Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here.

In the news toolbox
Error reports Nominations History (Posts · Nominations) Discussion General criteria Death criteria Recurring items Admin guide Image protection Current events portal
v t e

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

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

Mark Carney In Canada, the Liberal Party, led by Prime Minister Mark Carney (pictured), wins the most seats in the federal election. A power outage affects most of the Iberian Peninsula. An explosion and fire at the Port of Shahid Rajaee, Iran, kills at least 70 people and injures more than 1,200 others. At least 11 people are killed in a car-ramming attack at a street festival in Vancouver, Canada. Militants attack a group of tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir, killing 26 people. Ongoing: Gaza war M23 campaign Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: David Horowitz Tom Brown Jim Herriot Waltraut Haas Jiggly Caliente Puan Noor Aishah Nominate an article view — page history — related changes — edit

Archives of posted stories: Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/Archives

This page contains a section for each day and a sub-section for each nomination. To see the size and title of each section, please expand the following section size summary.

Section sizes

Article: 2025 Australian federal election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Australian Labor Party, led by the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese (pictured), wins the most seats in the Australian federal election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Australian Labor Party, led by the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese (pictured), is returned to government at the Australian federal election.
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

• Nominated by Happily888 (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.

 Happily888 (talk) 10:30, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support first blurb, as matches the recent Canadian blurb, and mentions them being incumbent, although I would prefer also mentioning they managed a majority V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 11:44, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Fahads1982^talk/contrib 09:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Former Governor of Illinois. 240F:7A:6253:1:801B:A5BD:237A:E9D2 (talk) 06:47, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Thriley (talk) 15:35, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Not ready. Filmography sections unsourced, and missing citations in the main body of the article as well. Natg 19 (talk) 17:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: An American singer and songwriter known for I Kissed a Girl SurveyMonkey...  10:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose on article quality. The presence of maintenance templates says it all Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: A Filipino actor. His filmography needs additional sources. Moraljaya67 (talk) 09:15, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose on article quality. The burden to provide additional sources to uncited claims is on the nominator. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 14:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 ArionStar (talk) 23:34, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Needs work. Discography section is missing citations. Natg 19 (talk) 00:17, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Article needs some heavy improvements. SurveyMonkey...  09:12, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Two head of state changes in one day in a turbulent moment for South Korean politics. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:53, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: this is more fall-out from the Yoon impeachment, changing the acting president so candidates can run in the election to be Yoon's permanent replacement. I don't see anywhere in the proposed article that discusses these changes and the blurb is far too long. I won't !vote for now, but I suspect we'd be better off waiting for the election to choose an actual president, rather than changes in the acting head of state. Modest Genius ^talk 15:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Wait for the presidential election in a few weeks time. I've tried to find more English-language media coverage of this, but there's very little available, which already tells us something about the importance. This is a change in an acting position, seemingly as part of the election campaign; no president is taking anything more than caretaker action until after the election on 3 June. We should therefore wait for the winner of the election, and post that. Regardless of whether an acting president does or doesn't count as a head of state for ITNR purposes (which is debatable), we can WP:IAR to get a more sensible outcome. Modest Genius ^talk 12:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  ITNR goes by List of current heads of state and government, which lists the new acting president. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 15:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait What the hell is going on in SK? Anyway, the Lee Ju-ho article is not good enough for posting. Bremps... 16:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It has been improved since then. Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:20, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Lee Ju-ho is still a stub, though it has some more improvements. Natg 19 (talk) 00:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose As of right now, this has been the norm in the Republic of Korea, do not see why it would be important to do this, we posted the fall of Damascus and the kicking out of Bashar as president of Syria, and his replacement. That was because of its massive reprecussions on the politics within that nation and around it. Does not mean we should post this. Shaneapickle (talk) 16:25, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively we can just put the crisis under "Ongoing". Bremps... 16:35, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that would be a solution Shaneapickle (talk) 12:24, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've struck this oppose as you !voted again below. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 15:55, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose/Wait: agree with Modest Genius that we should not post changes to the acting president, and wait to post the winner of the election in June. Natg 19 (talk) 17:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Neither of them were elected to the office, and this dosen't seem unexpected. Simply politicians doing politics. The Yoon impeachment was already run as a blurb and I believe his arrest was as well, so this has been well covered. Normalman101 (talk) 18:10, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Never in South Korean history was there a acting x3 president. Lee is now tasked with managing US trade talks, a pretty important decision in my opinion. Ca ^{talk to me!} 22:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I would probably wait for now. Also, small mistake. I don't think Choi succeeded him; Choi resigned before Duck-soo did, so Ju-ho straight assumed the presidency. Either way, this can be circled back around to after the election, maybe in a blurb where [X] succeeds acting president Ju-ho (or whoever's in power atp).

River10000 (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for pointing this out. I have changed the misleading sentence. Ca ^{talk to me!} 23:02, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support change in head of government is ITN/R This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 20:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Support per above. ArionStar (talk) 23:43, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Just jockeying for position and politicking in the wake of an unusual situation that we already posted. We'll post the result of the election and that's sufficient.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The election is on June 3rd, 2025, so it's best to just post the results from the election rather than this. Harizotoh9 (talk) 02:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Carney was posted twice. ArionStar (talk) 03:53, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  And I'm pretty sure we've already had at least one posting about the presidential crisis in Seoul. This (these) are just caretaker/interim Presidents - as far as I know none are running in the election. Carney was in full control of the government, with no election scheduled for over 7 months! That he chose to call an early one after it had been blurbed isn't relevant. They are separate events - these are linked. Nfitz (talk) 04:24, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. On March 24, Han reinstated as the acting president of Korea as Constitutional Court decides to not remove him. The event, which is the change of head of state, was not even nominated here. So I think this is an exception of "Change of head of state is ITNR" rule. Didgogns (talk) 06:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Added altblurb and support as this is a bit of a crazy situation and also a change in head of state. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 12:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Tagged as ITNR item, undisputedly qualifies as "Changes, reelections or reappointments in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at List of current heads of state and government". Howard the Duck (talk) 12:17, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Not ITNR. We've already blurbed the collapse of the presidency, and these are a series of interim caretakers during an election. Nfitz (talk) 08:57, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Put in Ongoing/Oppose I am opposing per my oppose from earlier, but I agree with @Bremps put this in ongoing as this has blown out into a full political crisis due to a mistake that, by May 4th, will be the official 5 months since this happened, and since this political crisis has been exploded into something bigger, put it in ongoing. Shaneapickle (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a good ongoing story as these events are not news on a daily basis. It might be a long-term story due to how long this is taking, but its not new events every day that we expect in Ongoing. Masem (t) 20:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Surprised the fact that it was ITN/R was not caught earlier. Ju-ho's article might need to be expanded but the others are fine, I think this can be posted. --SpectralIon 20:12, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It's not ITN/R. Only permanent leaders would be covered by that, this one is just acting and he'll be replaced in just a month's time after the election, which we'll of course post. We're not going to post every single twist and turn of this saga.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Kenyan parliament member shot dead by unknown gunman in Nariobi Editor 5426387 (talk) 15:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose The article is a stub. Grimes2 15:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose It’s a stub. Ping me when expanded.BabbaQ (talk) 16:30, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The article is very brief. SurveyMonkey...  09:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Famous Spanish football fan Alexcalamaro (talk) 19:47, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too short. Bremps... 04:45, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Norwegian soprano who performed at great houses and festivals of Europe, US, Japan and Australia. Article was basically there, references improved, no good obit yet, the one in Norwegian and paywalled is from 30 April. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:09, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: (Former) oldest living person in the world. Last surviving person born in 1908. There was a mini edit war over whether she had actually died or not, but since sources have come out confirming that she has in fact died, I think we can post this now. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 14:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Looks good. Sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Escalating to be the largest in the country. ArionStar (talk) 05:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support due to scale and significant media coverage, as well as arson allegations potentially making it a significant event in the Israel-Palestine conflict. Additionally, it occurred on Israel's remembrence day for fallen soldiers, which is also a day prior to Israel's independence day. It also occurred in the shadow of the first cancellation of the national independence day ceremony in history Someonefighter (talk) 08:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - plenty of media attention. Big scale fires. Sources looks good.BabbaQ (talk) 10:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait When searching "Israel" in the news tab of Google, the top results are still relating to the war in Gaza or even Lebanon. Bremps... 13:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now - sure, there's coverage, but I have doubts on human impact. Tens of thousands are evacuated every year in Cali, yet we don't post those fires. — EF5 ^(questions?) 13:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

California has ~7,000 wildfires a year, you don't hear of them happening in this part of the world very often. Aydoh8^{[what have I done now?]} 14:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aydoh8, there were wildfires in 2010, 2016 and 2021, and probably smaller undetected ones between then. These actually happen pretty often, and given the dense population of Israel they are bound to force evacuations. — EF5 ^(questions?) 14:30, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These are the biggest fires in Israel's history [4] [5] [6] [7]. It's not every year that there's such massive wildfires (two and a half the area of the one in 2011 [8] [9]) with that many locations Someonefighter (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, there was one in 2011 too. Yea, while it may be big (is 12 square miles really that big?) these happen all the time, this one is just bigger than the others. I'll change my mind if anything serious comes of it, i.e. the fire encroaching on a city. — EF5 ^(questions?) 15:49, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. To me personally "biggest in history" is notable enough Someonefighter (talk) 16:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it could be notable, but not ITN notable. These are also far from the biggest in history - in fact, these are 0.74% (less than a percent!) the size of the August Complex Fire in 2020. — EF5 ^(questions?) 16:17, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I meant biggest in Israel's history Someonefighter (talk) 16:25, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someonefighter, ah. Eh, while I get your point, "biggest" doesn't mean "ITN-able". — EF5 ^(questions?) 17:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as both common to area, and this may have been tied to the Gaza conflict (tied to Hamas or palesteins that set them) Masem (t) 15:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thus far, this is speculation. Israel has had wildfires before. Bremps... 16:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose The fires aren't yet at the scale of impact to merit posting. Most of the coverage when you google "Israel news" is still focused on civilian deaths in Gaza - to relegate coverage of those killings to our "ongoing" item, while simultaneously allotting an entire blurb to some largely inconsequential fires that have not killed anyone (yet) and are at most an inconvenience to Israelis, creates WP:UNDUE concerns. Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 16:24, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment/Soft Support Israel has declared a state of emergency as of now, also searching "Israel" seems to be giving several stories on the topic before news on the war in gaza. This is all coming alongside Netanyahu stating that several have been arrested in connection with arson causing the fires (whether this is true or not) and Hamas speaking on their alledged participation, making this a much larger event then just a random wildfire. Plus it is occuring near the very internationally important city of Israel. Normalman101 (talk) 18:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Peruvian theologian, article in OK shape but it will need a little bit of touch up before it's ready. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 01:55, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: American cowboy. Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:12, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Thriley (talk) 09:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Was just reading about his vast conservative/far-right/Islamophobic/racialist online media network a few days ago, comes as a shock (did not know he was in his 80s). Prominent left to far-right convert, the article looks in good shape. Gotitbro (talk) 14:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Sourced and ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 06:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would be great if we can get ISBNs for the listed books he wrote. – robertsky (talk) 10:56, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The article is comprehensive and well sourced. SurveyMonkey... 14:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support ISBN/OCLC numbers are missing in books section. Grimes2 15:52, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Done Grimes2 22:08, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted—Bagumba (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Lead singer of The Alarm. 240F:7A:6253:1:BDA3:4DC1:1DBB:6B2A (talk) 03:59, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too many stringy paragraphs. Bremps... 17:26, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - for now. Per what is mentioned above. Ping when fixed.--BabbaQ (talk) 06:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: A major build-up. ArionStar (talk) 02:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wait there maybe more to come this week. the ins V(something) just came back to home port and pak minister said could be an invasion in 2-3 days. So, we can see this week.Sportsnut24 (talk) 04:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait Something is definitely building up there, but we've seen these tensions ebb and flow like this before. If full scale combat breaks out as suggested, that would be a reason to include (perhaps as a blurb first). Masem (t) 04:12, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment A skirmish as such is not unique in context of the Kashmir conflict, see India–Pakistan border skirmishes (disambiguation). If this escalates, we can reconsider. Gotitbro (talk) 07:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support An important water treaty was just suspended. Bremps... 17:32, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Update existing blurb This is fallout from the 2025 Pahalgam attack which we are still blurbing. We should just update that blurb and then see how things stand when it scrolls off. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:54, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as the Pakistani government has said that an attack by India is imminent. Both sides have continued to escalate and border skirmishes in Kashmir are already occurring. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 02:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Since the space in the ongoing section appears to already be crowded and limited, if this is to be added, I suggest it be a piped link that reads "India–Pakistan crisis". Left guide (talk) 02:25, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait At the minute, it seems like just sabre-rattling. I would say wait and see what happens. IF India did attack, then yes it should be on ITN but at the moment, I'd say hold fire and see what happens. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 06:04, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article now says that Pakistani soldiers opened fire into India. History6042😊 (Contact me) 11:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait to see if this escalates or not. There has been a minor exchange of fire across the line of control, by both sides, apparently without hitting anything. The Guardian report states "Life is normal" and "no casualties were reported". Border skirmishes in Kashmir happen every couple of years (see Gotitbro's link above). The situation is certainly tense, even more so than usual, but it hasn't spilled over into actual conflict. If that happens, we should reconsider, but it's more likely that this situation slowly returns to the status quo. Modest Genius ^talk 12:52, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Admin note 2025 Pahalgam attack has just fallen off the main page; I'm noting this because some editors have commented on that. Schwede66 00:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As an ongoing armed conflict, this still ranks quite low and there are numerous other such that have been going on for years. A state of war seems needed for this to stand out. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:53, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soft support due to the high amount of editing the last two days. Although if it doesn't pan out to much we can just remove it. Scuba 03:47, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. ArionStar (talk) 14:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - going strong now for almost 80 years. Should we also put the still ongoing Korean war in Ongoing as well? Nfitz (talk) 15:23, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If the sides started shooting at each other, yeah. Bremps... 16:29, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  North Korea and South Korea frequently shoot at each other, User:Bremps. Do you really think that should be in ongoing then? Nfitz (talk) 17:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Touché. I walk my old comment back. Bremps... 18:02, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Remember this isn't just any armed conflict, these are two seperate nuclear armed nations, neither nation has to go to its' allies for WMDs meaning this is much more delicate then some other conflcits that have drawn comparisons Normalman101 (talk) 18:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Died on the 23rd, but announced on the 28th.[10] American football and baseball player who was the first to play in both the major leagues and in a Super Bowl. —Bagumba (talk) 07:28, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Well-written and sourced. Jusdafax (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 16:25, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article: 2025 Trinidad and Tobago general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Trinidad and Tobago, the opposition UNC wins the general election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Trinidad and Tobago, the opposition UNC wins the general election with former prime minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar (pictured) sworn in again.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In Trinidad and Tobago, the UNC wins the general election with former prime minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar (pictured) sworn in again.
News source(s): [11]
Credits:

• Nominated by Sportsnut24 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Ornithoptera (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: Note- swearing in will be tomorrow, so if there is waiting till updates/approval, we can post that. Sportsnut24 (talk) 04:03, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Seems well cited and up to date (And certainly shouldn't be overshadowed by Canada). I would suggest maybe dropping "opposition" from the hook. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:18, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Alt blurb 2 added per suggestion. Left guide (talk) 10:48, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The Alt blurb n°1— Preceding unsigned comment added by Varoon2542 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Not ready, the article needs work. There are a lot of detailed tables but very little prose - none whatsoever on the outcome. The 'electoral system' and 'constituency' sections have paragraphs with no references. Modest Genius ^talk 19:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, while the article could use more prose and less tables, but the election is fairly important. I do concur with others that we should probably not include "opposition", therefore my support is on altblurb 2. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 02:21, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support alt1 Maybe I'm just missing something, but I don't see why including the word "opposition" is an issue. It's more descriptive and gives the reader more information in a concise way by conveying this was an election where the governing party was ousted from power. On quality, the article is not perfect and could use more prose, but seems good enough to meet minimum standards. Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 14:19, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Alt1, could use more prose and fewer tables, but it seems to have most relevant information, just formatted poorly. V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 18:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The article is not good to go yet, as it has "citation needed" templates. ArionStar (talk) 03:33, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Just found the relevant sources for the CN tags. Should be ready to go now! Ornithoptera (talk) 07:30, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support ALT1 Should be ready to go, all the CN tags have been resolved and the information on the page has been updated. Ornithoptera (talk) 07:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've removed the 'ready' tag, because there is still no prose whatsoever about the results & outcome. Modest Genius ^talk 10:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Modest Genius the requested sections have been added. Should be all good now. Ornithoptera (talk) 01:54, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Alt2 - speedy post. Rushtheeditor (talk) 00:43, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article: 2025 Canadian federal election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Canada, the Liberal Party, led by Mark Carney (pictured), wins the federal election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Liberals, led by Mark Carney (pictured), win the Canadian federal election.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In Canada, the Liberal Party, led by Prime Minister Mark Carney (pictured), wins the most seats in the federal election.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The Liberals, led by Mark Carney (pictured), win a majority of seats in the Canadian federal election.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ In Canada, the Liberal Party, led by Prime Minister Mark Carney (pictured), is reelected to a minority government in the federal election.
News source(s): [12][13][14]
Credits:

• Nominated by ElijahPepe (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.

 elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:21, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The Alt-blurb is more accurate, since political parties form governments, and Canadians do not vote for the PM directly. For all we know, some unforseen issue will result in Carney not becoming PM. I would say wait a bit since current projections say the Liberals will win the majority but the polls only closed 1 hour ago. Harizotoh9 (talk) 02:34, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait for the numbers to be announced, and then wait for the article to be updated with riding results. pancake (talk) 02:34, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Support Alt2 More sources have announced it now, and I agree with both @Harizotoh9 and @Canuckian89 that blurb 1 is misleading. pancake (talk) 02:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NOT cbcSportsnut24 (talk) 04:21, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support But note that blurb one ("Mark Carney is elected to the position") is entirely inaccurate. Canadians do not vote for Prime Minister. The only ballots that have Carney's name on them are the ballots that will be for his own electoral district in Nepean, for him to serve as MP for that district. The Prime Minister is actually chosen as the person who can maintain the confidence of the House after the House members meet to form the new Parliament. Alt blurb is a bit better description of the election in that regard. Canuck^{89 (Talk to me) or visit my user page} 02:32, April 29, 2025 (UTC)

• Wait, and oppose current blurbs Once the results are more clear, the blurb should also specify whether the Carney Liberals won a majority or minority government (there is a very significant difference). Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 02:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait We need a little more meat on the bones before this can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, Id say that we should wait wait until about 2/3 of the seats have been officially called, it's far too early to determine an outcome. Hungry403 (talk) 02:53, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also alt II looks like the best blurb Hungry403 (talk) 02:54, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about something like "In the Canadian federal election, the Liberal Party under Mark Carney (pictured) retains power with a (minority / majority) government"  ?DS (talk) 03:42, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer something like "the Liberal Party, led by Mark Carney, wins (a majority of / the most) seats" DecafPotato (talk) 04:00, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wait currently Alt2 but could change.Sportsnut24 (talk) 04:05, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Alt2 Alt2 seems most accurate, as it seems to be a minority government Jone425 (talk) 05:16, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is CRYSTALBALL and not news. There is no harm in waiting a few hours.Sportsnut24 (talk) 05:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait CBC has been noting the race has been close. Since a chunk of the results have not been finalized, I think it may be best to wait until we know whether the Liberals have a majority or a minority. I will change my vote when that has been determined. Ornithoptera (talk) 06:11, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait until the results are finalised, as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:24, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I think it's safe to call it. With 99.15% of the results in, the liberals are at 168 seats (4 short of a majority) and the conservatives are at 144. Pierre Poilievre just lost his seat too. Liberals won the most seats but didn't win an outright majority. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support posting ALT2 now, which we can always update later. All major news sources have called it for the Liberals, but most have not declared it a minority (except CTV). That will depend on the counting of special ballots which will resume this morning and may be not be done for a couple hours, but the winning party is not in doubt. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 09:30, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  ALT4, now that minority is called. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 23:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support the win is not in doubt, the blurb can be updated later to reflect minority/majority once that's known. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:32, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support altblurb 3 for now, then update to altblurb 4 later I've added a new altblurb which mentions the type of government that was elected (minority, as opposed to majority), as I think this is an essential detail. CTV News has called it as a minority government, but CBC has yet to finalize whether it will be a minority or majority. Once CBC calls it, we should use the language of alt4. Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 12:23, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  CBC has now called minority. DecafPotato (talk) 19:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Not ready. The results table is still mostly empty and there are only two sentences about the outcome (in the 'aftermath' section). We need full results and at least a full paragraph describing the outcomes and reactions. Modest Genius ^talk 12:59, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As always, the official results won't be released for days to weeks. We don't normally wait that long. But it's very rare for an interim count to change to the final count. The key is whether this is a minority or majority government, and the article reflects this. Nfitz (talk) 17:19, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Not 'always', many countries manage to get results out within hours of polls closing. I accept that precise vote counts in every seat could take a while, given how sparsely populated parts of the country are, but the overall outcome is still unclear. We don't yet know whether the Liberals have a majority or minority of the seats, which is critical information. Unless/until the number of seats can be filled out in the table, I don't think this should be posted. That time should be used to improve the prose in the article. Modest Genius ^talk 17:38, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Canada usually has votes out extremely fast, that western time zones has complained that the election has already been called before their polls even close! The only difference this time - as widely reported - is that there was a much higher number of advanced, mail-in, and out-of-town voting. And in particular that those votes are trending very Liberal, flipping more than one riding when they are counted last. The official results however are different kettle of fish - even though the preliminary results are from Elections Canada. When I say always, I refer to Canada - not other countries. And we haven't ever waited for the official results before, as far as I know. Once the preliminary votes are virtually complete - in a few hours - we should blurb this. Nfitz (talk) 19:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I said 'full results', not final official vote counts. For me, it would be sufficient if there's enough information to fill out the number of seats in the table, and determine whether the Liberals have a majority or minority. That information needs to be in the article, with appropriate references. Modest Genius ^talk 19:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait: Alt blurb is more accurate as we don't vote for PM we vote for MP which then give confidence to PM (leader of winning party). There are going to be some recounts inevitably, so should wait until everything is finalized. 72.29.227.81 (talk) 16:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'm happiest with blurb #3 but would actively oppose #4. It is little more than a presumption at this point that the Liberals as the largest party will be able to put something together than can gain the requisite parliamentary confidence. 3142 (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Blurb four is certainly not good right now, but there should be enough information within the next 3-4 hours to put that question to bed. There's no doubt that something will be cobbled together - the Liberals are only 4 short of a majority right now, and with the NDP at 7, there's no way on the planet that the NDP is going to trigger another election soon, given they are both broke and leaderless. And even if it were the case the NDP would trigger an election, it could be months before Parliament is convened again, to find out. Nfitz (talk) 17:23, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No, that's excessive detail. We say who got the most seats or a majority if there is one and that's it. Coalition wrangling and other details are left to the article, not to blurb, per longstanding precedent.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It's generally taken as a foregone conclusion, in Canadian elections, that the party that wins the most seats will form government. There hasn't been a single coalition government at the federal level since confederation. Last night, and this morning, not a single outlet was questioning that the Liberals would form government, and that Mark Carney would continue on as Prime Minister. Poilievre gave his concession speech, Carney gave his victory speech, the only question was whether the Liberals would form a minority or majority government. Now all news outlets are reporting a Liberal minority government. 2604:3D09:1A80:110B:10D:5D52:C8D4:30CA (talk) 23:37, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait until we know if it's a majority or a minority. Elections Canada is indicating that the preliminary count should be finished later this afternoon. Nfitz (talk) 17:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Suppose all major news stations (CBC, CTV, Global) agree it's a minority Lib government. It's time to post this. JDiala (talk) 21:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support ALT4 as it has been called as a minority for the Liberals. Jbvann05 22:53, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support ALT4 per Jbvann05. The article is worthy of the Main Page in my view: it is comprehensive and well-sourced. Jusdafax (talk) 23:26, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted alt4. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 01:41, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• "wins the most seats" is the best wording. Easy enough for a child to understand and also true. The Liberal Party per se is not elected to anything, nor is the government per se elected. Srnec (talk) 02:44, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Done. Yes, "most seats" is the format we almost always use in scenarios like this in Westminster systems.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  And yet it isn't the common usage. Nfitz (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This is not the common usage, most sources clearly state the liberals won the election. JDiala (talk) 22:07, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article: 2025 European power outage (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A major power outage (blackout at Preciados Street in Madrid pictured) affects most of the Iberian Peninsula. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Seven people die after a major power outage (blackout at Preciados Street in Madrid pictured) affects most of the Iberian Peninsula.
Alternative blurb II: ​ A major power outage (blackout at Preciados Street in Madrid pictured) affects most of the Iberian Peninsula, causing at least seven deaths.
News source(s): [15]
Credits:

• Nominated by 3142 (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: New article already on this, I intend to look at developing that shortly. 50+ million affected, not unprecedented in size but highly unusual highly developed economies. 3142 (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait article needs some more work. Warrant the European editors are having issues with their internet too. Support in principle due to rareness - though if it's Spain and Portugal wouldn't it be best to call it Iberian power outage? Juxlos (talk) 13:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait if this is restored in a day, it's a minor first world problem and not worth posting. If it last for more than a day and starts causing major disruptions then it may be worth posting. Masem (t) 13:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • As of this morning 99% of the power has been returned [16] though there are a few lingering effects, but nothing like any major disasters or the like. They are still looking for the reason, but have ruled out any type of purposeful route. This really makes it a poor ITN (particularly as the article is only a random list of distriputions and very little attempt to describe what happened), but would be better at DYK if the cause is found in time. Masem (t) 12:19, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I did hear something about a problem with the France-Spain power connection but I don't know if that's correct. It's also suspected that heat variations in Spain caused the outage. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 12:21, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support A major power outage affecting a whole European region. ArionStar (talk) 14:47, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Seems to be quite a big deal, affecting several countries. The cause seems to be unusual weather causing a form of conductor gallop, which is quite interesting. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:50, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If this is a short term event (cleared in a day without any loss of life), this fact would make it good for DYK. Masem (t) 18:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The cause still seems uncertain and there are multiple theories such as it being due to a glitch with solar power. DYK is for definite facts while ITN is appropriate for unresolved incidents. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:26, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait to see the effects, as if this lasts or causes major disruptions it's worth posting. The article itself is rather short and we should consider waiting for an actual confirmed cause. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 14:52, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that given new reports of fatalities and the difficulty of getting power back, I now support and I've added an altblurb to reflect the deaths. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 23:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Wait. Understandably, it's difficult to get reporting out of the affected regions, so the impact remains unclear and there are few details to add to the article. We know that public transport ground to a halt, but not how much damage has been done, whether lives have been lost due to failing hospital equipment, impacts on water and food supplies etc. If the power is still down tomorrow we'll start getting beyond an inconvenience and into serious impacts. Modest Genius ^talk 17:41, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Oppose. Power was restored in the evening yesterday, ~8 hours after it went off. While a lot of people were inconvenienced by the outage, the actual damage done is very limited and there are no reports of casualties. I don't think this ended up being significant enough for ITN. The 2025 Chile blackout a few months ago was of similar scale and was rejected for a blurb. Modest Genius ^talk 11:26, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  At least five people died. ArionStar (talk) 02:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've heard various reports from three to seven fatalities. User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 02:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That information was not available when I !voted, and still doesn't seem to have made it into English-language reporting. It's moot now, given the item has already been posted. Modest Genius ^talk 10:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Making headlines around the world. Unusual event on this scale. But if it's mainly Spain and Portugal area the title is too broad. Valtteri1010 (talk) 17:44, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, parts of Southern France were without power for around an hour, and Andorra had an outage for a few seconds (admittedly very short). User:Chorchapu (talk|edits|commons|wiktionary|simple english) 12:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Whole country without electricity, pretty crazy. Article will for sure expand but it already hosts enough information to be worth adding into itn. AdrianHObradors (talk) 18:50, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, we didn't post this when it happened to Venezuela, Cuba, or Chile. Seems like double standards Kowal2701 (talk) 20:01, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  venezuela and cuba have non functioning power grids in the first place. this is a major developed economy with a historically reliable grid going off throughout the entire country for an extensive period of time. its totally different 2A00:23C8:B00:AD01:D1C3:9D9F:A656:E847 (talk) 00:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • This strikes me as a false equivalence, it could even be seen as reinforcing the significance of this event. This affected roughly the same numbers as the three of those combined. In terms of GDP it is well over three times that of all three of those incidents combined. And yes, that is a valid comparison, it is fair to expect greater resilience in advanced economies. 3142 (talk) 13:59, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Kowal. — EF5 ^(questions?) 20:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Good article quality, relevant, and blurb edited for a more precise context. News about the recovery from the blackout have started coming in.. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I would not call that good quality, it's lots of one sentence paragraphs with scraps of WP:PROSELINE. It affected Andorra for a few seconds, France for a few minutes, and Spain probably for a day. Kowal2701 (talk) 20:34, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  yes, quality is an issue. Just saying a number of random things affected is not how to summarize this. That would be fine for a newspaper but not WP. Masem (t) 20:40, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Not ready. There's a lot of info in the lead that I cannot see in the body of the article. It's all a bit thin on the ground. Schwede66 21:59, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support on notability, oppose on quality more than 50 million people are directly affected by the blackout, with all that this implies for the public service affected and the aggravating factor of the fall of a large part of telecommunications via mobile phones in two technically developed countries with modern infrastructures. Where I live the electricity has not arrived until now, almost 12 hours later. Tomorrow I will dedicate time to the article, as it does not yet contain much information about the event. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:26, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It is in List of major power outages. No doubts about the importance of the event. ArionStar (talk) 00:57, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per above, there are things on there that were not posted. It means nothing.Sportsnut24 (talk) 04:24, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on notability as this has been huge news in Europe and is unprecedented for a developed, highly-interconnected country. Obviously the article isn't of the highest quality right now, but that's understandable, given the editors directly affected by the outage couldn't contribute to the article because of it. I'm sure it'll improve today and be ready for posting before long. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on quality per above. Notability is unclear so I won't !vote one way or the other right now. Departure– (talk) 14:00, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kiril Simeonovski: I've undone your close as I don't believe that simply restoring power destroys the newsworthiness or notability of this item. The effects of a blackout on this scale often go far beyond simply turning the lights off and can have much larger implications that last longer than the outage itself, and consensus has been mostly to wait with a few !supports; few !opposes. Departure– (talk) 14:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Departure–: This was news with consensus on significance during the outage, but it wasn’t posted because of the article’s insufficient quality. Now that power returned in the affected regions, it’s no longer news (I’ve advertised this on the talk page.). If you think that this story is still significant because of its impact/aftermath, that should be discussed in a new or modified nomination. The suggested blurb and the presented arguments in support of this nomination are currently stale, and there aren’t fresh arguments after the incident was resolved that explain what is the impact/aftermath and why is it worth mentioning on the main page.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kiril Simeonovski, your close seemed like a WP:SUPERVOTE, which is why I think it was removed. — EF5 ^(questions?) 15:23, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The news isn't that the power is actively out, but that it went out at all. I think there might still be a story, which is why I haven't !voted on notability. I think the appropriate action would just be put in your !vote of opposition instead of closing under the pretense of nobody else thinking there's a story anymore. Departure– (talk) 15:23, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I closed this procedurally as the nominated story is no longer a current event. This has nothing to do with my personal preference, so it’s definitely not a supervote. I also don’t object re-opening it. In my previous comment, I just elaborated the closing rationale and advised in which direction the nomination should develop so that this can still be posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:34, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting off topic, but ITN has never been limited to events that are still ongoing - they just need to have happened more recently than the other blurbs on the template. The pope died on 21 April but still has a blurb up. The Kashmir attack was on 22 April, it's not still in progress. Your stated rationale is illogical and doesn't accord with any ITN procedure. Modest Genius ^talk 17:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t say that we should post only ongoing events. The difference is that this outage was literally undone, so the nomination in this form is stale and cannot move forward. The suggested blurb states something that is no longer the case, and there are no new comments pointing out to the actual impact and consequences. Fair enough as this goes nowhere.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I don't think we need to blurb France - the media reports are headlining Spain and Portugal. (what percentage of France). Nfitz (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The article is better now. Twenty-five language hiperlinks. Image added. Marked as Ready. ArionStar (talk) 20:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removed ready, don't think there is consensus on posting this. Natg 19 (talk) 20:34, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I desagree; there is a rough consensus. ArionStar (talk) 21:05, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The presence of an image and the amount of interlanguage hyperlinks have no bearing on article quality, as they are not mentioned at WP:ITNQUALITY. Those are wholly irrelevant arguments. Left guide (talk) 22:58, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Several hypelinks is a result of the importance of the event. Again, no doubts on its impact. ArionStar (talk) 01:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment News just said "EU says worst power outage in Europe in the last 20 years" AdrianHObradors (talk) 20:23, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Conditionally Support Sadly, the power outage claims many people died (Sky News said four people died, while Xinhua said seven people died. So, the blurb needs to be updated to include the number of deaths resulted from the blackout. 120.188.39.104 (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. People died & it affected multiple countries (entirety of Portugal and Spain), and article looks fine to me. Should be more than enough to be posted IMO. TwistedAxe [contact] 13:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Support. Despite the lack of a public statement providing a reason for the outage, >40 million people were affected. The article provides most of the available information at the moment. Angry Islander (talk) 13:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Article quality is fine and this is an unusual event that had a high level of impact on multiple countries. Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 14:21, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Admins willing to post ITN: ArionStar (talk) 16:33, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Kowal2701. Limited impact, it was over relatively quickly, even if sadly some people died for tangential reasons connected with the outage. And as noted, we did not post similar events in other countries around the world, not to mention storms which cause more lasting damage and don't get posted. Let's not perpetuate Eurocentrism and WP:SYSTEMICBIAS.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:52, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Prior power outages in other countries and this particular power outage are being treated differently based on systemic bias. If a power outage cut electricity across the entire American western seaboard (California, Oregon, and Washington - roughly equal population to Iberia) resulting in the death of seven people, I have absolutely no doubt it would be posted essentially immediately. Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 23:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, and I think the bias is the opposite; it's Anglocentrism. This event would, let's face it, undoubtedly have been posted quickly in the scenario that Flipandflopped suggests, and I will further suggest that it would have been posted in a similarly speedy time if the whole of the UK had been hit as well. Black Kite (talk) 23:24, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I guess this sets a new precedent then? Kowal2701 (talk) 08:32, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted – Schwede66 00:08, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Post-posting support. This event may be not notable regarding the scale of population impacted. But giving that enormous scale of the blackout in Iberian Peninsula (in turn causing many deaths that never seen before in many decades of similar blackout in many regions worldwide), i reluctantly agree for this article to be posted, with more emphasis of how many people died during the blackout. 120.188.4.191 (talk) 01:12, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Even better if it is the lead blurb (and mentioning the deaths) … ArionStar (talk) 02:02, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. It's been on ITN long enough. The present tense in the blurb is confusing: "A power outage affects most of the Iberian Peninsula." Power has been restored on April 29. —Joe vom Titan (talk) 06:51, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Ex-Deputy and Mayor of Cambrai Jmanlucas (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait Well-cited and whole enough. What a name.

However, it says he was the youngest lawyer in France. In France ever or at that time? Jacques Isorni was younger. Bremps... 22:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: American Hall of Fame basketball player. Death announced on 27 April. 240F:7A:6253:1:3DFE:9B0E:3195:6371 (talk) 05:41, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Joint record 20th title with Manchester United. Season finishes on 25th May but Liverpool confirmed as champions today. yorkshiresky (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The Teams section needs some citations but otherwise it's not in too bad nick. The prose summary is suitably updated which is often something missing from these. I know there is a school of thought that this should be posted at the end of the season but I don't agree with that. It's in the news now and we should post when the sourcing issue is resolved.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:51, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait for the end of the season. There are still four match days left and many places have not yet been settled. Yes Liverpool now have an unassailable lead, but the ITNR entry and bold link are for the entire league not just the champion team. Also, the season summary section is all WP:PROSELINE, which I've just tagged for cleanup. Modest Genius ^talk 14:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment From my perspective, it makes sense for this to be posted now (as it's "in the news", as Amakuru points out) rather than wait for the end of the season. However, this need to find support from the editing community, plus the usual readiness check. Schwede66 21:52, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support This is ITN/R, article is decent, story is in the news now - it should be posted now. It won't really make any sense to do so in three weeks' time, we aren't going to mention things like European qualifying places in the blurb (which are the only things left to determine). Black Kite (talk) 07:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 RachelTensions (talk) 14:11, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Looks good enough to post. Orange tag on the personal life section, but honestly there's not much information out there that could be added. Estreyeria (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support and tagged ready. I updated the orange-tagged personal life section and addressed the CN tags. RIP. Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 15:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted. Black Kite (talk) 15:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: English luthier, violin dealer and violin expert, regarded as leading worldwide. Article was mostly there, obits added. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Interesting person. Sourced. Long enough. Grimes2 18:16, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Unfolding incident Bremps... 05:21, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Tragic precedent for posting here, albeit a more deadly incident Bremps... 05:23, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait I'm from Vancouver, so this has been top of mind for me. The situation is still unfolding and thus I would have to wait and see what the scale of the attack is beyond "multiple people". The last time a major vehicle ramming attack had occurred in Canada was Toronto 2018, things like this don't happen in Canada often. When we receive more information I would probably switch my vote but for now it would be a wait. Ornithoptera (talk) 05:37, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Enough information has come out. Given the context within Canada and internationally as well as the scale of the situation, it justifies inclusion. Ornithoptera (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait Article is too stubby specifically because the police have released virtually no information yet. Wait for details to come out before deciding whether this is worthy of the front page. NorthernFalcon (talk) 05:57, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose let's find out more about this. Nfitz (talk) 07:31, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Police have confirmed at least 9 fatalities, making it the 2nd deadliest car attack in Canadian history (the 2018 Toronto van attack killed 11). Johndavies837 (talk) 10:21, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed death toll has risen to 11. Dozens injured. Johndavies837 (talk) 16:32, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait. Incidentally, the police are not treating it as a terrorist attack, it appears. Black Kite (talk) 12:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Even if its not a terrorist attack, nine people still died and multiple others were injured. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 14:45, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Awful, terrible. Even if it's not fully ready I think this is such a horrific situation that it needs to be published 24.77.127.72 (talk) 16:39, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - We posted the 2025 New Orleans truck attack. — EF5 ^(questions?) 16:41, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That was terrorism. The police have been very clear here that the person who did this in Vancouver is very well known to them, and that it's not terrorism. Nfitz (talk) 17:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support As the 2018 Toronto van attack was posted, too. ArionStar (talk) 18:16, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Support as per ArionStar and as someone from Vancouver too. 64.114 etc 20:17, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support: article is decently expanded and is a significant event.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 21:09, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:10, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Laval daycare bus crash was never on ITN despite being a much more tragic event. If those couldn't be on ITN, why is this one worthy? Is it yet another example of ITN's Anglocentric focus? LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 01:56, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  A crash in Canada that killed 2, and wasn't nominated, against a crash in Canada that killed 11, is evidence of Anglocentrism? Got it. Stephen 02:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I think the point about the Anglo-centrism is that Quebec is predominantly French. History6042😊 (Contact me) 11:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That doesn't even seem to be nominated based on the archives. Masem (t) 02:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It's very strange to call one event "much more tragic" than the other. Two young children died in Laval, at least one young child (and both of her parents) died in Vancouver along with eight other people. They were both the result of mental health issues. Why pit two tragedies against each other? The Laval crash was never nominated, so there's no way of knowing whether it would have been opposed anyway. Estreyeria (talk) 16:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  LilianaUwU, two people died there. Are you seriously comparing 2-death crashes to 11-person deliberate attacks as "anglo-centric"? Both incidents are tragic, yes, but if you had to pick which had more of a human impact it's pretty clear. — EF5 ^(questions?) 15:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment It may be best to mention in the blurb that the street festival (Lapu Lapu Day) was one that centred Filipino Canadians. A lot of the coverage is centred on that fact. Ornithoptera (talk) 06:42, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I second this. 85.131.184.138 (talk) 15:51, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Given that the driver is believed to have been suffering from mental health and that this was not seen as a racial incident, that seems unnecessary. Masem (t) 16:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The event disproportionately affected the Filipino community due to the festival's focus. A lot of the response by public figures and the coverage centered on the Filipino community in response to it. It is definitely central to the context and while racial reasons was not the direct cause, has a profound effect for said community. Ornithoptera (talk) 03:36, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'd rather use mention the festival event without necessarily calling out the nationality. That would be less of a implication that this was racially motived than by including the nationalities affected. Masem (t) 15:10, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I want to include some examples of the effect this had on the Filipino community and the coverage of it across media outlets:

  • ‘We are resilient’: Nova Scotia Filipino community mourns after Vancouver tragedy Global News
  • Filipino 'caring culture' hit hard by Canada truck-ramming that killed 11 Reuters
  • Alberta legislature stands with Filipino Canadians in tragedy’s aftermath CTV News
  • Filipino Canadians mourn after car ramming attack on their community. Here’s what we know CNN
  • Reeling from the Vancouver attack, Filipino community vows to stand strong The Globe and Mail
  • Alberta's Filipino community reacts to deadly Vancouver car ramming CBC
  • Yellowknife Filipino association to hold vigil on Friday Cabin Radio
  • Vancouver tragedy ripples through Winnipeg's Filipino community The Winnipeg Sun

  At the end of the day, this effect has had a disproportionate effect on the Filipino Canadian community, regardless of racial motivation. It was a targeted attack on a street festival in celebration of their identity. Media outlets recognize the effects this has on the Filipino Canadian community at-large, as was the response by the party leaders prior to the election. The Filipino-Canadian aspect was identified as a core aspect of this situation. Ornithoptera (talk) 07:19, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support amending to altblurb per two users above. It's a major part of the story that this was a Flipino-Canadian cultural festival, and that context is currently omitted in the blurb. If a shooting occurred at a gay pride parade, it would be misleading by omission to say that "ten died at a local festival" even if there wasn't any evidence the shooter was motivated by homophobia. The same principle applies: give the readers the full information. Flip^andFlopped ㋡ 15:03, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think that amendment is necessary. The nature of the festival does not seem to be relevant to the attack or its motivation. Modest Genius ^talk 16:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator's comments: Noted historian Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:11, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Sourced. And barely long enough. But ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 09:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Port of Shahid Rajaee explosion (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An explosion and fire (pictured) at the Port of Shahid Rajaee, southern Iran, kills at least 40 people and injures more than 1,200 others. (Post)
News source(s): CNN – BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Bakhos2010 (talk · give credit)
• Created by BasselHarfouch (talk · give credit)

 Bakhos Let's talk! 14:14, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Many families have been impacted and the article looks fair. I am also hoping that it will be further improved as new information continue to emerge. SurveyMonkey...

• Support Reminds me the 2020 Beirut explosion. Decent article. ArionStar (talk) 15:37, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Admins willing to post ITN: this has been marked as ready, and the last ITN blurb was four days ago, I think it can be posted. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:50, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose based on the current information. Tragic event, but the death toll currently is quite low (I appreciate it could increase). Comparing it with the Beirut explosion that killed over 200 people does not at the moment appear logical. Black Kite (talk) 15:42, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Withdrawing my oppose as the casualty figure has greatly increased. Black Kite (talk) 10:09, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support due to the high amount of casualties. The article could be improved, but over 700 injured and a death toll that's expected to increase by a lot is significant. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Five deaths with more than 700 people injured are enough, IMHO. ArionStar (talk) 16:01, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - large amount of injuries, article looks alright-ish, some deaths. WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 16:59, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I updated the blurb death count per the article's sources. History6042😊 (Contact me) 20:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Edited the blurb with the updated death toll. Kaito-san (talk/contribs) 21:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support 750+ is notable, and article looks to be good. TheHiddenCity (talk) 23:31, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Very notable, kind of reminds me of the 2020 Beirut explosions. TwistedAxe [contact] 13:50, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• @Admins willing to post ITN: This blurb is ready to go. ArionStar (talk) 15:40, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I already pinged the admins. History6042😊 (Contact me) 16:08, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per above. IDB.S (talk) 17:02, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. Jusdafax (talk) 18:23, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted – Schwede66 19:01, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 ArionStar (talk) 21:14, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article is of sufficient quality for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 04:01, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Looks good. Sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose One-sentence is too short.—Bagumba (talk) 17:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've added a couple of sentences to the intro. Good enough, I hope? --PFHLai (talk) 01:32, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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: