Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates
| Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
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.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary[edit]
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps[edit]
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.
March 6
[edit]|
March 6, 2026 (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Health and environment
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
2026 Winter Paralympics
[edit]Blurb: The 2026 Winter Paralympics open in Milano and Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The 2026 Winter Paralympics open in Milano and Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy.
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by BabbaQ (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
--BabbaQ (talk) 19:04, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Needs work Lots of predictions with phrases like "will be" and "are expected". And this should be an ongoing item while it's running. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:20, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Leave opening ceremony article unbolded The main 2026 Winter Paralympics article should be the bolded focus. CastleFort1 (talk) 19:40, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support blurb 1. The Paralympics are a huge event, the article is well sourced. Guz13 (talk) 19:50, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
European navies mobilise to protect Cyprus
[edit]Blurb: European navies send warships to protect Cyprus after it is attacked by drones. (Post)
Alternative blurb: NATO allies send ships to defend British military bases in Cyprus after a drone attack.
News source(s): BBC, Euronews, France 24, El Pais, Politico, Sky
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Created by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Brandmeister (talk · give credit), Lumbering in thought (talk · give credit), VitoxxMass (talk · give credit) and Helloyesiamhuman (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: A further widening of the Middle East conflict in which European navies act to protect this island after the British base is found to be weakly defended. It's ironic to see the French, Netherland and Spanish navies acting so firmly in this, given their history of conflict with the Royal Navy. I think this is being coordinated by NATO and so that's sending a signal of solidarity. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:52, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on significance This is a widening of the conflict beyond the Middle East. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose part of the Iran conflict. Masem (t) 12:37, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on significance, wait on quality Support good faith nomination in principle, but it would be worth specifying in the article and blurb whether the drones were sent by Iran or Hezbollah when we have access to reliable sources naming the party responsible. The news coverage at present is ambiguous and the blurb could be interpreted as if the drones attacked Cyprus on their own. This is especially the case here given the article is titled 'Iranian strikes on Akrotiri and Dhekelia', but the first line of the article contradicts that by stating 'either Iran or its Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah' was responsible). Oppius Brutus 12:47, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose I think all developments should be contained to one blurb. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Why do you think this please? The current blurb reads:
but this is an event from a week ago which doesn't even hint at an ongoing and widening conflict. Isn't it our job to to be more up-to-date and informative? Andrew🐉(talk) 13:07, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Israel and the United States launch strikes on Iran, killing its supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, along with other senior officials.
- Because otherwise every news item would be Iran. Including Issues in Cyprus, the attack off Sri Lanka and the closing of the straight of Homuz. When this ends up in ongoing it'll all be in there.
- I'm no 100% opposed to thinks making it out of ongoing into the news but it needs to be a high barrier. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 16:59, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Cyprus is not Iran. Sri Lanka is not Iran. The events in those places are in the news and our current blurbs don't say anything about them. What we are blurbing are other places like Brazil and Bolivia but those stories are not in the news now because they happened a week ago and there isn't continuing coverage. The Salmon of Ignorance doesn't explain his preference for keeping ITN stale by shutting out fresh news. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:29, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- It's literally the same war as the current top blurb. Suggest a modification to that blurb if this is so significant. I'm also curious in how the French, Dutch and Spanish navies have been in conflict with the British navy this century or even last (let alone the relevance). Have you forgotten Suez ... I think there may have been other joint UK/France naval operations last century </sarcasm>. I feel you are more here to play soldiers than ITN. Nfitz (talk) 18:26, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Cyprus is not Iran. Sri Lanka is not Iran. The events in those places are in the news and our current blurbs don't say anything about them. What we are blurbing are other places like Brazil and Bolivia but those stories are not in the news now because they happened a week ago and there isn't continuing coverage. The Salmon of Ignorance doesn't explain his preference for keeping ITN stale by shutting out fresh news. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:29, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Why do you think this please? The current blurb reads:
- Oppose, this is covered by the blurb and will be covered by ongoing once it rolls off. They also didn't strike the country of Cyprus, but a British military base (a British overseas territory), presenting this as against Cyprus is wrong Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 13:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- It's not rolling though, is it? The current blurb has been stuck without moving for a week now and still presents the matter as specific strikes rather than an ongoing conflict. As for Cyprus, see Anger... Andrew🐉(talk) 13:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Rather than nominating sensationalist headlines like ITN's a news ticker (let's be honest, it is atm), maybe try something actually educational or encyclopedic? Like looking through papers/magazines known for high quality analysis that can identify big stories of the kind we don't usually post, there's the Financial Times, Africa Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, National Geographic, New Scientist, Der Spiegel etc. Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 13:31, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- I try to use good sources and especially like The Economist but it's a weekly while other periodicals such as National Geographic are monthly. The trouble is that ITN works on a daily schedule and anything that's a week old will be dismissed as stale. I quite agree that ITN should take a more considered view and recently suggested a brainstorming/workshop process for working up stories which require a deeper dive. The usual suspects rushed to oppose that like they oppose any and every attempt to improve ITN. So we have to work with ITN as it is, not as we might like it to be. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:54, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- The problem editors appear to have had there was that those kinds of stories are too complex for a blurb, and they develop gradually rather than one big moment. ITN can only really cover the 'big moments' because of the nature of blurbing. It's also become habit and convention to oppose and snow close your noms, I think they're often an aspect of another story, rather than the meta stuff people are looking for. Re blurbs, if a blurb can show significance, ie. how it affects people's lives, the impact on international politics etc., maybe some will sneak through :) Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 14:12, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- I found this story when browsing Portal:Current events/2026 March 5 where I was impressed that the French were sending a carrier to Cyprus while the RN was still getting up steam. Those portal pages are listed every day at ITN but no-one ever refers to them. I suppose that's because they are quite straightforward and there's no arguing. Editors mainly seem to come to ITN for the drama but that's dysfunctional and is what stops it getting much done. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:29, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- The problem editors appear to have had there was that those kinds of stories are too complex for a blurb, and they develop gradually rather than one big moment. ITN can only really cover the 'big moments' because of the nature of blurbing. It's also become habit and convention to oppose and snow close your noms, I think they're often an aspect of another story, rather than the meta stuff people are looking for. Re blurbs, if a blurb can show significance, ie. how it affects people's lives, the impact on international politics etc., maybe some will sneak through :) Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 14:12, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- I try to use good sources and especially like The Economist but it's a weekly while other periodicals such as National Geographic are monthly. The trouble is that ITN works on a daily schedule and anything that's a week old will be dismissed as stale. I quite agree that ITN should take a more considered view and recently suggested a brainstorming/workshop process for working up stories which require a deeper dive. The usual suspects rushed to oppose that like they oppose any and every attempt to improve ITN. So we have to work with ITN as it is, not as we might like it to be. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:54, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Rather than nominating sensationalist headlines like ITN's a news ticker (let's be honest, it is atm), maybe try something actually educational or encyclopedic? Like looking through papers/magazines known for high quality analysis that can identify big stories of the kind we don't usually post, there's the Financial Times, Africa Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, National Geographic, New Scientist, Der Spiegel etc. Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 13:31, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- "Editors mainly seem to come to ITN for drama" - the same time as writing a ridiculous polemical statement like "It's ironic to see the French, Netherland and Spanish navies acting so firmly in this, given their history of conflict with the Royal Navy." when proposing this blurb. You have a history of making comments and nominations at ITN that many would perceive as creating drama - what about the Claude proposal last month complete with sarcastic comments about another editor's proposal regarding the name of an Indian state? AusLondonder (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Anthropic and Claude are still making lots of news. For example, see The Take: How is the US using Anthropic’s Claude AI in Iran? -- that's from just two hours ago. ITN's failure to report the continuing major stories about them is strange. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:33, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Your nomination was doomed because yet again you used it to engage in point-scoring such as piping the link from the United States Department of Defense to the US Department of War and make petty comments about how irrelevant news from India is. You're doing the same thing here with unnecessary, off-topic comments such as suggesting it is ironic France and Britain, who haven't fought each other for over 200 years, are both defending Cyprus. AusLondonder (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Anthropic and Claude are still making lots of news. For example, see The Take: How is the US using Anthropic’s Claude AI in Iran? -- that's from just two hours ago. ITN's failure to report the continuing major stories about them is strange. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:33, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- "Editors mainly seem to come to ITN for drama" - the same time as writing a ridiculous polemical statement like "It's ironic to see the French, Netherland and Spanish navies acting so firmly in this, given their history of conflict with the Royal Navy." when proposing this blurb. You have a history of making comments and nominations at ITN that many would perceive as creating drama - what about the Claude proposal last month complete with sarcastic comments about another editor's proposal regarding the name of an Indian state? AusLondonder (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- It's not rolling though, is it? The current blurb has been stuck without moving for a week now and still presents the matter as specific strikes rather than an ongoing conflict. As for Cyprus, see Anger... Andrew🐉(talk) 13:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support This shows how the conflict is now bringing in Europe. Guz13 (talk) 17:59, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment The alternative blurb is factually incorrect as the military assets are being dispatched from various countries to defend Cyprus more generally, not specifically the British base, as the sources make clear. AusLondonder (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Iran has fired missiles and drones at a score of facilities that the US air force are using. With many defensive moves. NATO members such as the UK and Turkey have already been fighting defensively - which might be more significant. If we had an ongoing, this would be a non discussion. But we don't have an ongoing because this war is still blurbed (and the top blurb at that). If it's that significant, combine with existing blurb. Nfitz (talk) 18:17, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Note - "Drone" is the colloquial term used by the media but NOT military sources, when it's almost always incorrect. The proper term is UAV - Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Most of them are discount cruise missiles or loitering munition. The word "drone" came about because of semi-automated UAVs and has been used incorrectly for everything from RC quadcopters, to Shaheds. Note that even short description calls it "Iranian unmanned aerial combat vehicles." Harizotoh9 (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose To think that this is even remotely notable in the context of what is going on Iran is baffling enough that I can't see this as anything other than Andrew voicing frustration with ITN with another WP:POINTY nomination. Gotitbro (talk) 19:30, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
March 5
[edit]|
March 5, 2026 (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
Chile eliminates leprosy
[edit]Blurb: World Health Organization verifies Chile as the first country in the Americas, and the second in the world after Jordan, to eliminate leprosy. (Post)
News source(s): IFLScience, NDTV
Article needs updating
UCinternational (talk) 13:57, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Needs work The target article was created by Doc James and so I suppose it has a sound foundation but it has had multiple orange tags for some time -- one of them since 2010. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:41, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose since this is not even the first case of leprosy being eradicated in a country. Also the linked article doesn't mention the fact that either country eradicated leprosy either. NotKringe (talk) 15:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The article needs work before it can featured. Guz13 (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on notability, article is in poor shape though Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 20:03, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Bob Harlan
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by EaglesFan37 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ~2026-12152-22 (talk · give credit) and Connormah (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: Green Bay Packers executive. Classified as a good article on Wikipedia. EaglesFan37 (talk) 23:45, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support GA. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:17, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Ready article is a GA. Jalapeño (u t g) 13:11, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 17:54, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) Sea level
[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: Global sea levels are found to have been underestimated, especially in SE Asia and Oceania. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A meta-analysis reveals that global sea level rise has been underestimated by an average of 25cm, due to a lack of use of local direct measurements.
News source(s): CNN, FT, Nature, New Scientist, NYT, PBS, Science News, Turkiye Today
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pol098 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Oppose - trivia. The attached image is also confusing and wouldn't be helpful to readers. Jalapeño (u t g) 08:09, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
.jpg/250px-Glaciers_and_Sea_Level_Rise_(8742463970).jpg)
The sea level is rising due to thermal expansion and melting ice. - The image comes from the Nature paper. It is rather busy but it highlights the impact on populations, which seem to be non-trivial. Note also that we are currently blurbing a flooding story in a comparatively small region.
- There are other global charts in the paper and we have other options such as a simple image from our article (right).
- Andrew🐉(talk) 08:15, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Trivia, not suited for ITN. I'm by no means that informed about how people at DYK handle their trivia/noms, but this could maybe be a possible nom for them. TwistedAxe [contact] 08:28, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- I've nominated numerous articles at DYK and so am very familiar with their criteria. The sea level article does not qualify as it's not new, having been created over 20 years ago. It was created early in the life of Wikipedia as it is considered level-4 WP:VITAL – a fairly fundamental topic for the encyclopedia. The flooding article that we're currently blurbing would have been eligible for DYK because it's new. And it's more trivial because it's not vital per WP:NEWSEVENT. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:22, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- I think it's very very clear, @Andrew Davidson, that you absolutely do not understand their criteria, based on the number of times you repeat the same mistakes. Your contribution here is a net waste of time for the project. Are you the only person who doesn't see this? Nfitz (talk) 18:30, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- I've nominated numerous articles at DYK and so am very familiar with their criteria. The sea level article does not qualify as it's not new, having been created over 20 years ago. It was created early in the life of Wikipedia as it is considered level-4 WP:VITAL – a fairly fundamental topic for the encyclopedia. The flooding article that we're currently blurbing would have been eligible for DYK because it's new. And it's more trivial because it's not vital per WP:NEWSEVENT. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:22, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose – Nice work to Pol098, but the article update is not appropriately significant to warrant featuring yet.
Especially if, subjectively, the blurb is so vague.I do like a blurb that is more specific. I proposed an alternative. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:02, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- The alt gives an average global figure of 25 cm which doesn't sound like much. But note that sea level rise explains that
Between 1901 and 2018, the average sea level rose by 15–25 cm ... This was faster than the sea level had ever risen over at least the past 3,000 years.
So, the revision is over a century's worth of comfort room. And it's just an average so some areas, such as SE Asia, get the sea lion's share. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- I am bewildered by the "trivia" !votes, as this discovery/reveal has enormous implications. An additional 25 centimeters on top of any other estimates already in play is huge. This is why this news story meets WP:ITNSIGNIF so easily, as shown by the sources listed in the nomination. I don't know what to make out of these "trivia" comments, they seem to come out of nowhere. I'm not familiar enough with the field or with this new paper to know if this is the biggest climate news story of the past decade, but I expect it's in that domain. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:40, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- The alt gives an average global figure of 25 cm which doesn't sound like much. But note that sea level rise explains that
- Oppose - trivia. EF5 15:04, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose as trivial. The Kip (contribs)
- Oppose - This sounds like trivia. Guz13 (talk) 06:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Can someone please tell me what "trivia" means and how we measure it for ITN nominations? To me, these !votes straddle a line between absurd and in poor taste. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:48, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- They seem to be the sort of dismissive one-word comment which WP:ITNDONT advises against:
curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful.
The actual reliable sources don't seem to use the word "trivial". Instead they indicate that there are significant implications for over 100 million people. For example,
Andrew🐉(talk) 09:47, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Torbjorn Tornqvist, a geology professor at Tulane University in Louisiana who was not involved with the study, said the findings were a real “wake up call,” with wide implications. “We finally have a really full blown, robust effort to sort this out and the result, it’s somewhat dramatic,” Dr. Tornqvist said.
- They seem to be the sort of dismissive one-word comment which WP:ITNDONT advises against:
- Support if the blurb were to include the reaction/impact of this finding (not implications) Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 13:35, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose It's just trivia! Squalwer (talk) 14:28, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Trivial. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 15:27, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - I'm not sure that this is actually trivia - there's a bigger issue in this nomination. Read the article in Nature. This is not saying that sea level rises are higher than previously estimated as much as sea level rises have not been correctly considered for the purposes of evaluating coastal hazard assessments, based on the assumption of the geoid model for the earth's shape, when reality is more complicated. It's not saying that sea levels have been rising globally faster than previously measured. I think the OP and several of the news agencies reporting on the Nature article have not understood what the paper is saying. I'm not seeing the egregious nature of this particular nomination, compared to most of those by this nominator. Nfitz (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Weak oppose as not breaking news, things are the same as they've awlays been, only the observations are new.–DMartin (talk) 19:59, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) 2026 World Baseball Classic
[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: The 6th edition of the World Baseball Classic, the premier international baseball tournament, kicks off today. (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo! Sports IOC USA Today
Credits:
- Nominated by KKhuc92 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
March 4
[edit]|
March 4, 2026 (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Lou Holtz
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by Natg 19 (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: Needs some work. Natg 19 (talk) 00:17, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support once it's been cleaned up. CREditzWiki (yap) | (things i apparently did) 17:36, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support The article needs work but it is a notable person. Guz13 (talk) 06:01, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- @CREditzWiki@Guz13
Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY
: Reviewers are asked to comment on the current state of the article. It's a given that any biography is notable enough to be posted. —Bagumba (talk) 18:36, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- @CREditzWiki@Guz13
IRIS Dena is torpedoed
[edit]Blurb: A US submarine torpedoes an Iranian frigate, killing much of the crew, following the International Fleet Review in India. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Guardian, Hindustan Times, Why the Torpedoed Iranian Warship Is a Political Problem for India, U.S. Submarine Launches Its First Torpedo in Combat Since World War II, How US sinking of Iranian warship blew hole in Modi’s ‘guardian’ claims
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Created by Legion of Liberty (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: The sinking seems to have made quite an impact. This seems to be partly because of the graphic video footage, which is in the nomination; partly because it harks back to WW2 when submarine warfare was more common; partly because it happened outside the Gulf and so extends the area of conflict; and partly because of the diplomatic effect of such action on India who was hosting the international review. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support The article is sufficiently sourced throughout, meeting quality standards. International coverage of the sinking meets notability. The sinking is the first time a US Navy submarine has sunk a ship since the Pacific theater of WW2, which also meets significance. CastleFort1 (talk) 12:33, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose part of the ongoing conflict. Jalapeño (u t g) 12:55, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Covered by current blurb. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 12:57, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The start of the war and the assassination of the Supreme Leader are already at the top of the blurbs. If this war had only lingered in ongoing, then maybe - though it's a very small ship compared to the Russian cruiser Moskva which we did blurb. Also, not only is this not the only Iranian ship that the US has sunk this week, it's not even the only ship of this particular class! Nfitz (talk) 17:55, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Shipping crisis
[edit]Blurb: Vital shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz collapses as a US submarine torpedoes a ship for the first time since WW2. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Vital shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz collapses.
News source(s): BBC, DW, Guardian, Reuters, Reuters, Sky, WGOWS
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: There been a lot of focus on the air war in Iran but the biggest economic effect seems likely to be a shipping crisis. You may recall how a single ship getting stuck in the Suez canal caused a lot of trouble. Or the Red Sea crisis provoked by the Houthis. Well this new situation seems to be bigger as there's no going round the Strait of Hormuz and this is a big deal for a lot of countries. There hasn't been much actual action there but the immediate effect on the insurance market has shut down most traffic. And there are sinkings elsewhere which are unsettling the global shipping industry. A US sub has sunk an Iranian frigate off Sri Lanka. And Ukrainian drones have sunk a Russian LNG carrier in the Med. Maybe these might be blurbed separately but let's start somewhere. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose covered by existing blurb. The Kip (contribs) 22:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose part of the Iran conflict. Also overly speculative as full impact of the straits clousure is not known Masem (t) 23:01, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - the latter article does not meet on quality. - Indefensible (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: The ship was sunk off the southern coast of Sri Lanka, something like 2,000 miles from the Straight of Hormuz. Both are part of the general Iran war, but I don’t think you can tangibly connect the shipping crisis with the frigate sinking as part of a single overarching story to warrant another blurb. RPH (talk) 03:52, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- I agree, these "first since YYYY" or "first since (whatever)" are being pushed out way too much on ITN for their actual impact. These stories aren't connected any more than the strike on Khamenei was connected to me paying extra for gasoline half the globe away, and shouldn't be combined as a blurb. Departure– (talk) 03:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- The most recent "first since" blurb was
Alpha Condé wins the Guinean presidential election, the first since the country gained independence in 1958.
That was in 2010. Some editors won't be content until ITN never posts anything, it seems. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:13, 5 March 2026 (UTC)- I meant as in at ITN/C, especially the past year or so, and I'm fairly certain you've been behind a lot of those nominations. When something with one of those "biggest since 1970" addendums gets consensus, it isn't posted, because unless we're talking thermonuclear bombs, there's not much difference between something happening today and 50 years ago in terms of ITN blurb-worthiness. Departure– (talk) 14:34, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- I find four "first since" nominations in 2025:
- 2025 Guinean presidential election -- closed as stale.
- Blue Origin NS-31 all-women space mission -- withdrawn
- March 2025 lunar eclipse -- no consensus
- King Thutmose II's tomb -- posted
- I didn't nominate any of these. My meagre contribution was to support the eclipse and make a non-committal comment about the tomb. In 2024, there weren't any "first since" nominations at all. So, I'm not seeing any evidence for "way too much" and therefore it's still {{citation needed}}.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 15:07, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- I find four "first since" nominations in 2025:
- This would have been notable regardless of whether it was the first or not as it was a new national leader. (Also I'm confused as it looks like there was a democratic election in 1998). Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- I meant as in at ITN/C, especially the past year or so, and I'm fairly certain you've been behind a lot of those nominations. When something with one of those "biggest since 1970" addendums gets consensus, it isn't posted, because unless we're talking thermonuclear bombs, there's not much difference between something happening today and 50 years ago in terms of ITN blurb-worthiness. Departure– (talk) 14:34, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- The most recent "first since" blurb was
- I agree, these "first since YYYY" or "first since (whatever)" are being pushed out way too much on ITN for their actual impact. These stories aren't connected any more than the strike on Khamenei was connected to me paying extra for gasoline half the globe away, and shouldn't be combined as a blurb. Departure– (talk) 03:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose as it's covered by the current blurb and the two incidents aren't directly related. I'm sure when this goes onto ongoing we can debate adding other pages in brackets after.
- Oppose. These two events are not directly related and both are parts of the ongoing war, which already has a blurb. Modest Genius talk 18:52, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Update I passed a news rack just now and noticed that the torpedoing was the top story on the front pages here. And our readers are noticing too as top read articles include IRIS Dena, Islamic Republic of Iran Navy, Mark 48 torpedo, Strait of Hormuz, Moudge-class frigate, List of current ships of the Islamic Republic of Iran Navy, Shahid Soleimani-class corvette and Sinking of IRIS Dena. Montana-class battleship is in there too but that's because it was the featured article yesterday! So, ITN's I see no ships shtick is not working.
- Meanwhile, the economic ramifications continue to mount up and headlines include:
- Andrew🐉(talk) 18:07, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- We do not post stories based on being headline news, period. We are not a newspaper, ITN not a news ticker. Masem (t) 19:03, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- The current Iran war blurb was posted in less than two hours because of
significant coverage
,front headlines in outlets
,mass coverage from multiple news sources
,Multiple media outlets are covering the attack
,front page news on many outlets
. Masem's theory doesn't fit the facts. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:25, 5 March 2026 (UTC)- No, that wasn't the reason the war blurb was posted, but you are pushing that here. Masem (t) 20:13, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Masem, keep in mind the nominator here has a rather distorted view of how ITN works. The Kip (contribs) 19:43, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Then why haven't we topic-banned them yet for being disruptive, and repeating falsehoods that they have been corrected on many, many times? Nfitz (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- The current Iran war blurb was posted in less than two hours because of
- We do not post stories based on being headline news, period. We are not a newspaper, ITN not a news ticker. Masem (t) 19:03, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment This is a strange bundling of stories, these two events lack any direct correlation beyond both being naval action related to the war in Iran. Frankly I would Support a blurb centered on just the Strait closure and impending oil crisis around the world, it's something that impacts pretty much every corner of the globe, but shoehorning in the sunken ship is strange to me. BSMRD (talk) 02:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose - This blurb doesn't make sense. The strait isn't closed because of the torpedoed ship. Guz13 (talk) 06:03, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose as covered by existing blurbs. And 'X as Y' headlines, where the link between X and Y is either (a) obscure, as here, or (b) causal in a way that belongs in the headline, which is very much not the case here, are a blight on modern journalism. GenevieveDEon (talk) 08:30, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Split The combined presentation was a tentative start, as explained in the nomination. As this is not liked, I've reworked this nomination with an alt focussing just on the shipping crisis. The sinking story has been split off now. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:01, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support a blurb that mentions the rise in global oil prices Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 13:37, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Dissolution of Unification Church
[edit]Blurb: The Tokyo High Court orders the dissolution of the Unification Church of Japan in wake of the 2022 assassination of Shinzo Abe. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The dissolution of the Unification Church in Japan is upheld by the Tokyo High Court, following the 2022 assassination of Shinzo Abe.
News source(s): Japan Times, BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: aka the "Moonies". While there is a route to appeal to the Supreme Court, that is not considered a standard step here and the high court's devision is considered final. Article likely needs more updates. Masem (t) 14:26, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on significance, oppose on quality - at present the article is a bit of a mess, both in terms of organisation and prose quality. But the dissolution of a major and controversial religious organisation seems highly significant and worthy of inclusion. GenevieveDEon (talk) 14:34, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose as from the blurb it's not even clear what's being dissolved. Unification is based in South Korea, but the blurb says "Unification Church of Japan", while the article and the linked BBC source say the organization as a whole, all of this putting aside whether the Tokyo High Court has the power to dissolve a foreign organization. Departure– (talk) 15:31, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Other sources all point to this only at the Japanese chapter, as dissolution forces the to lose the designation as a church in Japan affecting taxes, etc. Masem (t) 16:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- If it is just the dissolution of the Japan chapter, this does not seem "significant" to me. Closing of the entire church overall would be significant for ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 16:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Other sources all point to this only at the Japanese chapter, as dissolution forces the to lose the designation as a church in Japan affecting taxes, etc. Masem (t) 16:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support an alt that removes the link to the Shinzo Abe assassination. That was years ago and it may have set off a chain of events, it's not directly linked. Also, blurb can make it more clear it's the Japanese Chapter: "The Tokyo High Court orders the dissolution of the Japanese chapter of the Unification Church" Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:52, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- My reading from the sources all say that Abe's assassination triggered the investigation into the church leading to this decision. There are other contributing factors why the decided that way that existed before the assassination, but the church was only put under the microscope from that. Masem (t) 16:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- You can argue the string of events are related, but the legal decision was done after an investigation. So it's best to say "after an investigation..." rather than tying it to an assassination several years ago. Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- But nearly all sourcing for this story today mention this being a result of the assassination, and it would seem inappropriate to not mention that event that we posted back when as a driver for this finding. Masem (t) 05:05, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, that may be the broader context and someone may read an article for the broader context. But for a headline, the direct chain of events is: Investigation --> conclusion --> Action. The blurb as written implies Abe was assassinated, authorities sat around for a few years and shrugged their shoulders and dissolved the Japanese branch. Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:15, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- But nearly all sourcing for this story today mention this being a result of the assassination, and it would seem inappropriate to not mention that event that we posted back when as a driver for this finding. Masem (t) 05:05, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- You can argue the string of events are related, but the legal decision was done after an investigation. So it's best to say "after an investigation..." rather than tying it to an assassination several years ago. Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:35, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- My reading from the sources all say that Abe's assassination triggered the investigation into the church leading to this decision. There are other contributing factors why the decided that way that existed before the assassination, but the church was only put under the microscope from that. Masem (t) 16:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support leaving in the link to Abe's assassination as this is what started all of this, but Oppose for now due to quality. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 18:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Needs work For example, the section Persecution has entries for several countries but not Japan. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Persecution is not linked to any of the blurbs. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- My link is to a relevant section in the nominated article. Howard's is something else. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Again, "persecution" is not linked to any of the suggested blurbs. I don't know what the issue is here. Howard the Duck (talk) 14:46, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- My link is to a relevant section in the nominated article. Howard's is something else. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Persecution is not linked to any of the blurbs. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on significance A pretty big development and the product of Shinzo Abe's assassination. His links to the Unification Church and the LDP's broader links caused a significant discussion within the Japanese political space regarding their relationship. Ornithoptera (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment The assassination article ties the dissolution and is in far better shape than the church article. Also Criticism of the Unification Church in Japan has a section on the dissolution, and that is also in far better shape than the church's article. Either of these could serve as the target article in lieu of the church's. Masem (t) 00:53, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality There's very little information on the dissolution itself in the main article, and the history section is very light on any recent events. Given the very many forks on the subject, I would expect such a big development to have a Dissolution of the Unification Church article, with the full background, history of the proceedings, legal basis, outcome and reaction. Abcmaxx (talk) 07:06, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Just a note that this blurb is NOT the dissolution of the Unification Church. The order is only for the Japan chapter/branch of the Church. Natg 19 (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on significance as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:37, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on notability, oppose on quality Per Abcmaxx. I think this is a significant development, but the subject article is lacking. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 02:27, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support - This is an important article as it connects to the events of 2022. Guz13 (talk) 06:07, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment The Unification Church is only ordered to be dissolved in Japan. There's no guarantee it's going to happen and the Unification Church will still continue to exist elsewhere. Altblurb added. Jalapeño (u t g) 12:57, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- To add, this decision was already made in 2025 and was only upheld by the High Court now. So posting it now makes no sense. I oppose for this reason, and I updated the altblurb to reflect this. Jalapeño (u t g) 13:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- The reason to post now is that for purposes of Japan's legal system, the Tokyo High Court ruling is considered final (from the sources), comparative to when the US Supreme Court rules on something. There is a route for an appeal to the Japanese Supreme Court but all sources suggest this is rarely ever used. Masem (t) 15:29, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- To add, this decision was already made in 2025 and was only upheld by the High Court now. So posting it now makes no sense. I oppose for this reason, and I updated the altblurb to reflect this. Jalapeño (u t g) 13:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Follow the money: Casting this as some branch operation's closure is extremely misleading. Despite Moon's Korean start, the Japanese branch has long been the most successful of all, and deeply intertwined for decades with Japanese politics. The last detail was suppressed for decades, until the Abe assassination forced it into the open. See the 2-2-2026 New Yorker article on the trial of Abe's assassin and his recent conviction. ~2026-14366-36 (talk) 16:01, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) Supreme leader
[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: Mojtaba Khamenei is elected as the new Supreme Leader of Iran by the Assembly of Experts. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Mojtaba Khamenei is elected Supreme Leader of Iran following the death of Ali Khamenei during strikes by the U.S. and Israel.
News source(s): Hindustan Times, Iran International
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (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 update to current blurb regarding the US-Israeli strikes and death of Ali Khamenei, as it's a continuation of the same news story. Kurtis (talk) 12:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- That blurb is getting longer and longer Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 13:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait Both given sources above as well as other reports [3] all suggest he is either the top pick or likely will be voted, but there's been zero official word on this. Obviously, once affirmed, this should be added to the existing blurb since it's not likely to fall off ITN for a few more days at this rate. Masem (t) 12:32, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait Correct me if I am wrong but he hasn't been voted in yet Otto (talk) 13:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment looks like most sources are saying he's the favourite candidate and tipped to win but not officially confirmed.
- Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 13:20, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- It could be that they are putting security measures in place before making a big announcement because Israel has already said it will try to kill the next Supreme Leader too. See Iran postpones Khamenei’s farewell as Israel threatens to kill successor. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait There's no official statement made by the Assembly. Wait until they confirm it, and then update accordingly. I want to agree with Masem about integrating it into the current blurb, but with the blurb already being as long as it is right now, I'm slightly leaning towards a new blurb as this is about the election of a new leader and counts as ITN/R. TwistedAxe [contact] 14:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- The new updated blurb could be "Mojtaba Khanemei is elected Supreme Leader of Iran following the death of Ali Khanemei during strikes by the U.S. and Israel." Masem (t) 15:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Will add as an altblurb & consider it a support once the Assembly confirms Mojtaba is picked as the Supreme Leader. TwistedAxe [contact] 17:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- The new updated blurb could be "Mojtaba Khanemei is elected Supreme Leader of Iran following the death of Ali Khanemei during strikes by the U.S. and Israel." Masem (t) 15:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment It appears Iran International had Mojtaba Khamenei confirmed as supreme leader, per "informed sources". That could be why there's such a rush to post, even if "informed sources" is shaky at best for a blurb post. I'll also add they're not, to my knowledge, the most unbiased source for Iranian politics, so I echo calls to wait. Departure– (talk) 15:35, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- My impression of Iran International is that they have good contacts in Iran and so will be well-informed. They may have an agenda too but WP:RSP doesn't have an entry for them. Let's see how this "exclusive" plays out. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait for additional sources, this is premature. - Indefensible (talk) 17:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait per above. The Kip (contribs) 18:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait for confirmation, it shouldn’t take that long for it. Neither NPR or the BBC mentioned the appointment on their hourly news updates, so I guess it isn’t official yet. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 19:02, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait for confirmation, as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:14, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Dennis Cometti
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News
Credits:
- Nominated by HiLo48 (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: Australian sports commentator, player and coach of Australian rules football HiLo48 (talk) 03:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- support Shawdowpouncer2 (talk) 14:33, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
OpposeDon't even have to click the article, there's a {{cn span}} in the preview. Departure– (talk) 21:08, 4 March 2026 (UTC)- Make that a strong oppose. The section "Comettiisms" features the textbook definition of WP:CITEOVERKILL--twenty-three refs stacked on top of each other. For your amusement, I've attached it here. Departure– (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Looks like someone removed that section. Natg 19 (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Make that a strong oppose. The section "Comettiisms" features the textbook definition of WP:CITEOVERKILL--twenty-three refs stacked on top of each other. For your amusement, I've attached it here. Departure– (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Song Ping
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): South China Morning Post, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by CastleFort1 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TinaLees-Jones (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: Last living member of the Second Generation of Chinese Leadership, died at 108/109 years old. CastleFort1 (talk) 15:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
Needs reference improvement. - Indefensible (talk) 16:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Article has been significantly improved by TinaLees-Jones. - Indefensible (talk) 03:59, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
March 3
[edit]|
March 3, 2026 (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Alvin Greene
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [4]
Credits:
- Nominated by EaglesFan37 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ~2026-14133-44 (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: B-Class article, campaign for senate in 2010 in South Carolina received significant media coverage EaglesFan37 (talk) 14:50, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Article looks great. Jalapeño (u t g) 14:52, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) March 2026 lunar eclipse
[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: A total lunar eclipse occurs in North America, Asia, and Oceania. (Post)
News source(s): NASA
Credits:
- Nominated by Interstellarity (talk · give credit)
- Comment This event happened on 3 March 2026. Departure– (talk) 01:54, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: While we have posted total solar eclipses, a quick spot check of the two most recent total lunar eclipses in 2025 shows that they weren't posted to ITN (September 2025 lunar eclipse and March 2025 lunar eclipse). SpencerT•C 03:25, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The referenced April 2024 eclipse was a solar eclipse, this was a lunar eclipse. Lunar eclipses are far more common and significantly less newsworthy events for a load of reasons. RPH (talk) 03:47, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. Lunar eclipses are frequent, widely visible, and not particularly significant. They're nice to look at, and I encourage everyone to do so when they can, but that's not enough for ITN. Besides, the article has almost no prose - it's a gallery and list of related eclipses. Modest Genius talk 12:11, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Such events are best posted when they are happening so that people have a chance to see it for themselves. This is too stale now. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:12, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Checking Google News, I don't think this quite met WP:ITNSIGNIF anyway. Our articles on eclipses are nice, but very data-heavy, which always makes me unsure about how encyclopedic they are and what quality I should consider them at... ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:18, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per RPH. Lunar eclipses are more common. WP:ITN/Reoccuring doesn't include lunar eclipses and not very significant. RoyalSilver 19:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. And shouldn't this be closed by now? Guz13 (talk) 06:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
2026 Rubaya mines collapses
[edit]Blurb: A collapse at the Rubaya mines kills over 200 people, including approximately 70 children. (Post)
News source(s): Xinhua
Credits:
- Nominated by Wildfireupdateman (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: This collapse is different from the one on January 28 (although both are in the same article), so I believe that this is not stale. However, updates are scant on the March 3rd collapse. WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose This new collapse should be a separate article from the January collapse, not to mention that this article is lacking detail and isn't of great quality. Jalapeño (u t g) 07:51, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Good work to Bloxzge 025 for updating the article. I don't think the article's update is very detailed yet, but if we hadn't featured this article yet back in January, I'm comfortable with it getting blurbed as-is now. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Not ready. We posted the January collapse and this new one seems of similar magnitude and impact. So in principle I would support posting another blurb. However the article has only two sentences about the March event, which say nothing beyond the nominated blurb. This needs at least a full paragraph of referenced prose about the March incident before it could be posted. Modest Genius talk 12:13, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose AP says that the facts are disputed. As this is a remote warzone, we're unlikely to get good independent confirmation. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The quality on this article needs to be improved. Guz13 (talk) 06:13, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Ready) RD: Andrew Watson (bishop)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Alton Herald
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (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: Bishop of Guildford. Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:26, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Article looks fine. Scuba 05:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Well-written, factual article. Public figure. Baldwin de Toeni (talk) 15:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Unreferenced date of birth. Schwede66 21:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Added ref. Baldwin de Toeni (talk) 14:19, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support - sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Muhammad al-Khuli
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New Arab
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (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: Syrian air force officer. Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:25, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Soft support article is fine, but it's lacking in detail about how he was a part of the 1963 coup. Scuba 05:27, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: 2026 Iran conflict
[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.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Twistedaxe (talk · give credit)
- Ineligible. This article is already posted, as the first blurb on the template. In can't be listed in the ongoing section at the same time as having a blurb. Modest Genius talk 16:34, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Okay, but where in Wikipedia does it say that? Who says it's ineligible? ~2026-51002-1 (talk) 16:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) 2026 Iranian strikes on Cyprus
[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: Several Iranian and Hezbollah strikes hit Cyprus, including Akrotiri and Dhekelia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Iran and Hezbollah launch strikes on the island of Cyprus, specifically Akrotiri and Dhekelia.
