Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

Page for suggesting items for "In The News" 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.

Smiljan Radić Clarke in 2019
Smiljan Radić Clarke

Glossary

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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, 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

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...

  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...

  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

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.

Structure

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.

More information Discussions of items older than seven days are automatically archived ...
Close


March 15

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 15 ...
Close

Update posted blurb: 2026 Winter Paralympics closing

Articles: 2026 Winter Paralympics (talk · history · tag) and 2026 Winter Paralympics closing ceremony (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  The Winter Paralympics close in northern Italy. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Update to an already posted blurb. CastleFort1 (talk) 21:46, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: Bruno Salomone

Article: Bruno Salomone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:

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

 Varoon2542 (talk) 02:22, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Oppose Article is way too short, and the tables need sourcing. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

March 14

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 14 ...
Close

(ready) RD: Gemma Cuervo

Article: Gemma Cuervo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El Mundo
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: One of the most beloved Spanish actresses. Been working on her article, might be ready _-_Alsor (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Support, article long enough with no issues. Alexcalamaro (talk) 08:13, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Long enough and sourced. Grimes2 08:32, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:45, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support I did not spot any glaring issues from a quick readthrough. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 12:26, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

(Closed) Ongoing removal: Russo-Ukrainian war

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


Nominator's comments: I think this is the right time to remove this from ongoing for two reasons. Firstly, coverage in English-language reliable sources has significantly declined, and most news articles are pertaining to journalistic analyses of what the Iran war means for Ukraine and what impact does Zelensky have on the upcoming Hungarian parliamentary election. I just took a look at the 'War in Ukraine' portal on the BBC to note that the news documenting the last major attack with significant death toll was published eight days ago. Secondly, the timeline article chiefly relies on Ukrainian and Russian websites—RBC News Ukraine, The Kyiv Independent, Ukrainska Pravda, Militarnyi and Moscow Times—which raises concerns about whether this coverage is WP:DUE policy-wise. In this context, if there is insufficient coverage in third-party English-language reliable sources to sustain regular daily updates, it is a clear sign that its status as an ongoing story should be revisited. We all know that this war is notable geopolitically, but we simply cannot keep it in ongoing forever (note that even the COVID-19 pandemic was not posted that long, and it was removed at time when it was still the most important ongoing story globally with significantly more in-depth coverage). --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Obvious Oppose Even a cursory glance at international media shows it's still pretty much in the news. Der Spiegel just published a whole video on Russian prisoners being drafted into the war. Le Monde has a live blog at this moment, highlighting Russia's latest attack on Ukrainian cities. The Economist had an article on the impact of the war on Ukraine's real estate market. Even the points you make highlight the importance of the Russo-Ukrainian war - why would anyone report on a spat between Orban and Zelensky if it wasn't because Hungary is holding up EU support for Ukraine (again)? The covid comparison also makes no sense: the pandemic lasted less time than the war, so obviously it stayed in Ongoing for less time. Khuft (talk) 20:55, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose Six people have been killed in Ukraine *today*. Also today the European Council extended sanctions against Russia. There are literally dozens of articles published today alone regarding the war. In your own nomination you have highlighted the ongoing coverage of different aspects of the war including the links between this war and the Iran war. I'm failing to see a credible argument to remove. AusLondonder (talk) 21:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • @Khuft and AusLondonder: The information from the news articles you linked to is neither in the articles on the war nor on the timeline. I don't think finding external sources with information that isn't available on Wikipedia is a strong argument that this should be kept. A problem in providing daily updates from third-party reliable sources to articles with links on the main page, which is clearly the case here, is a good reason for removal. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:29, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose The Russo-Ukrainian war is still in the news and the articles are still receiving frequent updates. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:19, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • WTAF Oppose - it remains massive news nearly every single day in major interational media. I can't comprehend why someone would nominate this. Nfitz (talk) 23:56, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose Sadly, the war is still very much ongoing, and it's not going to change soon. Trepang2 (talk) 00:05, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose to fullest extent I still see pretty regular updates to this on the current events portal all the time. It has not ended. Gaismagorm (talk) 00:17, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose: The idea that articles—even if on the main page—should be instantly updated with all relevant events is misplaced. Wikipedia is not a news site; there is inherent lag time between when sources first report on an event and when that information can be verified and added to the article. Following this, I suspect the reason why the timeline article does rely so heavily on Ukrainian and Russian sources is because they tend to report on events earlier and in more detail than the wider international media, so their use keeps the timeline more current. As for COVID-19, it was removed when the article stopped receiving regular updates; these articles continue to be regularly updated (in spite of the last "major attack" having occurred over a week ago). I fail to see which part of WP:ONGOING these articles do not meet. --Leviavery (talk) 00:50, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Searching "ukraine war" on the Google news tab yields many results published within the last 24 hours, including an European Council report on extended sanctions and an Al Jazeera article on the six deaths caused by Russia today and the aforementioned sanctions. Definitely still a relevant and ongoing subject. ----DannyC55 (TalkContributions) 01:10, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
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.

RD/Blurb: Jürgen Habermas

Proposed image
Article: Jürgen Habermas (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  German philosopher Jürgen Habermas dies at the age of 96. (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel
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: Death just announced. One of the most well-known current-day philosophers - maybe worth a blurb? Khuft (talk) 14:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Several unsourced sections. If there is going to be a blurb, there should also be a better discussion in the body of why he was consdiered an influential modern day philosophers; while his studies are documented in depth, that doesn't necessarily translate as being influential. The awards suggest that too but again, awards alone don't necessarily translate. Masem (t) 14:31, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
As his death was just announced, let's see if the upcoming obituaries can give us fodder for a Legacy section. Khuft (talk) 14:46, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support blurb I'd not heard of him before but he's level 4 vital and so is in good company. For comparison, note that Tony Hoare is level-5 vital and most other RDs are not vital at all.
The article failed a GA review but that was in 2006 and it seems quite respectable now. And it has a good picture that we can use.
Andrew🐉(talk) 14:35, 14 March 2026 (UTC) (edit conflict)
For plain RDs we do not care at all about vital position, only that the person was notable. We also have already dismissed the automatic inclusion of vital level 4 as blurbs just recently, though that certainly points to a good possibility for a blurb, but all other factors must be met including quality which this clearly fails right on that factor alone. Masem (t) 14:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Howardcorn33 recently proposed that level-4 vital subjects be presumed notable enough for a blurb. The discussions rambled on at the talk page without a clear conclusion and have scrolled off now without a formal close. That's usually what happens to most suggestions there. I still think the idea has merit and level-4s usually do get blurbs. Note that Margaret Thatcher is level-4 vital too and so this guy is in the same league by that assessment. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:52, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Habermas is certainly a giant in his field, there should be no question as to if he should be blurbed or not, the V4 designation is well-warranted.
Furthermore, while I did personally withdraw both the proposals, I do see grounds for an RfC on this matter given that it garnered a lot of discussion and did not receive a formal close. ―Howard🌽33 15:00, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Which means there was no consensus to use Vital Article status as a measure for ITN. Masem (t) 15:39, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Which just means that it's not automatic. Editors are then free to use the VITAL assessment or not as they please. Looking at how they arrived at the assessment, I find a discussion back in 2008. What I like about their process is that Habermas is compared to others in his field. That seems more sensible than what happens here, where we assess people in isolation or by comparison with people in other fields. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Sure they *could* use it, but just like using page views or OLDMANDIES as a rational, its not associated with how we determine significant figures per RD blurb guidelines, and will become tedious to keep suggesting it. There *are* very good reasons this deserves a blurb, and it doesn't rely on vital article status. Masem (t) 21:02, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
RD blurb guidelines are at WP:ITNRDBLURB and they are quite sketchy. There are no precise criteria and the determination is described as sui generis. Masem's method is to look for a legacy section. Mine is to consult WP:VITAL. Others offer their personal assessment. Anything goes. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:24, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Support on significance/oppose on quality: certainly needs to be featured due to his prominence, but uncited statements in the article need to be addressed. ―Howard🌽33 15:03, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Support blurb on significance; one of the most influential philosophers of the C20/21. Oppose on quality, however. Black Kite (talk) 15:47, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Too much CN tags There are about 20 citation needed tags in the article. These should be resolved first before moving toward an RD or a blurb. CastleFort1 (talk) 16:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Yeah I added all of those tags just now. I've added some citations to plug the leaks but many more are needed. ―Howard🌽33 16:47, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support blurb in principle. Yes, he was arguably the greatest contemporary philosopher, so this a clear-cut case for a blurb. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:04, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support blurb on significance but the article issues need to be sorted our first. Habermas is as good as it gets for a blurb candidate in his field. PS: The navelgazing skullduggery over internal enwiki article organizing, discussions of which serve no purpose other than tangential cruft, is only one of the reasons for Andrew's current troubles at ANI stemming from this board. Gotitbro (talk) 17:20, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
    It really just needs some one or two paragraphs (if not more) to explain this rather than having the reader having to deduce this through the amount of coverage of his ideas. NYTimes gave him a long-form obit, that's usually a good place to start from, even Reuters coverage establish why he was important in post-war Germany. it should be easy to build these paragraphs, they just need to be added in addition to the CN. Masem (t) 19:55, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support blurb A towering figure in 20th century philosophy and sociology. The article is being heavily edited now and will likely meet all the standards soon. Trepang2 (talk) 00:02, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
    I've tried to add citations to the "Life and career" section. No clue how to progress on the other parts. ―Howard🌽33 00:28, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

March 13

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 13 ...
Close

RD: John Alford

Article: John Alford (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:

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

 Happily888 (talk) 02:22, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Oppose due to insufficient sourcing. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:00, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: John M. Perkins

Article: John M. Perkins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
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: Article in decent shape, but honorary doctorates and legacy programs needs more citations ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 20:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Needs work Some issues I spotted: Career section reads very proseline. Honorary doctorates, John M. Perkins Fellows & Legacy programs are uncited while the awards section only has one award cited. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 11:38, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: Phil Campbell

Article: Phil Campbell (musician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
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 musician, best known as guitarist for Motörhead. Needs some additional citations. Black Kite (talk) 16:00, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Not ready as the discography is unreferenced and there are multiple uncited statements in the Motörhead and Equipment sections. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 11:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: İlber Ortaylı

Article: İlber Ortaylı (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Daily Sabah
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: Turkish historian and professor. Palhassa (talk) 17:48, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Not ready Life and career has some major sourcing issues. Books section need ISBNs. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 12:46, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

March 12

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 12 ...
Close

RD: Hjálmar H. Ragnarsson

Article: Hjálmar H. Ragnarsson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Morgunblaðið
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: Leading Icelandic composer, rector of the national music university. The article, created in 2025, seems in good shape. Nominating because the the creator may not know this place. I made small formality corrections. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:00, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Support It needed a portrait so I took care that of that. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:47, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Comprehensive coverage. Yakikaki (talk) 18:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Long enough and sourced. Grimes2 16:24, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

(Posted) 2026 Pritzker Architecture Prize

Proposed image
Article: Smiljan Radić Clarke (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  Chilean architect Smiljan Radić Clarke (pictured) is awarded the Pritzker Architecture Prize. (Post)
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: May need some work, but this is ITN/R. Natg 19 (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Viña Vik
  • Picture his work As discussed in past years, we should picture some of his work rather than just another mugshot. I've not found anything grand yet as that doesn't seem to be his style so consider his bus stop vineyard, for example. (pictured) Andrew🐉(talk) 09:09, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
I disagree. I feel ITN images should primarily focus on featuring the primary subject(s) of the blurb (in this case, Smiljan and the prize itself), rather than adjacent subjects. ~2026-16121-05 (talk) 12:16, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Unless it was an extremely famous building that we could expect most people to recognize, its far better to feature the person than an example of their work, as the reader can then visit that page and see any examples included there. Masem (t) 12:42, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
This bus stop is not by Smiljan Radić Clarke. Grimes2 17:45, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Good point – I've removed it. Commons doesn't seem to have his work well categorised but I did a search there and found some images of the Viña Vik vineyard, which looks more impressive. That place had multiple architects too but this picture shows an area that Radić designed. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:45, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • I'm neutral on quality right now. Rather stubby. I think this image might also be an option to represent his architectural style? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:46, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
That image of his Serpentine Pavilion is interesting but I'm not sure it works at this size. I usually visit each year's new pavilion but missed that one, alas. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:15, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Almost ready. There are three cn tags on the article that should be addressed. Otherwise it's short and could do with more substance, but does just about meet our minimum requirements. Once the citations have been added I will support. Modest Genius talk 12:04, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support 2193 characters (310 words) "readable prose size", that's enough and sourced. Grimes2 16:17, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support expanded, updated, and sourced; looks good to me. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 21:06, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support per GhostStalker. Khuft (talk) 14:03, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support --Bedivere (talk) 22:03, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • PostedSchwede66 09:14, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: Fahd bin Mahmoud al Said

Article: Fahd bin Mahmoud al Said (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Oman Observer
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: Deputy Prime Minister of Oman Mr. Lechkar (talk) 19:18, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Oppose 835 characters (157 words) "readable prose size". Its a stub. Grimes2 19:55, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose for now Still a stub. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose until improved needs to be expanded from a stub Scooglers (talk) 13:57, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose An extremely short article for someone with such a long-time political career. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:22, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

(Closed) Ongoing removal: Sudanese civil war

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


Nominator's comments: Both articles no longer receiving regular updates. Would free up space to add Timeline of the 2026 Iran war to ongoing. Knightoftheswords 13:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Edits of the past two weeks are not very significant. We can feature much more actively-edited articles that are in the news. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:21, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    Looking closer at the timeline article: it does receive daily updates, but at one or two sentences per day it's a long drip-feed, and the timeline's overall quality does not feel like something worth keeping on the main page indefinitely. I still support the removal of both. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:29, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The timeline article is still regularly updated with almost daily events occurring. TwistedAxe [contact] 15:44, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Update cycle is not bad enough for me to support removing this war which is still actively ongoing and deserves more attention. --SpectralIon 17:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Very much in the news and updated to the current timeline. Gotitbro (talk) 17:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Strong Oppose, the timeline has DAILY updates. JaxsonR (talk) 22:37, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Sudanese civil war (2023–present)#2026 has 4 sentences of updates to summarize the past 2.5 months, and the quality of updates at Timeline of the Sudanese civil war (2026)#March are pretty marginal (single sentence bullet points: "X people killed in a drone strike at Y") without much depth or context. Compare to the quality at Timeline of the 2026 Iran war. SpencerT•C 02:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Demonstrably false that the timeline article isn't receiving updates; it has in fact received daily updates for almost every day in March. Multi-casualty drone strikes which kill dozens of people would be independently notable blurbs if not for the fact that so many of them are occurring daily, in close proximity - hence why the Sudan War is in ongoing. The main article doing a shorter summary of the 2026 updates is also perfectly acceptable and expected. The purpose of the timeline articles for conflicts is to enable precisely that. Considered together, they are being regularly updated. FlipandFlopped 05:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    Should we remove the war article and only have the timeline article on? No point in indefinitely featuring an article we're not updating. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:41, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above and precendent in re Israel-Gaza situation This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 07:50, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose still a very active conflict as pointed out multiple times already, and the timeline article receives near-daily updates. Johnson524 07:59, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Timeline article has been receiving consistent updates. The Kip (contribs) 08:02, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
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.

Ongoing: Timeline of the 2026 Iran war

Article: Timeline of the 2026 Iran war (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: This timeline would be a helpful addition to the Iran War topic in the Ongoing section (just like for the timelines for the Russo-Ukrainian war and the Sudanese civil war) ~2026-40027 (talk) 03:43, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Too many CNs at the moment to include. Masem (t) 03:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    I'm going to add that while it may seem reasonable to document every single aspect of the war now, these timeline article become a terrible burden in the future. Our COVID timeline articles are far too excessive. I would much rather see these more prose-ified and built in a narrative structure, than simply be a holding ground for proseline entries. Masem (t) 11:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Support - Makes sense, will be helpful and in line with the other ongoing conflicts in ITN Yorked (talk) 04:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Our main article is already receiving all major updates, might be a consideration if that wasn't the case but needn't unnecessarily crowd Ongoing here. Gotitbro (talk) 04:09, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per Gotitbro. SpencerT•C 11:38, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Support, ongoing is dedicated to events that are still rapidly developing. The timeline article provides recent updates regarding the conflict for readers interested in the latest developments rather than having to wade through a general overview. I was initially neutral, since I do agree that ongoing is pretty packed as is, but the Sudanese civil war and timeline are not being regularly updated, so they can and should be removed. — Knightoftheswords 13:41, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Er both of those have events up to march 11, they are being updated. Masem (t) 13:44, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Not daily, which means (as you can see throughout the recent page histories of both pages), there are (often large) stretches of times were neither article is being concurrently updated just in the past month. As of now, info goes up to today, but there were multiple times in the past week where the timeline was several days behind. — Knightoftheswords 13:53, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Looking at histories there may be one or two days with updates but this still looks close enough to "daily" for me, as opposed to weekly. Sure, many if these are bursts of additions but they cover multiple days of events. It is far from being outdated, which for me when the gap is far closer to a week than a couple days. Masem (t) 14:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Support It draws consistency from the other timelines. There are issues with timelines being updated, but this is often the case when it's still a current event and as implied is not a unique case amongst timelines. It is updated relatively daily, and having a link to the timeline present on the MP would help with encouraging further development on the timeline ɴɪᴋᴏʟᴀɪᴠᴇᴋᴛᴏᴠɪᴄʜ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/ᴄᴏɴᴛʀɪʙ) 14:47, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Wait. Most CN tags have been addressed although there are still a few that need to be taken care of. I think we should wait this out a bit and see how the war develops - we should treat this similar to how we treated the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. If this war drags on for longer, then I support this. TwistedAxe [contact] 15:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. This might be a better topic for the talk page, but it seems these dual-targeted ongoing entries were created to address a specific gap but are now becoming routine out of momentum. In particular the comment from Nikolai that consistency with the other timelines is cause of action raises my eyebrows. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:55, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strong support once the very few remaining CN tags are addressed. This article is being regularly updated with new, pertinent information - that's all that the policy requires. WP:ONGOING does not say anything about timelines having to avoid overlap with the main article. Expecting that seems self-defeating; if timelines are only acceptable when the main article isn't being regularly updated with all the new, pertinent information, why would the main article be eligible for ongoing at all? By definition and long-running precedent, a main article and a timeline article can overlap and coexist as ongoing items. FlipandFlopped 01:35, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Support in principle for consistency with other Ongoing events. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:39, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose per Gotitbro. Definitely worth revisiting if this war (unfortunately) stretches into a long-term thing, but for now, the main article is receiving enough updates by itself to render a timeline redundant. The Kip (contribs) 08:04, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

March 11

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 11 ...
Close

RD: Ernie Anastos

Article: Ernie Anastos (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter
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 television news anchor. ~2026-15724-16 (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: Salih Muslim

Article: Salih Muslim (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): (Le Monde); (Hawar 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.

 Grnrchst (talk) 22:20, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Support prominent leader with a well-established article. His death is also receiving a fairly significant amount of media coverage. Cheers! Johnson524 07:55, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:17, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Date of birth fails verification. What the source gives is the year of birth, but the article has day and month as well. Schwede66 04:01, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: Wendy Playfair

Article: Wendy Playfair (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:

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

 Happily888 (talk) 11:06, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Not ready Career and Filmography sections both need more sources. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Not yet ready Several unsourced claims. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 10:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Marsupials previously thought extinct for millennia discovered in New Guinea

Proposed image
Article: Dactylonax kambuayai (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  Two mammal species thought to be extinct, Dactylonax kambuayai and Tous ayamaruensis, have been discovered in Western New Guinea. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Arfak striped possum and the tous, previously thought to be extinct, are rediscovered in Western New Guinea.
News source(s): Guardian, New Scientist, ABC

 Wi1-ch (talk) 12:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Oppose lazarus taxon are routinely rediscovered every year (for example, the Tous (mammal) species that were also rediscovered this year), so there's no point of highlighting just two of the many species labelled as such. NotKringe (talk) 12:30, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
You realise that Tous is one of the two referenced in this very nomination, right? GenevieveDEon (talk) 12:36, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
      • But the discovery of new mammal species is rare. "The chances of finding one mammal species thought to be lost was ‘almost zero’ and finding two is ‘unprecedented’".Wi1-ch (talk) 12:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
      Ah, I just noticed it. Still, my point is that such rediscovery rarely garners attention to warrant a blurb. If it's coelacanth-level of rediscovery then I think that's definitely worth blurbing. NotKringe (talk) 12:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • My favorite kind of news story! The article(s) are currently very stubby, but I would be happy to support this type of blurb if the articles are improved. This makes the project feel more like an encyclopedia and less like a news website, that's for sure. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:47, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose neither article shows enough length to meet quality requirements. I will say thus should be ripe for being at DYK since both are still new though will need more expansion.Masem (t) 12:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support notability but pages are stubby right now. Good science news, cute little sympathetic fauna fellas, and ITN is currently moving slowly so if it meets quality we should add it Omnifalcon (talk) 14:37, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
We dontbweaken standards for posting just because ITN is moving slowly. We can't create what news happens or weight given to what is reported, and wevare dependent on volunteer editors to nominate good items and make sure the quality is there for them. Quality is an issue here. Masem (t) 15:01, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Support on significance as the sort of news-related encyclopedic stuff imo we need more of, but the articles need expansion (at least not being stubs). Tbh there are lots of presumed-extinct-but-very-likely-not species on New Guinea, but it's getting headlines Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 19:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • We don't post stubs. Schwede66 20:54, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose for trivial. It's nice but it's not some breaking news we have to tell the entire world about. Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Since when was ITN supposed to be breaking news, @Harizotoh9? Nfitz (talk) 00:36, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose good faith nomination, many species are rediscovered each year in the eyes of scientists but it is nothing new, an example off the top of my head is Gasteranthus extinctus. These animals have been familiar to the local Indigenous population, it is just that the broader (Western) scientific community was not in the loop. Ornithoptera (talk) 03:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Comment - Is there any precedent for posting re-discovered species? Yorked (talk) 04:05, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
I can only find this, which isn't quite the same thing and was 20 years ago. Another one in 2010 about a fish was opposed because it was only a sub-species of a species known to be extant. Black Kite (talk) 11:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Pictures and common names needed I've added a picture to the nomination but the other picture (right) is worth considering too. These and the common names are needed to help explain what sort of creatures they are – the pygmy long-fingered possum and the ring-tailed glider. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:33, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose on quality as stubs. Undecided on notability. The Kip (contribs) 08:05, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Support on cuteness. Preceding unsigned comment added by Varoon2542 (talkcontribs) 09:44, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

(Closed) Ongoing: 2026 Strait of Hormuz crisis

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 Strait of Hormuz crisis (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Whilst I understand that this is a side-effect of war, this particular event has a direct effect on the world's oil prices, which is now being felt by almost everyone in the world given global supply chains and that the cost of fuel has a direct impact on the cost of living. This is being just as reported on as the war itself as a result and is causing economic and political turmoil across the globe. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:48, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Maybe we can bracket this in with the Iran war at ongoing. But separately while a blurb's still up, don't think so. Gotitbro (talk) 02:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose largely per Gotitbro. The Kip (contribs) 07:54, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose I don't think this will be going on for very long, and even then, this is ineligible per WP:ONGOING. TwistedAxe [contact] 08:42, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose - This is a relatively small aspect of the wider war which already features directly in one headline and indirectly in a second, and will shortly be in Ongoing. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Covered by Iran war and soon will be in ongoing Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 09:59, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Should be part of an Iran War ongoing Nfitz (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
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: Ron Delany

Article: Ron Delany (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): RTÉ BBC
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: Irish athlete. 1500m gold medalist at the 1956 Summer Olympics Greenflipper (talk) 02:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Support Fully referenced, appropriate depth. SpencerT•C 03:54, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Looks good to me after a quick readthrough. I did not spot any glaring issues. ~2026-16121-05 (talk) 13:45, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:19, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • PostedSchwede66 03:57, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

March 10

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 10 ...
Close

RD: Hermann Kulke

Article: Hermann Kulke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Odisha Bytes
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: German Indologist, especially in the Odisha region. He also taught at universities where he researched. - Sources were there but not inline. It's still a bit "dry", but I have no more time today, - help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:55, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

(Ready) RD: Tony Hoare

Article: Tony Hoare (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Computer History Museum, The Register
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: Turing Award winner. - Indefensible (talk) 05:45, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Regarding the timeline: rumors started appearing online on the 8th of March. The source currently used in the article was published 10 March, as was the blog post that the source is also linking. Another blog post (in French) was published 9 March. —⁠andrybak (talk) 10:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    • Yes, I can only see affirmed news reporting as early as March 10 (not just random blogs) and much more on March 11 and 12, so I would push this up to at least March 10 for nomination. Masem (t) 23:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support: Seems to be an adequate summary of his life, adequately sourced. Given what a significant figure he was, one might be surprised by that one paragraph is sufficient for "[his] most significant work". But I think the right things are mentioned, and you can follow the links for details. --PaulBetteridge (talk) 23:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Reposting per Masem above. Sources are coming out, I believe it has enough to support an RD entry. - Indefensible (talk) 02:06, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment There are about 4 entries in the Awards and Honors that need sources, though given they are are based on blue link awards, this should not be hard to complete. Masem (t) 03:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    Done. Apparently there are even more awards not listed, what is there is fully referenced though. - Indefensible (talk) 04:48, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    Maybe mark it "selected awards"? Masem (t) 12:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    I don't think we do that for other articles, do we? Generally what is on Wiki is supposed to be encyclopedic but has no guarantee of being complete. - Indefensible (talk) 15:56, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
    It's not uncommon to see this on Wikipedia. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support as the previously mentioned sourcing issues have been resolved. I did not spot any glaring issues with the article from a quick readthrough. I think the article is ready. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 11:24, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:57, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

(Closed) Defection of Iran women's national football team

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: Defection of Iran women's national football team (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  Members of Iran women's national football team defect after being labelled "wartime traitors" for refusing to sing the Iranian national anthem. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Members of Iran women's national football team are granted asylum after being labelled "wartime traitors" for refusing to sing the Iranian national anthem.
News source(s): https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/mar/06/iran-womens-football-team-national-anthem-protection-ntwnfb, https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/mar/09/iran-women-football-team-australia-asian-cup
Credits:
Nominator's comments: I only cited one, but the story is being coverd by many big news outlets and is very much in the news. Amiri1383 (talk) 16:01, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose not notable, ITN is not for those kinds of stories. May be better suited for DYK   Jalapeño   (u t g) 16:21, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
To be fair, on what basis is ITN not "for these kinds of stories"? It has its own article.AusLondonder (talk) 16:24, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
As @Masem pointed out, ITN doesn't post those kinds of unusual stories, and the precedent on this probably won't change anytime soon. This event isn't significant enough for ITN anyway. This would probably be better suited in DYK though.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 17:42, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
@Jalapeño Masem hadn't expressed a view when you made this comment and their subsequent comment is actually saying wait. So I'm unclear what you're talking about. AusLondonder (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
See his statement in the section "German fireball".   Jalapeño   (u t g) 18:10, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
the fireball seems like basically a one and done event with no death or damage we know of, barring any discoveries from analysus of the residual. this is still a possible developing story that might impact relations between AU and Iran, but too doon to tell. its definitely not a curiousity as the german fureball waa. Masem (t) 20:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Support, receiving sustained coverage from multiple WP:RS sources, rather unprecedented situation. — Knightoftheswords 16:28, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Wait not ckear yet how much of an international relationships issue this will be particuoar with the war dominating coverage. Masem (t) 17:45, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Is that relevant to us as Wikipedia? Our purpose is to highlight quality articles that readers might be interested in. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Unsure, scale of significance unclear The article is fine in quality, and it does have some notability in reputable sources and has some separation from the Iran war. What's unclear is the scale of significance. Is this a minor diplomatic incident or is it a major international incident? CastleFort1 (talk) 18:28, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
How is the difference between a major incident and a minor one determined? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:01, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
it sometimes takes days to weeks to be certain, but id then nk things like evicting embassies or the like to be at the starting point. Masem (t) 20:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
We already expelled the Iranian ambassador and closed our embassy in Tehran last year. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:23, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This is a minor knock-on effect of the ongoing war, which is already posted as a blurb. While it's clearly momentous for the 8 women who have claimed asylum (calling that a 'defection' is a bit odd), I can't see any broader significance or implications. Modest Genius talk 19:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Note on defection: I think its part of a cold war-ism about 'defecting' to the west Yorked (talk) 01:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Article looks like WP:NEWS and WP:RECENTISM. As in, breathless over detail about a recent event, when it should be integrated into a previous article on either the tournament or Iranian sports. Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:43, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose, Good faith nom, but I feel this is too tied to the war, and since we already have a blurb on that, I feel this is already covered by that blurb, similar to the "covered by ongoing" reasoning for ongoing events. ~2026-15314-17 (talk) 21:11, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Cannot blurb every insignificant happening related to the war. Gotitbro (talk) 21:52, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Do you have a source backing up that this is insignificant? Where does that idea come from? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support (also, maybe wait a little so the story develops a bit) - Quite significant act of protest from an Iranian group, here in Australia we've seen a lot of coverage, and has been covered by multiple Wikipedia:RS's. Yorked (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support. Covered by major international RSes, and significant in the Iran-Australia relationship. It has more ramifications than just another incident in the war, and there is more to unfold, no doubt. I'd give it another day, perhaps. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:47, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose, seems pretty minor in the context of global repercussions relating to Iran et al. --LivelyRatification (talk) 05:11, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Do you have a citation to back that up? I've not been able to find any sources suggesting this is one of many examples of these types of stories. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    A citation for what, that there are several global repercussions? Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 09:16, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Any reliable source claiming that this is a minor thing. I can accept not posting something as "trivial" if that's somehow a common statement by sources about it, even if the subject otherwise meets WP:ITNSIGNIF. But I've only seen news articles talk about this as a serious and important subject, going into significant depth about these events. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    Sources won't state something is insignificant in the grand scheme of a war, judging if something is worth posting in ITN comes down to Wikipedia guidelines and editors' judgement of significance, asking for a source is bizarre.
    The 2026 Strait of Hormuz crisis, Europeans navies mobilising to defend Cyprus and the Sinking of IRIS Dena were all closed despite every source treating them as serious and important subjects (which of course they are). Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 17:33, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose as covered under the main blurb. The Kip (contribs) 07:55, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strong support I believe blurbing this article would best fit WP:ITNPURPOSE. It is a high-quality well-written article about a subject that thoroughly meets WP:ITNSIGNIF (as a quick Google News search confirms; BBC, ABC, Al Jazeera, NYC, Reuters, the works). The only concern is that this is too closely tied to the Ongoing item, but this article isn't even linked at 2026 Iran war. Our readers would not be able to find this article through the front page, and as such I don't believe this is a functional argument against posting this article. We would simply be failing to highlight quality work, show ourselves as a dynamic resource, or help readers navigate to an article they might be interested in. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Covered by Iran war which will soon be ongoing. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 09:20, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose - This is a relatively small aspect of the wider war which already features directly in one headline and indirectly in a second, and will shortly be in Ongoing. GenevieveDEon (talk) 09:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Should be part of Iran war ongoing Nfitz (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Covered as part of the Iran war or its just simply "country grants asylum". The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 19:22, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment Everybody knows there's an ongoing war, which is covered in great detail by most large outlets in the world as well as Wikipedia, and is in a way now stale news, and the number of readers of the main article are dropping every day. This item is exactly the kind of incident that brings the war home in the most unlikely of places and makes for interesting reading. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:34, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment I read yesterday that among other reasons, fears of the team seeking asylum is causing Iran to pull out of the World Cup . There may be more here but right now still seems somewhat small. Masem (t) 11:35, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Nowhere near notable for ITN. TwistedAxe [contact] 15:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose and time to close very minor part of a major conflict, no consensus will be reached. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose per GenevieveDEon, Modest Genius, and others. Covered by ongoing. I would close this per WP:SNOW, but I am cognizant this is a sensitive topic area and there are some support !votes, so will opt against a NAC. FlipandFlopped 01:39, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment following up on Masem’s comment above regarding the World Cup, it appears that Iran is indeed withdrawing from the World Cup this summer, the official reason is that all of their games will be played in the US and of course the US is currently bombing them.
But yeah, neutral on this nom right now, because I can see how this is covered by the Ongoing. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 06:08, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
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.

RD: Allan Legere

Article: Allan Legere (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC
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: Serial killer in New Brunswick, Canada B3251(talk) 16:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Support Article seems well-referenced and meets our minimum standards. FlipandFlopped 01:40, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Not ready Several unreferenced sections. Article could use some copy editing. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

(Ready) RD: Dotty Fothergill

Article: Dotty Fothergill (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): United States Bowling Congress
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: A "B" class article on a Hall of Fame bowler, one of the all-time greats. She defeated the top men (including the game's superstar Dick Weber) in exhibition matches and actually sued for right to compete in men's events. A real pioneer and advocate in women's sports. Her death was not noted in the press until March 10 (she died in December but, sadly, the press wasn't made aware until this week) It would be great to have this great female athlete's passing noted on the main page. Thanks for considering. - Cbl62 (talk) 05:40, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Almost ready, First paragraph in the Later years section is unreferenced. Also spotted an unreferenced statement in the second paragraph. Article looks good otherwise. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 12:22, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
I have removed the unsourced sentences until sourcing can be found. Someone had also added an unsourced sentence about her being the mystery guest on "What's My Line" in 1970 which I have removed as I could not find any soure for this. Will continue searching today. Cbl62 (talk) 13:06, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
All fixed now. Still no source for What's My Line? appearance, so that's been removed. Cbl62 (talk) 16:45, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support Article quality is now sufficient. Marking as ready. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

March 9

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 9 ...
Close

(Closed) German fireball

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 Koblenz meteor (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  A meteor causes a large fireball seen across Europe and lands in Germany. (Post)
News source(s): DW, ESA Planetary Defence, NYT, Scientific American,
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This really needs a good picture or video like this but I haven't found a CC image yet. Many eyes may help. Note that, in these troubled times, such lights in the sky may be misinterpreted. See Meteor’s fiery flash in skies above US bases in Germany raised fears of incoming attack, for example. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:34, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose and close Not notable in the slightest.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 09:29, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose -- I wouldn't phrase it as harshly as Jalapeño; I love this story and found it genuinely interesting. But this isn't ITN material (for lack of notability). Renerpho (talk) 11:21, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose, close and TROUT Andrew, should know very well ITN is not for stories like this. Masem (t) 11:24, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
I really don't want to start an argument. Blaming the nominator as if this was a frivolous nomination isn't called for though. Having an idea for an unusual news story is nice, and shouting this down only leads to less diversity in the proposals we can expect. Vote oppose, fine. Close it early, okay, since there's little chance it will pass. But don't blame the nominator. Renerpho (talk) 14:55, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
ITN doesnt really doesn't do "unusual" stories, we've long established thats better for DYK where the purpose is to have interesting hooks to new or expanded articles . Abdrew is not a newcomer here and knows this very well, and along with several similar candidates that they should know likely fail significance, and part of recent POINTy behavior. Masem (t) 17:25, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Very cool, and might meet ITNSIGNIF quickly googling it. However, the article is a stub, so it's not suitable for a feature yet. Not sure what other editors mean with ITN not being for "stories like this." ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:29, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    It's not a particularly unusual event. Impacts like this happen maybe once or twice per year. The one aspect that is genuinely unusual is that it hit and damaged a house, but the blurb doesn't mention that. Maybe an alternative blurb that does may get more support, I don't know. Renerpho (talk) 11:32, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    replying as article's creator; besides what Renerpho mentioned, there is a chance that this meteorite could become notable if lab analysis of the fragments turns up anything interesting/notable. however, on top of being WP:CRYSTAL territory, analysis will probably take a few weeks, and given that it seems like an ordinary chondrite i wouldn't get my hopes up. ArkHyenawoop! (she/they/it) 13:29, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    I don't think that kind of analysis of a subject's significance is helpful for us. We shouldn't editorialize and should just follow WP:ITNSIGNIF. We can't decide whether or not it hitting a house is a reason we should blurb this article. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:46, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
How does this meet ITNSIGNIF? A random meteor striking the Earth and causing minimal damage is not significant in the slightest. Natg 19 (talk) 00:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This seems to have been a fairly large fireball, but not abnormally so. There are thousands of fireballs reported every year. This one was seen by more people than usual but that's about it. One damaged roof is not sufficient impact for ITN - this isn't another Chelyabinsk meteor. The media coverage is brief and our article covers most of the available material, but is still only one paragraph long. Take this to DYK instead. Modest Genius talk 11:45, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose on both quality and significance. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:54, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose and snow close due to lack of quality/significance and a clear consensus forming on not posting. ~2026-15456-55 (talk) 14:52, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose besides being relatively insignificant, the article is barely above the level of a stub. Natg 19 (talk) 00:46, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
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: Alexander Butterfield

Article: Alexander Butterfield (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
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) 22:21, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Support. Very significant personality in the Watergate affair, his testimony was the beginning of the end of the Nixon presidency. Article is well written and well sourced.
~2026-15392-66 (talk) 14:11, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Support One CN, the article is otherwise well-written and well-sourced.   Jalapeño   (u t g) 14:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
PostedBagumba (talk) 22:12, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: Tommy DeCarlo

Article: Tommy DeCarlo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TMZ Rolling Stone Deadline] [Fox 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: Rock singer who the lead singer of the classic rock band Boston thrashbandicoot01🐉(talk) 22:22, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Needs work orange tagged and multiple unsourced paragraphs. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 22:26, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

RD: Mantana Morakul

Article: Mantana Morakul (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Naewna
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: A Thai national artist in such styles as luk krung. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:49, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Article needs work, wait, there's a lot of red links and the Singing tab of the article looks weird. I'll try to help it. RoyalSilver 17:37, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose for multiple reasons: article is poorly sourced, poorly written, and not notable. All references are Thai-language, which isn't necessarily disqualifying but also means that this article would fare better on the Thai Wikipedia. No point in attempting to improve article, as there are almost no good sources that will help. I like octopusestalk to me, talk to me 19:15, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
I expect that editors who speak both English and Thai can help us with that. This is a very odd !vote. GenevieveDEon (talk) 19:17, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
en.wiki does not discriminate topics jusy because the sourcing may only be in a fireign language. but it dies nean we should look to that version of Wikipedia to help build oit the en.wiki version. Masem (t) 22:25, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Thai sources are fine per WP:NONENG policy. —Bagumba (talk) 06:16, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Poorly written (grammar, syntax, odd capitalisation, etc.), and numerous red links. Baldwin de Toeni (talk) 20:36, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

March 8

More information Portal:Current events/2026 March 8 ...
Close

Colombian election

Proposed image
Article: 2026 Colombian parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  The Historic Pact of President Gustavo Petro (pictured) wins the most seats in the 2026 Colombian parliamentary election (Post)
Alternative blurb: Despite losing the popular vote, the Historic Pact of President Gustavo Petro (pictured), wins the most seats in the 2026 Colombian parliamentary election
News source(s):
Credits:

Article needs updating
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: National legislative election, article can use some serious work Scuba 16:47, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose article needs significant expansion. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:23, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

(Posted) Supreme leader elected

Proposed image
Article: 2026 Iranian Supreme Leader election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  Mojtaba Khamenei is elected Supreme Leader of Iran following the killing of his father, Ali Khamenei. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Mojtaba Khamenei is elected Supreme Leader of Iran.
Alternative blurb II: Mojtaba Khamenei is elected Supreme Leader of Iran.
News source(s): Al Jazeera France 24
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: New supreme leader elected Interstellarity (talk) 21:40, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

This should be an update to the blurb, addressing the issue below. "In the Iran war, Mojtaba Khamenei is elected Supreme Leader following the death of his father in U.S./Israel strikes." Masem (t) 21:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Done. Interstellarity (talk) 21:46, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • wait orange tag and only one sentence on his appointment. Updated now and locked. Support combined blurb as an updarte and bump.Psephguru (talk) 21:49, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support when ready - Though, keep it as a separate blurb from the current iran war one. Considering how the current nomination for making the Iran war ongoing proves how heavily people want the blurb to just roll off already so they can place it in ongoing and also with complaints of how complicated the Iran war blurb seems to be I'd rather have this be separate. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:09, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • weak support as not much has been mentioned in the Appointment sec. but notable on coverage and relevance due to the ongoing war in Iran and the Middle East. I'd suggest to separate Iran war's article in 'ongoing' per my reply below. ACMehta (talk) 22:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support altblurb - Sufficiently ready for ITN/R. Oppose combining. This is independently notable and ITN worthy blurb. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 22:54, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support new blurb, oppose retrofitting into existing blurb. This event is sufficiently independent and notable to warrant its own blurb. Natg 19 (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
    Its the same larger event, we don't post multiple blurbs for that reason. That said, I don't see a problem with resetting the timer for an updated blurb and making this the most recent (as of now) Masem (t) 00:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I do not see it that way. The ascension of a new head of state warrants its own post. We do not have to wait for this to roll off too to add the war to ongoing. The olympics is a nice spacer between. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 00:57, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support its own blurb. Per above, this is its own event, I don't support combining it with the strikes and death of Khamenei blurb. Just one thing though, the BLP should not be linked, only the election. So alt blurb 2 above. See the election of Donald Trump for similar case where Trump himself is not bolded.   Amakuru (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose separate blurb, they should be combined somehow. Both events are directly connected. - Indefensible (talk) 04:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Comment @Admins willing to post ITN: Knightoftheswords 05:19, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Separate blurb Can't just keep stuffing that up. The longest serving leader in the Middle East replaced by a successor, as notable as they come. Gotitbro (talk) 06:17, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Separate blurb, but shift the reference to his father to this blurb from the general war blurb. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support split blurb as described by 331dot. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:32, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Support Split Blurb per above TheFellaVB (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Posted as a separate blurb, with the original Iran war blurb adjusted accordingly. Schwede66 09:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Hi @Schwede66: please unbold Mojtaba Khamenei per my comment above. The election itself is the ITN/R event, and in general we don't bold the individual too... See Macron and Trump for precedents. Cheers   Amakuru (talk) 10:33, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Done. Sorry, must not have read the above properly. Schwede66 11:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Schwede66 please remove the image, as it's currently being deleted on Commons on basis not only of its copyright but also AI generation suspicions. ~2026-15099-19 (talk) 15:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
     Done Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:10, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    That image is being used by Tasnim which seems reasonably official. Anyway, there are plenty of other images such as his article's current lead image. (right). Andrew🐉(talk) 16:46, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Schwede66: The blurb for Mojataba does not make it clear that his father was killed in the same US/Israeli strikes listed separately. Need to add this to the assassination bit. Gotitbro (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Please make a specific phrasing suggestion that editors can discuss. Schwede66 17:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    A suggestion for picture: ArionStar (talk) 17:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Schwede66: Since we already have a blurb for the strikes, I believe merely appending "in the strikes on Iran" should do the trick. Gotitbro (talk) 22:10, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    What do others think? Schwede66 05:41, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Not needed. Stephen 18:23, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Separate blurb Ceoil (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

(Posted) 2026 Men's T20 World Cup final

Proposed image
Article: 2026 Men's T20 World Cup final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: India defeats New Zealand and defends their World Cup title by 96 runs. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​In Twenty20 International cricket, the Men's T20 World Cup concludes with India defeating New Zealand in the final.
Alternative blurb II: ​In cricket, the Men's T20 World Cup concludes with India defeating New Zealand in the final (player of the match Jasprit Bumrah pictured).
News source(s): SkySports
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.

 Rushtheeditor (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Support but needs work - The blurb should read "India defeats New Zealand by 96 runs to win the Men's T20 World Cup and successfully defend their title." Otherwise the article meets WP:ITNCRIT. woaharang (talk) 17:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
I don't think we generally report score details in sports blurbs. GenevieveDEon (talk) 17:48, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
I believe we have a standard sports blurb style just to avoid that sort of thing wrt score and to get around ENGVAR problems. GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 18:42, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
I've added the standard blurb as ALT2. Vestrian24Bio 02:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • There is an empty "Aftermath" section. Natg 19 (talk) 19:47, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Support but change the blurb and hide the score part.  Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-14896-83 (talk) 20:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose on quality due to empty "Aftermath" section and extremely sparse prose on the match itself. The Kip (contribs) 20:22, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Support on notability but only after the 'Aftermath' section is completed. The T20 World Cup is a prominent International Cricket event with the top 20 ranked nations participating based on rankings and continental/regional qualifications and has recieved coverage from multiple revered international media sources too like the Reuters, BBC, ToI, Al Jazeera etc. ACMehta (talk) 21:54, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose. No prose write up on the match, and aftermath empty. Also only the final should be bolded, not the tournament itself.   Amakuru (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    There is a prose write up on 2026 Men's T20 World Cup final woaharang (talk) 14:09, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    No there isn't, the 'New Zealand innings' and 'India innings' sections are empty. Modest Genius talk 17:39, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment. The sport must be mentioned by name. Many lay readers will not know what sport it is. As such, I would only support altblurb 2. ~2026-76480-5 (talk) 11:15, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Needs work such as a good picture. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:15, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Not ready. There's no prose summary of the match, those are empty sections. They need a full paragraph of referenced prose explaining what happened in each innings. If/when that has been addressed, alt2 follows our standard blurb format, so use that. Modest Genius talk 17:36, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I've added an image of the man of the match. Modest Genius talk 17:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    There's now a paragraph on each innings, but they're completely unreferenced. Fix that and then this could be posted. Modest Genius talk 19:09, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
    Support. There are now references for the innings summaries. I've tidied up the prose and the rest of the article seems in good enough shape. Marking ready and pinging @Admins willing to post ITN: . Modest Genius talk 11:49, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Posted. Black Kite (talk) 12:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Ongoing: Afghano–Pakistani war

Article: 2026 Afghanistan–Pakistan war (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Ongoing war (the RM to change the wording to conflict will almost certainly lose) South Asia, receiving daily updates. Should only be put there once blurb rolls off tho, in line with the prior nom. Knightoftheswords 00:32, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Needs work The timeline hasn't been updated since 5 March. More generally it seems that there's still bad blood but that both sides are not going all out because they have plenty of other headaches. So, it's still a tit-for-tat limited conflict. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:38, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Support but needs work Timeline not updated. Squalwer (talk) 13:27, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now Timeline not regularly updated at present. SpencerT•C 17:23, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose - literally no references in the nomination! Nfitz (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose until the current blurb rolls off + the timeline hasn't been updated in three days. The Kip (contribs) 20:25, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above as the timeline hasn't been updated since some days and it's a less intense and stalemate-ish conflict for now (unlike the one in Iran and ME) nearby. ACMehta (talk) 22:09, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose Becoming dormant, the article only covers up until 6 March (six days ago). Not being updated with enough frequency for the main page. FlipandFlopped 01:46, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Support, A large majority of the concerns have already been addresd, The Conflict covers information detailed till yesterday 4-RΔ𝚉🌑R-01𝕏 (talk) 11:34, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

(Closed) Bantar Gebang

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: Bantar Gebang (talk · history · tag)
Blurb:  Landfill avalanche at Bantar Gebang kills 7 people (Post)
News source(s): China Daily
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: World's largest landfill, weakened by rainfall, suffers an avalanche that killed 7 people. ~2026-14366-36 (talk) 17:35, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose article quality is not sufficient for posting on the main page. But also this does not seem to meet our significance requirements either. Natg 19 (talk) 00:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
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.

References

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI