This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

Ural Airlines Airbus A321 in 2013
Ural Airlines Airbus A321 in 2013

How to nominate an item

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated) in UTC.
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process. Remember, we use UTC dates.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

Headers

  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as (Ready) when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked (Ready), you should remove the mark in the header.

Voicing an opinion on an item

  • 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.
  • Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • The blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...

  • ... add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  • ... 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.
  • ... accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  • ... comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  • ... oppose a WP:ITN/R item here because you disagree with current WP:ITN/R criteria (these can be discussed at the relevant Talk Page)

Suggestions

August 19


August 18

Armed conflicts and attacks

International relations

Politics and elections

RD: Kathleen Blanco

Article: Kathleen Blanco (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NYT, CBS News

Article needs updating

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American politician, former governor of Louisiana (2004–08) dies at age 76. Article needs lots of work. Davey2116 (talk) 00:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose Not in close shape for posting. --
    Armed conflicts and attacks

    Politics and elections

    Science and technology

    RD: Kip Addotta

    Article: Kip Addotta (talk, history)
    Recent deaths nomination
    News source(s): THR

    Article updated

    Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

    Nominator's comments: Comedina frequently on Carson, but probably his legacy is the pun-filled song "Wet Dream". Article is almost there, releases need sources. While died on 13th, family only just announced his death on 17th. Masem (t) 15:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

    • Support from this Dementoid. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:53, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Oppose article looks incomplete (mainly about personal life) and insufficiently sourced. -
      Article: 17 August 2019 Kabul bombing (talk, history)
      Blurb: 63 non-British/American people were killed in Kabul bombing.
      Alternative blurb: ​At least 63 people are killed in a bombing of a wedding in Kabul, Afghanistan.
      News source(s): Al Jazeera, AP, BBC, Guardian, AFP

       Abutalub (talk) 10:44, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

      • Support alt blurb. This news is the headline of every news site across the world. --DBigXray 11:22, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Support - headline news.BabbaQ (talk) 12:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Support – in principle due to high mortality. However, two-thirds of the current article consists of comments from assembled notables, while descriptive text is a spare 170 words. Further, the article's statement that "there were no immediate claims of responsibility" is misleading, as RS reports from AP, BBC, the Guardian and AFP say the local 'IS' affiliate claimed responsibility. – Sca (talk) 14:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Support - High casualty, hence notable as well - Sherenk1 (talk) 13:04, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Weak support - not the most comprehensive article imaginable but covers the bases satisfactorily. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 14:14, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Posted - Article may be short but that's about as much as major sources are reporting this morning, so should be fine. --Masem (t) 15:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
        Masem Don't link Afghanistan please. Common geographical location. Plus, consistency in the template too. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:24, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
        Fixed. --Masem (t) 15:27, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      • What a terrible blurb. Who proposed this first blurb? – Ammarpad (talk) 15:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      Snide. – Sca (talk) 20:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Post-posting comment – Still quite thin. – Sca (talk) 20:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
        • I spot checked the latest news on this and there's not much else to say, that doesn't get into politicizing the incident (which is mostly speculation on the current US-Afghanistan talks, which we shouldn't post.) --
          Article: Damodar Ganesh Bapat (talk, history)
          Recent deaths nomination
          News source(s): NDTV

          Article updated

          Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

          Nominator's comments: Start Class article with excellent sourcing. Indian social worker. DBigXray 08:33, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

          The Rambling Man thanks for the feedback, I have further expanded the article. --DBigXray 16:05, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
          • Support - looks fine. -Zanhe (talk) 01:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
          • Support
            International relations
            Law and crime

            RD: Richard Williams (animator)

            Article: Richard Williams (animator) (talk, history)
            Recent deaths nomination
            News source(s): BBC

            Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

            Nominator's comments: Multiple award-winning director. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:02, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

            • Oppose. Filmography needs more sourcing and there's no prose about his death, just a single reference in the lede.
              Article: José Nápoles (talk, history)
              Recent deaths nomination
              News source(s): ESPN

              Article updated

              Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

              Nominator's comments: Boxing legend. " one of the greatest fighters of all time". Start Class article, sourcing needs some volunteers. DBigXray 15:16, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

              • Comment Generally regarded as one of the great welterweight fighters. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:12, August 17, 2019 (UTC)
              • Oppose almost entirely unreferenced.
                Article: Peter Fonda (talk, history)
                Recent deaths nomination
                News source(s): NBC News

                Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

                 Masem (t) 23:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

                • Comment I can see someone arguing for a blurb here , but before we go that road, this is a poorly sourced article. And if someone tries to sweep the filmography (unsourced) to a separate article, that's not appropriate per recent discussion on the ITN talk page. Let's get this up to RD quality first before we talk a blurb. --Masem (t) 23:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                • Oppose far from ready, but never a blurb in any situation. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 06:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                WP:DENY.--WaltCip (talk) 16:13, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
                The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
                • Support RD, support blurb We've posted some black woman writer I've never heard of a few weeks ago simoply because she was a black person with a Nobel prize (in literature!). Fonda clearly deserves a blurb then. 5.44.170.9 (talk) 07:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                I don't see the criteria that says if 5.44.170.9 hasn't heard of someone, they can't be posted. I think it's also mildly offensive that you indicate Morrison was posted because she was "some black woman" who received a Nobel prize. 331dot (talk) 10:03, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                Find me another nobel prize in literature winner who's death was posted as a blurb on english wikipedia over the past 10-15 years. It's self evient she was only posted because she was 1) woman 2) black for anyone who isn't lying to themselves 5.44.170.9 (talk) 11:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                P.S. The fact that my comment is considered to be "offensive", and was even removed as such speaks volumes about the state of this website in 2019 as well as confirms what I said. No wonder the vote succeed, if all opposition is declared offensive and is immediately removed/banned from the website. 5.44.170.9 (talk) 11:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                We would have blurbed the first white man to win the Nobel Prize in Literature when he died too! Does knowing that make you feel better? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 11:55, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                If you don't like the state of Wikipedia, perhaps you should find somewhere else to spend your time and make your offensive statements. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                @331dot and Coffeeandcrumbs: The IP is trolling. I deleted their original comment for race baiting, but was reverted. -Zanhe (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                The IP seems to be making a WP:POINT. If someone who knows how comes along it would be worth collapsing this convo.--Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 22:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                • Oppose blurb This blurbed death thing is getting out of control. Not every really famous person gets a blurb just because you like them. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                To note, I would be against this as a blurb myself, but was only cautioning here because of how his death was being handled in newspapers as "oh gosh, a major loss!", and wanted to address the major block to that point first. --Masem (t) 19:47, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                Masem, I wanted to do the same thing. RD only. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:57, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                • Oppose both Unsourced early life chunks, disproportionate Twitter beef, just OK in his field. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:01, August 17, 2019 (UTC)
                • Oppose blurb As per Muboshgu--BoothSiftTalks 20:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                • Oppose blurb – In view of the subject's somewhat checkered film oeuvre. – Sca (talk) 20:47, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                • Oppose blurb I'm not seeing blurb-level fame here. Should be RD.--
                  Article: Felice Gimondi (talk, history)
                  Recent deaths nomination
                  News source(s): Sport Sky

                  Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

                  Nominator's comments: One of only seven cyclists to have won all three Grand Tours of road cycling (Tour de France, Giro d'Italia, and Vuelta a EspañaHolapaco77 (talk) 18:44, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

                  • Oppose about half the bio unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                  • Oppose Multiple entire paragraphs are unreferenced --
                    Article: Princess Christina of the Netherlands (talk, history)
                    Recent deaths nomination
                    News source(s): NL times

                    Article updated

                    Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

                    Nominator's comments: Start Class article. DBigXray 15:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

                    • Oppose Early life section looks to be entirely unreferenced, and other issues thereafter. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:13, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                    • Oppose for now. Article needs some spit polish in several areas. In the realm of referencing, there are many more inline cites needed. While some stuff is uncontroversial and easily verifiable (like the fact that she had three sisters, etc.) other stuff which is more open to interpretation or not readily available in the public record, like "Christina was a bright and happy child, with a considerable talent for music. She also had a capacity for languages and as a young girl delighted the visiting President of the French Republic, René Coty, by conversing fluently with him in French." and the information on the faith healer, and several other places, needs direct inline citations. Furthermore, the article is woefully incomplete, it looks like she did nothing of note between changing her name in 1963, getting married and having children in the 1970s, and dying in 2019. Surely in four decades there's something worth reporting that happened in there? It does need some work. --Jayron32 15:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                    • Support Lets get people looking this article and fixing it! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC).
                    • Weak Oppose A few missing citations left in a couple of sections, as editors above have pointed out. If this is resolved, please ignore this !vote or consider it a support !vote.
                      Disasters and accidents

                      International relations

                      Law and crime

                      Politics and elections

                      (Posted) RD: V. B. Chandrasekhar

                      Article: V. B. Chandrasekhar (talk, history)
                      Recent deaths nomination
                      News source(s): The Times of India

                      Article updated

                      Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

                      Nominator's comments: Former India Cricketer dies Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

                      • Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 06:12, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                      • Support start class with good sourcing.--DBigXray 08:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                      • Comment still ready to post 10 hours later. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                      • Support The article looks to be in reasonable shape. Nsk92 (talk) 23:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                      • Comment still ready to post 22 hours later... The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 06:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                      • Support enough delay already! -Zanhe (talk) 07:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
                      • Posting. --
                        Proposed image
                        Article: Ural Airlines Flight 178 (talk, history)
                        Blurb: ​All 233 people on board Ural Airlines Flight 178 survive as the aircraft crashlands in a cornfield following a bird strike in both engines of the Airbus A321 (aircraft pictured) operating the flight.
                        News source(s): BBC, AP

                        Nominator's comments: Not quite the Miracle on the Hudson, but close. Mjroots (talk) 15:40, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

                        • Oppose - I know it's refreshing to see an airline story that isn't a catastrophe for once, but "plane lands safely" is not really newsworthy.--WaltCip (talk) 16:00, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Oppose. A successful emergency landing with no casualties isn't a significant story. Modest Genius talk 16:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                          • Comment - The Miracle on the Hudson was a "plane lands safely" "with no casualties" story and it was posted. Mjroots (talk) 16:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                            • Over a decade ago. I'm not convinced it would meet today's ITN criteria for that exact reason. Modest Genius talk 17:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support. When was the last time pilots made an emergency landing of a large wide-body jet on rough terrain with full fuel tanks after both its engines failed and managed to avoid any deaths or serious injuries? This is a miracle on Hudson-tier event, IMO 5.44.170.9 (talk) 16:11, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Given the distance and angle from the runway, it seems that the plane did not climb to any significant height or yaw/turn from the "liftoff vector" (pardon my terminology). As such, a successful ditch is not nearly as remarkable as that if 1549. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:31, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Weak oppose. It is good that there were no fatalities, but a successful emergency landing does not quite make it to the INT level. There are several other Russia stories, such as the 9M730 Burevestnik situation and the current mass protests in Moscow, that are a lot more significant. Nsk92 (talk) 17:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support I think the idea that "if they'd only all just died, this would be postable!" is pretty nonsensical. Banedon (talk) 19:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                          "Nonsensical" is quite a strong word here. You can simply disagree with the opposers without it. Our opposes are based on the fact on the ground not because we relish death. If they indeed all died, the story would have been completely different. The Russian government, Aviation stakeholders, US and Airbus would have issued series of statements. Media would have gone agog with scoop and images, flights would be delayed/canceled. A high-level investigation panel would have been established, technical investigators would have been imported from US/France to start studying the remnants of the plane. That's a STORY and what differentiate the others with this. There are almost 10 air crashes that happened after the last one we posted here. This one is not different from them. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Oppose per WaltCip. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Oppose – A nice "brite" (as they used to say in the noozbiz), but not really significant. – Sca (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support per Banedon. I believe this is notable enough for ITN and the article is good. Davey2116 (talk) 22:44, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Oppose per above. The article is good, but I believe this is not notable enough for ITN. MSN12102001 (talk) 23:24, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Weak oppose it's a good news story but is already getting stale. Not much of encyclopdic long-term value, aircraft routinely suffer bird strikes, we won't be learning an awful amount from this incident other than a tick in the box for the pilot and for Airbus. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 06:15, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Oppose per others above--BoothSiftTalks 06:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support. This would be like not posting Apollo 13 because the astronauts lived. Sometimes a "successful failure" is still notable. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        I would further add the points that there were more injuries here than with the Hudson River event, and we don't often post things related to Russia. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        I think comparing a bird strike (daily occurrence) and successful controlled descent into terrain (from a few hundred metres) with Apollo 13 (the third ever attempt at a moon landing, tens of thousands of miles in space, 50-odd years ago, employing the scientific minds of NASA to find a solution....) is the biggest stretch of imagination I've seen today. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:30, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        I was not making a direct comparison other than the fact that people do not have to die for something to be notable. Please link to stories on double bird strikes that brought down commercial aircraft from each day of the last week(since these occur daily). 331dot (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        Apollo 13 was not heavily followed by the public until the astronauts were in danger. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        Then why bring up Apollo 13? There are dozens of aircraft crashes in the past few years where nobody died. We haven't posted any of them. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:05, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        And if you read my comment correctly, you'll see I said that bird strikes are a daily occurrence. This was a bird strike. It has no long-term encyclopedic value, will have no impact on flying and hence my weak oppose. It's great that everyone survived but it's happened plenty of times. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        Bird strikes do happen daily. Bird strikes that take out all engines of an airliner and result in a crash landing in which everyone survives is pretty much a "less than once in a decade" event. Mjroots (talk) 11:31, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        Sure, but ultimately it was a controlled descent into terrain in which everyone survived. That has happened more than one a decade. You can intersect as many different aspects as you like to make it unique, but ultimately it's just crash from which everyone escaped but nothing will change, the EV is very low. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:36, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        What definition of EV are you using? 331dot (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        Clearly one that's wildly different from you as this is in no way comparable to Apollo 13. This is a minor story with no long-lasting impact, it's borderline trivia. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:40, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        And FYI, some light reading which demonstrates that on any given day in the US alone, seven years ago there was an average of 28 bird strikes per day. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:05, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        But that does not mean that 28 commercial airliners are brought down in cornfields with injuries every day. So, since this isn't notable, I guess the Hudson River incident article should be deleted. Maybe they should take the plane out of the museum, too. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        Sure, other stuff definitely exists. I guess after a point we stop making a fuss over things that are relatively routine. Or we don't make a fuss about it at all because it happens in other countries. Who knows? As you know, they even made a movie about Sully, so it's unlikely that the Hudson page will be deleted. And also unlikely that this will be deleted either, but as for EV and newsworthiness, it's down at the bottom end of the scale. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:21, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        I have not kept track about how often things related to Russia are posted in INT. But this story is really small potatoes compared with several other Russia related stories that are happening now. The 9M730 Burevestnik story, nominated below, is a much more significant event, both nationally and internationally. But by far the biggest story in Russia now is the ongoing protests related to the 2019 Moscow City Duma election. Thousands of people have been arrested, and the protests have spread significantly beyond Moscow. These are the largest protests in Russia since 2011-2013[1]. If any current Russia story deserves ITN posting, it is that one, rather than a story about an aircraft birds strike. Nsk92 (talk) 08:51, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support per 331dot. Also, there is precedent as 5.44.170.9 points out above, with US Airways Flight 1549 which was posted to ITN when it happened. Regards SoWhy 08:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support per 331dot and SoWhy. ——SerialNumber54129 08:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Weak Oppose A passenger plane crash in which everyone survives is quite common. For example: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] and this only includes large passenger aircraft since 2018. At least one of those stories involved a plane landing in the water similar to the Miracle on the Hudson. I will grant that of these six crashes, this story is the most notable because it involved the largest aircraft. However, while it is a heartwarming story, I don't believe it is notable within an international context. NorthernFalcon (talk) 08:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Oppose Opposing this is not easy because it may sound like expressing some pessimistic thought because no one died. But a plane crash in which everyone survives is really not news and would be forgotten soon, in a matter of weeks at most. Whereas those with heavy fatality tend to make lasting impression to the families of victims, affect government procedures and aviation industry in general. That's why we post them, not because we relish fatality. It's just how human mind perceive events since time immemorial, we cannot change this here on Wikipedia. I've to add that, the analogy to old posting (10 years ago) is not relevant here. The same thing would not be posted if it were to be judged with today's criteria. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Comment An American plane, with American passengers, landing on an American river would not be reported these days? Don't make me laugh. Complete fiction. Leaky caldron (talk) 09:53, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Oppose Mostly per Ammarpad, though I disagree on 1549. There's a big difference between a control descent 60 seconds after liftoff on your original trajectory and maneuvering an engine-less A320 to avoid crashing into a dense urban area. I would agree it was much fluffed up by having occurred in the "capital of the world." GreatCaesarsGhost 13:20, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support on the principle that we have posted near-disasters in aviation before, and otherwise meets quality and newsworthiness, and that its clear if we didn't at this point, we are showing bias. It's still being considered a major accident in terms of aviation - it is being given the same thorough investigation that a crash would have had (for those asking about lasting impact). Even if the "difficulty" of the safe landing between this crash and the 1549 flight is far different, it still was fast action to save a large number of lives. --Masem (t) 14:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support Per 331dot, basically, but I'd more like to point out that this is definitely on the news from what I've searched, so there is at least a notability aspect to it. Plus, it was still an accident, so it's not like nothing happened, though I wouldn't call it an Apollo 13. Pie3141527182 (talk) 18:32, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        • Support A large commercial airliner landing in a cornfield is not a routine occurrence. That there were no fatalities should not be a bar to it being significant or newsworthy. -- KTC (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
                        Bandera Federación Rusia, 2016.gif