Alternative blurb II: Strikes are launched by Iran and Hezbollah hit the country of Cyprus, the only geographically non European member of the European Union, and the overseas territories of UK called Akrotiri and Dhekelia.
Alternative blurb III: Non-Essential personnel temporarily evacuates Akrotiri following Strikes on the island of Cyprus.
News source(s): [5] [6] [7] [8]
Credits:
- Nominated by Squalwer (talk · give credit)
- Oppose I think after the Iran blurb rolls off we should add 2026 Iran conflict to ongoing. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 13:25, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Almost a dozen countries have been hit and are involved the conflict, we of course are not going to blurb each incident separately. The most significant aspects have been blurbed and the rest will be rolled off to ongoing. Gotitbro (talk) 13:35, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - Add 2026 Iran conflict to ongoing instead. Harizotoh9 (talk) 15:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. I cancel this. Squalwer (talk) 16:00, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Eric Allan
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Telegraph Birmingham Live
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: British Actor best known for his role in The Archers. ItsShandog (talk) 09:47, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - Article is a stub. JaxsonR (talk) 17:20, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Stub, has major quality issues. Jalapeño (u t g) 13:09, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
March 2
[edit]|
March 2, 2026 (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Sports
|
Aramco refinery attack
[edit]Blurb: Saudi Arabia's largest oil refinery, Ras Tanura (pictured), shuts down for weeks following Iranian drone attacks. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters - ABC, NYT
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Dog Oxide (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Saudi Arabia's largest oil refinery has halted operations after a foiled Iranian drone strike. Dog Oxide(talk) 23:34, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is a small part of the wider war, which already has a blurb. I'm also sceptical that this event merits an entire article - it could be a single paragraph in Economic impact of the 2026 Iran war. Modest Genius talk 12:46, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- As the Wikipedian below stated, this is Saudi Arabia's largest oil refinery and a huge part of their oil export chain. Its closure means a large disruption to Saudi oil exports as a whole. Given these effects, I think it can be considered notable enough. DoO2 21:22, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support This is Saudi Arabia's largest oil refinery and they plan to close it for weeks. They plan to reroute its output via the Red Sea but that's where the Houthis hang out. Seems like this might be quite significant and the current blurb doesn't even mention Saudi Arabia or the other affected producers. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:02, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Nikolay Kolyada
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.teatral-online.ru/news/39730/
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kelisi (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: selected plays need some citations. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support after selected plays is cited. Jalapeño (u t g) 13:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Yanar Mohammed
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New Arab
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Updated by ForsythiaJo (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: Assassinated Iraqi activist. - Indefensible (talk) 03:54, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support now, updates have been pretty thorough and the article is now pretty well sourced. ~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 23:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Article quality is sufficient. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:04, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Her age is unsourced—not a simple WP:CALC without an exact birthdate.—Bagumba (talk) 07:26, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Age fixed. - Indefensible (talk) 16:46, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 23:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
March 1
[edit]|
March 1, 2026 (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Käthe Menzel-Jordan
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Thüringer Allgemeine (in German)
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (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: German architect, died at age 109, worked on the restoration of prominent historic buildings in around Erfurt after the destruction of World War II. Article was mostly there as a translation from de. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:16, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - needs a bit more reference improvement currently. - Indefensible (talk) 00:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Neville Peat
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/conservationist-author-deeply-loving-man
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk · give credit)
- Updated by DrThneed (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: Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Yuri Korolev (ice hockey)
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://iz.ru/en/node/2051324
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (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: Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support. The article is basic but seems a reasonable biography, sufficiently referenced, and has been updated. I'll assume good faith on the Russian-language source for his death. Good enough to post. Modest Genius talk 12:50, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Christine Johnson McPhail
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.wral.com/news/local/saint-augustines-president-christine-mcphail-death-march-2026/
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Connormah (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: Academic administrator. Seems good though it is pretty short. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support - meets requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 01:02, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Coverage of her career is a mere resume/CV with mostly a listing of positions without further details or accomplishments. Fails WP:ITNQUALITY's
minimally comprehensive overview of the subject
.—Bagumba (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) RD proposal: Iranian officials killed during war
[edit]Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: The Israeli and United States airstrikes on Iran kill many Iranian officials, including defence minister Aziz Nasirzadeh, IRGC commander Mohammad Pakpour, and Armed Forces chief of staff Abdolrahim Mousavi. (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jeffrey34555 (talk · give credit), Imperator125 (talk · give credit) and Rakoon (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: With so many notable figures dying in the wars, I propose that we add the list of Iranian officials killed in these strikes. We're getting a large amount of short-term RD noms and RD blurb proposals from the assassinations incurred in the past two days, and I think that this would be a great way to compress everything down and reduce fighting over whether these RDs should be featured or not. The blurb above is how I propose it whould look on {{ITN}}, but y'all can propose other formats. — Knightoftheswords 21:12, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Um... I don't think it's a bad idea, frankly. I think we could make an extraordinary exception, but obviously the list is incomplete (
the former Iranian president is missing, for example) and I think we also need to review the quality of the articles listed. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2026 (UTC) - At present, we have 5 RD noms pending and Khamenei's that we blurbed. There are at least 5 more that could be nom'd. I can't think of any precedent for this happening, and this isn't a bad solution to the fact that at least 11 notable people died within a short span and only one or two have a chance of being blurbed. 1brianm7 (talk) 22:40, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Makes sense since we have multiple Iranian officials who were killed yesterday and having a single list on RD while preserving the current RD people on is best. Otherwise we’d have a bunch of Iranian officials name on the main page for at least a whole day. The only exceptions is the blurbed assassination of Ali Khamenei and possibly Mahmoud Ahmadinejad if confirmed. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support as per above. This is an unusual circumstance for RD. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 22:51, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support because it's a good idea. I haven't reviewed every article for quality though. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 23:02, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support pending quality checks. A clever solution to this problem. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 23:08, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Any precedent for mass RD listings such as this? Would oppose otherwise. Gotitbro (talk) 23:09, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- And I am not too confident if this listicle passes the FORK test. Gotitbro (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support, with the caveat that I support Khamenei's inclusion in the main blurb, and Ahmadinejad too once his article is ready. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support If that article list did not exist, individual nominations for each death for Iranian officials would likely overshadow other RDs that could be nominated. The perspective for viewers browsing the main page should also be considered, as the viewer would most likely see lots of Iranian officials on RD when in the case of individual nominations. This article is a solution to this extraordinary case. CastleFort1 (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: To tell the truth, I think with the rapid developments, we should consider actually having an "ongoing" event for this conflict. Trump just said he expected the war to last a month. And with the constant exchange of missiles, it seems this flare-up isn't going to end soon.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 01:00, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Though it should be noted that Trump is not a reliable source for anything. He is also on record negotiating a ceasefire here at this very time. Gotitbro (talk) 04:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support so we don't have to flood the RD ticker with officials who have died/will die from the conflict. EF5 01:19, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Interesting idea. I support it This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:33, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- oppose it is part of the blub.Psephguru (talk) 01:45, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- this is an RD nom, not blurb nom? Ion.want.uu (talk) 04:57, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The last major time we had a disaster with multiple notable people that died from it, it was LaMia Flight 2933, where we mentioned a whole football team (effectively) had died, see Wikipedia:In the news/Posted/November 2016. Here, it makes sense that if there is a list of all the officials that had died, even as a subsection somewhere, we can include that in the current blurb, rather than trying to list them all in the RD line. Masem (t) 03:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- The difference there is they all died at once so a single blurb could encapsulate it. The attacks on Iran are ongoing and the news of deaths is coming in day by day. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 09:00, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Its still a single event for our purposes. Masem (t) 12:31, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- The difference there is they all died at once so a single blurb could encapsulate it. The attacks on Iran are ongoing and the news of deaths is coming in day by day. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 09:00, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Linked in the blurb; not sure practically how this would work--is it going to remain after it ages off with additional RD postings? Consider ongoing after the main item rolls off. SpencerT•C 03:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Any continuation of the conflict that results in more RD eligible people dying will almost certainly mean the conflict gets an ongoing message. I think this issue solves itself Omnifalcon (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support and set as precedent this is a great solution for situations like this where large sums of notable people die in a very short period of time all for the same reason, and could be applied to so many situations like wars or accidents where this type of stuff may happen. Ion.want.uu (talk) 04:56, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support but I think it'd be a better idea to just write a separate blurb, e.g.
The Israeli and United States airstrikes on Iran kill many Iranian government officials, including defence minister Aziz Nasirzadeh, IRGC commander Mohammad Pakpour, former national security council secretary Ali Shamkhani, Military Office head Mohammad Shirazi, and Armed Forces chief of staff Abdolrahim Mousavi.
. Davey2116 (talk) 05:58, 2 March 2026 (UTC) - Add to existing blurb A link to this list could be appended to the existing blurb, making it clearer that it was not just the Supreme Leader that was targeted and killed. For example, "Israel and the United States launch strikes on Iran, killing its supreme leader, Ali Khamenei (pictured), along with many other senior officlals." Andrew🐉(talk) 08:00, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Agreeing with this one. Description in RD would be either too vague or too long. ~2026-13516-26 (talk) 10:15, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- This solution makes the most sense and minimal disruption to ITN box Masem (t) 12:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support, add Ahmadinejad if his assassination is confirmed properly. Ornithoptera (talk) 09:20, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support adding to the blurb. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Merged into the existing blurb. – robertsky (talk) 15:16, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- We should close all of the relevant proposed entries below which are covered by this blurb and will no longer be individually posted. - Indefensible (talk) 21:34, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 21:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) Interim Leadership Council of Iran
[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: An Interim Leadership Council is appointed to rule Iran pending the election of a new Supreme Leader. (Post)
Alternative blurb: An Interim Leadership Council is appointed to rule Iran pending the election of a new Supreme Leader which is delayed by destruction of the Assembly of Experts building in Qom where the votes were being counted.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, AP, China Daily, France24, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Created by MarketFruit (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Roya1977 (talk · give credit) and AGiantPulsatingMindisaTerribleThingtoWaste (talk · give credit)
Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
- Wait A new supreme leader is ITNR indeed, but this is different than that. I'm not so sure about whether the existence of an interim leadership council passes the threshold... is the interim council the
holder of the office
, as required by ITNR, or rather an interim body governing during a period where there is no 'holder of the office'? In any event, even if it is ITNR, I'm also seeing conflicting reports flat out saying that Alireza Arafi is officially the new leader. We should wait until there is either greater clarity or perhaps until the Assembly of Experts has formalized the change. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 15:02, 1 March 2026 (UTC)- The body that makes this call is the Expediency Discernment Council. Iran seems better organised than the US when it comes to observing its constitution, eh? Andrew🐉(talk) 15:06, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Implied by the existing blurb - someone has to be running the country albeit for a temporary period after the death of the leader. Once someone more permanent is named, likely weeks to months away, then that would be the ITNR to post. Masem (t) 15:19, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- That's nonsense. Sometimes you get anarchy, civil war or a power struggle if the succession is not well-organised. And, even if it's done properly, as in this case, the point of the ITN/R event is to announce the name(s) of the people now in charge. We should not just leave readers to figure this out for themselves. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:27, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Whether its ITNR or not is debatable, but even if ITNR, the posting of a specific ITNR can be discussed if it should be posted when there are unusual situations. This is such a case, in addition to the double coverage in blurbs that we are trying to avoid. Masem (t) 16:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- We should probably have a decision in interim/acting leaders, We've skipped the merry-go-round in South Korea before, and it seems this is a similar matter now... but not Peru. (For some reason, I also don't think people would skip acting/interim PMs in European countries.) Howard the Duck (talk) 16:44, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Because interm leaders are just that, temporarily, they shouldn't automatically be a ITNR blurb. Nearly all the time, the reason there's an intern leader is due to the leader having died, resigned, or similar, and that is nearly always a blurb-worthy on its own, so I would expect in that article to learn what the interm leadership will be pending the country's laws, and if there is reasonable space in the blurb, to include it there. Masem (t) 18:20, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- There's a good reason such interim/acting leaders be excluded from ITNR, isn't it? Howard the Duck (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- If we know there's a more permanent leader selection in the near future in the absence of a standard line of succession (as we do here), yes. If this was going to be around for years before they'd get to naming a new leader proper, sure, but we know that's not the case now. Masem (t) 03:19, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- There's a good reason such interim/acting leaders be excluded from ITNR, isn't it? Howard the Duck (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Because interm leaders are just that, temporarily, they shouldn't automatically be a ITNR blurb. Nearly all the time, the reason there's an intern leader is due to the leader having died, resigned, or similar, and that is nearly always a blurb-worthy on its own, so I would expect in that article to learn what the interm leadership will be pending the country's laws, and if there is reasonable space in the blurb, to include it there. Masem (t) 18:20, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- We have an ongoing situation now with multiple new developments such as the shutdown of shipping in the Gulf. We shouldn't let the existence of the initial blurb prevent posting more updates as this might cause a gridlock. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:46, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- We should probably have a decision in interim/acting leaders, We've skipped the merry-go-round in South Korea before, and it seems this is a similar matter now... but not Peru. (For some reason, I also don't think people would skip acting/interim PMs in European countries.) Howard the Duck (talk) 16:44, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Whether its ITNR or not is debatable, but even if ITNR, the posting of a specific ITNR can be discussed if it should be posted when there are unusual situations. This is such a case, in addition to the double coverage in blurbs that we are trying to avoid. Masem (t) 16:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- That's nonsense. Sometimes you get anarchy, civil war or a power struggle if the succession is not well-organised. And, even if it's done properly, as in this case, the point of the ITN/R event is to announce the name(s) of the people now in charge. We should not just leave readers to figure this out for themselves. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:27, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Needs work The article has very little prose outside of mentioning the council's formation and quoting from Iran's constitution. FallingGravity 15:42, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. Looks like a very short term development. The same Al Jazeera article linked in the nomination says: "Although the leadership council will govern in the interim, the Assembly of Experts “must, as soon as possible,” pick a new supreme leader, according to the Iranian constitution." Nsk92 (talk) 15:48, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- The state of war may delay this. They probably won't want to be assembling their top people in one place for a while... Andrew🐉(talk) 15:56, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is not ITNR because it is just a temporary/transition committee. This event is part of the big picture which contains alot of important events. This specific event does not deserve its own blurb. Tradediatalk 16:27, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support We should be figuring out how to put all these individually notable and blurb-worthy events into 2 or 3 blurbs, or perhaps even a banner like we had for the pandemic. We hear all the time about "systemic bias" at ITN. If an analogous event happened in a Western country, involving the death of the incumbent leader, a former president, high-ranking defense officials, a triple-digit death toll of literal children at an elementary school, the activation of emergency constitutional measures, etc., etc., etc., do we really think we would post only one blurb? Davey2116 (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, find past examples to prove your point rather than conjecturing. This is not bias, it is not being hasty. - Indefensible (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Your response further proves my point. As stated as obvious fact by many above, this is an unprecedented event to happen in any country. To ask for a past example of this, especially within Wikipedia ITN history, is just silly. Davey2116 (talk) 06:10, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- A recent precedent is Venezuela. The swearing in of Delcy Rodríguez as the acting president was nominated as ITN/R and posted at ITN. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:41, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- It was a single blurb, not multiple blurbs. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:In_the_news&oldid=1331944317
- The point is that it was posted. The mechanics of bundling the various developments in Iran are an implementation detail. Maybe we should have a bigger blurb with more than one sentence so that we can cover all the key points. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Also that is an incumbent leader, this is just a council to pick a leader which is only expected to last a few days.
- - Indefensible (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Expectations vary. See this analysis which the article presents as
So, we'll just have to wait and see about that. In the meantime, we should report what we do know so that readers have the current up-to-date position and thus emphasize Wikipedia as a dynamic resource. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:37, 3 March 2026 (UTC)The appointment of a new successor has been described by Suzanne Maloney, vice president of the Brookings Institution as necessarily "improvisational" and "dictated by the context of the moment", and as experts warn that "a smooth process is nearly impossible", her expectation is that the temporary council will remain permanent.
- Expectations vary. See this analysis which the article presents as
- It was a single blurb, not multiple blurbs. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:In_the_news&oldid=1331944317
- A recent precedent is Venezuela. The swearing in of Delcy Rodríguez as the acting president was nominated as ITN/R and posted at ITN. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:41, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Your response further proves my point. As stated as obvious fact by many above, this is an unprecedented event to happen in any country. To ask for a past example of this, especially within Wikipedia ITN history, is just silly. Davey2116 (talk) 06:10, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, find past examples to prove your point rather than conjecturing. This is not bias, it is not being hasty. - Indefensible (talk) 17:07, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - wait until a leader is selected. - Indefensible (talk) 17:04, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose We don't usually post interim or acting leaders when a new leader is to be elected/appointed soon (for example, Bangladesh usually has an interim PM before an election, if I recall correctly). I've seen reports that state that a new supreme leader will be appointed in 2-3 days - so let's wait. Khuft (talk) 19:02, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait Reliable sources suggest we have no clear idea what the bleep is going on in Iran's government right now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:24, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait A new leader is likley to be soon elected and at the moment we have multiple articles 2026 Iranian leadership crisis, Interim Leadership Council, 2026 Iranian Supreme Leader election with much duplication and none upto par. Gotitbro (talk) 19:57, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- And I agree with others above. This is not ITNR, neither the council nor Arafi succeed Khamenei as the supreme leader/head of state which is going to be decided by the election. Gotitbro (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait per Gotitbro. The Kip (contribs) 20:41, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Hold until a new SL is elected or something else happens This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 01:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Update Reuters reports that the council has met and this confirms that the transition is happening. Meanwhile the IRGC has a new commander – Ahmad Vahidi. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:46, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait. This is just an interim body. 331dot (talk) 09:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose interim leadership is to be expected after the assassination of the previous dictator - which is already blurbed - and I assume (and will support) and ongoing Middle East War or something after it rolls off. When a new dictator comes to power, that should be blurbed. Nfitz (talk) 00:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - Report that is not confirmed: Israel conducted the strike on regime clerics gathering to elect new Iranian supreme leader — defense source - Times of Israel Harizotoh9 (talk) 15:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- That's a remarkable development. I wonder whether they had reached a decision on the new supreme leader or whether that will now be delayed while they find some more experts. When we have more details, we might add something about this to this blurb. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- The latest reporting says that the assembly building in Qom was destroyed while the votes were being counted and that this was done by Israel deliberately to delay election of a new supreme leader. I'll add an alt to this effect. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:59, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- That's a remarkable development. I wonder whether they had reached a decision on the new supreme leader or whether that will now be delayed while they find some more experts. When we have more details, we might add something about this to this blurb. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
February 28
[edit]|
February 28, 2026 (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
RD: Johana Ng'eno
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Bloxzge 025 (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: Kenyan politician Bloxzge 025 (talk) 12:42, 2 March 2026 (EST)
- Comment: Insufficient depth in 3-sentence career section. SpencerT•C 04:29, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Fails WP:ITNQUALITY's
minimally comprehensive overview
with short career section. Once that's expanded, the lead will need a few sentences more.—Bagumba (talk) 07:18, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Mohammad Pakpour
[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.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn5ge95q6y7t?post=asset%3Abf732579-0cec-4aef-a365-639c15b11925#post
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (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.
(Closed) RD: Aziz Nasirzadeh
[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.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.iranintl.com/en/202603017664
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (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.
- Merge under Multiple Iranian officials. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:02, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Abdolrahim Mousavi
[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.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ilna.ir/%D8%A8%D8%AE%D8%B4-%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%A7%D8%B3%DB%8C-3/1757256-%D8%B3%D9%BE%D9%87%D8%A8%D8%AF-%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%AD%DB%8C%D9%85-%D9%85%D9%88%D8%B3%D9%88%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D9%87-%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%AA-%D8%B1%D8%B3%DB%8C%D8%AF
Credits:
- Nominated by Onegreatjoke (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.
- Merge under Multiple Iranian officials. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
[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.
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Twistedaxe (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
- Support The article looks fine. Tradediatalk 16:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support This should really be a blurb. Davey2116 (talk) 16:43, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support blurb One of the most consequential Iranian presidents. Can be appended to the extant blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 18:01, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support individual blurb The current blurb is already a bit bloated. I think he should have his own blurb. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 18:42, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Something I think others may have failed to note is the odd juxtaposition that would occur if Khamenei and this guy few people outside Iran have heard of were put side-by-side in a blurb. Yes, he may be important, but Khamenei's death completely dwarfs this. I do support an individual blurb, but oppose any combined blurb with Khamenei. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 19:18, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- They were killed in the same cache of attacks, whether people outside of Iran/otherwise have heard of him or not should not undermine his significance. As for juxtaposition, simply mentioning him as the former prez should be OK. Gotitbro (talk) 23:06, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- "few people outside Iran have heard" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is incredibly famous beyond Iran. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 15:21, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Something I think others may have failed to note is the odd juxtaposition that would occur if Khamenei and this guy few people outside Iran have heard of were put side-by-side in a blurb. Yes, he may be important, but Khamenei's death completely dwarfs this. I do support an individual blurb, but oppose any combined blurb with Khamenei. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 19:18, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose RD on quality A handful of CNs throughout the article that must be fixed. Oppose blurb, he may have been a controversial figure but no evidence is documented on the page why he would be a major figure in terms Iranian leadership. Masem (t) 18:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality for now, until CNs are resolved. Once polished up, add to current blurb alongside Khameini. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:54, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Add to current blurb former head of state assassinated in a notable air strike and Ahmadinejad was a notable and influential figure in Iran/Middle East region during his time in office. I think it’s appropriate to add his name alongside Khamenei in the current blurb. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Not Ready As of this comment, his death is not even mentioned in the article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment There is conflicting evidence about his death - his political party says he is still alive. Droodkin (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait It is not clear that he is dead. Let's wait a while for further information. If he is, I don't know to what extent I would add it to Khamenei's blurb because neither the President of Iran governs nor am I so sure that Ahmadinejad had a particularly important role at present. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:28, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support inclusion in shared blurb when ready - He was, in his day, a major figure in national and international politics (and the article should reflect that). Once that and other article quality issues are addressed, I would support adding his name alongside Khamenei's in the main blurb. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:11, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support blurb when ready per GenevieveDEon. A former head of state's assassination being a relative blip with all that is going on is indicative of how much that is going on in such a short amount of time. I'd have to agree and state that he was a relatively major figure during his tenure. Ornithoptera (talk) 09:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait - No one pointing out that NY Post and tabloids are posting this? These sources should be put on a blacklist. It hasn't been confirmed as of yet. Harizotoh9 (talk) 10:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The nomination's claim that the article has been updated is now contentious as the death is disputed and so I've set it to "no". The only source listed is the New York Post, which is not impressive. This needs a lot more work and confirmation before it can be considered. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:13, 2 March 2026 (UTC) (edit conflict)
- Oppose for now pending confirmation and article improvements. Would support a blurb (or merging into the current blurb by name) if confirmed, but all we have at the moment is the NY Post, who are not trustworthy at all, and similar rumors. Agreed with Harizotoh9. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 18:59, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose per above awaiting confirmation of death. --SpectralIon 15:30, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose and close the source that the nominee used is considered unreliable (WP:NYPOST). The Wikipedia page says that the death is disputed. This is an unusual case that is almost the opposite of the Khameini case: Iran may have claimed he is dead, but Israel and the United States have not claimed anything. [9] If the target page isn't saying he's dead, then this nomination is dead in the water, if you pardon the phrase. Unknown Temptation (talk) 23:09, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) 2026 Minab school airstrike
[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: An airstrike on an elementary school in Minab, Hormozgan province, Iran, kills at least 165 people, mostly schoolgirls. (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times, Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by Hsnkn (talk · give credit)
- Created by 110 and 135 (talk · give credit)
- That is already going to be covered by the strikes and we'd usually not have doubling-up of blurbs. We'd normally try to incorporate blurbs into one, but given the word that Iran's leader was killed, that's going to have far higher billing to include with th existing one. Masem (t) 19:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- That is a rumor. This is affirmd. Plus that could be its own blurb.Psephguru (talk) 20:21, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- The Khamenei nom has been withdrawn as of writing this. Is there a way I can nominate this to be merged with the 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran blurb? Hsnkn (talk) 20:22, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Suggest an altblurb.Psephguru (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- support and merge VERY notable 80+ deaths, but together with the current one.Psephguru (talk) 20:19, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- oppose until confirmed by independent media. Also, there's currently a discussion about deleting the article, exactly because of lack of independent corroboration. Khuft (talk) 20:22, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- [10]Psephguru (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- The nominated article itself says there's no independent confirmation about the number of casualties. Khuft (talk) 20:37, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- [10]Psephguru (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Wait for independent confirmation - virtually all details are currently sourced to Iranian state media, which we’ve generally taken to be unreliable. Even the Al Jazeera article says “according to Iranian state media.” The Kip (contribs) 20:39, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- I’m also inclined to oppose as covered by the already-posted blurb, but again, that debate is premature for now. The Kip (contribs) 20:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Agreed. Independent media confirmation needed -- maybe once it is, merge it with the Iran strike blurb? TheChestertonian (talk) 00:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- I’m also inclined to oppose as covered by the already-posted blurb, but again, that debate is premature for now. The Kip (contribs) 20:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- oppose per Khuft and its already covered by the most recent blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Covered by extant blurb. Also, this nomination's current blurb language is factually incorrect. Cf, the language used by the Guardian. This feels like a repeat of false claims surrounding a strike on the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital during the Gaza War. Dr Fell (talk) 20:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Comment - this article currently has an open AFD discussion. - Indefensible (talk) 20:50, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Closed as no consensus. - Indefensible (talk) 03:42, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support on notability as significant enough to be separated out from the main item (assuming reporting is accurate), but wait as I think we need better sourcing. Blythwood (talk) 20:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- We do not post multiple blurbs from the same basic event (part of the Main Page requirement too, to avoid duplication of topics). Its part of the strikes, already posted. Masem (t) 21:05, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- It has been done. If I recall, Bucha was posted while the invasion of Ukraine was already in ongoing (realizing later that ongoing is not the same as a blurb, so feel free to ignore me). AustrianEarlyOne (talk) 22:14, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, we do allow major developments from an ongoing to be posted without removing the ongoing. Did that frequently at the early part of the Ukraine conflict. But not two blurbs, we try to combine those instead. Masem (t) 23:29, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- It has been done. If I recall, Bucha was posted while the invasion of Ukraine was already in ongoing (realizing later that ongoing is not the same as a blurb, so feel free to ignore me). AustrianEarlyOne (talk) 22:14, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- We do not post multiple blurbs from the same basic event (part of the Main Page requirement too, to avoid duplication of topics). Its part of the strikes, already posted. Masem (t) 21:05, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Conditional merge to the main event, notable for the high civilian casualty count if it can be independently verified, but we should avoid doubling up. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:48, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support on notability A high civilian casualty count is notable. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose the air strike has already been posted. Nfitz (talk) 00:18, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality Poorly sourced and article is marked for deletion, especially given there are no reliable sources which give any details about the casualty count. So far, only Iranian state media has provided primary sources of the airstrikes (as The Kip rightly points out) and other sources are simply quoting them in turn, which is plainly inadequate for inclusion on ITN. Oppius Brutus 00:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Verification I see comments that this isn't verified beyond state (Iran) media but our article says this "videos taken of the destroyed school immediately following the attack were verified by The New York Times, Reuters, and Iranian fact-checking organization Factnameh, as authentic; these videos were compared against existing imagery of the school. Drop Site News published accounts of the incident from several parents whose children were among those killed." So this certainly did take place but I agree the article quality is very poor. Gotitbro (talk) 01:39, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- al jazeera did. please read.Psephguru (talk) 02:32, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Psephguru Al Jazeera attributes the news to Iranian state media. The Kip (contribs) 03:38, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- I now support blurbing this (or appending this to the extant blurb). This is a significant enough event to be featured separately and the article and the sources are now much more firmer about the school being bombed and multiple children being killed. Gotitbro (talk) 09:05, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- al jazeera did. please read.Psephguru (talk) 02:32, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose: A tragedy for sure, but unfortunately part of high-scale conflicts like these. Could be explained briefly in the dominant blurb. Rooves 13 (talk) 01:47, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- "but unfortunately part of high-scale conflicts like these" a very callous and irresponsible comment. Gotitbro (talk) 02:04, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Seconding this in spirit, although I wouldn't use such harsh wording. But yeah, mass civilian casualties like this should not be treated as routine, even during a conflict. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:08, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- ITN Candidates is not a place to hash our morality or what should or should not happen or how we should value them. Merely a place to see if something matches the pre-approved criteria. Harizotoh9 (talk) 12:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Seconding this in spirit, although I wouldn't use such harsh wording. But yeah, mass civilian casualties like this should not be treated as routine, even during a conflict. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:08, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- "but unfortunately part of high-scale conflicts like these" a very callous and irresponsible comment. Gotitbro (talk) 02:04, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose merge since we're already adding Khameini it looks like This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:06, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose – While we would have posted this if it was an isolated event, it is covered by the wide attack on Iran already posted. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:27, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wiki has perecedent for thisPsephguru (talk) 02:34, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose The casualties numbers are from Iranian authorities and can be propaganda and lies. Tradediatalk 03:43, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Unlikely. Along with the verified video evidence we also have this "Human rights organization Hengaw stated that around 170 students were present in the school at the time, among them mostly girls between seven and 12 years old." Gotitbro (talk) 04:34, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose this strike is the part of attack already covered in an another blurb, no need to fill ITN with this entry of the strikes. LiamKorda 04:12, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- support — a very significant event. I think the arguments of a number of participants are untenable. For example, during the Russo-Ukrainian war, separate articles are very often created describing strikes with victims (such as February 2025 Poltava strike, 2024 Kostiantynivka supermarket strike and more and more). AlexeyKhrulev (talk) 07:42, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support per above. If an event is historically significant enough to encompass multiple blurbworthy articles, then multiple blurbs should be posted. For this operation, we should be highlighting (at least) 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran, Assassination of Ali Khamenei, and 2026 Minab school airstrike, as well as deaths of other significant individuals. We shouldn't be not posting a blurbworthy event just because another blurb covers a different aspect of this operation. Davey2116 (talk) 09:59, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - For a few reasons, namely this is covered by an event already and this event may end up in ongoing. Second, as I've said a few times already, Iran is a closed system. Exact number of dead, and details from this event, are impossible to verify at this time. Third party investigators would be needed to review the scene. Harizotoh9 (talk) 10:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose covered by existing blurb Ion.want.uu (talk) 16:09, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combining with current blurb This is a major mass-death event that likely would have been the focus of the blurb about the strikes if it weren't for the assassination of Khamenei overshadowing it. I think we have enough room to mention this. Vanilla Wizard 💙 01:06, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
Merge into existing blurb The current blurb gives the impression only one person was killed in the strikes. Mentioning the current estimated death toll gives a more accurate impression of the scale of these strikes.FallingGravity 04:43, 2 March 2026 (UTC)- We don't know the context of this at all. We don't know if it was a missile strike, or an air-defense missile, or any number of things. It's also a closed Iranian system that no one can double check. We can say something hit the school, some people probably died, but we can't confirm many details. Harizotoh9 (talk) 11:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Regardless the school was struck and children were killed. And I don't any sources actually counter the Iranian statements, if anything independent video verification and witness testimony only confirms the claims. Gotitbro (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Other innocent (non govt, non military) people in Iran have been killed in these attacks too. We should not be focusing on one attack simply because it involved children. Now, if later this is called a war crime and waatents made for arrests, that would be a reason to focus on this. Masem (t) 18:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Regardless the school was struck and children were killed. And I don't any sources actually counter the Iranian statements, if anything independent video verification and witness testimony only confirms the claims. Gotitbro (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Switching to conditional Support Should be fine as long as the estimated death toll is attributed to Iran and the alleged perpetrators aren't identified pending further confirmation. FallingGravity 19:02, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- We don't know the context of this at all. We don't know if it was a missile strike, or an air-defense missile, or any number of things. It's also a closed Iranian system that no one can double check. We can say something hit the school, some people probably died, but we can't confirm many details. Harizotoh9 (talk) 11:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) Ali Khamenei
[edit]Blurb: Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei (pictured) is killed by an Israeli drone strike. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Israel and the United States launch strikes on Iran, with an Israeli drone strike killing Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei (pictured).
Alternative blurb II: Israel and the United States launch strikes on Iran, with an Israeli drone strike killing Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei (pictured).
Alternative blurb III: Iran confirms Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei (pictured) was killed in an Israeli drone strike.
Alternative blurb IV: Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is killed as part of a series of joint Israeli-American strikes on the country
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Jalapeño (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Reuters reporting just now that his body has been found. Jalapeño (u t g) 19:52, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- strong oppose and close the source is an israeli one. That is not confirmation.Psephguru (talk) 19:56, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- This if confirmed by non-Israel/US sources, should be incorporated into the existing strikes blurb. Masem (t) 19:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Agreed IFF. Its BLP atm.Psephguru (talk) 20:00, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- According to Israel, lol... no need to rush, let's wait for an official confirmation from the Iranian side. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Wait - BBC headline is literally "Unconfirmed reports that Iran's supreme leader is dead". https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn5ge95q6y7t Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:04, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Wait More confirmation from independent sources and/or Iranian media is needed.CastleFort1 (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2026 (UTC)- comment based on the REtaliation, he is likely dead. however, need a proper source like Iran confirming it,Psephguru (talk) 00:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Iran has confirmed his daughter ad grandson were killed. Not notable for ITN, but just a heads up.[11]Psephguru (talk) 00:58, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Reopening, as Iranian Tasnim & Fars have confirmed his death. Consider this a support, preferably integrating/combining it into the current blurb. TwistedAxe [contact] 01:40, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb following confirmation of the death. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 01:43, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb, with picture Notability is clearly met, and the quality of the article appears to be sufficient. CastleFort1 (talk) 01:45, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support, obviously notable death of a long-serving leader. Sahaib (talk) 01:46, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support: Khamenei confirmed dead via Iranian state media. Rooves 13 (talk) 01:46, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb – Now confirmed by Iranian sources and clearly notable. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 01:48, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb per all above. WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 01:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Notable death of a leader. TheHuman630 (talk) 01:50, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- support
altblurb3Based on Irnas' reaction, I'm 99% sure he's dead, but just wait a few hours. IT is 5am there.Psephguru (talk) 01:55, 1 March 2026 (UTC)- Their state media has confirmed his "martyrdom". TwistedAxe [contact] 01:56, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Probs the article is locked down, since i expect nonsebse.Psephguru (talk) 02:03, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Their state media has confirmed his "martyrdom". TwistedAxe [contact] 01:56, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb obviously. No explanation needed. Vanilla Wizard 💙 01:56, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb ArionStar (talk) 01:58, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb to keep tidy. I'd prefer a bit more in the assassination section of his article, but I imagine it's going to expand quite rapidly even before this is posted and it's sufficient as it is now. La Ovo (talk) 02:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb any additional explanation feels redundant at this point. Per Exemplum 02:02, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support merge rare good deathblurb inasmuch as he was a serving head of state This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:06, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb and any other answer is objectively wrong. There is no need for an explanation. MountainJew6150 (talk) 02:08, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support combined blurb; seems good enough in quality per above, though I wish the foreign policy section was updated with more information about today. The article's in remarkably good shape otherwise, and I extend my congratulations to everyone who brought it to the state it is now. Departure– (talk) 02:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: looks like there is a consensus for a combined blurb? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 02:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Lol Aren’t you an admin willing to post ITN? Chorchapu (talk | edits) 02:12, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- They are requesting a different administrator make a decision here because they left a !vote in favor of posting, see WP:INVOLVED. Vanilla Wizard 💙 02:18, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Good on you.Psephguru (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- They are requesting a different administrator make a decision here because they left a !vote in favor of posting, see WP:INVOLVED. Vanilla Wizard 💙 02:18, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Lol Aren’t you an admin willing to post ITN? Chorchapu (talk | edits) 02:12, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support altblurb4, most clear and concise blurb. — Knightoftheswords 02:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah, tht ooks good.Psephguru (talk) 02:21, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support - This is definitely the most recent notable event. NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 02:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support altblurb4, death has been confirmed. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 02:33, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support altblurb4, BBC and Iranian State media has confirmed his death.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 02:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Nine citation needed templates, so this is not ready to be added. Masem (t) 02:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Posted altblurb4, waiting for image to be protected on Commons and then I'll put that in as well. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:36, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- aaand image posted as well, so
Done :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:43, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron could you change "is killed" to "was assassinated"? His assassination is past tense, and every mention of his death on Wikipedia lists it as an assassination, not a killing. NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 02:45, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- ITN blurbs are in present tense, generally, and i don't have the authority to make a change to verbiage that's been agreed upon by consensus, especially when it implicates NPOV that heavily. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:51, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron could you change "is killed" to "was assassinated"? His assassination is past tense, and every mention of his death on Wikipedia lists it as an assassination, not a killing. NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 02:45, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Not the best choice of blurbs. Most of the support votes came before this blurb was suggested late. It contains multiple errors including the term "Israeli-American" which is nonesense in this context.---- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:43, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Not the best blurb how? Nonsense how? Dr Fell (talk) 02:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Israeli-American means an Israeli who became an American. Supreme Leader should be decapitalized when the modifier Iranian is before it. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:54, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- That's one use of Israeli-American, but that hyphenated form isn't limited to a single meaning. The Sino-Japanese War doesn't refer to a Chinese individual who became Japanese and then invaded somewhere. Hyphens are commonly used to form compound modifiers, as that usage is common practice and well understood. Style guides differ on capitalizing supreme leader. Dr Fell (talk) 02:59, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Sino-Japanese War is COMMONAME and not MOS. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 03:20, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- In this case, Israeli-American is a perfectly valid compound modifier, and is synonymous with Israeli-United States, which our article currently uses (although it incorrectly uses an en dash instead of a hyphen). Based on your logic, Israeli and American should also only refer to Israeli people and American people respectively. 9ninety (talk) 13:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- That's one use of Israeli-American, but that hyphenated form isn't limited to a single meaning. The Sino-Japanese War doesn't refer to a Chinese individual who became Japanese and then invaded somewhere. Hyphens are commonly used to form compound modifiers, as that usage is common practice and well understood. Style guides differ on capitalizing supreme leader. Dr Fell (talk) 02:59, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Israeli-American means an Israeli who became an American. Supreme Leader should be decapitalized when the modifier Iranian is before it. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:54, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Not the best blurb how? Nonsense how? Dr Fell (talk) 02:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Khamenia's article is not ready due to multiple CNs, this must be reverted. Masem (t) 02:48, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Please post altblurb2. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:50, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- ah, i thought altblurb4 was the referenced "combined blurb", i'll put in altblurb2. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- You cannot post alt 2. It is not confirmed that he was killed by an 'Israeli drone strike,' a missile strike or some other part of the attack. Alt 2 is simply factually incorrect. And consensus, such as it is, was for alt 4. Dr Fell (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Which also means we shouldn't be linking to the "Assassination of..." article because of this.
- And again, Khamenei's article has nine citation needed tags. It cannot be featured either. We need to revert until Khamenei's article is up to quality expectations. Masem (t) 03:01, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Khamenei article is not bold linked in altblurb2. We can also remove "an Israeli drone" if that is in doubt. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 03:17, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- You cannot post alt 2. It is not confirmed that he was killed by an 'Israeli drone strike,' a missile strike or some other part of the attack. Alt 2 is simply factually incorrect. And consensus, such as it is, was for alt 4. Dr Fell (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- ah, i thought altblurb4 was the referenced "combined blurb", i'll put in altblurb2. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Please post altblurb2. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:50, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- aaand image posted as well, so
- Support altblurb 4—More concise, and places the emphasis on the bigger news story: that the longtime leader of a major regional power in the Middle East was just killed by a foreign military operation. Kurtis (talk) 03:14, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Better mentioning "and other officials". ArionStar (talk) 08:53, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Agreed. Kurtis (talk) 21:40, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Better mentioning "and other officials". ArionStar (talk) 08:53, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Post-posting support altblurb 4 per above. Davey2116 (talk) 09:59, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Post-posting comment Better: "Israel and the United States launch strikes on Iran, killing supreme leader Ali Khamenei (pictured), former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad" and other officials." ArionStar (talk) 16:22, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- I second this as well, per my comments for the Ahmadinejad RD above. Gotitbro (talk) 20:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: ArionStar (talk) 21:46, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
Not done Iranian sources have not yet confirmed his death, which is what the article at present indicates at Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad#Personal_life. SpencerT•C 07:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- I was midlead due to this in the current affairs portal [12] (added by GWA88). Quite the opposite of what sources say about cofirmation by Iranian state media. Gotitbro (talk) 12:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- At least adding "… and other officials" is a reasonable opinion. ArionStar (talk) 15:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- I was midlead due to this in the current affairs portal [12] (added by GWA88). Quite the opposite of what sources say about cofirmation by Iranian state media. Gotitbro (talk) 12:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Admins willing to post ITN: ArionStar (talk) 21:46, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- I second this as well, per my comments for the Ahmadinejad RD above. Gotitbro (talk) 20:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ali Shamkhani
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Iran International
Credits:
- Nominated by Davey2116 (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: Iranian defense official and top advisor to Khamenei. Killed in the U.S./Israel strike. Davey2116 (talk) 17:10, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
OpposeNo confirmation of this, an encyclopedia should not be presenting unconfirmed media reports as fact. Gotitbro (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2026 (UTC)- Officially confirmed. Article looked fine last time I checked. Gotitbro (talk) 20:11, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Wait, opposing for now Further confirmation is needed on the status of Iranian officials before nominating for RD. CastleFort1 (talk) 18:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Wait, because it may be true, but we need confirmation. Israel is saying this, but we can't confirm this. Right now the headline would be "Israel says" or "Israel announces". May be confirmed later? Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:51, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- oppose the sourcfe is not even reliable.Psephguru (talk) 19:56, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Wait/Oppose Claim is not supported by any credible sources, I would be willing to blurb if his death was confirmed hungry (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- In theory, could be combined with Khameini IFF true.Psephguru (talk) 20:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose/wait due to lack of independent confirmation - currently, only Israeli government sources are claiming he’s dead. The Kip (contribs) 20:40, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose/wait Until the Iranian government confirms it, this shouldn't be posted.
If they do, support blurb.PolarManne (talk) 21:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)- Retracting support for blurb. Several other Iranian officials have been (allegedly) killed today, most notably Khamenei, and there's just not enough space or justification for multiple. I still stand by posting this as an RD once the Iranian government confirms it. PolarManne (talk) 02:44, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support It is now confirmed by state media. Also, the article looks fine. Tradediatalk 15:41, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 03:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- This entry is covered by the blurb and is redundant now. It should be removed from the box in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 21:33, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
PULL Never seen this done before so it might be WP:IAR. But Shamkhani's death is now part of the blurb, so there's no need to keep it on the RD stream. --SpectralIon 23:15, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Pull agreed with Indefensible; now that his death is part of the blurb, this RD should be pulled. -GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 23:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
- Pulled as a new RD was posted. Stephen 23:58, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: MaryAnn Bin-Sallik
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SBS ABC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Aydoh8 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Cavrdg (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: First Indigenous Australian to get a doctorate from Harvard. Died last Saturday but reported today. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 10:28, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - looks good to go. Sources are good.BabbaQ (talk) 13:56, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - A bit short, but a well sourced article. NewishIdeas (talk) 19:00, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Posted—Bagumba (talk) 01:24, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Makybe Diva
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [13]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by A.Classical-Futurist (talk · give credit) and Sunline02 (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
Happily888 (talk) 09:14, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Not yet ready Multiple CN tags. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 09:21, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support: Article looks good as of now. Rooves 13 (talk) 01:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: Still orange-tagged for referencing issues. SpencerT•C 07:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran
[edit]Blurb: Israel and the United States launch strikes on Iran. (Post)
News source(s): AP, BBC, CNN, JPost, Times of Israel, Ynet
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Created by JaxsonR (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Skitash (talk · give credit), EmpAhmadK (talk · give credit) and لوتوس پرینسس (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Major event with significant coverage. - Indefensible (talk) 07:12, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support obvious. Scuba 07:18, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support, front headlines in outlets, article is ok considering this is breaking news. Brandmeister talk 07:20, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - Do I even need to explain? JaxsonR (talk) 07:23, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Please see the guidance above. #1 is
Please do not...Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons.
Andrew🐉(talk) 07:49, 28 February 2026 (UTC)- Yet also WP:BLUE. It, to put it bluntly, pretty bloody obvious. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:17, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Please see the guidance above. #1 is
- Wait Too many uncertainies in a rapidly developing situation. Let us wait out for a bit to see what has been struck and for the article to somewhat stabilize. Gotitbro (talk) 07:28, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- And quality issues persist: half the article is background, the other half security measures in Israel, barely anything on the places struck, damage done and people killed in Iran. Cannot blurb this. Gotitbro (talk) 07:40, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support Another dangerous attack. ArionStar (talk) 07:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Needs work The article currently leads with a focus on Israeli operations which is puzzling in the light of recent coverage about US intentions. It seems that they are trying to take out the Supreme Leader but describe the attack as preemptive. Perhaps they saw a window of opportunity and so went for it. We need some time to clarify this as we can't simply take official statements from the warring parties on trust. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:36, 28 February 2026 (UTC) (edit conflict)
- Support - Multiple media outlets are covering the attack, and while it isn't exactly clear what has occurred, there seems to be confirmation from Trump himself that the US participated in the attack Oakchris1955 (talk) 07:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support: major event of high importance, front page news on many outlets CROIXtalk 07:51, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - Major implications for the Middle East and the globe as a whole, and mass coverage from multiple news sources. RealAmericanNixonite (talk) 08:06, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - Major escalation.BabbaQ (talk) 08:10, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - Clear distinct event and escalation. Harizotoh9 (talk) 08:20, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- WAIT as a developed story. QalasQalas (talk) 08:30, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support sigh here we go agian. LiamKorda 08:36, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support Clearly worthy of ITN based on nature of conflict and the parties involved NewishIdeas (talk) 08:46, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support another huge escalation in the region 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 08:57, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Posted - Fuzheado | Talk 09:09, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Fuzheado: Do we need to link the countries (IS/US)? Appears WP:OL and don't think we do that at ITN. Gotitbro (talk) 09:13, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- You are right, I've delinked the countries. Thanks. - Fuzheado | Talk 09:24, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Fuzheado: Do we need to link the countries (IS/US)? Appears WP:OL and don't think we do that at ITN. Gotitbro (talk) 09:13, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Support Hopefully this actually goes through as it is currently a huge story ~2026-51002-1 (talk) 09:04, 28 February 2026 (UTC)WP:CT/A-I restriction Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 13:23, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Strong support. Praying for everyone's safety. TwistedAxe [contact] 09:10, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Comment – After posting the blurb which described a one-way attack, there have now been retaliatory strikes. That brings up two issues:
- What would be an appropriate revised blurb to characterize the new nature of the conflict?
- Which articles might we link to, as we now have some confusion between two articles: 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran and 2026 Iran–United States crisis, which have a
{{duplication|...}}template pointing to each other, and one of them is having a move discussion.
- - Fuzheado | Talk 11:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- The crisis article indeed appears to be unnecessary duplication. I wouldn't really change the hook as there are no stable articles here. The blurb though can be amended by merely apending that Iran has also conducted retaliatory strikes at US bases in the Gulf and in Israel. Gotitbro (talk) 13:09, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Neither title is perfect as 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran doesn't allow for the counter-attacks and 2026 Iran–United States crisis doesn't include Israel. It's really just another phase in the Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present) which involves many countries. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:16, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Follow the precedent used by United States strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Also the move/merge request on the article talk page currently has consensus for support but is wrong for the same reason. - Indefensible (talk) 17:37, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Comment – The current blurb is appropriate as is. Retaliation is a natural consequence for an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation, which the current bold-linked article handles just fine. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:16, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Comment Israel is claiming Khamenei has been killed, which should be included in this blurb if confirmed (other notable officials probably should fall as RDs, though). Masem (t) 19:43, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Bibi has released a statement, but does not fully confirm it: "There are many signs that this tyrant is no longer." Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:09, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Exactly. We should also express any doubt if US makes the claim too. Masem (t) 20:13, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Bibi has released a statement, but does not fully confirm it: "There are many signs that this tyrant is no longer." Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:09, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Post-posting support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 09:59, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- How come Israel is listed first before the US, isn't the US taking the lead here? Is it because of alphabetical order? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 13:22, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
(Posted) 2026 Bolivian Air Force Lockheed C-130 crash
[edit]Blurb: A Lockheed C-130 Hercules operated by the Bolivian Air Force crashes in El Alto, causing at least 20 deaths and 30 injuries. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A Bolivian Air Force Lockheed C-130 Hercules crashes in El Alto, causing at least 20 deaths and 30 injuries.
Alternative blurb II: A Bolivian Air Force plane crashes in El Alto, killing at least 20 people
News source(s): [14] [15] [16]
Credits:
- Nominated by Wildfireupdateman (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · give credit) and Relton66 (talk · give credit)
Wildfireupdateman (talk) 05:30, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support but wait and needs link in blurb - Support as it (perhaps being overshadowed by the Iran strikes) is significant, however the article is a bit of a stub and needs some work. The blurb also needs a link to the article in it, perhaps linking the article to 'crashes' Elizaofchaos (talk) 07:54, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed, seems somewhat awkwardly worded still.–DMartin (talk) 07:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Maybe something like "A Bolivian Air Force Lockheed C-130 crashes in El Alto, causing at least 20 deaths and 30 injuries"?
- Feels like it works better Elizaofchaos (talk) 08:33, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Turned it into an alt blurb Elizaofchaos (talk) 09:13, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed, seems somewhat awkwardly worded still.–DMartin (talk) 07:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose We do not usually post about minor military aircraft accidents because they are part of the routine risk of that activity. I believe that twenty fatalities in this case is not a figure that, although regrettable, is neither monstrous nor ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:15, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Last Year UPS Airlines Flight 2976 was posted with similar casualty figures, however I completely see how this is nothing compared to the Middle East conflict currently Elizaofchaos (talk) 10:27, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- While it is true to we don't post military craft accidents, that's on the presumption that all deaths or injuries were to military personnel (such deaths being considered part of the risk of their job). Like with the UPS flight, this had significant innocent ground casualties, so absolutely fair to consider it. Masem (t) 13:29, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- The fact that there appear to be significant casualties on the ground (who presumably are not military personnel) may make this more significant than a routine military accident, but currently the article is just too short. So oppose for now.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:39, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support the original blurb. I believe there is precedent to post this, as we have previously posted air crash of similar weight on ITN before such as the aforementioned UPS Airlines crash, with the death toll seemingly (and unfortunately) likely to increase. I can't even see how this is a "minor military aircraft accident", a large military plane flew off the runway into public traffic. CaptainGalaxy 11:44, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Neutral – The article is still a stub with a size of 1475 B, below 1500 B. Uncertain on ITN eligibility; comparable articles on military plane crashes brought to ITN include the 2024 Korochansky Ilyushin Il-76 crash (discussion – 76 deaths) which was not posted, the 2025 Sudanese Air Force Antonov An-26 crash (discussion – ≥46 fatalities) which was not posted, and the 2025 Dhaka Chengdu J-7 crash (discussion – 37 deaths) which was posted. I would be willing to reconsider once the article is further expanded. It has the potential, but I'd wait a day or two for more information to come out. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:32, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- I've proposed a second alternative blurb that is structured like the ones for the 2025 Sudanese Air Force Antonov An-26 crash and the 2025 Dhaka Chengdu J-7 crash, which are more concise as they don't mention the aircraft type and the number of injuries. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:44, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support For a bit more background, the article states that the plane was carrying bank notes and attracted a crowd of demonstrators. However, like the Louisville crash, this one happened on a highway in a highly populated area and thus casualties were not confined to merely military personnel. Article is barely past the quality I recommend for a feature. Departure– (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support While we don't usually post military aviation accidents, this seems to be more notable due to the large number of fatalities on the ground. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:23, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support Alternative blurb II - The others are mouth fulls. Harizotoh9 (talk) 15:30, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support Alternative blurb II - sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support Alternative blurb one - More detailed, yet concise. Quality of article is fine to post. CastleFort1 (talk) 21:17, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Alt1 violates SEAOFBLUE, however. Chorchapu (talk | edits) 22:12, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support Alt Blurb II - as others have said, this blurb is the most efficient. Rooves 13 (talk) 01:50, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: I agree with Aviationwikiflight in that depth of the article is pretty borderline/marginal, and would benefit from a little bit more expansion. I wouldn't consider a 3-sentence paragraph (i.e. Background) to meet the minimum requirement toward "three complete, referenced and well-formed paragraphs". SpencerT•C 04:25, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Support Original Blurb or Alt1, Strong Oppose Alt2 The number of injured seems worth mentioning, and the general type of plane which crashed is a central detail that simply must go in the blurb. "Plane" could be anything from a Cessna to an Airbus A380. Of course it should be specified. At the very least, we should include something in the blurb so the reader does not get the false impression that only a small fighter jet (or alternatively, a large Boeing 747) has crashed. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 15:53, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:38, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Lorraine Bayly
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [17]
Credits:
- Nominated by Happily888 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by TVHead (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNQUALITY.
Happily888 (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - Looks good. Sourced.--BabbaQ (talk) 08:13, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support - A very thorough article on a lady with a long and successful acting career. HiLo48 (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: Filmography/Stage only partially referenced. SpencerT•C 04:17, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
February 27
[edit]|
February 27, 2026 (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
(Closed) 2026 Cuban crisis
[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.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by ArionStar (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Not daily in the news, article does not show a lot of new events happening. Its a story we should keep watching, but there's nothing really to justify ongoing for it yet. Masem (t) 04:04, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose This was proposed and declined just two weeks ago, and no major events have since occurred to change that conclusion. The Kip (contribs) 20:49, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Not enough for now for "ongoing" Tradediatalk 02:41, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Masem. SpencerT•C 04:13, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose not enough major events for ongoing Ion.want.uu (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
RD: Neil Sedaka
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by ElijahPepe (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.
elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:55, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Article currently in very bad shape; needs citations and whatnot. ―Howard • 🌽33 01:09, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose - Disgustingly undercited article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 05:24, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
RD: Dan Simmons
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Newsweek
Credits:
- Nominated by Trepang2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Andrew Davidson (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: A major figure in sci-fi, author of Hyperion Cantos, scores of top awards. Don't know if it's blurb-worthy, but certainly qualifies for RD. Died on Feb 21, but it was reported only today Trepang2
- Support Fine by me. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose fine for Andrew, too much CN tags for me (and ITN quality standards). _-_Alsor (talk) 22:35, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Besides the citation issues, the actual biographical portion of the article is just 8 sentences, with a lot more of the article about his works, bibliography, and awards. Natg 19 (talk) 22:56, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Natg19. More prose and info about bio. Also article has some referencing issues TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 00:00, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
RD: Colman McCarthy
[edit]Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (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.
Thriley (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose way too many CN tags La Ovo (talk) 02:23, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: 2026 Afghanistan–Pakistan war
[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.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): [18]
Credits:
- Nominated by DangoDino (talk · give credit)
- Wait – The war was just posted as a blurb. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 14:51, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support when the blurb rolls off the front page, if the target page meets the ongoing criteria at that time. GenevieveDEon (talk) 14:53, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support per nom. This is a continuing and escalating conflict. Guz13 (talk) 16:31, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support per nom. JaxsonR (talk) 16:51, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Wait can post when the blurb rolls off. Natg 19 (talk) 17:47, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Support Per above when the blurb rolls off. --SpectralIon 18:30, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- STRONG SUPPORT Per nom, this might just escalate further...
- ~2026-51002-1 (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Ineligible. This article has already been posted as a blurb - it can't be in ongoing as well. Nor can we predict whether the article will still be getting regular updates when it rolls off the template (could be a week from now). This nomination should be closed; a new nomination can be made once the blurb rolls off. Modest Genius talk 19:47, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose at this time as per Modest Genius. Feel free to renom when blurb rolls off ITN. --GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 20:31, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Oppose ongoing for about 200 years now. War seems to be a bit strong. Let's see if this escalates to a war, rather than just ambiguous claims. Nfitz (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
- Wait until the current blurb rolls off ITN. That will also give the conflict more time to "develop", and we'll see if the conflict blooms further. TwistedAxe [contact] 21:53, 27 February 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: