Moderate Support; let's wait for more information about preperators and if the BLA was behind it, although the IS and Taliban paper to be behind it. 4-RΔ𝚉🌑R-01𝕏 (talk) 15:47, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Major attack with dozens of fatalities, hundreds of injuries and has been covered internationally. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 17:00, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose tragic, but this kind of attacks are sadly too common in Pakistan. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:42, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Per 2026 in Pakistan, this seems to be second-deadliest attack this year. Most such bombings have fatalities in the single digits. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 01:43, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It was also the deadliest attack targeting a religious place in Pakistan since 2023. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We posted the 2025 Islamabad suicide bombing that had a smaller death toll. This is the capital of Pakistan, not a small town with no security. JaxsonR (talk) 01:48, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Soft support recentism is a factor, but with a death toll like this it shouldn't be the defining factor. Scuba 00:41, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Major attack in a capital city. Hsnkn (talk) 00:50, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Note the 2025 precedent. Bremps... 01:42, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

February 5

[edit]

RD: Vladimir Kuroyedov

[edit]
Article: Vladimir Kuroyedov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://ria.ru/20260205/rossiya-2072556019.html
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: Aside from needing to cite the awards section the article seems good enough. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:24, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support article looks good enough. Scuba 17:01, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) New START

[edit]
Article: New START (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The expiry of the New START makes Russia–United States relations without any nuclear arms reduction treaties for the first time since 1972. (Post)
Alternative blurb: New START, the last active nuclear arms reduction treaty between the United States and Russia, expires.
News source(s): CNN, The Associated Press, Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating

 UCinternational (talk) 13:34, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Added ALT1, which is more direct and relies less on the whole "first time since YYYY" thing that gets significant pushback at ITN (nevermind that the Russian Federation didn't exist in 1972, so all sources declare this to be the first time, period). Departure– (talk) 14:04, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We are in a new era in which neither Putin nor Trump can be relied on to observe any treaty, and Trump in particular, has been tearing up lots of them lately. Because of their actions, other powers such as Germany are now contemplating getting nuclear weapons. So, this particular expiry seems a small detail compared to the overall assessment of the scientists who set the Doomsday Clock to its most advanced setting recently. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:04, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A treaty expires is not really a news, only what happened afterwards that is noteworthy enough is. NotKringe (talk) 14:54, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a random treaty randomly expiring and plentiful top-tier WP:RS coverage tells something very different. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:53, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose – AlexeyKhrulev did a nice job expanding the article, but it doesn't feel quite quality enough yet. Doing a quick Google News search, it looks like ITNSIGNIF is easily met. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:50, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    More specifically, there's four citation-neededs, one clarify, and one 'unreliable source?'. I just changed a whole section to past tense, but that section probably requires some updates based on new information. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:15, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Is this the start of new nuclear arms race (Nuclear arms race#Post–Cold War)? Perhaps. But while a treaty expiring is news, it is isn't significant in and of itself. As the significance here entirely relies on WP:CRYSTAL what nows. If the treaty was violated or otherwise terminated out of process, its termination then would be significant news itself but that is not the case here. Gotitbro (talk) 18:58, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I would like to object to opposes based on WP:CRYSTAL. It is policy, but only regarding article contents. If the world media is into some inane feeding frenzy over what proves to be a nothingburger, and we share the FACT up front that they are into silly speculation, there is no WP policy violation. The only embarrassment on our end is that we encouraged clickbait trash. ~2026-81816-3 (talk) 23:27, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when properly updated, the expiration of a treaty can be just as fitting to be posted on ITN as the signing of the treaty itself. I see no CRYSTAL in saying that the treaty has ceased. --GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 23:31, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support – definitely ITN worthy and the article is in good enough shape. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:51, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this is now featured in German Wikipedia's ITN and made it there very quickly as many editors understood the notability. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:11, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Altblurb for conciseness. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:02, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support Altblurb - Definitely significant and notable enough to be ITN. Also agree with GhostStalker that there is no WP:CRYSTAL in saying that this treaty has expired. ***Eliza*** (talk) 09:19, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hotline I'm still not convinced that this treaty is a big deal as Russia already suspended participation in 2023. But I see that, in other fresh news from the Ukraine peace talks, the US and Russian military have re-established their hotline which may help in resolving incidents. Our article about that needs work though: Moscow–Washington hotline. Recall also Dr Strangelove and wonder how those calls between Putin and Trump compare. In that movie, the crisis was triggered by fluoridation and now, RFK plan's are advancing. "Truth is stranger than fiction"! Andrew🐉(talk) 11:00, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Fluoridation was just a cover story, a rationalization for irrational behavior. More specifically, it was triggered by a rogue general whose simultaneous hatred of communism and impotence in his love-life drove him to the ultimate form of compensation. In fact, his character was very likely based on Curtis LeMay, who apart from dutifully drawing up strategic bombing plans for annihilating Russia, apparently had repeatedly sought to nuke North Korea into oblivion during the Korean War so much so that new security protocols were set in place to prevent unauthorized use of nuclear weapons.
    If the latter is indeed true, then I would hesitate to draw parallels between now and the past, particularly to Dr. Strangelove, since the Cold War was a much different time both strategically and technologically. That said, I tend to agree that the reestablishment of the hotline (which is actually not a red phone, as commonly believed) is a bigger deal. Duly signed, WaltClipper -(talk) 13:04, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The BBC report links the hotline with START:

    This marks a significant rapprochement between the world's two largest nuclear powers and comes after President Donald Trump repeatedly voiced his desire to normalise relations between both countries.
    The announcement also came amid reports the US and Russia were negotiating a deal to extend a nuclear arms reduction treaty due to expire on Thursday.

    It seems that Russia and the US are actively negotiating and so this is a work-in-progress. We should perhaps await a conclusion.
    Andrew🐉(talk) 13:25, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems I've been subject to a bout of word blindness[sarcasm]; nowhere in that quote does it mention the hotline. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 16:19, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If the BBC doesn't work for you, try Euronews, The US and Russia have agreed to resume military communications hotlines following talks... Andrew🐉(talk) 20:14, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    In the Euronews article, it has the opposite problem - not mentioning the nuclear deal. This nomination isn't about the hotline, it's about the nuclear deal (or newly-lack-thereof). Thus this entire thread, is really pointless. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 22:56, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This is breaking news about ongoing negotiations and so different sources present the emerging details in different ways. See Axios for coverage of both these aspects and more including extensions to and modifications of New Start. These matters are all related aspects of Russian-US military relations which are now evolving. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:29, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Blurb-worthy news that could well affect all life on Earth. Jusdafax (talk) 18:49, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support given the global importance of New START, not WP:CRYSTAL as we're not speculating on a new arms race but only pointing out that the treaty expired. The specifics of its renegotiation and how it connects to the reopening of the hotline are all a bit murky, so I wouldn't be opposed to keeping our options open for updating the blurb in that regards. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:38, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - global importance. Article looks good.BabbaQ (talk) 11:22, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, altblurb looks good. The lack of any nuclear arms protections has immediate effect, not just speculation. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 14:23, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt per Chaotic Enby. Prefer the alt per Departure. FlipandFlopped 01:42, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Admins willing to post ITN: Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 19:04, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It's orange-tagged. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:44, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Took about twenty seconds fixing the issue you added the orange tag for :) Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 20:27, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    You didn't fix it. For example, there's a deadlines section which lists a bunch of things to be done in the future. But that's all history now. Did they happen? The article doesn't say. This is essentially the proseline problem of isolated updates being made as things happen. The treaty now has a long history and it needs consolidating in a retrospective way. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a diary. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:44, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 21:56, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Masalit genocide

[edit]

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: Masalit genocide (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Should be added in parentheses with Sudan war. This article was changed to "genocide" relatively recently, and I believe any ongoing genocide should be on the front page, similar to how the Gaza genocide was. I want the second Darfur genocide page up instead, but it is of lower quality. Also, sorry I wasn't sure what date to put an ongoing event on. Pencilceaser123 (talk) 00:37, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose only two edits this year. Greedycell (talk) 00:49, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for several reasons. The topic is not receiving coverage in the news and the article has no substantial updates in almost 2 months so fails WP:ITNSIGNIF. The "Masalit genocide" also does not have scholarly recognition, and has so far not been added to List of genocides. The article is currently orange tagged although that could be easily fixed. Finally, the Gaza genocide is still ongoing but was removed from ITN, so that comparison doesn't work. EvansHallBear (talk) 00:57, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The Gaza genocide article wasn't added to ongoing because any ongoing genocide should be on the front page, it was because it was frequently updated. I anticipate a WP:SNOW close. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 01:00, 5 February 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.

February 4

[edit]

RD: Lee Hamilton

[edit]
Article: Lee Hamilton (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington 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: US Representative, Vice-Chair of the 9/11 Commission. Article has orange tag. Goosedukeee (talk) 18:53, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose multiple orange tags. Scuba 17:00, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mickey Lolich

[edit]
Article: Mickey Lolich (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [10]
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.

 Greedycell (talk) 18:53, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support besides the sports trivia, the actual biographical information in the article looks good. Scuba 17:01, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Elizabeth Kelly

[edit]
Article: Elizabeth Kelly (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [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: English actress Omelettemaker (talk) 16:37, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:38, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no citations in the Filmography. Scuba 16:59, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Virgo

[edit]
Article: John Virgo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News The Independent
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: English snooker commentator and professional snooker player. ItsShandog (talk) 09:47, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support absolute hero of mine. Absolutely distraught. Will hopefully get some more work done on it over the next couple of days in addition Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:54, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Ongoing: Olympics

[edit]
Article: Chronological summary of the 2026 Winter Olympics (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Curling starts inside 12 hours, although the official opening is friday for the blurb. Psephguru (talk) 06:09, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose (for now) — Let's post a blurb for the opening ceremony. If that blurb rolls off before the Games end, then I think an ongoing entry would be warranted, but for now I don't see a need. DecafPotato (talk) 06:30, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait The Olympics are typically an ongoing item and it is listed at ITN/R (The Olympics, as the world's leading multi-day multi-sport event, is accepted as an appropriate "ongoing" entry.), but we should wait until after the opening ceremony, as that is the official start of the Games. Additionally the ongoing item should just be 2026 Winter Olympics, not this other article. Natg 19 (talk) 07:45, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's better to have 2026 Winter Olympics as the target article. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:34, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Chronology has the updates.Psephguru (talk) 10:50, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@MtPenguinMonster Another way to do it is to link the Olympics main page and then this summary in parentheses Thedevilif (talk) 14:00, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds reasonable. How was it during the paris games? Psephguru (talk) 07:31, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - Lets wait until the opening ceremony blurb rolls off. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:37, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Technically yes, but officially no. The Games begin at the opening ceremony, though for scheduling reasons there are events earlier than that. Natg 19 (talk) 00:24, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There's already been major events, such as yesterday's Canada-Czechia curling match. I'm not sure why waiting 24 hours for an ongoing makes much difference, unless we think the Olympics may be cancelled or something. It's all over the news right now. It's front pages of major papers here today, and at least one of them yesterday. Nfitz (talk) 19:14, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support propsal of EvansHallBear. The main article looks good enough to be added as ongoing, given that it will plenty of updates as the games go on. V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 02:35, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think ongoing should be added when games begin, before the Opening Ceremony. I know that is a minority opinion but there are events happening now.
Omnifalcon (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there is a proposal to withdrawl this ongoing item at the subheader Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Winter Olympics (temporary Ongoing removal). Departure– (talk) 04:17, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

February 3

[edit]

RD: Tom Britt

[edit]
Article: Tom Britt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
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: American interior designer. Obit published 3 February. Thriley (talk) 23:17, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Soft support very close to being a stub, but it has enough sources, albeit barely. Scuba 16:59, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) February 2026 Kwara State attacks

[edit]
Article: 2026 Kwara State attacks (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Attacks on two villages by Islamic State-affiliated Lakurawa gunmen in Kwara State, Nigeria, kill at least 162 people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Attacks on two villages by Islamist gunmen in Kwara State, Nigeria, kill at least 162 people.
News source(s): Associated Press BBC
Credits:

Article updated

 Chomik! (talk?) 00:53, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Attacks like this one are fairly common in Nigeria but I think this rises high enough to warrant a blurb. The article is on the short side and can of course be expanded, but everything is cited and it is of sufficient quality to post. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 01:24, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support - For an obvious reason, however, it should just say Islamic State. JaxsonR (talk) 02:14, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, why? It seems like this is an IS-affiliated group operating within Nigeria. Natg 19 (talk) 03:51, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Being the Islamic State and being affiliated with the Islamic State are two different things. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:53, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support because as Chorchapu said, deadly attacks by gunmen in Nigeria are common, however, it is not often that over 100 people are killed. I would like to see is the article be expanded though. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:52, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for more information per @Andrew Davidson Scooglers (talk) 13:22, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what more information we need to wait on. It is already confirmed by multiple sources that the attackers were motivated by Islamic extremism and were trying to force the residents to submit to their doctrines. [12] [13]
The only thing that is not known is which group did the attack (between Boko Haram and Lakurawa), although that is addressed in the article and by the alt blurb. Chomik! (talk?) 14:12, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt, article is good quality ("Perpetrators" and "Aftermath" sections are a little short though) Kowal2701 (talk) 17:40, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt Article is of good quality and issue is notable. Bremps... 01:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt – Article is in good quality, the story has a notable death toll and is widely covered. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 14:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:48, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: US military buildup in the Middle East

[edit]

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 United States military buildup in the Middle East (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): CNN, etc.
Credits:

Article updated
 An ongoing development, with recent engagement of a US fighter jet and Iranian drone and US tanker vs gunboats. Also handy to track armada's movements when nothing is happening. Brandmeister talk 09:33, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Since the Iran protests fell out of the news this has replaced it. We also featured Venezuela's build up. JaxsonR (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose mostly on significance per Andrew and Gotitbro. Additionally, the article is not particularly high quality with vague references to "regional instability" and some poor sourcing (WP:AAPOLITICS and WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS). EvansHallBear (talk) 18:36, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. If major military action occurs, nominate that for a blurb. Simply moving forces around is not a major event in itself, nor suitable for the ongoing section. Modest Genius talk 19:01, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where in the world is...? I thought it would be interesting to see a live map of the current locations of the 11 US CVNs. There are tracking sites for the world's shipping using AIS but I find that this gets turned off by such vessels when such operations are in progress. So, for example, the Abraham Lincoln became a ghost ship after it passed through the Straits of Malacca recently. And this sets up the possibility of spoofing and feints.
Our article uses CNN as a source for the movement of that ship and CNN attributes unnamed "sources". But CNN is no longer accredited by the Pentagon so I wonder what they are...?
Andrew🐉(talk) 19:37, 4 February 2026 (UTC) (edit conflict)[reply]
A live/real time map of an ongoing event is absolutely outside the purpose of WP. We can keep current but the tracking of military ships at that resolution is just not accept (and strictly from a NOTNEWS perspective, not anything like related to national security). Masem (t) 21:34, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There have been numerous times that "US Carrier Task Force relocated to the Middle East" headline has happened since 9/11. Usually to saber-rattle at Iran. Less frequently they send one to East Asian waters when North Korea needs a reminder.Danthemankhan 19:57, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per all above. Please... _-_Alsor (talk) 21:13, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per above. Wait until a blurb-worthy event occurs if any to avoid WP:CRYSTAL. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 22:57, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. As of now it's just a meaningless pressure move. V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 00:09, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until something actually happens as the US moves forces around all the time, especially in the Middle East. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 02:17, 5 February 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: John Terris

[edit]
Article: John Terris (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360943154/former-lower-hutt-mayor-john-terris-dies
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: New Zealand politician. Article looks good aside from a single missing citation. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:48, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Uncited sentence removed as negative unsourced statement in a BLP (after searching, I was unable to find information about him being convicted for drunk driving in 1986). Pretty close; can the lede be expanded slightly? SpencerT•C 12:02, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted blurb) RD/Blurb: Saif al-Islam Gaddafi

[edit]
Proposed image
Articles: Saif al-Islam Gaddafi (talk · history · tag) and Assassination of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the second son of Libya's former leader Muammar Gaddafi and presidential candidate, is assassinated outside of his home by four unidentified gunmen. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Libyan presidential candidate Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the second son of Muammar Gaddafi, is assassinated.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Libyan politician Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, a son of Muammar Gaddafi still wanted by the ICC, is assassinated in Zintan.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Libyan politician Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, a son of Muammar Gaddafi wanted by the ICC for crimes against humanity, is assassinated in Zintan.
News source(s): https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/saif-al-islam-gaddafi-son-late-libyan-leader-has-been-killed-sources-say-2026-02-03/
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: Son of Muammar Gaddafi and Gaddafi loyalist presidential candidate who was just assassinated. Article seems to be nearly there. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:23, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Looks good to go. This is also appears to be a good blurb candidate. Gotitbro (talk) 19:32, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine with the proposed blurb and alt blurb, certainly oppose alt blurb 2 and 3 for serious BLPVIO. To further illustrate the precedent, we have not inserted the still standing ICC warrants against Netanyahu and Putin in recent blurbs to do so for a much more low profile BLP would then be bizarre. Gotitbro (talk) 05:49, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, also a good blurb candidate The article for the son of Gaddafi is good in quality to post for RD. This is also a blurb candidate, and so my advice for this would be to just bold the Saif al-Islam Gaddafi article and leave the article of the assassination unbolded since the assassination article is still a stub. CastleFort1 (talk) 21:25, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If interested in an image, the Wikimedia Commons photo of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi from 2021 first needs a license review. CastleFort1 (talk) 22:23, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support and mention that he was a presidential candidate This is a major event for Libya, he was polling very high (only second to Dbeibeh) for the upcoming election planned in April 2026. No doubt needs the coverage in the form of a blurb, and the election candidate part should be mentioned as its important in regards to assassinations (ie. how it was mentioned when Miguel Uribe Turbay was assassinated 9 months before the election) ☞ Rim < Talk | Edits > 22:05, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb, this is Death as the Story of a notable individual (and not just as a son of Gadaffi. No evaluation on Readiness of article. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 22:19, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb per death-as-story (though the assassination article is, understandably, still embryonic). Photo? There's one in his article. Moscow Mule (talk) 22:27, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - Information surrounding his assassination is limited. JaxsonR (talk) 23:08, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb on notability, quality is mostly there but the "International diplomacy" section is missing some sources (including for a quote which is explicitly required per WP:V). Maybe link "is assassinated" instead of just "assassinated" so it doesn't look like it's a link to the definition of assassination? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:03, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Death is the story and a game changer like Miguel Uribe Turbay. ArionStar (talk) 01:19, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support death is the story assassination. I've added alt1. 1brianm7 (talk) 04:22, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb The assassination of a presidential candidate is unusual and notable. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:52, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
support blurb alt1 per above and notable end to the Gaddafi era (however remove last 15 years).Psephguru (talk) 05:59, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. An assassination of a presidential candidate is notable. He was also the son of a very notable politician (Muammar Gaddafi). The assassination article should be expanded however. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:56, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The election has been postponed for almost a decade and there's little reason to trust that it's going to be held this year (thus it's difficult to compare him to, say, António José Seguro in Portugal). The government itself has not consolidated control in Libya and is not the only government. The "son of Gaddafi" angle would be more convincing if he still had a chance of inheriting power, but Gaddafi was overthrown. Bremps... 21:18, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

support if changed, see below, but alt 1 of the three Very much notable, but this one is better-worded and doesn't have the un-cited elements of the text. TBH I don't think the wording of any of them are perfect, but this is the best one. I'd rather something like 'Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the second son of Muammar Gaddafi, is assassinated [in Zintan, Libya]." The 2nd alternative one is too partisan and raises irrelevant information, it should be disregarded out of hand. LevatorScapulaeSyndrome (talk) 16:24, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I like that wording: short and sweet, no editorializing. I'd even drop the "second": Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of Muammar Gaddafi, is assassinated in Zintan, Libya." Or does that violate Sea of Blue? Moscow Mule (talk) 16:41, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it matters too much whether you have the 'second' or not, but if you do, I'd change "the son of..." to "son of...", as "the son of..." kind of implies that he's the ONLY son, which is not the case. LevatorScapulaeSyndrome (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with Altblurb2 or Altblurb3. Saif Gaddafi was wanted for crimes against humanity, so I would go for Altblurb3. Many readers won't know what the ICC is, but seeing "crimes against humanity" they'll guess that it's a court. Considering the huge walls of text that go into title debates and Wikivoice for "genocide", here we have an uncontroversial case: Saif Gaddafi was definitely indicted for crimes against humanity. Boud (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    An indictment is not definitive at all, as crimes against humanity have only been alleged and not proved. As such, altblurb3 falls afoul of WP:BLPCRIME. EvansHallBear (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    In this case there is no exclusion under WP:BLPCRIME, which states that it only applies to individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures.... Saif Gaddafi was clearly a public figure: WP:BLPPUBLIC. Boud (talk) 22:41, 4 February 2026 (UTC) (PS: I did write definitely, not definitively. Boud (talk) 22:44, 4 February 2026 (UTC))[reply]
    The issue is that altblurb3 wording implies he has definitely committed crimes against humanity while these have only been alleged. The WP:BLPCRIME guidance that Accusations, investigations, arrests and charges do not amount to a conviction applies to both public and non-public figures. Adding "alleged" or "suspected" would be enough to fix the blurb. EvansHallBear (talk) 22:53, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The word "wanted" does not say that Gaddafi definitely committed crimes against humanity; it just means that he was indicted, so it already contains the "alleged" (by witnesses) and "suspected" meanings, but is somewhat stronger, because charges were laid and an arrest warrant issued. Putting "alleged" in to the blurb would be tricky, because there's not much doubt about the killing/injuring/arresting, it's rather the question of intentionality and Saif Gaddafi's allegedly direct role in decision-making and giving orders. How about ... wanted by the ICC for alleged responsibility for crimes against humanity ...? There doesn't seem to be a suggestion that he did the killings and persecutions himself - this is a case where the ICC went for the top political leaders apparently responsible for the crimes, believing that they had enough evidence to go up the chain of command. If we wanted newsy-speak, we could put ... wanted by the ICC for allegedly masterminding crimes against humanity ..., but since the responsibility also included (at least) his father, it would have to be ... for allegedly co-masterminding .... Boud (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, but needs work - When I voted initially, the article for the assassination itself was very short and void of a lot of information, an issue which seems to have since been largely remedied. Once some additional citations are added for the places where they're missing, it should be good to go. Preferably blurbed with any of the proposed altblurbs. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 20:35, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree, the assassination article is barely above stub level and most of the article is just a background section. The bolded article should be the article about Gaddafi himself. Natg 19 (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

February 2

[edit]

RD: Gabor Boritt

[edit]
Article: Gabor Boritt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gettysburg Connection
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: American Civil War historian Engineerchange (talk) 22:19, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article is orange tagged due to lack of citations. Scuba 16:57, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Chuck Negron

[edit]
Article: Chuck Negron (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
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: Founding member of Three Dog Night~2026-76047-6 (talk) 02:49, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose article in pretty bad shape source-wise. Scuba 16:57, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ranjit Das (footballer)

[edit]
Article: Ranjit Das (footballer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Daily Star
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: In decent shape. Natg 19 (talk) 18:33, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:09, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose countless people who are many times as notable aren't/haven't been featured. Article quality is not the only criteria. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:53, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is RD. In fact, article quality is the only criteria. The recent death of any person (or animal) with a Wikipedia article is considered notable enough to post. If you believe that the subject does not deserve an article, then start an AfD. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 17:55, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for explaining. I struck my vote. Looks like I'd need to take this concern to the talk page about RD. I think other criteria/notability should also be considered and would then also encourage minimum quality requirement standards to be slightly reduced and maybe more people to be nominated via scans for unnominated people in the respective month's deaths cat. --Prototyperspective (talk) 18:05, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Costa Rica election

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 Costa Rican general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Laura Fernández Delgado (pictured) is elected as the president of Costa Rica. (Post)
News source(s): CNN
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: With over 3/4 of the votes counted, Fernandez has achieved a majority. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 04:12, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

:Oppose article needs a lot of work. It needs more in-depth coverage of the election (background, prose on candidates and results sections, Aftermath and/or Reactions section, more extensive Campaign) and covers almost nothing about the Legislative Assembly elections. The article in Spanish may help. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:18, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am improving the article. A helping hand would be great, especially to include updated tables in the infobox and legislative assembly results, and to expand the campaign section (it would be desirable to compile the candidates' proposals). _-_Alsor (talk) 00:29, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Alsor97: I can help with expansion. Which parts do you plan to work on, to avoid edit conflicts? Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:31, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Chorchapu I won't continue until tomorrow, so feel free to edit without any worries on my part. The campaign section needs to be expanded: you can take a look at 2025 Chilean general election and 2025 Honduran general election, which I worked recently on and think will give you some guidance. Thank you! _-_Alsor (talk) 00:35, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thank you as well! Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Chorchapu And also a section about parliamentary candidates is needed. _-_Alsor (talk) 00:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'll keep that in mind as well. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:37, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'll support this blurb once the campaign section is expanded via content from the Spanish article. A results prose appears to exist in the header of the article at this time, and it can be simply transferred over to the results section. CastleFort1 (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Change to support The campaign and aftermath sections have been expanded. Results have their respective proses. Amount of sourcing is adequate. The article appears ready to post. CastleFort1 (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Article significantly expanded since original nomination, and contains an acceptable amount of prose and is fully cited. Seeing no reason to oppose any longer. Has the quality I would expect for a front page article of a current event. Certainly could probably continue to be expanded, but at present, it looks ready! AaronNealLucas (talk) 02:18, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

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: