Edge Rewrite
restyle Source code View original
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

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

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

The aircraft used on Flydubai Flight 1073
The aircraft used on Flydubai Flight 1073
Ongoing:

view — page history — related changes — edit

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 that a recent death is important enough to warrant a blurb instead.

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

Nomination steps

[edit]
  • 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 items marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, post the item and change the header to (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).
  • When consensus to post will not be reached, close the discussion section and change the header to (Closed). If the article's quality remains poor, leave a brief note explaining why to encourage and assist others in fixing it.

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]
Shortcut
  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. Mention 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 or help is needed.

Please do not...

[edit]
Shortcut
  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 explain yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is or is not related to a particular country. 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 its significance. 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.

October 4

[edit]

‎Avengers: Endgame becomes the highest-grossing film of all time

[edit]
Articles: Avengers: Endgame (talk · history · tag) and List of highest-grossing films (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following its re-release, Russo brothers' Avengers: Endgame becomes the highest-grossing film of all time, surpassing James Cameron's Avatar. (Post)
News source(s): Variety, Deadline Hollywood
Credits:

Article updated
Yet, this is only the 4th time this has happened in this century or only the 7th time this happened in last 50 years. LiamKorda 15:37, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

2026 World Rally Championship

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 World Rally Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In motorsport, Elfyn Evans and Scott Martin win the 2026 World Rally Championship. (Post)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: The first British WRC champion in 25 years won the title......basically at the very last few concerns. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:04, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Almost there As sporting article go, it’s not bad. But it needs prose for the results. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:16, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply
We got season report section. Unnamelessness (talk) 15:30, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

2026 Asian Games

[edit]
Article: 2026 Asian Games (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2026 Asian Games concludes with China winning the most medals. (Post)Credits:

Nominator's comments: Closing cereminy just started about 15 minutes ago. Opening nomination was said to re-nominate at the closing. Fourth biggest sporting tournament in the world. after summer, winter olympics and soccer world cup. Psephguru (talk) 11:30, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

We also need sources to show this was covered by the news. Masem (t) 12:13, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

2026 NRL Grand Final

[edit]
Article: 2026 NRL Grand Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Sydney Roosters defeat the Newcastle Knights in the 2026 NRL Grand Final 19-18. (Post)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.

 PrezDough (talk) 10:50, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

October 3

[edit]

2026 Latvian parliamentary election

[edit]
Article: 2026 Latvian parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United List, led by Andris Kulbergs, wins the Latvian parliamentary election. (Post)
News source(s): AP, DW
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: Article needs a bit more prose. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:12, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

2026 Spanish housing protests

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 Spanish housing protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Widespread protests occur in Spain following a housing crisis. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

 ArionStar (talk) 14:41, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Support These have been going on a while and don't seem to be stopping anytime soon. They are getting extensive coverage worldwide, and have additional impact given that there will be an election in Spain within a year. The article is looking great as well. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 14:54, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

2026 Super League Grand Final

[edit]
Article: 2026 Super League Grand Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In rugby league, the Wakefield Trinity defeat the Warrington Wolves to win the Super League Grand Final. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport, ESPN, The Guardian
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.

 Abcmaxx (talk) 20:03, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

October 2

[edit]

RD: Sass Jordan

[edit]
Article: Sass Jordan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
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: Important Canadian musician/singer and popular culture figure. Okay article, probably sufficient to be included as an ITN article. Abebenjoe (talk) 01:56, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Lyle Odelein

[edit]
Article: Lyle Odelein (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NHL
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 is not terrible but woefully undercited, I have orange-tagged the article. However lots of sources available. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:17, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Alister Smart

[edit]
Article: Alister Smart (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) 00:13, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Not yet ready Several unsourced claims. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:53, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Overhaul of the criminal justice system in South Korea

[edit]
Article: Supreme Prosecutors' Office of the Republic of Korea (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ South Korea dissolves the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, which indicted president Lee Jae Myung. (Post)
Article needs updating

 UCinternational (talk) 00:34, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Oppose on quality Reading the article, I am really confused. What did this office do? Why was it dissolved. On the writing, some parts are strangely phrased as well. If this is to be posted it needs to show why it’s important, and it needs a serious expansion and copyedit. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:49, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose "Government dissolves a government agency" seems a bit unnecessary for ITN. Especially when they seem to simply be replacing what it did by giving those powers to other agencies.Basetornado (talk) 07:51, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose I'm using this to try to distill what's going on, and to me, this reads very much like internal politics that are not yet at any type of significant end fate. The office is being replaces by two others, separating investigative powers from prosecution, though it does read that there's weaker ability to investigate that affects more than Lee here. Its the type of move/action that we've been seeing countless times over the last two years at the US Gov't but which would never meet ITN. Masem (t) 10:52, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose ignoring the significant issues with the article itself, I don't see how a reorganization is anyhing other than local news - I'm not seeing much coverage. Nfitz (talk) 17:15, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Comment President Lee's Democratic Party of SK was never in a good relationship with prosecutors, and former president Yoon Suk Yeol was a prosecutor himself. After his martial law declaration and arrest, he was released and the prosecutor-general chose not to appeal court orders canceling his detention. This is long story and should be mentioned in some detail in the article to not confuse readers. Didgogns (talk) 23:51, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Brooke Eby

[edit]
Article: Brooke Eby (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
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 social media personality and ALS advocate/patient, passed from ALS yesterday but death was announced today. The Kip (contribs) 23:15, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Tony Reno

[edit]
Article: Tony Reno (American football) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN New York Post USA Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former head football coach at Yale University. thrashbandicoot01 (talk) 22:22, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

2026 French lycée protests

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 French lycée protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ High school students in France and Belgium launch mass protests for better conditions, starting fires and causing 400 schools to be closed. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, DW, BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Students across France and Belgium are protesting against poor conditions in schools. The unrest has led to dramatic scenes of fires and blockaded schools across the country, and they are only increasing. Also today, they have spread from France into Belgium as well. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:56, 2 October 2026 (UTC) Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:56, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Strong support. Most definitely. Not only did Libération have scrolling coverage earlier today, the protests have their own section in Le Figaro. (The Guardian tells the tale for the anglosphere: "Fires, fury and hundreds of arrests as France gripped by student protests — Government struggling to deal with worst crisis in months after being taken by surprise by massive demonstrations".)WP:CRYSTALBALL notwithstanding, this has May 1968 vibes to it. kencf0618 (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support on significance - Major news story that has only been intensifying as it goes on. However, the article has one small section without citations, which should be fixed before this can go up. Youraveragearmy (talk) 23:31, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support on notability, article needs work While protests are common in France, the international coverage's main focus was the student demand for better conditions in schools and education centers. The article clearly demonstrates this notability by detailing the scale of the youth protests. However, I agree that the article quality also needs work, as there is an orange tagged section and another tag which states that the citation style is unclear. I also wish for the article to expand into detail about the conditions leading up to the protests: Teacher shortages, air conditioning issues, stress-induced climates, and overcrowded classrooms. CastleFort1 (talk) 00:40, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support I was actually going to create this article yesterday, but didn't find the time. This is receiving sustained coverage for some time now, though the article quality is clunky. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 17:59, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
So many tags... ArionStar (talk) 18:37, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality per Castlefort. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 19:22, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support on notability but oppose on quality. Major impact and consequences, reported worldwide. However the first two subsections, "background" and "demands and organisation" both need a major overhaul and implementation of sources. The rest of the article is in very good shape however. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • As many above support on notability, oppose on quality. There's something very odd about this page, as if it has been translated word-for-word from the French page, without due thought to our separate guidelines on citations. Just one example: We've got newspaper-eque coverage of the statements of one 17-year-old protester saying she's been outside since 7 am and the school has been in poor shape for three years. Citing this means finding the article that quotes this anonymous member of the public, which is the complete opposite of how encyclopedic articles should be written. Unknown Temptation (talk) 10:19, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    It is a very strange article indeed. I'm working on citing the article right now - and I predict I'll be cutting quite a lot. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 14:56, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Cesar Virata

