Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
| Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines (or admin instructions). |
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.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary[edit]
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]
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.
Headers[edit]
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]
Please do not...[edit]
Suggesting updates[edit]There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
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 27
[edit]|
October 27, 2026 (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections |
(Ready) RD: Tetsuya Chiba
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by Miminity (talk · give credit)
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 is announce on this date Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 05:21, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Almost readyJust needs a bit more sourcing for the selected works section before he can be posted. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 14:02, 27 October 2026 (UTC)- @QuicoleJR: done Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:39, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks. The article is now of sufficient quality, so I am ready to support. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 14:55, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- @QuicoleJR: done Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 14:39, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support I see one Citation needed tag, but that should be easy enough to remedy. Much improved with sourcing from when I checked it this morning, good work. A big loss. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 15:35, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Almost ready, I found an unsupported claim that I've marked in the Background section.Comment I think the same section could also benefit from being split into Career and Personal life (sub)sections, but I'm uncertain if the personal life section would be large enough. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 15:35, 27 October 2026 (UTC)- @CantBelieveINeedAnAccount: done Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 15:41, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks, I withdraw that part of my comment and change my !vote to support as there are no more outstanding issues with the article. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- @CantBelieveINeedAnAccount: done Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 15:41, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Looks good. Marking as ready. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:39, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
October 26
[edit]|
October 26, 2026 (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Donnie Iris
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by CoatCheck (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
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: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania musician know for work with The Jaggerz (The Rapper) as well as his signature solo hit Ah! Leah!, Love Is Like a Rock CoatCheck (talk) 02:29, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality. RIP. Kampolama (talk) 04:37, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not ready due to severely deficient sourcing. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 17:05, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
2026 Ballon d'Or
[edit]Blurb: In Association Football, Harry Kane wins the Men's Ballon d'Or and Alexia Putellas wins the Women's Ballon d'Or (Post)
- Nominated by Heatrave (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Balon d'Or winners announced with Harry Kane taking home football's biggest individual award. Heatrave (talk) 23:07, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment This is not WP:ITN/R but it has been posted twice: in 2013 and 2014. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 23:38, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. In theory, I think the biggest individual award in the biggest sport in the world should be an easy pass for notability. That said, the issue with this article is the same as it's been seemingly for years now - the article is of poor quality for ITN in a general sense. Very low prose-to-tables ratio. I think there needs to be an overhaul to the yearly Ballon d'Or article structure before we can even think about posting 2026 Ballon d'Or or the like to the main page. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:22, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose for now per DarkSide830. Certainly notable, yet doesn't even have 10 sources and isn't sufficient quality. If it gets expanded, I will change my vote. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:32, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose for now - BdO is notable enough in my opinion, but article is wholly tables at the moment. The Kip (contribs) 05:28, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think an individual award in a team sport is notable enough. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:44, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- The Ballon D'Or is a suite of individual and team prizes; the blurb simply showcases the biggest two awards. However the article is nowhere near being suitable. Black Kite (talk) 14:25, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- I know. But we're discussing individual awards here, and they're not notable in a team sport. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:39, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose I would agree an individual award for a team sport is odd, especially when we are comparing players from different leagues. The ranking here seems completely capricious and silly. Somehow Kane suddenly skyrockets up in the ranking for a ceremony they hold in England? Messi wins three straight, then moves to the MLS where suddenly he's not even in the top 30 for two years (despite winning two MVPs, a golden boot and three team trophies), then its a World Cup year so he's 5th again? GreatCaesarsGhost 15:14, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- You are arguing based on emotions and that is not the right thing to do. Argue the article, the facts or according to Wikipedia guidelines. Every individual award stems from the performance of the individual in a team environment. Whether rapper, actor or footballer. Everything they achieved singularly was as a result of the team they had behind them. So you cannot discredit the award because it is a team sport. Heatrave (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
RD: Cyanide (gamer)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by Curbon7 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Gauzecard (talk · give credit)
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: Death announced on this day. Needs source work. Curbon7 (talk) 20:58, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah article needs a lot of work as it lacks citations but given that a bunch of articles just came out about him following his death, it should hopefully be easy to fix. Gauze ↵ 21:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Along with sourcing issues/under sourced, the article's layout is not the best, this is a biography of a gamer not a television series. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- It appears that the tournaments of his game are titled "Season N", like League of Legends: Season 1 World Championship, so headers like "Season 1" are the same as "2024-25 season" in ball sports. But the layout, citations, and accessibility to the uninformed are far from standard. Unknown Temptation (talk) 14:44, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Currect soircing is very weak to support notability, none of those sources would meet reliable. I would take to AFD but let's see if this can be improved for ITNRD. If not, then AFD would be appropriate. Masem (t) 21:40, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. Barely any sources. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:39, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose article is nowhere near ITN material (Camilo Escalona was in way better shape and wasn't posted as a reference) --Bedivere (talk) 05:30, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Walter Koenig
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)
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: Actor most notable as Chekov from Star Trek. News just broke, but article also needs major sourcing fixes. Masem (t) 16:31, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait for the "citation needed" tags, especially in the later work section, to be dealt with. Then it's an obvious support. Renerpho (talk) 16:55, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Renerpho: Sourcing issues addressed. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:46, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks! Renerpho (talk) 22:07, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Renerpho: Sourcing issues addressed. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:46, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Fixed up sourcing issues. Article looks good. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:45, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support, everything now looks sourced. Suonii180 (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Very grim news to hear this way. Article is almost ready as the article looks decent, at least from a glance. However, when verifying a reference in a sparsely referenced paragraph in the Star Trek section, I spotted two claims that were not supported by the reference which I've marked. It might be prudent to check the references so that everything is properly sourced.
In addition, there is a "By whom" tag in the fourth paragraph of the same section that might be a problem.CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 23:39, 26 October 2026 (UTC)- @CantBelieveINeedAnAccount: Fixed. Had to reword a paragraph to exclude unfounded material with sourced material. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 03:18, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support - Well-written and sourced. Jusdafax (talk) 06:17, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 08:30, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
2026 Ethiopian offensive
[edit]Nominator's comments: Sadly, this page (and its separate timeline article) have not been updated since October 18. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 02:55, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support removal It appears that Ethiopia has a fairly firm grip on Tigray now and the rebel offensive is over. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:52, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose removal it is notable and was updated ~2026-57085-60 (talk) 08:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support removal: Having tried to add some content to these articles, it is obvious that international coverage has almost entirely dried up. I do not think there are enough quality sources to maintain the level of updates expected of an Ongoing item. --Leviavery (talk) 23:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support removal very little happening recently, and even less reliably sourced. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:53, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
2026 Brazilian general election
[edit]Blurb: In the 2026 Brazilian general election, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (pictured) is reelected as the president of Brazil. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Incumbent president Lula da Silva (pictured) wins the 2026 Brazilian general election after the second round.
Alternative blurb 2: Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (pictured) is re-elected as the president of Brazil.
Alternative blurb 3: Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (pictured) is reelected President of Brazil, while the Liberal Party retain the plurality of the seats in both houses of the National Congress in the country's general election.
- Nominated by Skyshifter (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)
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.
Skyshiftertalk 00:11, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Added shorter, alternative blurb. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:18, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support as his victory has been confirmed by the electoral court. Procrastineur (talk) 00:18, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Resolve CN tags first, also add results prose, update header prose and the aftermath section accordingly. CastleFort1 (talk) 00:20, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Looking at quality, there are a few CN tags and uncited bits that need fixing. There also needs to be prose added to resuts section; right now it's just tables. I'm also concerned about LLM use in the Campaign section by Victor R de Oliveira. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 00:24, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Chorchapu I suspect that Victor uses DeepL.com to reate this article, not chatgpt.com or claude.ai VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 00:33, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Is better fixing article, and add more sources. VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 00:34, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Chorchapu I suspect that Victor uses DeepL.com to reate this article, not chatgpt.com or claude.ai VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 00:33, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support His victory has been confirmed, see here. --VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 00:25, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support bold linking the word reelected would make it shorter. GustaPapp (talk) 01:10, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support article's in good shape. Rather unlikely victory for Lula --Bedivere (talk) 01:30, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not yet ready Map in infobox is missing second-round election results by state. It's currently an empty map. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:40, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- The counting isn’t still complete. but the map could already be done with simplemaps for example GustaPapp (talk) 02:21, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Info The opponent just requested the annulment of the election. ArionStar (talk) 01:48, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- He announced he will request. formally in the working hours of TSE or STF. GustaPapp (talk) 01:53, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support but LLM tag OrdinariusFingius (talk) 02:12, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- tag the sections not the article GustaPapp (talk) 02:15, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- The map is also gray OrdinariusFingius (talk) 02:23, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support, and prefer altblurb2 if this is posted. CatPerson987 03:41, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Strong support for any of the blurbs.
- Comment It is important to mention the parliamentary results too. ArionStar (talk) 04:12, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- parliamentary results are stale _-_Alsor ⭐️⭐️ (talk) 07:10, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. Big story, upset victory, but article is not up to snuff (yet): table-heavy, lacking prose. Moscow Mule (talk) 04:42, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Altblurb2 is short and sweet but the article isn't getting the flurry of furious edits that elections normally receive in the first 24 hours after they're called and that this article needs so I think the question is academic. Moscow Mule (talk) 19:09, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Obvious support, with a preference for altblurb2 if posted. Lazesusdasiru (talk) 04:46, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Jeez "obvious suppport" without explaining if the article is up to snuff is not a valid !vote. Do people read the two banners above (LOL)? Howard the Duck (talk) 05:16, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well, I think in this case, it's fairly obvious why I'd support featuring the outcome of a presidential election, but that's my bad. Qwerty took the words out of my mouth. Lazesusdasiru (talk) 07:15, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- FWIW, it's not just you. Even Qwerty supported a blurb on article he admitted to have a "lack of some citations". I trust the admins would be able to read through these kinds of arguments. Howard the Duck (talk) 07:53, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- No, of course people don't read those banners -- see banner blindness. The {{not a ballot}} banner is especially bloated and useless. Everyone continues to post support/oppose votes regardless and so that's the pattern which newcomers follow. And the {{ITN discussion quality notice}} is a silly innovation as it mainly repeats what's already in the nomination banner. ITN has huge amounts of boilerplate -- see all the enormous orange banners at the top of this page. No-one is going to read through all that and adding to the banner bloat just makes matters worse. So, to address the issue, I've added a {{banner holder}}. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:28, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- And now Stephen has removed all those superfluous templates and more besides. That's fine by me. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:39, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- I'm well aware of these discussions prioritizing consensus. I simply kinda wanted to join in and forgot that I had to give an argument to back it up Lazesusdasiru (talk) 09:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well, I think in this case, it's fairly obvious why I'd support featuring the outcome of a presidential election, but that's my bad. Qwerty took the words out of my mouth. Lazesusdasiru (talk) 07:15, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support. Elections are always significant events and this one was discussed widely by the international media because of a shift to the right-wing in Latin America which Brazil seems to have been immune to, meaning this is a very notable result since the opposite result was predicted. I am however concerned about the lack of some citations. I support alternative blurb 2 when it comes time to post this event. Qwerty123M (talk) 07:11, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support This is quite a significant result so we should post it quickly but the article will still need work. For example, the 2 hour extension of the polling, which got lots of coverage, doesn't seem to be mentioned at all. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:45, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The 2 hour extension of the polling is not mentioned at all, the 2nd round campaign is not described at all, the campaign section is orange-tagged, most sections such as the candidates and results sections are just a sea of tables, akin to frequent quality issues on sports articles. Article is also incredibly long and difficult to navigate and probably could do with further splits per WP:SIZESPLIT and WP:FORK and I would expect there be enough content to have a 2026 Brazilian second round presidential election article. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:03, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Weak support alt2. – Obviously very significant news making headlines, but article not quite there yet, needs to and should be able to be fixed soon. Jiewei Xiong (talk) 10:27, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support altblurb2 pending the LLM orange tag being addressed and a few missing refs. I added some prose in the Aftermath section which mentions the voting hours extension and Bolsonaro's refusal to concede. Davey2116 (talk) 10:47, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not ready, LLM tag in the Campaign section and sparse sourcing issues in the article overall. I suggest we wait until both issues are fixed, as well as see what the article looks like after the split discussion has been decided. I think alt2 has the best wording. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 12:27, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support with the caveat that the blurb or altblurb1 should read 2026 Brazilian presidential election, which is a redirect to the general election article. "General election" is broader and in many places specifically refers to legislative elections while "presidential election" is likely to be clearer on this. See a discussion on splitting out presidential election which looks to have consensus for splitting, so the blurb will need to be changed anyways when that is closed. From a quick read of the campaign section, I don't think the LLM content is particularly egregious nor do I think it damages the quality of the article, I don't think it breaks WP:ITNQUALITY. In its current state it seems quite well cited so I'm not too worried about that. Respectfully dissenting, Coleisforeditor (talk) 14:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Also oppose altblurb3, the general election is stale. Respectfully dissenting, Coleisforeditor (talk) 14:14, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support alt2, but there are two sections currently flagged for possible LLM content. I don't have time to look into those in detail, but the issue should be resolved (one way or another) before posting. The rest of the article looks to be updated and sufficiently referenced. Modest Genius talk 14:39, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support alt2. Although this discussion is not relevant for publication purposes, there are no valid grounds to annul the election due to the two-hour extension; the number of people who voted after 5:00 PM was fewer than 40,000, whereas the margin of votes between the two candidates exceeded 3 million. Therefore, even if the votes cast after 5:00 PM were annulled, the result would remain unchanged. A.WagnerC✍ (talk) 21:10, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support obviously Yacàwotçã (talk) 00:56, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Strong support Article is in good shape Kampolama (user) 04:46, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Pretty important topic, I mean its one of the biggest countries in this world... Zuniwang (talk) 05:19, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- This is ITNR. It means it is important. Articles do not get posted here solely because "it is important". Howard the Duck (talk) 06:41, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Oppose for now as one section is orange-tagged for possible LLM use.Once it's fixed, consider my vote a support. The Kip (contribs) 05:24, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Orange tag has been resolved. The Kip (contribs) 07:34, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support - No orange or cn tags. It’s ready for posting. Jusdafax (talk) 06:24, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Admin comment I checked the article whether it's ready as the latest contributions suggested that much. After a couple of citation needed tags (not necessarily a big problem), I came across a section that I had to orange-tag for ref improvements. That's a showstopper; this needs to be addressed. Schwede66 09:09, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Schwede66 already solved. Did you check the sources? Apparently they were there, but only in the table. Yacàwotçã (talk) 11:46, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, you’ve got it. The references were only in the table. The prose underneath the table was unreferenced. And that was the problem. Schwede66 15:29, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Please mark ready if taken care of, I can post. Tone 17:11, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, you’ve got it. The references were only in the table. The prose underneath the table was unreferenced. And that was the problem. Schwede66 15:29, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Schwede66 already solved. Did you check the sources? Apparently they were there, but only in the table. Yacàwotçã (talk) 11:46, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
RD: David Rigert
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by Mellk (talk · give credit)
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: Soviet weightlifter who won a gold medal at the 1976 Summer Olympics. Mellk (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
October 25
[edit]|
October 25, 2026 (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Eric Bauza
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
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: Current voice artist for Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck for last few decades. Article has the typical sourcing issues for actors (lack of sources in the filmography and other similar lists) Masem (t) 03:52, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- 2020 was not a few decades ago, I hope. Celjski Grad (talk) 06:47, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- support he's been active as a voice actor in the animation scene for years. not sure about general notability to the average person but most people will know him by voice. astral ▪️ he/him ▪️ >:3 13:59, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- All recently deceased people with Wikipedia biographies are presumed to be significant enough to be posted at Recent Deaths. These items should be reviewed only on quality. @AstralAlley: please re-evaluate your !vote. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:32, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- noted for future :] thanks. i'm still a support, citation issues are, as nominator says, typical of these actor articles, might be able to fix lightly but everything else is good to go. astral ▪️ he/him ▪️ >:3 15:38, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- All recently deceased people with Wikipedia biographies are presumed to be significant enough to be posted at Recent Deaths. These items should be reviewed only on quality. @AstralAlley: please re-evaluate your !vote. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:32, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose for now as there is multiple citations missing, however, support once issues are fixed. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) 2026 Serbian parliamentary election
[edit]Blurb: Former President Aleksandar Vučić concedes the 2026 Serbian parliamentary election in favor of the Student List. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In the 2026 Serbian parliamentary election, the Student List wins a majority of seats, defeating former President Aleksandar Vučić. Credits:
- Nominated by Jalapeño (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Communispyrus (talk · give credit)
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: Will probably update the blurb once full results are confirmed this evening though the Student List has most likely won. Jalapeño (user / talk / guestbook) 20:41, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- As the results come in, expect improvements in article quality, specifically relating to results prose, the aftermath section, and the header. Vucic actually conceding the election to the Student List is a very significant thing. CastleFort1 (talk) 20:48, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not to WP:CRYSTAL too much but I'm skeptical of such a quick resignation. We should probably let it play out, and see what happens in the end. With the official results Jalapeño (user / talk / guestbook) 20:52, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well, Vucic has already resigned, hasn’t he? He was gambling on his party winning and him becoming PM, but that hasn’t turned out as he planned. For the past few weeks the de facto leader of Serbia has been a private citizen, and now with the election results we don’t know his future plans. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:57, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Strong support The header prose, results prose, and aftermath section were updated accordingly and are now present. The Serbia election is now in a better position to be posted within a day or two later after the election, pending further result updates. CastleFort1 (talk) 00:25, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not to WP:CRYSTAL too much but I'm skeptical of such a quick resignation. We should probably let it play out, and see what happens in the end. With the official results Jalapeño (user / talk / guestbook) 20:52, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support once updated This is breaking news so I can’t expect a detailed update yet, but aside from that it is plenty comprehensive and fully sourced. Great quality for an election article. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:54, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- very strong support orban level developement in serbia ~2026-57076-69 (talk) 21:51, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Strong support once issues resolved.... Sorry, I know ITN/R I should look at quality only, but just came back from celebrations... byteflush Talk 00:01, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support - Has conceded defeat in parliamentary elections. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:23, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support altblurb This is ITNR, so pending expected improvements to the article, and the full preliminary result coming in, it should be posted. However, I prefer reversing the blurb to have the subject of the sentence be the winner of the election. Hence I have proposed an alternative blurb that rephrases things.Gust Justice (talk) 01:05, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support altblurb, I'm not sure why you wouldn't directly say who won. KhokcheHendi (talk) 02:45, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait 60% of the vote has been counted. When we get to 90%, then sources should be able to call it. In solidarity, shane (talk to me if you want!) 03:10, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- @EditorShane3456 Actually, it's 90% . And sources have called it a long time ago. byteflush Talk 04:13, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support altblurb. – Both significance and quality are there. Jiewei Xiong (talk) 10:22, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Posting, looks complete. --Tone 17:29, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Pull Until the prime minister's appointment. ArionStar (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- That may not be for a while. I think it's best to post the results of the election now, while they're fresh. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 21:50, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Don't pull - After the Republic Electoral Commission (RIK) announces the final results, the parliament has 30 days to hold an inaugural session. After that, it has another 90 days to elect the new gov't (including the PM). We can't actually wait for that to happen. byteflush Talk 22:22, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Don't pull The election result is more important than the PM, more so than usual in this case. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:38, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Nonsense, and you know that full well. Elections are ITNR, and appointments of new PMs can be posted in exceptional cases. It’s been done this way many times… and you know it _-_Alsor ⭐️⭐️ (talk) 16:35, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
October 24
[edit]|
October 24, 2026 (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Slavcho Binev
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by TNM101 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Borgenland (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and KittyTeggie (talk · give credit)
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: Bulgarian politician who was a former MEP. There are some sourcing issues within the article, which I'm trying to fix TNM101 (in solidarity · chat) 18:11, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Sourcing issues appear to be fixed, article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 12:51, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
October 23
[edit]|
October 23, 2026 (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Dónal Lunny
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
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 of good quality. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:53, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
Oppose Significant unsourced content. Did the article change after you nominated @Abcmaxx:?--Launchballer 07:50, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: just the production section needs a few more citations and one or two other sentences but other than that the article is in overall good shape. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:19, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
2026 West Bank lockdown
[edit]| The Arab–Israeli conflict is designated as a contentious topic with special editing restrictions. Editing and discussing this topic is restricted to extended confirmed users. You are not logged in, so you are not extended confirmed. Your account is extended confirmedis not extended confirmed, but you are an administrator, so your account is extended confirmed by default. Participants are limited to 1,000 words per formal discussion. |
Blurb: Israel orders a "full lockdown" of the West Bank after an attack by two Palestinians that leaves the attackers and two Israeli soldiers dead. Thousands of Palestinians have been displaced. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Israel orders a "full lockdown" of the West Bank after an attack by two Palestinians on an IDF checkpoint, resulting in thousands being displaced.
- Nominated by Ltbdl (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ebeling-Marius (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Chomik1129 (talk · give credit)
ltbdl (talk) 08:01, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Added altblurb to try and make it shorter TNM101 (in solidarity · chat) 08:17, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment should this be under WP:CT as it relates to the Israeli-Palestinean conflict? CREditzWiki (yap) | (things i apparently did) 13:41, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Agree, I've added the notice to the top TNM101 (in solidarity · chat) 14:01, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support An escalation of the Middle Eastern crisis. ArionStar (talk) 16:43, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose This is yet a detail in the ongoing saga for which we already have 2 ongoings. Also this is too detailed. No prejudice about adding an "Ethnic Cleansing by Israel" or combining the Iran/Yemen theatres of this war and this, into a single Ongoing. Nfitz (talk) 19:49, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- It is part of the Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present) and the Arab–Israeli conflict, only. ArionStar (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- It's all part of the former. That should be the ongoing - not just the ethnic cleansing in the West Bank and/or the genocide in Gaza. Nfitz (talk) 02:59, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- It is part of the Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present) and the Arab–Israeli conflict, only. ArionStar (talk) 20:06, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support. Part of a broader Middle Eastern crisis that has engulfed the world's attention for a long time. Particularly significant development as it is in the run-up to an election in Israel. Qwerty123M (talk) 07:18, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support This is having large-scale effects across the West Bank, with houses being demolished and mobility severely restricted. It isn't covered directly under any of the Ongoings. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 18:08, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Weak oppose I'm not really seeing how this is making things that much materially different than the average day-to-day treatment of the West Bank. The Kip (contribs) 05:25, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose With everything going on in the middle-east, this doesn't seem important enough for a blurb. It is not rare for such events to occur in the West bank. Tradediatalk 09:19, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Important events don't have to be rare. ArionStar (talk) 15:59, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Major escalation, especially as it's clear that it won't end soon. To be blunt I find the constant use of "just a typical day in Palestine" whenever major news happens there to be uninformative and trite, and is increasingly clear that it's used as an excuse to avoid discussing it at all. Mount Patagonia (talk • contributions) 16:58, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
RD: Mariusz Urbaniak
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:
- Created and nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
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: Polish footballer. Article needs expansion and better referencing. Article created from Polish Wikipedia. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:25, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not yet ready Article has multiple CN tags. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:08, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) Karak church massacre
[edit]Blurb: In Jordan, a mass shooting at a church leaves 9 people dead and 40 wounded. (Post)
- Nominated by Militant.Insurgency (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: A rare mass shooting at a house of worship in Jordan. Currently in the news. Militant.Insurgency (talk) 15:08, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
Wait Article is too short right now, and it's not yet clear who is responsible for the attackTNM101 (in solidarity · chat) 15:57, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Article has been expanded significantly, and there is now a possible link to ISIS/ISIL, therefore support. TNM101 (in solidarity · chat) 14:30, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait Too early. --VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 22:27, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Seven fatalities, targeting a church and covered internationally. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:28, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Also, since I wrote that comment, two more people have died, I believe three days of national mourning were announced and the government carried out deadly strikes on Syria. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 03:30, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Jordan is in the Middle East but it is not a country home to terrorism. ArionStar (talk) 01:29, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support. Article has enough depht and looks well-written to me (only one minor cleanup tag currently). The level of international coverage is significant enough for ITN as well. — Rtrb (talk) (contribs) 16:33, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Good article. @Admins willing to post ITN: consensus looks to have been reached. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: pinging again. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support per above. Terrorist incidents are comparatively rare in Jordan and this has received large coverage. The Kip (contribs) 05:26, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- I'm in the process of posting this. However, a situation has arisen that I haven't come across before. The ITN image currently belongs to the bottom item. So a new one will have to be posted. This article has an image, but it's of poor quality. Either way, this article isn't in top spot, but the 2026 Serbian parliamentary election is. The winner of that election, the Student List, deliberately does not have a leader. They have someone who is heading their list, but that person isn't named in the blurb. Who is instead named in that blurb is the person who lost the election: Aleksandar Vučić. Hence, I'll be posting a photo of a person who has lost an election. That will no doubt cause some discussion and I'm not wedded to that decision. But in order to get things moving, that's what I've done. If it does need a discussion, please move that to the talk page and ping me. Any admin is welcome to post a different image without me commenting first. Schwede66 08:21, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 08:25, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
RD: Ron Duguay
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:
- Nominated by ItsShandog (talk · give credit)
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: Canadian professional ice hockey player and coach. ItsShandog (talk) 12:00, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait, Junior career section needs citations, and there are a couple citation needed tags that need good sourcing. Support if those are added in a good manner. Gauze ↵ 12:39, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Deep Brillante
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Updated and nominated by RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Lowyat Slyder (talk · give credit), ItzAPotato2009 (talk · give credit), BorgQueen (talk · give credit) and Tigerboy1966 (talk · give credit)
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: Racehorse that won the 2012 Japanese Derby, that passed away today . Article is long enough and sourced. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 10:51, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Seems well-sourced, and I have referenced the date of birth TNM101 (in solidarity · chat) 16:04, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Well sourced, I don't see any issues. --GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 19:32, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Posted – Schwede66 08:42, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
October 22
[edit]|
October 22, 2026 (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Health and environment
International relations
Science and technology
Sports
|
(New, needs reviews!) Tibet earthquake
[edit]Blurb: At least 16 people are killed in a magnitude 7.0 earthquake in northern Tibet. (Post)Credits:
- Nominated by Chorchapu (talk · give credit)
- Created by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Bloxzge 025 (talk · give credit) and Quake1234 (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Major earthquake in Tibet, 16 dead and 76 injured. Article is long enough and in fully sourced. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:49, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Weak oppose article is good quality, but we have posted all 5 of the deadlier quakes this year, so I think have reached the cutoff for lesser impact of frequently occurring events. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:34, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Frans Geysen
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jerome Kohl (talk · give credit)
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 composer and academic teacher, both for decades, on the silent side. The so far only obit appeared on 22 October, therefore I placed it here. It relies heavily on our article. That was created 2 decades ago by Jerome Kohl, solid work, especially musical analysis and the lists of publications and works. In gratitude --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:33, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support 3618 characters (542 words) "readable prose size" and sourced. Grimes2 17:15, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 16:39, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Sakharov Prize
[edit]Blurb: The Sakharov Prize is awarded to the International Criminal Court. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The International Criminal Court wins the Sakharov Prize. Credits:
- Nominated by Chorchapu (talk · give credit)
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.
Chorchapu (talk | edits) 14:44, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- quick check of past postings shows the awarded group should be the target article. Masem (t) 14:48, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
Done Chorchapu (talk | edits) 14:51, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not ready Sakharov Prize needs an update. Grimes2 14:52, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
Done by Placeholderer Grimes2 19:39, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support don’t see any glaring issues with either article. The Kip (contribs) 06:05, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Currently Sakharov Prize appears to be missing from the ICC article (doesn't appear in the search bar). Weird. Brandmeister talk 10:15, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not ready ICC article has faulty and duplicate refs. Grimes2 10:59, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Duplicate refs in-article should be all set—were mostly from a template Placeholderer (talk) 15:55, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
Done Faulty refs fixed Support. Grimes2 16:14, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Admin comment This isn't ready. WP:ITNUPDATE states:
The decision as to when an article is updated enough is subjective, but a five-sentence update in the body of an established article (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable.
I note that the update in the ICC article is a single sentence. Schwede66 08:46, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
October 21
[edit]|
October 21, 2026 (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
RD: Tom Skerritt
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by Thunkii (talk · give credit)
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 actor and director. Article is long enough and sourced. thunkii (talk) 20:01, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Needs work Couple of sourcing issues in the Career section that I've marked, Filmography has some unreferenced entries as well. CantBelieveINeedAnAccount (talk) 23:19, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
RD: John Anderson (singer)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)Credits:
- Nominated by Doc Strange (talk · give credit)
- Updated by BrDen (talk · give credit) and TenPoundHammer (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
Nominator's comments: US country music singer. Article is shorter than expected, and needs some more sourcing, but it has seen improvements over the last 12 hours or so. Doc Strange (talk) 16:38, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not yet ready Awards and nominations section is unsourced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:17, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) New premier of Quebec
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: Paul St-Pierre Plamondon (pictured) is sworn in as Premier of Quebec. (Post)
- Nominated by EditorShane3456 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Di123 (talk · give credit)
- Oppose - sorry, longstanding practice is to not post subnational election results and leadership changes (e.g. US gubernatorial elections). Blythwood (talk) 19:07, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose subnational politics. Suggesting snow close as the Quebec elections were not even posted. _-_Alsor ⭐️⭐️ (talk) 19:28, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
(Re-posted) PHP2Shell
[edit]Blurb: A critical security vulnerability in PHP causes disruptions to many online services. (Post)
- Nominated by Chorchapu (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ca (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Ahecht (talk · give credit), GreenRunner0 (talk · give credit) and Pieceofmetalwork (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: This critical security vulnerability has caused mass disruption to all sorts of internet services. This includes a lot of Wikipedia-related things, but also the Finnish government, internet forums, and a lot of news sites. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:48, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait for more information on the impacts. Definitely a major incident and one of the most widespread I can recall in the last few years but a bunch is still coming out. Eoline 15:55, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support on notability - I was going to post the same thing, but was unable to access Wikipedia for a while, ironically likely due to patching PHP2Shell. I'd say this is probably the biggest security issue since Heartbleed (which was posted to ITN), if not more significant, since the estimations are ~70% of websites affected. Major news sources are slow to catch up but will likely be reporting on this soon enough. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait until we have a good idea of the scale of the impact that can be included in the article as to habe it reach good quality. Its severe, yes, but if its not exploited while quickly patched, it could be a nothingburger. Masem (t) 16:44, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support It's already caused widespread disruption from administrators taking down websites as a precaution, so I'd argue that alone gives it enough notability. No quality issues with the article either, it's rather fleshed out considering how new it is. PolarManne (talk) 17:33, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support From German Wikipedia: "Warnings regarding cyberattacks that exploit the PHP2Shell vulnerability are currently leading to widespread shutdowns of internet services globally." Grimes2 17:38, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- the outages are not because ppl are exploiting this but websites and services proactively shutting down until they can patch. That's a good thing, and not anywhere as severe as actual exploits. Masem (t) 18:25, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Widespread outages (including our very own beloved Wikipedia) Otto (talk) 17:45, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support - and that's why I was getting maintenance messages when coming here today. With the amount of websites being provisionally shut down (70% of websites use PHP), it's already had immediate disruption worldwide. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 18:01, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support- but give it a few hours. Some extra time to clean up the article and add sources on what has actually been downed and the more conclusive consequences would be prudent, I think? Certainly its notable enough regardless. Amshpee (talk) 18:10, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Major global outage. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:32, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Posted. Sandstein 20:06, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- there are outstanding quality issues, this needs to be pulled. Masem (t) 20:18, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- This was the diff at the time of posting btw. Pull. ~2026-56418-34 (talk) 20:30, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Pull tags must be fixed. _-_Alsor ⭐️⭐️ (talk) 20:59, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Pulled strictly due to quality exists that still remain at the point it was first posted (specifically issues with unreliable sources). Masem (t) 21:04, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The article does not explain the actual vulnerability, how it could be exploited, and what the possible results of this could be, and is therefore useless. Black Kite (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- at least the specifics have been voluntarily kept quiet to give time for the patches to be disseminated and avoid exploits. There habe been a few malevolent actors that did report what the issue is, but no RS seems to be reporting those specifics. And the lede does get thus into being being a remode code execution, which has lots of possible impacts saying what that is could help with possible exploits. Masem (t) 21:24, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- What the vulnerabilities are have been well explained in many places. At this point many hours after the patch was released, there is no reason not to actually explain what this problem is. Black Kite (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- at least the specifics have been voluntarily kept quiet to give time for the patches to be disseminated and avoid exploits. There habe been a few malevolent actors that did report what the issue is, but no RS seems to be reporting those specifics. And the lede does get thus into being being a remode code execution, which has lots of possible impacts saying what that is could help with possible exploits. Masem (t) 21:24, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support The quality issues seem quite minor and the topic's overall significance is the more important consideration. As Wikipedia itself was affected it's important to spread the word while we can. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:17, 21 October 2026 (UTC) (edit conflict)
- Which would be great if the article actually explained any of that, which it doesn't. Black Kite (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- It explains nothing to someone that isn't an expert. It doesn't explain why this is a problem, what the vulnerability actually is, and what could happen if the vulnerability was exploited. The phrase "out of memory error" is mentioned but isn't explained for 109618, and 109619 isn't explained at all. This isn't acceptable. Black Kite (talk) 21:37, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- its now also suffering from.a number of very minor details. Like fir example with 70% of the web possibly affected, we should only note the largest companies that preemptively shut down for the patch as examples but the list is growing like kudzu to include very minor actors. Masem (t) 21:40, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- The very first sentence explains that the vulnerability enables remote code execution and that's a link for non-experts who don't know what it means. The article could use more background for non-technical readers but the urgency of the issue means that it's more important to get the word out to the people who do understand the implications. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:47, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well, possibly, if arbitrary code execution (which is where remote code execution redirects to) wasn't a terrible article as well. Black Kite (talk) 22:00, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- That article explains that
Arbitrary code execution signifies that if someone sends a specially designed set of data to a computer, they can make it do whatever they want.
Whatever they want! This is not difficult to understand and appreciate. It is obviously a huge vulnerability and the article lists various authorities who have confirmed its importance. In such a case, time is of the essence so pulling this to keep readers in the dark seems vexatious. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:21, 21 October 2026 (UTC)- Perhaps readers wouldn't be as much in the dark if the article actually explained the problem clearly. Also, I doubt if the operators of any site using PHP are waiting for Wikipedia to help them out with their problems. Well, at least I hope they're not. Black Kite (talk) 23:30, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Per our disclaimers, we are not here to act as warning services (not legal, not medical, and we have rejected storm articles posted before the storm hits) - it keeps our nose clean of any potential issues. ITN and main page is about quality of the work, and we can wait for a quality to be in place to post something that otherwise has high significance. That's one big reason why WP is not a newspaper. Masem (t) 23:38, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- The article exists regardless of your concerns and lots of people are already reading it -- it was a top read article yesterday. The BBC has live coverage as its top story (highlighting Wikipedia as an affected site) and so is taking it seriously. It's just ITN that is failing to perform, as usual.
- Note that this is compared with the Heartbleed vulnerability. That was posted by ITN in a timely way. That still has some citations needed years later and nobody cares. Wikipedia is about getting things done quickly -- "Wiki" means quick -- and the disclaimer means that its quality cannot be guaranteed. ITN started by posting the September 11 attacks within minutes. It was far from clear what was happening initially but Wikipedia made a start and this made a good impression. Masem would have opposed that too, it seems, and this attitude would have stifled Wikipedia at the outset. Tsk.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 09:09, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- The Heartbeat bug was posted using the OpenSSL article as the target, the standalone wasn't created until after the ITN item was posted. And at the time, the OpenSSL article seemed in good shape.
- The 9/11 article from the start was maintained in good quality, and it was clearly of global significance within an hour. We're still in the state of "okay, this could be a major issues but a patch was issued immediately, websites voluntarily went dark to avoid exploits, so what actually was left to exploit?" Significant to be covered in the long-term on WP, sure, but we're still not sure of the short term factors here.
- And again: we dont care about page views, we don't care where a story is being covered (front page vs back page) on news sites, we're trying to build an encyclopedia here, we are not sacrificing quality as a key factor. Masem (t) 11:33, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- The equivalent of OpenSSL in this case is PHP. That has been updated too and so we have the option to make that the bold article.
- I just saw a banner displaying on top of the main page which explained that a variety of community tools are down because of this incident. That doesn't link to any of the relevant articles and so there continues to be a deficiency in providing such links. That's supposed to be ITN's job and it's not doing it now, thanks to Masem's action. Tsk.
- Checking the NYT, I see that they have multiple stories about this and they seem to be leading with them. The impact seems to be growing as lots of sites are taken down, not just Wikipedia's tools.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 20:28, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- This is most definitely not "ITN's job". And yes, most here agree it is a big deal but quality is a major pillar here at ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 23:41, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- That article explains that
- Well, possibly, if arbitrary code execution (which is where remote code execution redirects to) wasn't a terrible article as well. Black Kite (talk) 22:00, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- So it's not just Umamusume huh... Wait till we get the exact detail of why it happened instead of vagueposting. NotKringe (talk) 21:41, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Indeed. I have to point out I would Support this if the article wasn't so poor. Black Kite (talk) 21:43, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Patch is out, my website is online again. Much ado about nothing. Grimes2 21:49, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- For the websites that can't be fixed/aren't maintained, this is a big deal. Just because you fixed yours doesn't mean that everyone will. And the downtime that it took to get it fixed is an effect of its own. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 21:52, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- >9.2 critical vulnerability
>ace possible
>majority of internet affected
>major sites experience downtime
>surely every single website out there is as well maintained as mine
>much ado about nothing
~2026-56604-91 (talk) 13:59, 23 October 2026 (UTC)- Who are you quoting?:^) ~2026-56756-47 (talk) 22:48, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Pull No reason to rush. There are older nominations waiting to be reviewed. ArionStar (talk) 22:39, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:36, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Re-posted quality improved, Stephen 02:23, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not really. It still doesn't tell us in simple terms what the issue is, how it could be exploited, and more important what the results of that exploit could be. It is unfortunately typical of Wikipedia's technical articles in that your average user opens it to see vectors and scores in an infobox that are gibberish to 99% of the population, and who will be none the wiser about how it will/could affect them even after they've read it. Black Kite (talk) 13:07, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Honestly, looking at what RSes are saying today, still, no one is going in depth on the technical aspects of this bug, a voluntary moratorium to minimize exploits (and likely good as I'm also no reading of any major incidents that have happened). That said, I did update the lede to put layman's aspects there. I don't know what else can be added at this point, at least for a few more days as any impacts develop. The key issues I saw when I pulled were questionable sources and those have been addressed. Masem (t) 13:48, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- And yet whilst I was driving to work this morning, I heard more useful information (for a layman) on the issue from BBC Radio than exists in the whole of this article. Black Kite (talk) 18:44, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- You don't happen to know which progamme this was? I'm interested in hearing it. ~2026-56756-47 (talk) 21:39, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- And yet whilst I was driving to work this morning, I heard more useful information (for a layman) on the issue from BBC Radio than exists in the whole of this article. Black Kite (talk) 18:44, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Not really. It still doesn't tell us in simple terms what the issue is, how it could be exploited, and more important what the results of that exploit could be. It is unfortunately typical of Wikipedia's technical articles in that your average user opens it to see vectors and scores in an infobox that are gibberish to 99% of the population, and who will be none the wiser about how it will/could affect them even after they've read it. Black Kite (talk) 13:07, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
October 20
[edit]|
October 20, 2026 (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
(Ready) Martian Moons EXploration (MMX) launch
[edit]Blurb: The Martian Moons eXploration spacecraft, which aims to bring back samples from Mars's moon Phobos, is launched from Tanegashima Space Center. (Post)
- Nominated by Chorchapu (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Chattenoir (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: A significant mission to return the first-ever samples from Mars's moon Phobos. The article is fully cited and in good shape. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 20:24, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support. In very good shape and very readable. Moscow Mule (talk) 18:40, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support. Article looks good. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:51, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support per above. The Kip (contribs) 05:26, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Significant enough and of sufficient article quality. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 14:03, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
RD: Alex Sanders
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by QuicoleJR (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
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 jurist and politician. Article is long enough and fully sourced. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 21:56, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:04, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Unreferenced date of birth stops me from posting this (apart from the fact that one support vote is not enough either). Schwede66 08:37, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
RD: Hiroshi Tsuchida
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
- Nominated by GhostStalker (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Imranfreak (talk · give credit)
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: Died October 11, announced by his agency today. Needs a lot of sourcing work. GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 21:56, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait - Needs a lot more sourcing. Bullet pointed lists should be converted into tables with references (I would do that but I struggle with complex formatting adjustments) Also a very strange article in the way he has such long bullet pointed credit lists but only 3 short paragraphs summing up his entire career and life. Are there no Japanese articles about him that may be translated? Gauze ↵ 10:29, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
2026 European unrest (ongoing)
[edit]Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
ArionStar (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment I'm unconvinced by this article, which appears to conflate a large number of protests for wildly different reasons into a single movement, which it clearly is not. And we clearly can't post this whilst the French story is on ITN. Black Kite (talk) 17:43, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- These incidents of unrest have been described collectively by multiple sources (, , , , and more, plus a lot in local language sources). With that said, Oppose/wait until the French blurb drops off. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 17:57, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Europe is far too large for this to make sense. Secretlondon (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- There's no geographic limit for an article's scope aside from what RSes ascribe it to be. See also Gen Z protests in Asia. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 18:26, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- I would like to see RS linking all of these protests together, because there aren't any in the article. There are RS that link some of them together, but even then they're vague, such as "cost of living issues". Some are just nonsense - the Axios source has a headline "Student protest unrest spreads across Europe", but the story mentions ... oh, just Belgium. The CBC source says "France student protests spread across Europe" and mentions ... just Albania and Greece. It's quite notable that nearly all of the sources that are trying to link all of these things together are not European ones. This is an exception, but read closer and it's clear that these are separate protests about very different things. Black Kite (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
It's quite notable that nearly all of the sources that are trying to link all of these things together are not European ones
- Nope; as I said earlier, plenty of European sources are describing this as well; see , , , , , , , , , , , , and those are just a few I grabbed on the day of the article being created; some from just today have been , , , , , , , , , .
- Also, I'm not sure where you got that read of the Axios story; it mentions multiple countries (Austria, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Belgium, France); it just has a focus on Belgium. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 01:14, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well, exactly - many of that huge list of sources you provided are clear that whilst many of the protests are similar, there's no overriding link between them and they generally had disparate flashpoints - education in France, housing in Spain, cost of living in Portugal, corruption and unemployment in Albania (we've posted the Flamingo movement before, have we not?) and so on. To SYNTH this as part of a Europe-wide movement misunderstands the issues behind the protests and Europe itself - it isn't a huge homogeneous continent. Black Kite (talk) 03:29, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- I don't think that this is WP:SYNTH when no broader, stronger, continent-wide link is being implied, and the article is explicit that even the Belgio-Italian protests, which are linked to the French ones, are independently organized. The sources say as such, and they state that the main link is the general broad dissatisfaction AND (imo more importantly) the general effect their having on incumbents (the snap elections in Spain, the instability and unpopularity of Macron's government, Meloni's prospects in the 2027 election, etc.) — Knightoftheswords(talk) 05:28, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well, exactly - many of that huge list of sources you provided are clear that whilst many of the protests are similar, there's no overriding link between them and they generally had disparate flashpoints - education in France, housing in Spain, cost of living in Portugal, corruption and unemployment in Albania (we've posted the Flamingo movement before, have we not?) and so on. To SYNTH this as part of a Europe-wide movement misunderstands the issues behind the protests and Europe itself - it isn't a huge homogeneous continent. Black Kite (talk) 03:29, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- I would like to see RS linking all of these protests together, because there aren't any in the article. There are RS that link some of them together, but even then they're vague, such as "cost of living issues". Some are just nonsense - the Axios source has a headline "Student protest unrest spreads across Europe", but the story mentions ... oh, just Belgium. The CBC source says "France student protests spread across Europe" and mentions ... just Albania and Greece. It's quite notable that nearly all of the sources that are trying to link all of these things together are not European ones. This is an exception, but read closer and it's clear that these are separate protests about very different things. Black Kite (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Smaller than the Arab Spring. I am unconvinced this is deserving of being ITN but there are several RSs connecting the events. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 08:10, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- There's no geographic limit for an article's scope aside from what RSes ascribe it to be. See also Gen Z protests in Asia. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 18:26, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Europe is far too large for this to make sense. Secretlondon (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- These incidents of unrest have been described collectively by multiple sources (, , , , and more, plus a lot in local language sources). With that said, Oppose/wait until the French blurb drops off. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 17:57, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - too many disparate things. If there's a link between these it's the oil prices driven by the Ukraine war and the Iran war, both of which are already ongoing. Nfitz (talk) 00:12, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- That page needs a TNT. It is fair to have a landing page to say there were multiple, unconnected unrests in several European countries during the back half of 2026, providing a link and short summary of each, but no attempt to link them, more as a navigation page. Masem (t) 00:57, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
unconnected unrests
- The Belgian and Italian protests started explicitly as spillovers of the French protests, so this is just incorrect. Furthermore, the article makes it clear that these aren't centrally coordinated or have the exact same purposes, and I don't see the argument for why that's needed; the demonstrations listed in the Arab Spring or even better the Gen Z protests have all had various different key causes, but were described collectively by sources due to having certain common thematic needles. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 01:21, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- The problem here is that these articles are far too detailed. If the Belgium and Italian protests are spillovers of the French one, they should be discussed in the French one and not spun out to separate articles. We need to aim for comprehensive coverage, not detailed. These articles are glorified timeline articles which are already a problem. Masem (t) 04:23, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Well the Belgian and Italian protests are taking place in the context of their own country's situations, no? I agree the article needs workshopping (which is partially why I oppose adding it rn), but I do think there is merit to this page.
- Note that atm, three other European language wikis have created their own versions of these pages (eswiki, nlwiki, ptwiki), and anecdotally in person and online, I have seen people discussing this after this weekend as "European riots", "European protests", etc. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 05:22, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- The problem here is that these articles are far too detailed. If the Belgium and Italian protests are spillovers of the French one, they should be discussed in the French one and not spun out to separate articles. We need to aim for comprehensive coverage, not detailed. These articles are glorified timeline articles which are already a problem. Masem (t) 04:23, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- That page needs a TNT. It is fair to have a landing page to say there were multiple, unconnected unrests in several European countries during the back half of 2026, providing a link and short summary of each, but no attempt to link them, more as a navigation page. Masem (t) 00:57, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, the article itself even notes that the events are "largely unconnected". I just don't see why separate events that are mostly unrelated should be put into one. Ornithoptera (talk) 09:05, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- wait until the French blurb drops off as @Knightoftheswords281 MrCryptoNerd (talk) 11:45, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per others above. Just because certain things happen at the same time in the same place doesn't mean they're connected. We wouldn't post an ongoing item called "Wars in Africa" or "Poor weather in Asia", so... Yakikaki (talk) 07:34, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - I disagree with the notion these are totally unconnected or can't be grouped in some way due to the underlying issues. However I don't think they are consistent enough to justify ongoing. We posted individual coups and coup attempts that formed the coup belt, but didn't put it in the ongoing. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 08:57, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Commment This should ideally be a blurb nom but I share the sentiment that this appears to be synth of unrelated events. Gotitbro (talk) 16:01, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
Oppose We already blurbed the French protests twice. None of the protests in other European countries would be even borderline blurb worthy. They are also not as strongly related (compared to events due to the haze for example). This nomination feels like Western centrism. --~2026-55444-41 (talk) 07:30, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Not significant enough to justify "ongoing". All the other ongoing are much more important and impactful. Tradediatalk 09:09, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) 2026 Alberta referendums
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Blurb: In the province of Alberta, voters reject a proposal to separate from Canada as part of a series of referendums (Post)Credits:
- Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
- Created by EagleImperial (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Lilactree201 (talk · give credit), DRWiki1102 (talk · give credit), Moondragon21 (talk · give credit), RedBlueGreen93 (talk · give credit) and Casspedia (talk · give credit)
- Oppose - subnational politics. Whole thing is a bit of a joke really ... support has always been small for separation. Also, this referendum was not about separation. It was about having a referendum about separation - which of course would take years to negotiate what the terms of that would be, and negotiate with indigenous communities. Those who were "voting to separate" were only voting for "The Government of Alberta should commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada". A blurb should reflect that. It's little more than a glorified opinion poll - separation was never the outcome of this - that would have taken at least one more referendum if not referenda. Nfitz (talk) 06:10, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, but the ref question was itself subject to a bunch of politicking, which is why it ended up in that way. All in all, it was an express in support of separatism, even if unlikely to actually unfold. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 06:17, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- We are going OT here, but with such a massive defeat on even having a referendum on the subject is not an expression in support of separatism. Nfitz (talk) 06:24, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, but the ref question was itself subject to a bunch of politicking, which is why it ended up in that way. All in all, it was an express in support of separatism, even if unlikely to actually unfold. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 06:17, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- For the love of god, check your blurbs for basic spelling and grammar: 'seperate', 'Canda'. Mr rnddude (talk) 06:13, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- A real god would understand what was said without the spelling being correct! Nfitz (talk) 06:15, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Sorry I'm disleksic. — Knightoftheswords(talk) 06:18, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose because the other option was not to separate from Canada, but to hold another referendum that would ask that question. Even if they voted for that referendum to be held, we'd wait to post the results from it. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:17, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose they didn't even accept the proposal. If they accepted the proposal, I would be willing to hear this out, but right now the blurb is just saying that nothing has changed.
- Support, formally organised independence referendums are rare. That this referendum has specific language about creating a second referendum, that remains an unusual, newsworthy, event: a current event of wide interest. The result was a referendum failing, but that is still newsworthy. Elections which re-elect the existing government are a similar sort of event. The article quality is reasonable, I expect the Results section to expand over time. CMD (talk) 11:06, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per others. This was the vote to decide if they should do an actual formal vote to secede. Masem (t) 11:28, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The separation vote was non-binding. Referendum of a referendum, concept of a plan. CastleFort1 (talk) 12:12, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Weak oppose The result of the referendum is no change, which is less notable than if the referendum had resulted in separation. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 13:21, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per above. Nothing changed, and it's non bonding. Vetrenarisisum (talk) 13:51, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - this would not have been posted if it succeeded and it most definitely will not be posted if it failed OrdinariusFingius (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - it was a referendum on whether to hold a referendum. Not really that important. ғѳmɑɭʱɑυե (Any pronouns)ᵀᵃˡᵏ 22:21, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Alberta voted to not hold a binding vote. Don’t get me wrong, I agree with the status quo being upheld, but this is pretty inside baseball stuff and not really all that noteworthy. RPH (talk) 15:29, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support. For all the legalists here, this has been framed as an independence referendum by Carney himself. The political message is what counts, not the technicalities. It's also not "subnational" politics, as an independence referendum is about creating a new nation. It's clearly noteworthy, the topic has been in the news for months, and the resounding success of No is also noteworthy as it sounds the death knell for the Albertan independence movement for decades to come. Khuft (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose—Albertan here. I've lived in this province for nearly 30 years. The separatist movement was a total nothing-burger from the start. Poll after poll showed that it had zero chance of success. None. The only hope they had was for Albertans to be complacent like many Brits were for Brexit, and we were not. The media made it look so much bigger than it actually was, but separatism here was never a serious proposition. I'm a Canadian first and foremost, and so are most Albertans. Kurtis (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Given it's just a subnational election and only a poll whether to hold a referendum for separation. There's certainly some pressure, yes, and plenty of loudmouths plus media hyping it up, but the poll showed 25% support which wasn't much of a change from other unofficial polls conducted.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 00:35, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
Attack on Helen Haines
[edit]Blurb: Australian independent politician Helen Haines (pictured) is struck by a vehicle in a deliberate attack outside her electorate office in Wangaratta. (Post)
Alternative blurb:
Alternative blurb 2: Australian independent politician Helen Haines (pictured) loses her legs after a vehicle attack outside her electorate office in Wangaratta. Credits:
- Nominated by Rhain (talk · give credit)
- Updated by GentleOnion571 (talk · give credit) and Laterthanyouthink (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Rare act of political violence in Australia that has seen immediate condemnation from every party, especially in light of Haines's reputation as "a principled politician who is well respected by virtually all across the parliament". – Rhain ☔ he
him 04:00, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support. This was a significant event which has been widely reported upon — including its subsequent developments — in the Australian and international media. Political violence is so rare in Australia that when it does happen people need to know about it. I support the first blurb as we do not need to give much detail about this event, readers should want to know more about an event per WP:ITNPURPOSE and the tragic circumstances may be upsetting to read in detail. Qwerty123M (talk) 07:24, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
Off topic and getting quite heated. |
|---|
|
- Oppose I'm Australian and this is certainly major news here. I don't see it as necessary for ITN though. Especially when currently the signs seem to point to it being deliberate, but also the actions of someone with serious mental health issues.PliskorCor (talk) 07:27, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait given Haines' current condition, I would say that the situation is in flux and we should wait and see how she fares. Ornithoptera (talk) 08:29, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait per Ornithoptera and PliskorCor. Gauze ↵ 11:44, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Moderately support I moderately support this nomination based off these multiple factors:
- Even if the attack was mental health related, this is still a rare act of violence against a politician in Australia, a nation that has seen little to none political violence in the modern day.
- There is also sustained international coverage, with articles from from BBC, the NYT, and the AP.
- The international implication is that it reflects a wider theme of a possible spread of violence against politicians globally in the past two years that was thought more contained to only the United States. The combination with the coverage fulfills the notability criteria.
- The aftermath has also created considerable weights in the Australian sphere of politics. No doubt there will be security increases and political discourse being pulled from the brink. Every major political party in Australia has condemned the attack. Even the One Nation leader Pauline Hanson appeared to have read the room following the attack and had to backtrack on a Jacqui Lambie cartoon.
- The bolded article does have good quality to be posted onto ITN. Fulfills quality criteria.
- The most similar case to an attack on a legislator which was posted onto ITN was the 2025 shootings of Minnesota legislators, posted upon ITN on 15 June 2025. The attack has not caused a death yet, so the case is so far similar to the Attack on Paul Pelosi, which wasn't nominated for ITN. Considering that the attack upon a legislator happened in Australia rather than the United States where acts of political violence are more likely to happen, I am more moderately inclined to have this nomination posted.
- CastleFort1 (talk) 14:17, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- oppose comprable to giffords shooting (well before my wiki time) and doubt it was posted as local.Psephguru (talk) 15:33, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment The 2011 Tucson shooting which involved Gabby Giffords was also posted onto ITN back in January 2011. CastleFort1 (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Granted, six people died in that shooting so it's not a perfect precedent. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 17:23, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Comment The 2011 Tucson shooting which involved Gabby Giffords was also posted onto ITN back in January 2011. CastleFort1 (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support I was just about to nominate this when I noticed it had already been nominated. It has received worldwide coverage, and is a rare instance of political violence in Australia (I think the last time something of this severity happened was in the 1990s). ғѳmɑɭʱɑυե (Any pronouns)ᵀᵃˡᵏ 21:28, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Although, I would argue that the word "deliberate" needs to be removed for now because we don't know if it is deliberate or not. ғѳmɑɭʱɑυե (Any pronouns)ᵀᵃˡᵏ 22:07, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Changing to an Oppose due to the length of time it's been. It's no longer in the news. ғѳmɑɭʱɑυե (Any pronouns)ᵀᵃˡᵏ 11:26, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Largely due to CastleFort1's points. This is far more than just a 'local' story and regardless of the outcome (if she makes it or not), something like this rarely happens in Australia. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:02, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Suppport, also per Castlefort1 and others - this is very rare in Australia and has made all the major international news outlets. The attack was deliberate, whether or not mental health issues were involved. I have been working more on her biographical details than the attack, but I suspect that there will only be commentary for a while now, as the alleged culprit's court date is only in Feb next year. It is timely to post it now. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:45, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Third term has a tag. I did however add an alt blurb as she's now lost two of them.--Launchballer 07:30, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- What tag? If you're talking about the discussion tag to see if her attack should get its own article, I don't think that's equivalent to an orange/quality issue tag and (IMO) shouldn't question the article's quality for posting. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:19, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose I would argue that blurbing the 2025 shootings of Minnesota legislators sets a bad precedent, given that the politicians involved are not "top-tier" and the impact are quite overblown. As tragic as this incident is, I don't think this is notable enough to warrant a blurb. NotKringe (talk) 09:18, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support Blurb - per Castlefort1. MrCryptoNerd (talk) 11:50, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support - The last politically motivated assassination attempt on a politician in Australia was on John Newman in 1994. This is an unprecedented escalation in the polarisation of politics in Australia. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has activated a joint-terrorism team as consequence of this attack. TarnishedPathtalk 12:11, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- It's still undetermined if this was politically motivated or an assassination attempt. And while both are very plausible, it shouldn't be posted based on it.Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 12:37, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- As @Salmon Of Ignorance said, there has been no mention of it being politically motivated or an assassination attempt. A terrorism team would be activated regardless of what happened due to who was attacked. But virtually everyone who either lived near the alleged perpetrator or knew them has raised the point that they had concerns for his mental health in the years leading up to it. The person who pulled him out of the car said that he was rambling and incoherent. Assassination is a big word, and it does not appear to be relevant in this case.PliskorCor (talk) 23:31, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- @Rhain, perhaps you should update your proposed blurbs to indicate that she's lost both legs. TarnishedPathtalk 00:41, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- They were already updated yesterday with alt blurb 2. I've struck alt1 as well. – Rhain ☔ he
him 01:06, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- They were already updated yesterday with alt blurb 2. I've struck alt1 as well. – Rhain ☔ he
- Support. Possible assassination attempt on a politician that has been receiving coverage for days. Haines has also lost both legs and is in critical condition. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 19:42, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- I have no idea who this woman is OrdinariusFingius (talk) 22:19, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Your lack of knowledge doesn't make her more or less significant. GenevieveDEon (talk) 19:17, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Support This event is having a massive effect on political discourse in Australia. It has generated a lot of comment on the need to raise the standards. HiLo48 (talk) 00:28, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose While this is tragic, nothing in the article denotes significance of either the person (not in the cabinet nor in the opposition) or the attack. I don't see any impact of this in Australia either. Gotitbro (talk) 16:06, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- You don't see "any" impact in Australia? Come on, be real. Steelkamp (talk) 03:43, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The case for this rests on an assumption that it is politically motivated where the best information available suggests it is not. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:40, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Strong support An attempted assassination of a member of a national parliament is ITN, in my view. ArionStar (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- There is no evidence that this is an attempted assassination.PliskorCor (talk) 01:15, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- A person strikes twice a politician using a car… ArionStar (talk) 02:40, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- It's certainly an attack, but the word "assassination" implies that it was a wilful attack "typically for political, social, or ideological reasons." The more news that comes out, the more it appears the actions of someone with serious mental health issues. I have no issues with calling it an attack, but assassination is too much for the information that has come out.PliskorCor (talk) 02:53, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification. In Brazil, we call any intentional homicide (murder) an "assassinato", hence the mistake. ArionStar (talk) 18:20, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- No concerns at all. Just different language meaning different things.PliskorCor (talk) 04:11, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification. In Brazil, we call any intentional homicide (murder) an "assassinato", hence the mistake. ArionStar (talk) 18:20, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- It's certainly an attack, but the word "assassination" implies that it was a wilful attack "typically for political, social, or ideological reasons." The more news that comes out, the more it appears the actions of someone with serious mental health issues. I have no issues with calling it an attack, but assassination is too much for the information that has come out.PliskorCor (talk) 02:53, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- A person strikes twice a politician using a car… ArionStar (talk) 02:40, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- There is no evidence that this is an attempted assassination.PliskorCor (talk) 01:15, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose while an assassination attempt on sitting or former head of state/government or even an attempted assassination of leader of the Opposition rises to the significance level for ITN, this simply doesn't. - ~2026-56747-06 (talk) 21:24, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. I would support if she had been killed, as per previous precedent that sitting MPs who are assassinated get blurbed, but she has survived. Steelkamp (talk) 03:41, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Not a major national political figure (like a minister or opposition leader). Motive is not confirmed and she survived the tragic attack. --~2026-55444-41 (talk) 07:27, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Steelkamp and GreatCaesarsGhost. While the perpetrator's attack on Haines was horrific, it didn't result in her dying, her condition is now stable and reliable sources haven't confirmed any motive for the attack; on the contrary, their reporting is currently that police are still at the very early stage of trying to work out the perpetrator's motives. Haines being a crossbench MP now in stable condition carries lower significance than the death of a head of government or state, and while you certainly could make the argument that a failed attempt to assassinate a more senior federal politician (e.g. the PM of Australia or President of the United States) would still be significant enough for ITN, ascribing a political motive for this particular attack is plainly speculation and a potential violation of WP:CRYSTAL at this stage. Oppius Brutus (talk) 01:35, 24 October 2026 (UTC)
- Does an attack need to be successful to be considered ITN? ArionStar (talk) 00:58, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- No, but there is a higher bar. Steelkamp (talk) 09:53, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Does an attack need to be successful to be considered ITN? ArionStar (talk) 00:58, 25 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. While a tragic incident, and Ms Haines's life has been irrevocably altered, this doesn't rise to the level of significance for ITN posting. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Falls short of importance needed for ITN. Tradediatalk 09:05, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Ongoing: French Protests
[edit]Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by V. L. Mastikosa (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Currently there are discussions for renaming the student protest article and merging with fuel protests with consensus in the latter to merge so the article title is prone to change and will probably get even more attention. V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 00:15, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Too early. Wait until the most blurb is likely to fall off (And assume no new major blurb about the protest is needed). Masem (t) 00:37, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - literally the top blurb. Speedy close with no prejudice against reopening it once it falls off the page. Nfitz (talk) 05:41, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per Nfitz and Masem. Gauze ↵ 11:46, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait until blurb rolls off. CREditzWiki (yap) | (things i apparently did) 14:19, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
- Wait Too early. --VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 01:07, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose and close Top blurb of ITN right now. Gotitbro (talk) 16:08, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- Admin comment The blurb has just rolled off, but this will get archived in a few hours, too. Nobody has commented on the merits of the ongoing nomination, hence this might need to get renominated. Schwede66 08:34, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Even if blurb rolled off, Protests in France are not rare enough to justify an "ongoing". Tradediatalk 09:03, 27 October 2026 (UTC)
Luca Niculescu
[edit]Blurb: Luca Niculescu is sworn in as Prime Minister of Romania, replacing caretaker government of Ilie Bolojan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Luca Niculescu replaces caretaker Ilie Bolojan as Prime Minister of Romania, ending the political crisis in the country. Credits:
- Nominated by Ieditarticles (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
- Support altblurb A typical ITNR. ArionStar (talk) 22:52, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose for now on quality, though as the banner notes, the Romanian article seems to be much more thorough and could be used to expand. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:00, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- The crisis article is really better and could be the main/target one. ArionStar (talk) 16:41, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
- I was referring to the crisis article. Prima facie, an article that doesn't requiring scrolling to read the references is unlikely to be of the quality we want to feature. The Romanian article being 12x longer would suggest it is not a "minimally comprehensive overview of the subject." GreatCaesarsGhost 11:04, 23 October 2026 (UTC)
- The crisis article is really better and could be the main/target one. ArionStar (talk) 16:41, 22 October 2026 (UTC)
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: