Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/February 2022

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:In the news | Candidates

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnomieBOT (talk | contribs) at 00:00, 9 February 2022 (Archiving February 1. Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/ITNCArchiver). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

February 1

February 1, 2022 (2022-02-01) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Sports

(Posted) RD: Remi De Roo

Article: Remi De Roo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times Colonist (Victoria); The B.C. Catholic; Vancouver Island Free Daily
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 10:12, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Robin Herman

Article: Robin Herman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN, New York Times, Washington Post
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: First female sports journalist in the NYT's history, first female journalist to gain access to an NHL locker room. Article seems well-cited. The Kip (talk) 02:44, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2022 Guinea-Bissau coup d'état attempt

No consensus to post a failed coup. Stephen 01:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Article: 2022 Guinea-Bissau coup d'état attempt (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: An unsuccessful coup attempt. The article needs more content as things are not very clear at the moment but I am putting it here to keep an eye on it. --Tone 08:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC) Tone 08:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the coup seems to have failed, so no long lasting effects of it. Thus, not ITN-worthy in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, leaning oppose. At present this seems like a potentially significant event that didn't happen. If it snowballs into something more significant, or details emerge of a major loss of life, I'll be willing to consider. But the facts available now do not indicate an ITN-level event. Modest Genius talk 12:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, I created the article and have written everything the article currently holds, I could have nominated it too but just like Joseph says the coup failed and it has no significant long lasting effects. We don’t even know who did it, ”armed men” that the president suggested has no connection with military but gangs, it is currently not ITN worthy unless something more significant comes out of this story. But in terms of geopolitical analysis, it is worrying with all these coups in West Africa. BastianMAT (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Beneath the impactfulness radar. [1] [2] [3] – Sca (talk) 13:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Bud Clark

Article: Bud Clark (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Oregonian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Freedom Convoy 2022

WP:SNOW. No chance. Unanimous opposition.
– Sca (talk) 20:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(non-admin closure)

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.

It's the sort of wide-scale unrest event that I would expect to at least be debated at ITN. 188.27.42.181 (talk) 16:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the appropriate formatting for an ITN blurb nomination(under the "show" tab when you open the edit window); and propose an appropriate blurb, along with news sources to demonstrate it is in the news. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note that we already have COVID in ongoing. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was planning to add the ITN template, but not sure whether the request is for a blurb or ongoing. It looks to be an ongoing event (since 10 days ago), so think ongoing would be okay for it. But someone feel free to suggest a blurb. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Tom Brady tweets his retirement

No means no. --Jayron32 12:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

This can go on and on but a consensus will not form. This time I am not waiting for the discussion to get longer than Brady+s article, though. --Tone 08:05, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: Tom Brady (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ National Football League quarterback Tom Brady announces his retirement after 22 seasons. (Post)
News source(s): Sports Illustrated ESPN BBC Le Monde South China Morning Post
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: This is official now, Brady has tweeted that he is retiring. 331dot (talk) 15:00, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sandstein "Please do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." There is no global relevance requirement. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per the ITN instructions above: "Please do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." WaltCip-(talk) 15:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the reason. The topic relates to a niche interest (a particular sport) within a particular country. When we post about individual people, it's people who are important to all of society in their country, such as very prominent political leaders. A Mandela or Thatcher this person is not. Sandstein 15:31, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is patently untrue in every sense. The NFL might be a niche interest to the world but it is not a niche interest to the USA in terms of popularity, and certainly is not a niche sport. Moreover, you need only look through ITN's dense archives to note that we do not limit ourselves only to political leaders with outsized societal impacts. WaltCip-(talk) 15:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a death blurb. Mandela and Thatcher do not apply here. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your opinion and am not trying to talk you out of it, but we only don't do things here until we do. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think that we've ever considered sporting retirements worthy of ITN (after all, we haven't blurbed the deaths of some very significant sportspeople, let alone their retirements), and whilst I'm aware this is quite important locally (Brady is probably the only current AmFoot player I could name) I'm somewhat unconvinced that it rises to the level of ITN. Black Kite (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There's precedence from Ferguson and Tendulkar. Say what you want about "lack of international competition/notability," but for what that's worth, Ferguson only managed a national team for two years and cricket is fairly unknown outside a handful of Commonwealth states. This is on their level, or that of a Gretzky or Jordan retiring. The Kip (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very much understand that; however, one of the prior arguments against Brady was that he's "irrelevant" outside the US because NFL-only. Going by similar logic, Ferguson's "irrelevant" because he spent the vast majority of his career with a single English team. Now, that logic is awful, but others were using it, somehow. The Kip (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What should he do to announce his retirement? Take out a full page ad in newspapers? How he announces it is immaterial. Retiring from singing is a very different thing than retiring from a sport, which requires certain physical abilities. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
People in sport often go on to work in the same sport as administrators, coaches, commentators, managers, etc. See Ray Illingworth for a recent example. Andrew🐉(talk) 15:49, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Managing/coaching/broadcasting are not participation in the physical action on the field, which is difficult to return to especially at an advanced age. 331dot (talk) 15:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retirement means no longer working rather than changing position. In any case, see Brett Favre – a similar long-service quarterback who "retired" and then played again. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then you should communicate that to the English speaking media of the world, who use the word to refer to stopping the professional playing of a sport. Michael Jordan also famously retired (much earlier in his career), played another sport, and then returned. If Brady comes back(doubtful given everything else he does and his retirement statement) that would likely be newsworthy as well. Favre was younger than Brady is now at the time. 331dot (talk) 17:06, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Curious that you want more postings but are opposing this one. 331dot (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Preceding "huge" post made by a user whose contributions to Wiki total four – all in the last two days. – Sca (talk) 20:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Now that it's official, I can say that this has been newsworthy enough to post, especially with the cricketer and the footy guy having set our precedent on posting noteworthy retirements. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Nothing specific about this really, but in general we shouldnt post retirements because it really is a sport-centric 'thing' that is made a big deal of. We wouldnt post the retirement (or even consider nominating it) for biographies in other areas. People do their jobs, then they die or retire. The reason its a 'thing' in sports is because its a money-making exercise. "So and so comes out of retirement for huge payday" not being an unfamiliar sight in many sports. (leaving aside singers/bands who announce retirement at the drop of a hat for a similar reason). All that said, I wont have any real feeling if it is posted. Brady is certainly in the news, at the top of his game, possibly (certainly acclaimed as such within his lifetime) the greatest in his field. Its big sports news regardless on the same lines as Tendulkar and Ferguson - the only real difference being the wide-spread coverage of the sport in question - but thats not a criteria for opposition. For the future any similar sports-people would have to reach a standard that is rare in any sport. (I know I am arguing into a support, but I will stick with an oppose.) Only in death does duty end (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The existence of a salary cap in the NFL, the fact that Brady is still under contract with Tampa Bay for another year, the fact that Brady's not even the primary breadwinner in his family, and the fact that Tampa will have to pay not only him but several other prominent players on the team to keep the core together at a championship-level..to me, this all makes it extremely, extremely unlikely that Brady will be coming back. 65.24.244.191 (talk) 17:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That we didn't do X thing so we shouldn't do Y thing is a poor argument, that leaves no opportunity for change in the future. 331dot (talk) 16:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above and because of what I said days ago. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:21, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as this time it seems actually official he's retired. He's the GOAT by a long way, and the coverage of his retirement is not just in the US: [4] (that article also just shows how many records he annihilated in his career). The fact that the NFL is a US-focused sport doesn't deter from the fact that this is a significant moment. And ITN should really do more than just post elections and disasters. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Somewhat hesitant oppose. This is borderline, for me, but I believe we ought to have a very high bar for sporting retirements, and like it or not the reach of American football isn't comparable to that of association football, or even cricket. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:50, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Joseph2302. -- Tavix (talk) 16:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, and I say this as a HUGE American Football fan; this is really not the sort of thing we post. Individual retirements shouldn't merit an ITN posting like this; I know I am usually very liberal about what gets posted, but even for me this is a bridge too far. --Jayron32 16:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on principle I think if the arguable greatest of all time in a reasonably noteworthy sport retires, that would merit a post. I'd be happy posting the retirements of Jordan, Gretzky, and Messi. Regarding quality, the article is in reasonable condition but there's a couple of paragraphs that could use a quick pass. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - If this guy's blurb is formally uploaded (which I can't assert my opinions or else I'll get mobbed), this sets a standard where other notable sportsmen in their fields, like Federer, Nadal, Messi, Ronaldo, Axelsen, and many, many other notable athletes of their field has the qualifications and requirements to be listed in a blurb. Notably, Federer, this guy is giving hints on retirement soon, and this guy is far more famous than Tom Brady, while being one of the greatest players in tennis. (PenangLion (talk) 17:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC))[reply]
PenangLion We have posted sports retirements before, we posted Sachin Tendulkar and Alex Ferguson. 331dot (talk) 17:29, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Precedent is just a synonym for "times we did the wrong thing in the past". There is no standard, no precedent, that we should ever hold ourselves to. We should adjudge every potential posting on it's own merits, without reference for what may or may not have ever happened before. If we do the wrong thing one time, it should not bound us to doing the wrong thing forever. --Jayron32 17:56, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is a standard and a precedent. You may not like it or wok to change it, but it's still a precedent. And there very much ARE standards for ITN. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you simply stop taking as a precedent what was published in 2013? The standards have changed so much in nine years. It's simply ridiculous. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - There are very few individuals whose retirement is as big of a story as Brady’s, and who have had as big of a career as his, so I think based on that and past precedence of posting two athletes retiring this should be posted. The only other athletes currently I can foresee being posted upon retirement are LeBron James, Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Williams, Messi/Ronaldo, and potentially Sidney Crosby/Alexander Ovechkin, so it’s not like there would be a ton of these posted often if we posted this one. Especially since they will all retire at different time periods so there will not be an influx of retirement blurbs at once. Andise1 (talk) 17:31, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support NFL GOAT, on par with other sporting retirements that have been posted. Career section is thoroughly fleshed out. SpencerT•C 17:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support To heck if American football isn't as possible as soccer of something. Football isn't just some niche sport and Brady isn't just a "very good" player. Easily the top of his field in a sport that is the biggest in one of the most populous countries in the world. Clearly reported in other countries as already indicated. To me, the sport being more popular shouldn't be the benchmark that most make it out to be - Brady's clearly known outside of the realm of American sports and football fandom. I acknowledge that some people don't like sports stories in general, but it's worth noting we have plenty in ITN/R, and I daresay this is bigger news in the sports world than most championships. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • LOL you guys must be ashamed of yourselves. The German ITN beat you to the punch. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, there already is a predecent from before, very famous guy with RS posting it too, and overall a nomination that is relevant. BastianMAT (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support now that it's official. GOAT.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 18:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per DarkSide830. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would be supporting in principle but the update to the article appears to be one line and we normally expect more than that.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose from before. In a sport that does not have international competition, the retirement of a player is a non-event in contrast to the retirement of cricket or assc. football players that have played at international events. And even at the international level there are only exceptional people we would consider. --Masem (t) 18:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "international competition" or international relevance requirement. We don't only post sporting events between nations. We get so much criticism for not posting enough, why turn this away? 331dot (talk) 19:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Super-Duper Strong Mega Support - This is one of the few sports retirements we should post. "International competition" is a red herring. He is the best of all time by a wide margin in a major sport. If your best argument is "but it's not cricket or soccer", well, there you go. --Bongwarrior (talk) 19:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. First, the article does not meet the updated content criteria. It has exactly one sentence about this, and I believe the criteria requires more coverage than that. And, even if that is addressed, I share Masem's and Vanamonde's concerns here. I also philosophically echo Jayron32's bridge too far sentiment. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 19:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – even as a huge American football fan, this does not rise to the level of notability required for ITN. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PCN02WPS What is the "level of notability required for ITN"? This is being reported on around the world, including in France and China where American football is little played. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please fix sources / citations: While this conversation is going on -- please can folks knowledgeable of this topic, fix the citations in the article. A few paragraphs require citations. The sections NFL career records, NFL career statistics, awards and honors require sources / citations. That way, the article will be ready for posting if this discussion results in a post. Good luck. Ktin (talk) 19:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not to diminish Brady's argument, but for what it's worth, hockey's pretty big in Europe (Russia, Sweden, Germany, and Finland especially). The Kip (talk)
  • Neither our article nor most of the references I've checked claimed that Brady is the greatest American football player of all time, as claimed again and again and again above - the greatest quarterback, yes, but that's a narrower field.
    More to the point, I'm only seeing - generously - a one-and-a-half sentences of relevant update to our article, which is far short of Wikipedia:In the news#Updated content. —Cryptic 22:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not fair to compare quarterback to other positions because of how the game works. Almost every play starts with 1 to many seconds of everyone being still on opposite sides of a ball they cannot cross (except one dude on each side is allowed to move without crossing, and one dude of one side is allowed to cross without moving (but only enough to grasp the ball)) This dude then jerks the ball to the quarterback who then HAS to make the identity of the dude who tries to advance the ball unpredictable or the defense would have a huge advantage. Some high school teams discovered a rule loophole where the number of guys the quarterback was allowed to give the ball to approximately doubled to the whole team and just that worked so well that it was quickly made illegal. So no matter how good the guy he gives the ball to is the quarterback is responsible for more yards (of ball advancement towards the goal). As for the ones the quarterback can't give the ball to, the fatties usually stalemate long enough that they don't have much effect, the central fatty doesn't have to be that skilled at ball jerking (if he isn't good at aiming the ball far well he could just have his quarterback hover his hands so close to his privates that he almost touches them (quarterback's allowed to hover his hands between the ball jerker's legs as far forward as he can without touching the jerker or ball before the jerk)). The other defenders only cover part of the field, unlike the quarterback who is involved in two ball givings in every offensive play, or one ball giving then trying to advance the ball himself, he is the most important and popular guy on the team. Punting and field goal kicking only happen because the offense has failed, and a kicking off guy or kickoff return guy rarely helps the team as much as the quarterback. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's also worth noting, more importantly than his stats; he has seven Super Bowl victories as a player. That's more than every franchise in the league, and two more than the next-most-decorated player (Charles Haley). The Kip (talk) 02:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Banedon Le Monde and the South China Morning Post would disagree with you. There is no international relevance/knowledge requirement for any posting. If there were, very little would be posted. 331dot (talk) 01:29, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but have you looked at their main pages? You can find this piece of news alright - buried deep in their sports pages. E.g. right now the top news on SCMP is Winter Olympics: what is curling? How ‘chess on ice’ works, where it came from, and why there’s so much sweeping. See also, e.g., [5]. Banedon (talk) 03:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
#Please do not... oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do everyone a favor next time and directly quote that on myself the next time I oppose such a nomination. Banedon (talk) 03:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose One of the fundemental reasons for why we shouldn't post sports retirements is because they are frequently reversed. Rob Gronkowski announced his retirement in March of 2019. He currently plays for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, coincidentally the same team that Tom Brady plays for. The only way to know whether a retirement will stick is to wait, and by that point it's hardly "In the news". —Alpaca the Wizard (talk) (contribs) 01:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • An entirely fair point. However, wouldn't this would just bog us down into the weeds of determining which retirements are likely or unlikely to be reversed? I don't think anyone can make that determination without clear-cut guidelines. Therefore: where do we draw the line? —Alpaca the Wizard (talk) (contribs) 02:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I apologize for not making myself clear. I am not saying that Tom Brady will reverse his retirement. On the contrary, I believe his career is likely over. The point I am trying to make is this: Tom Brady can reverse his retirement, if he so chooses to do so. Unlike some other fields, sports retirements can be reversed. The Gronk comparison was not a direct 1:1 comparison, but simply an example (from American gridiron football) of a prominent player who reversed their retirement. Sportspeople coming out of retirement is so common, in fact, that we have a entire list of people who have. —Alpaca the Wizard (talk) (contribs) 04:05, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (This is long but I tried to explain fully.) There are some sports retirements I would consider posting, but those would have to be the top of their game worldwide. For that, a sport needs to be worldwide - tennis, golf, football, various rugbies, chess... This oppose does not preclude my support of posting a new GOAT achievement in a less-than-global sport, e.g. the sumo grandmasters, but those feel more like winning the Super Bowl than really a person blurb. I will also make a possibly controversial point: this is American news. And no, I am not saying it happened in America, no "do not oppose because it relates to one country" needed; things can relate to one country but still be cared about in the rest of the world. There will be non-American gridiron fans who care, yes, but (for an anecdotal example) there has been no news about Brady on the BBC, which devoted entire segments to Wordle being purchased. It is not news, it is American news. And this is where we try to counter some bias: I hope I will not be challenged by saying that British and American news often impacts other countries, whether it is really that interesting to the other countries or not, while rather important news from 'lesser' countries does not get reported globally. So when an American news item does not travel, it really isn't important. Get back to me when a multi-World-Cup-winning captain, Nadal, or similar, retires. A retirement so significant it will disrupt a global sport is the time for a person blurb in these conditions - we are careful with person blurbs for many reasons, including not over-exaggerating the value of one person. Most of the world would not care if you explained the achievements of Tom Brady to them, while they might about Nadal (here assuming the person has not already heard of either) - "has been mostly the MVP among a couple dozen teams in one country" does not swoon one. Kingsif (talk) 06:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Probably perhaps the only NFL player retirement that would be posted in this decade. Meets precedent set by Sachin Tendulkar. International competition is not a requirement for posting sportspeople blurbs, especially when the sport in question is highly popular in major English speaking countries (i.e. USA, Canada). Even if Brady were to unretire, which is unlikely given his age, it shouldn't be an argument against posting because it is speculative and in the future, and doesn't take away from the present story. Furthermore, given contract timelines, any hypothetical second retirement would not be up for discussion for posting over a year from now. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:37, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  • Post-closing comment -- I'm not sure I agree with the closer that consensus is unlikely to form here. By all indications, consensus is (lightly) in favor. But alas; I'll let someone with more experience than me reopen this if they would like. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 08:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) I was writing this in response to the last !vote before/while the discussion was being closed, so figured to add it here. Comment Can I question Brady being equivalent to Tendulkar? I do not think Tendulkar would have been posted if he was only the greatest batsman in Indian cricket history, even with cricket as a national sport - instead, he was posted because he is to many considered the greatest in the world. Every country has someone who is the best in the country at their national sport, which is what you could say Brady's career comes down to (no pro leagues in other countries). So there will currently be around 200 Bradys out there, all considered less important than one of the others depending on which country you are in. And then someone else becomes the best in the country - will we post when Aaron Rogers retires based on a precedent of Brady if this goes through? Will we push through Harry Kane because football is English? As a different line of thought, would we be suggesting posting Brady if Dan Marino had retired during the Wikipedia era - either leaving a precedent to not post or having been posted as the GOAT so we couldn't claim the same of Brady without effectively advocating for retirements to be ITNR? Kingsif (talk) 08:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tone Could you explain the basis of your decision, please? 331dot (talk) 08:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-closing comment, Just wondering, how were the consesus threads on the other two retirement articles? Was there a big difference in those two compared to this one? BastianMAT (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Wordle

X/6 (i.e. no consensus for posting).--WaltCip-(talk) 14:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: Wordle (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The viral word game, Wordle, is so popular that it is bought by the New York Times. (Post)
News source(s): BBC; Guardian; FT
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: I noticed my friends playing this and then wide coverage of the NYT purchase. The clincher was a report on The World at One just now – an interview with Jimmy Wales explaining that he plays it and comparing its success with Wikipedia. "...people are fed up with the viciousness of social media ... there's always a yearning for something simple and good..." Andrew🐉(talk) 14:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I dare say most of our readers have never heard of most of the people who appear at RD, or indeed many of the articles that appear at DYK, so this isn't a valid argument. Having said that, I'm unconvinced that it rises to the level of an ITN nomination. Black Kite (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Great article. Glad you Reddit. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm over the hurdle
And into Wordle
Though my progress there mimics
That of a turtle.
– Sca (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/February_2022&oldid=1070729317"