[edit]
Article: Cesar Virata (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rappler
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: Last prime minister of the Marcos-era Philippines and a prominent financial figure in the regime. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 13:58, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) RD: Bruce Baird

[edit]
Article: Bruce Baird (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC
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: Australian politician Samuel Wiki (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:24, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

October 1

[edit]

RD: George Waft

[edit]
Article: George Waft (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: Manx politician who proposed legislation to abolish birching and supported anti-discrimination legislation Jon698 (talk) 03:01, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Conrad Lant

[edit]
Article: Conrad Lant (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone, Guardian
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: Died 29 September, announced on 1 October. British heavy metal musician known by his stage name Cronos, founder of Venom. Sourcing is currently very poor, with entire paragraphs that don't have a single reference and the discography completely unreferenced. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Not yet ready Orange-tagged with multiple unsourced paragraphs. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:29, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Lito Sousa

[edit]
Article: Lito Sousa (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN Brasil
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.

 ArionStar (talk) 22:36, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:27, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
What do you mean "for RD"? The standard of quality is the same for all ITN nominations. GreatCaesarsGhost 23:32, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
I don't see much of a problem with it. They're just saying that the biography is up to scratch. And yes, RD does have a few requirements not needed for other ITN articles, such as that the birthdate must be specifically referenced. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:48, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose for now per GCG. As someone who hasn't heard of this individual before, I don't come away from the article with a sense of what he's notable for. We're told he's the most watched aviation YouTuber but with no real detail on that, examples of his top work etc. Having CJD is somewhat interesting, but it's not what he's famous for, and shouldn't occupy half the prose. WP:ITNQUALITY applies to all articles, we don't water it down for RDs compared to full blurb. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 06:18, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Strongest support possible This is a YouTuber with 4.2 million subscribers (he ran the Aviões e Músicas channel). Lito helped people understand airplanes, investigate air crashes, and make aviation simple for newcomers. FlamingMingo 🦩 13:04, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    RDs should not focus on notability; they should be judged exclusively on quality. Please re-evaluate your !vote. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 13:10, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support The article is well-cited and meets the minimum standards. We routinely and frequently post RDs with less total prose and detail. Someone having well-documented health struggles and those struggles being one of the prime things they are known for should not be disqualifying. If most of the coverage of him relates to his CJD, which is seemingly the case, we are not here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS by arbitrarily bloating the remaining parts of the article out of some effort to commemorate his aviation work. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 19:25, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Weak oppose per Amakuru, GCG. Insufficient depth regarding what he was generally known for (his Youtube channel); article only has 2-3 sentences related to that in the career section (" His channel, "Aviões e Músicas" (Airplanes and Songs), is the most-watched aviation channel on YouTube, where he posted videos "demystifying the mysteries of aviation." ... His journey was chronicled in the series Decola Lito." SpencerT•C 21:00, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

September 30

[edit]

(Posted) RD: John Bröcheler

[edit]
Article: John Bröcheler (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): limburg.headliner.nl
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: Dutch baritone based at the Dutch National Opera, appearing internationally, first in contemporary concerts, then on great opera stages, interesting lead characters such as Wozzeck and Lear, also world premieres. I wrote the article, so updating was faster than normally ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Support Above issue has been fixed. There are no more issues that I could find and the article looks good overall. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 20:39, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Christa Pike

[edit]
Article: Christa Pike (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Christa Pike, who was to be the first woman executed in Tennessee in 200 years, survives two doses of a lethal injection drug. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Christa Pike survives an execution attempt in Tennessee after receiving two doses of a lethal injection drug. Credits:

Nominator's comments: First execution of a woman in TN in 200 years but failed after two attempts to execute her. International news. CutlassCiera 12:07, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Oppose. It's certainly made headlines around the world, but it's a relatively local event whose lasting significance nationally and globally isn't likely to be enormous. We're not a news ticker and this doesn't seem to rise to the level to satisfy WP:ITNSIGNIF IMHO. Also, "the first woman to be executed in Tennessee in 200 years" is rather evidently not an accurate description, at least for now, so a tweak to the blurb would certainly be required... Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 13:34, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    "to be" was intended to be in future tense, but the sentence reads differently than I thought it would. Oh well. CutlassCiera 14:51, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Added alt blurb byteflush Talk 23:11, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support - Spectacular failure of a death penalty attempt that calls much into question. I strongly disagree with reasoning regarding lasting significance, and being a news ticker. This is a larger matter of global reflection for humanity on crime and punishment with numerous facets including gender, in my view. Discussion of precise blurb wording will take place, no doubt. In the news, notably. Jusdafax (talk) 13:49, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose She's still sentenced to death, and as the NYTimes article poitns out "It was the second botched execution in the state this year." Adding on the first female execution in 200 years in the state makes this a superlative-type story that is just not good for ITN, since you can make any event seem super significant depending on how you cut the basis. Masem (t) 14:10, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    The last attempt to execute someone wasn't as much botched as this one. In that case, they failed to find a suitable vein and called off the execution; this time, the condemned survived two doses of an execution drug. Additionally, her execution had already been a news story of its own. CutlassCiera 14:53, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    I've reworded it a bit to hopefully make it a bit clearer. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:01, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support since it’s been garnering a lot of coverage and would be an intriguing entry for our readers. Meets the WP:ITNPURPOSE and could have implications on the death penalty in America. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 15:34, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support International coverage of an uncommon event and a well-documented case. ArionStar (talk) 16:15, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Masem. It is, for now, of almost no significance at the judicial and prison levels; it has received very limited international coverage and is of no significance to ITN. We are not a news portal, let alone one for this sort of sensationalist, local news. _-_Alsor ⭐️⭐️ (talk) 16:43, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Limited? ArionStar (talk) 16:49, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
This website is blocked by my school, what is this about? Militant.Insurgency (talk) 17:13, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
I don't know why, but that is a Brazilian news site talking about how the UN has condemned it. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 17:56, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
There's lots of criticism of the US's allowance for death penalties. The unusual nature here of this does not make that a new thing. Masem (t) 19:55, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose Aside from media and political circus, it's basically a trivia at best. Probably better off as DYK. NotKringe (talk) 18:27, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Is it eligible there? CREditzWiki (yap) | (things i apparently did) 18:47, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
could be if it somehow expanded fivefold in like the last 7 days TuffMangoPhonk6741🥭🥭 (those who talk 💀)(Tuff edits for 🥶LE SIGMAS🥶) 19:52, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose Botched executions are rare, but not unprecedented. There was another botched execution in Tennesee this year (Tony Carruthers) who doesn't even have a Wikipedia article as of this writing. I'm not sure why this story has received more media attention (maybe because she's a white woman, highly unusual for the death penalty). Pike and Carruthers will in all likelyhood still be executed in some manner or another once Tennesee reassesses their execution protocol. I think the state also has the electric chair as an option. Other botched lethal injection executions have happened in the U.S. in the last decade, which led to the use of nitrogen hypoxia as an alternative for those inmates (Execution of Alan Eugene Miller, Execution of Kenneth Eugene Smith), though that option is currently not on the table in Tennessee. TarkusABtalk/contrib 21:22, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support - Meets WP:ITNPURPOSE and WP:ITNSIGNIF pretty much on every point. It's a widely covered story, not just in the US, even UN experts called for halting the execution, and people will come to Wikipedia to find more info. Article is updated and is still being updated. People who wouldn't look it up otherwise will find it interesting too (subjective, ymmv, but I did). It's not a one-off, the governor already halted the remaining execution for this year, and reputable sources have been reporting on it and the followup, so it's not just one agency story reposted everywhere. byteflush Talk 22:53, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support as per above. This is an uncommon event receiving international coverage, and meets WP:ITNPURPOSE. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:29, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Wait - if the key here is that they lived, and not the attempts to kill her, then given the reports of her current critical condition, the entire discussion may be moot. This doesn't endorse a blurb if she lives - but we might as well wait until then to have this discussion. Especially as the coverage actually seems to have increased over the day, to my surprise. Nfitz (talk) 00:02, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support due to extremely uncommon case and very rare event. – Ivan Humphrey (talk) 09:23, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose I was on the fence here because the UPDATE is good as is overall quality. I'm struggling with the significance though, and the arguments from supporters here are not compelling. The death penalty is always subject to criticism from wide sources, in large part because it is barbaric. Others argue it is rare, and that appears to very much not be the case. This very specific flavor of botching may be unique, but that gets into the superlative talk that is ill-suited to our purposes. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:40, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose The detail that Wikipedia goes into on the subject of American death row and capital punishments is frankly embarrassing, and this is not particularly important, despite being unusual. There are 248 articles in Template:CapPun-US, and they don't include the hundreds upon hundreds of bios of all the people who have been executed, were sentenced to be executed but weren't, or are currently awaiting execution (List of death row inmates in the United States). (I appreciate some will be notable, but I suspect most are just WP:NOTNEWS). The irony is that many are very well written, they're just ... unnecessary. Black Kite (talk) 13:00, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    I completely agree! I’ve never understood why everyone executed/pending executions in the United States has to have their own wiki article. It’s totally unnecessary, and many of these cases receive little media attention and are of little legal relevance or significance. Although this one isn’t… _-_Alsor ⭐️⭐️ (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    Let's not get out of hand. This article is 18 years old. It has 90 citations from at least 9 different years, showing sustained, diverse, and direct coverage. It is a good article, and there is no reasonable argument that it shouldn't exist. It's unfortunate that some topics languish while other less important topics get the FA treatment. But we're all volunteers and Wikipedians have their pet interests. There are policies in place to keep the details from getting out of hand, but the article should have some detail of the crimes of a notable criminal. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:47, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    I wasn't suggesting this particular article was non-notable, merely that the story wasn't ITN material (whilst commenting on the somewhat creepy hyperdetail of Wikipedia's coverage of people being killed by the US authorities). Black Kite (talk) 10:20, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Weak oppose on significance This is a difficult nomination to comment on because there has indeed been some media coverage of the story, but more in the realm of reporting on the unusual novelty/shock factor of surviving two doses of a nominally lethal chemical injection rather than the impact or notability of the victim herself. Given that execution by lethal injection is not a perfectly reliable method for administering capital punishment, and the fact that there have been multiple well-attested instances of it happening recently as per TarkusAB above that did not get any nominations for ITN earlier, I am reluctant to consider this significant enough for ITN. Oppius Brutus (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose ITN is not DYK. Hardly any WP:ITNSIGNIFICANCE in this subnational news item. Gotitbro (talk) 14:53, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support – I'm seeing in-depth coverage even in Dutch sources. Article expansion is impressive and quality is good. All seems set to go for this article. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:21, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose - it is very interesting event with a lot of coverage but also a very singular event OrdinariusFingius (talk) 18:54, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Comment - In addition to the various notable reactions in the media cited above, it is now headline news in USA Today that the state governor announced Oct. 3 that Frank Strada, the criticized Tennessee Commissioner for the Department of Prisons, will resign. Jusdafax (talk) 17:03, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Can someone tell me why she is given life-saving care? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of an execution? (This is mentioned in the lead but not the body.) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:59, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    As I understand it, that’s just the default they’re falling back on - someone’s injured, save them. They no longer have permission for the execution so giving her life-saving care is what they must do. I’m not an expert though so someone familiar with this can add it to the article, if correct. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:10, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose as it is a very minor event in the American justice system. Plenty of people don't die everyday and this is the second botched execution by Tennessee this year. Jon698 (talk) 07:07, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support Like it or not, this is a hot topic with massive coverage and readership. And the article is quite substantial and polished. And it's quite consequential too as the head of the prison system has now resigned. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:17, 4 October 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) RD: Gabriel Serville

[edit]
Article: Gabriel Serville (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.

Nominator's comments: President of the Assembly of French Guiana, which is akin to leaders of other regional/departmental councils in metropolitan France. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 03:01, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

Support Article is referenced and well-sourced. Looks good to post in terms of quality. Header prose is sufficient, with Serville holding the regional assembly presidency, the second highest position of French Guiana's government, from 2021 to his death in 2026. CastleFort1 (talk) 04:14, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support Decent enough. Could be expanded. Yakikaki (talk) 21:53, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) RD: Esther Rantzen

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

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

Nominator's comments: English journalist and television presenter who presented the BBC television series That's Life! for 21 years. ItsShandog (talk) 18:12, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Not yet ready Multiple CN tags. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:13, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support Just resolved them.--Launchballer 23:17, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support Article seems well written and no citation tags on it. I did add a little about her libel case but I hope that doesn't dq me from !voting. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:53, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) Flydubai Flight 1073

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Flydubai Flight 1073 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Over Saudi Arabia, the crew and passengers of Flydubai Flight 1073 avert an apparent attempt to hijack or crash the airliner. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Euronews
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Very uncommon aviation incident reminiscent of September 11, headline news in major international media.  Sandstein 15:48, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Support but wait I support this because it is a major attempted hijacking incident, especially with the Iran war going on right in that area. It seems like one of the pilots tried to take control and crash the plane, but was stopped by the other pilot. However we should wait for some more information to come out so we don't publish anything without confirmation. This is a messy situation and we should tend on the side of caution. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:51, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    In ITN, we report stories that are currently in the news, even if uncertainties remain. That's a matter for the editors working on the article. Sandstein 15:57, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
No we don't promote speculation.Psephguru (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support but wait per above. shane (talk to me if you want!) 15:57, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
strong oppose nothing happened and it is all he said, she said.Psephguru (talk) 15:58, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support The article seems adequate and clear enough. There's no need to wait further. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:46, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose for now - a whole bunch of "possible" and "could have"s as of now. The facts are that there was a stabbing and that the plane landed safely; the September 11 comparisons ignore that those were coordinated and mostly-successful attacks. There hasn't been a definite cause that would make it an attempted crash at this time and so I've attached the "for now" at the end of my vote. Eoline 17:18, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support - despite the hijacker failing, this is a major event in the media and could've have been a large 9/11-style terrorist attack. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 17:18, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
At present, that's not confirmed, with Israeli security officials currently saying it's not a hijacking. It's definitely premature to ascribe a detailed motive and description. GenevieveDEon (talk) 18:54, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Seems they're calling it an attempted terrorist attack now. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 19:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support and post ASAP; I'm not a fan of support but wait !votes; its in the news, and the newsworthy details are generally agreed upon; a simple wait vote would be better imo. Irrespective, this has been gaining widespread coverage; I've certainly seen it be up there on social media and news sites. There is no need to wait. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 18:17, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
WP is not a newspaper. We are focused on featuring quality articles, and we will wait to make sure all the appropriate details are in place before posting. There is no driver to post a sub-par quality article faster. Masem (t) 19:08, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Yeah and it's a C class article, which is acceptable for ITN. If ITN waited for all the details of a story to be in place prior to posting, we wouldn't be able to feature anything. When the core facts of the story are agreed upon, it should be fairgame. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 19:18, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
There's still a lot of details not known, like motive. ITN is in no rush to post anything, and we can wait for more details, particularly when otherwise everyone else is safe and sound. As other opposes have noted, if no one died, why should we post anything? It would be far better to know if this was a serious terrorist incident or some guy that went crazy on his own, among other possible outcomes. Masem (t) 21:48, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

if no one died, why should we post anything

WP:MINIMUIMDEATHS is redlinked for a reason ya know. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 22:00, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
You spelled it wrong, which is why it is redlinked - WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. Eoline 22:05, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Figured
Anyway, There is not a guideline for the "minimum death toll" needed for such posting. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 02:03, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Its not about death tolls, but the lack of a significant incident. Motive is what separates thing from a random nutcase from a serious terrorism incident. We'd clearly post the latter, but the former is of questionable merit. Masem (t) 03:00, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Image added to WP:CMP. Mjroots (talk) 18:22, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
@Mjroots: The image has been already marked as imagevio (it's from Reuters). — Draceane talkcontribs. 18:37, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Image removed from blurb and CMP. Mjroots (talk) 18:46, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support as per Knightoftheswords. Major news item. 174 passengers saved in extremis - the opposes to this are just unfathomable. Khuft (talk) 18:50, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
An alt-blurb is needed, since an attempted hijacking is the working theory as of now, but we don't actually know for sure. There will be an investigation by multiple agencies from several countries in regards to this incident. The alt-blurb should stick to what is known, and I would suggest saying it made an emergency landing after a disturbance in the cockpit. Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
The act is undoubtedly hijacking, is there another theory? But I thought the working theory was about the motive, which was suicide, not using or taking the aircraft. Nfitz (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Is it? How do YOU know? Were you there? None of us were. We are merely relying upon reports. Early reports can be wrong and sometimes are. History is littered with examples of a rush to judgement and then it turns out to be true. And in any case, WP is not about what happened, but what can be cited. The sources say passengers and Israeli officials consider it an attempted hijacking. It's entirely possible both are wrong. The first officer was arrested, and likely interrogated, and we will learn much more and can confirm what most likely happened later. We must always express caution and err on the side of caution and there's never a rush. We're not even a news organization! Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:47, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
That feels a bit agressive! What does it matter what I "know", @Harizotoh9. The question was what is the working theory? Not what actually happened. Of course it's likely an attempting hijacking - by definition, a suicide attempt by crashing a plane is attempted hijacking. Why are you telling me that there's no rush, when I literally "voted" wait? Nfitz (talk) 22:08, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Opppose There weren't any casualties involved nor was there any significant follow-up action, such as the UAE temporarily suspending all flights in response to this. In general we don't post failed attacks regardless of how much coverage there is, and without any real significance on its own there's no reason it should be posted. Mount Patagonia (talk • contributions) 22:11, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    There's at least three casualties: both pilots were stabbed, and a passenger was hospitalized. Maybe the word you're looking for is fatalities? – Nice4What (talk · contribs) ♥ 00:45, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose I don't remember the last time we posted an averted incident. 9/11 and UA-93 comparisions are entirely inapt. No one was killed here and the possible disaster averted, but just to be sure we don't know what was the intention of the hijacking itself (crashing/suicide or kidnapping) or even the motive. WP:CRYSTAL looms large. The lead as of now has this "On 30 September 2026, the Boeing 737 MAX 8 flying the route broadcasted a hijack squawk code, diverted from its flight path, and made an emergency landing at Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz Airport in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.", I am not seeing anything here that rises to WP:ITNSIGNIFICANCE. Gotitbro (talk) 00:00, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose nothingburguer Yacàwotçã (talk) 00:54, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Over 100 people nearly being killed from a suicide by aircraft attempt which resulted in injuries is a nothingburger? I mean seriously, what do you think is big news than. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:10, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support. Hijacking incidents like Tropic Air Flight 711 are uncommon enough, but an attempted suicide by pilot on a passenger jet carrying 180 people? I don't remember the last time I've heard a pilot stabbed another pilot. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:12, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support Normally I'm not a fan of "near miss" type nominations. But this one is clearly different. It sounds like the plane was moments away from crashing and it was a deliberate attack. I think that, coupled with the global attention it is getting is enough to justify blurbing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:16, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Strong support. Being treated as a possible terrorist incident with geopolitical ramifications; if the cabin and crew had not intervened, we would have been looking at a very different result. ~2026-38065-02 (talk) 01:55, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    Investigators are of course going to assume terrorism when it involves trying to hijacking a plane, but that doesn't mean it actually is. Masem (t) 03:01, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Strong support but wait An attempted suicide by pilot is quite rare, especially with a large passenger jet. I do hope for more info to come out first however, I still feel like a lot of the news sources are in disagreement of what happened. – LuniZunie(talk) 02:38, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support per above Setarip (talk) 03:39, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose uncertainty aside, I don't think "near miss" is worthy enough of a blurb, especially when it wouldn't amount to anything in the long run. It's like that one blurb for nothingburger 9.0 earthquake in Siberia all over again. NotKringe (talk) 03:53, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support. Do not wait. Whether a news incident has an established motive or not is completely irrelevant to its notability for In the News. There are many violent news incidents which never have any motive established even years after the event. —Lowellian (reply) 04:06, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support/comment re blurb This story has been all over the news worldwide and is obviously significant given the notability of an averted mass disaster (given 180 people were on board the plane) and multiple key regional actors implicated. I do feel the proposed blurb comes off too ambiguous (apparent...hijack or crash) and should focus more on the diversion and landing of the plane, e.g. "Flydubai Flight 1073 diverts and lands safely after its captain is attacked by its first officer in Saudi Arabian airspace". That said, happy to workshop the wording further and not fussed about the timing of whether to wait or post ASAP. Oppius Brutus (talk) 04:44, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Posted. Supporters argued that the event has received major billing in international media due to its novelty. Some opposers countered that, because the attack was foiled, there has been limited impact and no casualties, but ITN is not a casualty counter and ITN items are judged by significance as measured by level of media coverage rather than any direct measure of impact. Others argued that we should wait due to the uncertainty involved. However, additional details have emerged since some of those !votes. Also, supporters countered that the information in the proposed blurb was factual and did not make unwarranted assumptions, and that reader interest does not wait for all the details to emerge. As such, I find consensus to post. The blurb can be updated as needed if additional information emerges. Sdkb talk 04:52, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Comment File:A6-FKF B737Max8 2026-01-02 DXB FlyDubai psnb.jpeg now available to use. Added to CMP. Mjroots (talk) 15:43, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

SpaceX Starship launch into the Earth's orbit

[edit]
Article: Starship flight 14 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ SpaceX Starship super heavy-lift launch vehicle has delivered a functional payload to the Earth's orbit for the first time. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated

 Wi1-ch (talk) 08:38, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Support Seems to be good progress but it's puzzling that they are splashing down rather than landing on the tower. The article really needs a picture though. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:09, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support, achieving orbit with one of the largest and biggest launch vehicles in history is a massive milestone. This launch might’ve not demonstrated catching and potential reuse of Super Heavy or Starship, but it is nonetheless a very significant advancement in spaceflight. Anacaab (talk) 13:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose At a certain point we need to develop guidelines for spacecruft. This isn't the first time heavy launch vehicles have delivered things into orbit, we've been doing that for the better part of a century. One corporation's milestone does not news make. BSMRD (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose as per BSMRD. These space tech "milestones" are becoming run-of-the-mill... We're not posting the releases of the latest LLM generations either. Khuft (talk) 19:12, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose, very marginal gains from the previous flight. And despite reaching orbit, it did so after engine failures in both the booster and the second stage. And then remained in orbit only for a single orbit, rather than the original plan to remain there for much longer. They also didn't recover the spacecraft - or even the booster. Nfitz (talk) 21:00, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose per all above. The Kip (contribs) 18:38, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose "Spacecraft goes to orbit" isn't a ITN thing. Basetornado (talk) 12:57, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Support biggest and most powerful rocket to go into orbit. Scuba 19:31, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose per BSMRD. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 20:43, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

(Removed) Removal: 2026 Lebanon war

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

Nominator's comments: Last significant update was done on Sep 10 (Special:Diff/1374253830). A quick search on Google shows no significant coverage of the conflict in the area since beyond rethorics, hence not qualifying as an event with frequent coverage which is a criteria for the Ongoing section. – robertsky (talk) 05:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Support removal As there is no clear idea what the end will be, having such in the ongoing line wears it down, in addition to the fact that while it is still ongoing, news coverage is very low and the lack of updates to the appropriate articles. Any major events in the future can be considered for ITNC. Masem (t) 11:19, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support This was added as a sub-entry for the Iran war when it received significant attention beyond the main entry. It isn't anymore and the main item should suffice in any case. Gotitbro (talk) 11:41, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support removal Not in the global news. Rolluik (talk) 13:11, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

United States fully withdraws from Iraq

[edit]
Articles: Operation Inherent Resolve (talk · history · tag) and Withdrawal of United States troops from Iraq (2025–2026) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States completes its military withdrawal from Iraq, ending Operation Inherent Resolve. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The United States withdraws its last troops from Iraq, ending twenty-three years of American military presence in the country.
News source(s): , , , ,
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Operation Inherent Resolve, the United States military's intervention against the Islamic State has officially come to a close. This is a historic event for Iraq since its the first time they havent had American troops stationed in years.

There is an article for this event, but it is very poor and outdated so I decided to link to Operation Inherent Resolve. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 02:25, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

I'm inclined to support, as this seems to be a major event for the history of Iraq. Did we post the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan in 2021? Of course it's not very similar circumstances but it would give some idea as to prior postings. I can't find it in the posted archive though. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 02:40, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
The Taliban offensive in 2021 was posted to ongoing, so it was not posted. After it was removed from ongoing, the 2021 Kabul airport attack was posted to ITN. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 02:54, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Weak support: especially in the context of the Iran War, this is reasonably significant, though an argument could be made that it isn’t that significant. Mitchsavl (talk) 03:00, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
What is the argument that it is not significant? Militant.Insurgency (talk) 03:32, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
@Militant.Insurgency I haven't decided my vote yet, but I'd imagine the argument would be that the end of the deployment doesn't mean a ton given the bulk of US troops were withdrawn years ago; the remaining forces being pulled out now are comparatively a skeleton crew. The Kip (contribs) 06:13, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Needs work The nominated article doesn't have much to say about the termination of the operation and its significance. It seems to have been largely successful in suppressing ISIS and so it's a backwater now compared to the Iran War. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:39, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose Quality issues first and foremost, but the removal of forces is more like a footnote at this point than a major conclusion as most combat had stopped long ago. Masem (t) 11:18, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
oppose per above.Psephguru (talk) 16:05, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Strong support was going to nominate this actually. Major event that's receiving global coverage; it's the first time that the US has not had troops in Iraq in over twenty three years and signals a new era in Iraqi history. I have proposed ALT1, which is what I would have worded it as had I nominated it. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 18:07, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
It's the first time that the US has not had troops in Iraq in over twenty three years. From NPR:

This was not the first U.S. military withdrawal from the country. U.S. forces pulled out in 2011, declaring their mission over amid mounting Iraqi political opposition to the presence of U.S. troops. Three years later, the Iraqi government invited them back again to fight ISIS.[1]

It's also worth noting that combat operations already ended five years ago. – Nice4What (talk · contribs) ♥ 20:00, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Incorrect; after the 2011 withdrawal, troops still remained attached to the US embassy and Foreign Military Sales. Here, no active military garrisons remain; it's a total withdrawal. Additionally, even if in a purely internal Iraqi context, there hadn't been combat operations in a half a decade, it was still being used in regional combat operations, including the current war, and as such is being heralded as a success for the Irano-Shia militias, while local authorities and Kurds are worried it could spur the rise of a new organization ala ISIS. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 20:45, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Similar to 2011, there are still troops attached to US embassies (though this is typical for US diplomatic missions). From NBC: "After this week, a smaller contingent of U.S. forces will stay in Iraq to protect American diplomats."[2] – Nice4What (talk · contribs) ♥ 21:54, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
It's also worth noting, @Nice4What, that we did blurb Withdrawal of United States troops from Iraq (2007–2011), and that the article notes that 17,000 personnel (!) remained in the embassy compound, along with 1,000 in each of Basra, Mosul, Kirkuk, in addition to thousands of defence contractors. I'm not sure how many will remain in the embassy this time, but there were only about 1,000 or so staff last year, and 3,000 defence contractors. This is on a different scale. Nfitz (talk) 21:08, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now Once again, there is more talk of the notability than article's quality. I do consider it ITN-worthy, but I think the article leaves a lot to be desired – it amounts to little more than a chronological account of the withdrawals, with little depth regarding the events themselves, their significance or the reactions… _-_Alsor ⭐️⭐️ (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) RD: Adrian Rurawhe

[edit]
Article: Adrian Rurawhe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former Speaker of the House; resigned from Parliament just a few months ago. Schwede66 21:40, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note In the section "First term 2014–2017", the second paragraph remains uncited. ErktheBerserker (talk) 09:03, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
I've cited that paragraph. Schwede66 20:21, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

September 29

[edit]

(Posted) RD: Courtney Meppen-Walter

[edit]
Article: Courtney Meppen-Walter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): News & Star
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: Subject only had one professional club, Carlisle United (2013-2015); I've tried to expand that as far as I can, but the rest of his career might look choppy because there was very little to write about. Even all the obituaries only seem to portray him as a Manchester City youth player who went to jail for causing the deaths of two people in a car crash. Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) 2026 Bangkok floods

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2026 Bangkok floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Flooding in Thailand caused at least 23 deaths, including four in Bangkok. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At least 23 people died as a result of a flood in Bangkok, Thailand and surrounding area. Credits:

Nominator's comments: Worst flooding in the Bangkok region for fifteen years, and outside impacts are also noteworthy. MarioJump83 (talk) 14:59, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

That's not what ITN is for, per WP:NOTMEMORIAL. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:03, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Okay, my mistake. In that case I think the other arguments emphasizing inclusion on the basis of RS reporting are compelling. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 09:36, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply

(Closed) Ongoing: Gaza war, Outline of the Gaza war & Gaza genocide

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT•C 20:18, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

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

Articles: Gaza war (talk · history · tag) and Outline of the Gaza war (talk · history · tag) and Gaza genocide (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)Credits:
Nominator's comments: The following articles (Gaza war (outline, genocide)) should be added to the "ongoing events" section like so:
−
[[2026 Iran war|Iran war]] ([[2026 Lebanon war|Lebanon war]]) [[Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)|Russo-Ukrainian war]] ([[Timeline of the Russo-Ukrainian war (1 September 2026 – present)|timeline]])
+
[[2026 Iran war|Iran war]] ([[2026 Lebanon war|Lebanon war]]) [[Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)|Russo-Ukrainian war]] ([[Timeline of the Russo-Ukrainian war (1 September 2026 – present)|timeline]]) [[Gaza war]] ([[Outline of the Gaza war|outline]], [[Gaza genocide|genocide]])
 Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 05:12, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Comment - What is the reason, as there been any sort of flare up in the war? If not, then I oppose adding this back. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose, no armed conflict has flared up. shane (talk to me if you want!) 16:10, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Oppose been going on so long without a clear end in sight, and that it doesn't make daily headline news. Ongoing is meant for long running events that likely should have a clear end, but if they keep on going indefinitely, ongoing no longer serves that purpose well. Masem (t) 16:31, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
According to the NOW Corpus (requires academic affiliation or subscription to access), 239 news articles have been published with the words "Gaza war" this month in their titles, 618 with the words "War in Gaza", 109 with "Gaza genocide", and 479 with "Genocide in Gaza". It is evidently still in the news.
The idea that this event won't end and therefore should be removed from the "ongoing events" section doesn't make any sense. If it is ongoing with no clear end in sight, why is that anything other than a good reason to add it back to the "Ongoing" section?
Also consider how the Russo-Ukraine war, which began in 2022 rather than 2023, is still in the ongoing section. Why are we selectively applying arguments to keep the Gaza war removed while not applying the same rationale to remove the Russo-Ukraine war? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 04:06, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose Not enough right now to justify "Ongoing". Tradediatalk 17:04, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose per above, and if there were more updates coming out I would advocate to reduce the number of articles listed to only one or two ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 18:07, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    There's been thousands of updates (on the low end) this month alone, per the above.
    The genocide and war have both individually received substantial coverage, and in accordance with the established de facto policy of the page, it seems like we should add "timeline" as well. Can we at least include these 3? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 04:12, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    Proof here of the frequent updates we're receiving. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 14:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support I may be in the minority in this discussion, but this was removed in the first place because editors wrongly believed the genocide was over after the "ceasefire" (or worse, denied that it ever happened in the first place). It's as ongoing as the other wars we've been keeping in Ongoing for months/years.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:21, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    Adding that Timeline of the Gaza war (3 October 2025 – present) would make a good alternative to the Outline article. It's being updated daily.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:25, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    I support the timeline article instead of the outline article, or the inclusion of both. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 03:53, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    To be honest I think the outline articles, as well as the timeline articles, all belong in this section. These are huge, multifarious topics and we need to make it as easy as possible for readers to access the information they're trying to find. There's not really an intuitive way for a casual reader to know "outline" and "timeline" articles even exist, and this is the perfect place to introduce them to casual readers trying to keep up with current events.
    Can we add Outline of the Russo-Ukrainian war and Outline of the 2026 Iran war to the ongoing events section as well? Speedy consensus here would be nice. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 14:16, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support as per Vanilla Wizard. The timeline article would be a better candidate than the outline article, given that it is being updated daily. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:34, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose per above. The Kip (contribs) 01:56, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Question There's certainly enough coverage of the Israeli genocide. But is there really a war still going on? I really haven't seen much in the way of reports of Hamas still waging war. Any good references to their actions, and what they still occupy? Nfitz (talk) 04:58, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    Thats the problem when ongoing events go past 6 months or so - they become background noise from a news perspective. Unlike the Ukraine situation which still dominates headlines despite being several years old (likely because of the larger direct impact on world politics with US and EU involved), events in Gaza don't capture much attention though there is still reporting on them as they happen. Masem (t) 11:51, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    My understanding is that Israel is currently colonizing the entire Gaza strip, breaking it into five giant columns (military checkpoints/borders controlled by the IDF) in preparation for a permanent on-the-ground occupation. The best case scenario for Gazans in the next few years (assuming the status quo of international inaction/weapons funding remains) is becoming a permanent underclass in an apartheid system with a subtle systematic ethnic cleansing, slowly driving them out while upper-class non-Palestinians move into wealthy apartments, throwing their trash out their windows into the slums occupied by the oppressed Gazans below (like today's West Bank). The worst case scenario is that the genocide will continue until all Palestinians are refugees or dead, because they want to "start fresh" on the Gaza strip. We should keep an eye out for any significant articles written about the occupation (which will mark a transition from the "Gaza war and genocide" to the "Gaza occupation and genocide" in the timeline, which currently is stationed here which is lackluster coverage in its current state), but until that happens, we should keep using the Gaza war as our primary article reference point for the ongoing situation in my view. I frequently work with related articles and Gaza war is considered the parent article for essentially everything that has happened from Oct 7 to now, including the October 7 attacks article, the Gaza genocide article, and any other related articles. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 13:20, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    There's no doubt that the Israeli genocide continues ... but people are seeking links for both the genocide AND the war. And I'm not seeing anything here indicating there's really a war going on. One-sided ethnic cleansing isn't a war. Structural issues in the articles shouldn't bring multiple links to ongoing. Nfitz (talk) 16:17, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    This is true, though if I'm not mistaken, this was one of the reasons why the war article was moved to "Gaza war" from "Israel-Hamas war". Everything that's occurred after the Oct 7 attacks, i.e. everything covered by the scope of that article, has been completely one-sided. It's a war on Gaza. There's maybe a case for renaming the article to something more along the lines of "Israeli invasion and occupation of Gaza (2023-present)", but Gaza war is more WP:CONCISE and the term war is used enough in news media that I doubt that proposal would get very far.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 18:06, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    The question remains, why would we ongoing a war that doesn't appear to be ongoing. Rather than just ongoing the genocide? Nfitz (talk) 20:51, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    Well, the timeline article for the "war" is suitably updated for ongoing at least. I don't think we have a separate timeline for the genocide specifically.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 20:59, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    Is it updated @Vanilla Wizard? I see one for a conflict (Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2026), but not one for a war; did I miss an article. Nor are the recent updates characteristic of a war. It also hasn't been updated in 20 days. On one hand, some of my comment sounds pedantic, on the other hand, we are debating putting the word "war" in the Ongoing blurb. Nfitz (talk) 01:08, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    Re did I miss an article @Nfitz I had in mind Timeline of the Gaza war (3 October 2025 – present) which is being updated every day  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 03:33, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    Ah, thanks. Very arbitrary dates. I went through the September entries (I hadn't actually realized that there were actually people called Hamas - confusing), but the entries that sounded as if they might be actual war were all in Lebanon - which isn't even near Gaza. Everything else is just Israel killing women, children, paramedics, and stuff that appears to be more like summary executions of people alleged to have done bad things in the past. Again, I see no actual war in Gaza. So we shouldn't be having the war in the blurb. And this appears to not be an appropriate timeline for the Genocide - some of it might be, but some isn't in, or perhaps even related to, Gaza. Gosh, these articles are a mess. Nfitz (talk) 06:22, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    To be frank I agree with you that there isn't a war and that the events from October 7 to now are best described as a genocide. I even believe even calling it a "war" at any point in time is misleading. It's simply that as someone who has been through the ringer in the article space, my understanding is that current Wiki consensus considers the Gaza genocide to be a subset of the Gaza war. This is the main reason why articles like Gaza war protests aren't instead called Gaza genocide protests - because technically, according to Wiki consensus in previous RfCs, all of the protests were against the Gaza war, but only a subset of those protests were against the Gaza genocide.
    I have argued against this characterization, and I won't argue in its favor here. If there's consensus for including Gaza genocide but not Gaza war, I'll certainly support it. It's simply that I can easily foresee people coming in and arguing we are violating consensus by adding only the "Gaza genocide" when more RS are characterizing it as the "Gaza war" as of lately. The propaganda model explains this phenomenon of delegitimizing the Gaza genocide with whitewashed language like "war" very well, but I've never been able to convince anyone to go against the majority characterization of RS on the topic due to systematic bias in reporting. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 14:53, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    In order to resolve this question since there hasn't been a discussion about this topic in a while, maybe a new RfC is due. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 14:55, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose While there is still some action, the war itself is mostly out of the news by this point. The few updates that there are to the timeline article are just little targeted bombings that kill a commander or two, not sustained action. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:43, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    There are thousands of news articles about it this month alone, per the above. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 14:58, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    As pure numbers, those mean nothing. Please stop WP:BLUDGEONing the discussion as well. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:14, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    Seeing as I'm the person who started this discussion and how I know a lot about the article space and the recent consensus on common issues regarding the Gaza war/genocide topic in Wikipedia, I think it's reasonable that I give a few comments that provide in-depth introductory context and arguments for the sake of facilitating subsequent discussion.
    If we aren't going by pure numbers, what do you suggest we go by? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 16:33, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    Depth of coverage. It doesn’t matter if hundreds of reports “mention” Gaza, if they don’t say much about it. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 17:19, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    How do we measure depth of coverage? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 18:06, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    While it’s not about this in particular, WP:DEPTH can give a good start. But as I said, just the numbers say almost nothing. Most of those hits are probably for barely-related items. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 18:44, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    I'm not satisfied with that answer. What do you suggest we do to determine whether this article should be included? Because right now you are saying thousands of news articles mentioning a topic does not mean the topic is receiving significant news coverage, and you are not providing any alternative ways to determine whether there is significant coverage. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 18:54, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    Thousands of articles mentioning it at least once, mostly in passing, do not indicate the large-scale coverage that we expect for ITN Ongoing. For Ongoing I would expect daily or near-daily updates that are relevant to the event, included in the article. I would also expect the coverage presented to show detail and depth of events that are of the topic itself. The numbers shown could mean anything - a small protest in New York that gets picked up by a local outlet would be included in that number, but of course it does not confer notability to the event on the whole. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 19:03, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
    For Ongoing I would expect daily or near-daily updates that are relevant to the event Again, it's unclear on what basis you have determined daily updates are not coming out regarding Gaza while daily updates are coming out for Ukraine. According to the NOW corpus, the "Ukraine war" has 5 mentions today in news articles and "war in Ukraine" has 25. The "Gaza war" has 3, and the "war in Gaza" has 13. "Gaza genocide" has 7 and "genocide in Gaza" has 14. Combined the sums are pretty similar (37 Gaza vs 30 Ukraine), so again the only data we have suggests you are incorrect. I understand you don't agree with the methods being used, but you have still not provided any quantitative alternatives for analyzing whether a topic is still in the news and I am still waiting for any sort of suggestion that would allow us to put this to rest that does not depend on subjective analysis. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 20:17, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support It probably shouldn’t have been removed. Same goes for Sudan and Congo genocides. -TenorTwelve (talk) 17:05, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose per Chorchapu. Khuft (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support per VanillaWizard. It's clearly still ongoing despite it nominally being a "ceasefire", it still gets regular coverage from outlets like Reuters, and the articles relating to it still receive updates. Mount Patagonia (talk • contributions) 22:18, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    The primary timeline hasn't been updated in about 3 weeks, @Mount Patagonia. Updates are too frequent. Also, are massacres a war? I don't see much in the way of updates at all about Hamas actions, and those this month all seem to be Israelis shooting women and children, arresting people for past (not present) actions, and ethnic cleansing by settlers; none of those are war. I'm find with a simple link for Genocide. Nfitz (talk) 01:12, 1 October 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Oppose There doesn't seem to be much significant updates beyond Israel's continued occupation in Gaza since the first phase of the ceasefire is still frozen. Also, ongoing requires regular updates to the article. The Lebanon War has now been removed from ongoing ever since much of the action died down, but that doesn't mean that front is entirely over. And the Sudanese Civil War and the massacres are still ongoing, but not on the main page. The occupation in Gaza and the settler violence in the West Bank are unfortunately norms of the wider Israel-Palestine conflict. Simply put, there doesn't seem to be any larger flare-ups beyond the occasional skirmish or bombings.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 05:37, 1 October 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.

September 28

[edit]

RD: Pac (wrestler)

[edit]
Article: Pac (wrestler) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Man, this sucks... Sceptre (talk) 04:12, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Comment: Unfortunately there's a lot of unsourced content there, including a few paragraphs. I did a brief CE earlier of about half the page and found quite a lot. That being said, absolutely awful news to see. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 08:28, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Comment At this time, twelve citation needed tags exist within the article. CastleFort1 (talk) 19:53, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Comment - Possible blurb? Once all the tags are fixed. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
If you are not personally supporting a blurb, please don't bring it up. Everyone will feel the need to pile-on opposes, which is an unneeded distraction from the RD nom discussion. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:08, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
This would be, by leaps and bounds, the most insane death blurb ever posted. He was never even a major promotion's main champion, and this was not big news outside of the specialty press. If (heaven forbid) Dave Bautista died tomorrow, I'm not sure he would get posted, and he's more notable than Pac by orders of magnitude. I don't even know why you would bring up a blurb without providing any justification. Kicking222 (talk) 13:08, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) RD: Siti Hasmah Mohamad Ali

[edit]
Article: Siti Hasmah Mohamad Ali (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
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.

 CMD (talk) 03:25, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Please state your reason for your support vote per WP:ITNCDONT. Tofusaurus (talk) 07:55, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support Every paragraph within the article has references. This article is ready for an RD post. CastleFort1 (talk) 19:52, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:06, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Posted – robertsky (talk) 14:00, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

September 27

[edit]

2026 São Toméan parliamentary election

[edit]
Article: 2026 São Toméan parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ MLSTP–PSD wins the most seats in the 2026 São Toméan parliamentary election. (Post)
News source(s): Telanon
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: Recent parliamentary election. The name of the party that won the plurality is so large that I decided to abbreviate the name. Onegreatjoke (talk) 04:34, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

obvious support when ready per ITNR.Psephguru (talk) 16:06, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support It it ITNR so the "comments should focus on the quality, not the significance". The article is not bad. ArionStar (talk) 16:11, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
•Support when ITNR, national elections are significant. CatPerson987 17:12, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Article still not expanded though. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:17, 3 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Dennis Haskins

[edit]
Article: Dennis Haskins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WTVC
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: American actor known for playing Richard Belding in Saved by the Bell. Article could use some work; many sentences are unsourced. Useless Niamh (talk) 13:04, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) RD: Angela Stribling

[edit]
Article: Angela Stribling (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): USA Today
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: BET host and radio host, also a jazz singer. Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: Mighty Sparrow

[edit]
Article: Mighty Sparrow (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York 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: Perhaps the most famous calypsonian ever. Article sourcing looks good. Pladica (talk) 23:28, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply

  • Support Article looks good. I wonder if there would be a conversation about blurbing this, given his standing within the genre (most famous calypsonian ever?). That would be something that I am less versed in. Ornithoptera (talk) 17:32, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
    I think a blurb could be appropriate given his iconic status across the Caribbean and pioneering of the genre, but I am of course biased as a fan so any other opinions are appreciated. Pladica (talk) 19:53, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support article looks good. Not sure it's blurbable but I'm not heavily against a blurb here either, so neutral on that. Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 19:19, 30 September 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) Serbian president Aleksandar Vučić resigns

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Aleksandar Vučić (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Serbian president Aleksandar Vučić (pictured) resigns to run for prime minister in the upcoming parliamentary elections. (Post)
News source(s): AP Reuters
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The consensus back during a nomination on 27 June 2026, under Vacant0's advice, was to wait until the resignation actually happened. Nomination is there to set the stage for the upcoming parliamentary elections on 25 October 2026. CastleFort1 (talk) 19:08, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Support as the previous nominator. It is ITNR too. ArionStar (talk) 01:33, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Was a bit curious about this. The list of current heads of state and government regarding Serbia says the prime minister constitutionally administers the executive of the government. What's also interesting is that the president, per the article, also jointly exercises the executive power with the government. ITNR would not be wrong here. CastleFort1 (talk) 01:50, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
I don't think it's ITNR. I'm looking at that table, and de jure it's the PM that has the executive power. President is only there because they are the head of state. They do wield some executive power (less than USA or France; more than Germany or Austria; about the same level as Croatia), but the main executive branch is still headed by the PM. byteflush Talk 02:36, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Weak support while I don't think it's ITNR, this means that the de facto power shifts from the office of the president to some ordinary citizen. And besides, they've been president for almost 10 years. The issue is that we now have parliamentary elections in less than a month (ITNR blurb) and a new presidential election very soon after that. byteflush Talk 05:05, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Support This is ITN/R as Vučić is the person who de facto holds all the power. Everything else is purely academic and in the grand scheme of things, irrelevant considering Serbia's huge democratic backslide iver the last decade. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:08, 28 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Support regardless of ITNR, it seems to be a National position of importance and resignation of such seems important enough to post. We can cover elections etc when the time comes. I don’t see a reason to wait unless we plan to see them within a week or so. ITN doesn’t have a limit on how many things we can post. La Ovo (talk) 15:41, 29 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Wait/soft oppose There seems to be some good arguments here for why this is significant, but the updated content does not seem to reflect this. Should this be posted, nothing in the blurb or the article would indicate WHY we felt it was worth posting. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:24, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply
@Admins willing to post ITN: ArionStar (talk) 15:29, 2 October 2026 (UTC)reply

RD: César Ortiz-Echagüe

[edit]
Article: César Ortiz-Echagüe (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: Newly-created article; short but looks good. More on eswiki if anyone interested might want to expand. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 17:07, 27 September 2026 (UTC)reply

(Posted) 46th Chess Olympiad

[edit]
Proposed image
from left to right: Sindarov, Abdusattorov, captain Kasimdzhanov, Madaminov, Yakubboev and Vokhidov
Articles: 46th Chess Olympiad (talk · history · tag) and Open event at the 46th Chess Olympiad (talk · history · tag) and Women's event at the 46th Chess Olympiad (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In chess, the 46th Chess Olympiad concludes with Uzbekistan (team pictured) winning the Open and China winning the Women's event. (Post)Credits:

One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 I am working on all articles while reliable sources with coverage of the final round as well as summaries of the tournament come in.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:03, 27 September 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:

  1. ↑ Jane Arraf (30 September 2026). "The U.S. military withdraws from Iraq over 2 decades after its invasion". NPR.
  2. ↑ Alexander Smith; Helen Graham (30 September 2026). "U.S. ends ISIS-fighting mission in Iraq as regional security fears mount". NBC News.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&oldid=1378451516"