Talk:2023

message: I'm curious why the recent events in the US house haven't been mentioned on this page. I feel like it's important to include given its rarity and impact on US politics.
I'm not a frequent Wikipedia editor, but I feel like American politics is rarely mentioned in these disambiguation pages? I understand not wanting Western politics to overrun the wiki, especially given the makeup of its editor base, but I think there's been a small over-correction. Or maybe I'm just biased myself lol :p Beccabecco (talk) 00:44, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Kevin McCarthy's removal was purely domestic politics and belongs in 2023 in the United States. Wjfox2005 (talk) 13:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

text: This is the article about 2023 for the whole world, not the United States or any other individual country. Only national events that have enough due weight internationally are featured on this page. General elections for individual countries are regularly featured on this page, but not domestic political events unless they are important enough to have a direct international impact. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 21:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

text: I second the comments made by Wjfox2005 and JohnAdams1800 - to include this event on the main 2023 page would be Americentrism, particularly as if this exact event happened in any other country, nobody would raise a peep/bring this up for debate at all. We have 2023 in the United States for this. TheScrubby (talk) 05:28, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

text: I would strongly disagree with the above comments and say VERY strong include the ouster of Kevin McCarthy. Just because 2023 in the United States exists doesn't mean that international notability should be reigned in yet again, see User:InvadingInvader/Against international notability. The exclusion of Kevin McCarthy's removal represents a failure to follow the Due Weight policies. Considering that this was the vote heard around the world, and reported by numerous sources including but not limited to NHK in Japan, DW in Germany, Al Jazeera and ArabNews from the Arab World, ABC in Australia, and The Wire in India, and further considering that all of these sources list the ouster as unprecedented, this domestic event has high importance in world history. To respond particularly to @TheScrubby in saying that the removal of Kevin McCarthy is Americentrism, what about Liz Truss in 2022? She was not too much more notable than McCarthy. One could say that her 45 days being included but not McCarthy's 270 days in the following year could actually be British-centrism. Moreover, if we include her but not McCarthy, that's not preventing Americentrism. It's fostering Anti-Americanism. May I remind you that Wikipedia articles are written from a neutral point of view, not biasing in favor of, or against, any country. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:45, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I unequivocally reject any notion of “anti-Americanism” when I stand against Americentrism (and will continue to call out and stand against with such blatant examples, such as this). Kevin McCarthy was not a head of government or state, and his international equivalents would never be seriously considered for this page. This does not include Liz Truss; there is absolutely zero equivalence with Truss, who was Prime Minister and head of government of one of the world’s most powerful and influential countries. I’ve given my two cents, as has Wjfox2005 and JohnAdams1800, and I’m not about to get into any habit of WP:BLUDGEONING, so I’m not going to comment further on this thread. TheScrubby (talk) 23:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: VERY strong include. Hello, as someone we in living in Denmark, Europe, I can testify that McCarthy's removal was breaking news and I know – as @InvadingInvader has pointed out – that the same was the case in many other countries. Both Danish analysts (for instance here  use Google Translate) as well as CNN here has pointed out that I might greatly impact U.S. aid to Ukraine. Here is also a mention in the mainstream Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun. I believe it should absolutely be reinserted into the article. Marginataen (talk) 19:45, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Include, per the reasons given by those supporting inclusion above. Carter00000 (talk) 09:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now put an updated version back in Marginataen (talk) 18:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Also see the recent RFC on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years which actually ruled that we should be basing inclusion off of due weight. Another discussion on that page presently is actually discussing whether or not we are firmly deprecating international notability, and as Carter suggested below, whether it already was deprecated. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:28, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

text: Exclude. McCarthy's removal is not 'important in world history' and I have to agree with above that any comparison with Truss, the leader of a country, is ridiculous. Agree that this is a perfect entry on the 2023 in the United States for being a purely domestic political event. Yeoutie (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

text: I feel compelled to again remind participants that inclusion is not based on any arbitrary criteria but on the Due Weight policies, per WP:DUE. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 15:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

text: *Exclude because he hasn't been a head of state/gov & there's no chance that we'd include such an event in any other country. It's not even on 2023 in politics, so why should it be on here? X2023X (talk) 19:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

text: *Exclude on balance. Deb (talk) 15:52, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kevin McCarthy removal? 

message: This process will be a 3-step process:
#Candidates by everyone
#An RfC to discuss and “ratify” the candidates <—— Current Step in Process
#An RfC to vote for the collage images and events
The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Where was the decision that we needed a collage for 2023, and where is the discussion on how the process should be carried out? Deb (talk) 08:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with @Deb on this matter. I'm of the belief we should wait until 2025 to make decisions on what images to add for 2023. It gives more time for users to reflect on what events are most important for 2023 and we can get more objective consensus. PaulRKil (talk) 18:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The process I proposed & started is over two-months long (with two separate RfCs). Waiting until 2025 doesn't really do much since there would be over 2 months of community discussion and reflection (At least 2 RfCs). By the end of it (in March 2024), we should easily know what was the biggest events of 2023. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. MJGTMKME123 (talk) 15:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

text: bro no, that's boring, that's more like the opposite, and so in my opinion I don't think that waiting until 2025 would be a good idea MJGTMKME123 (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Strongly suggest swapping coronation for a tighter photo, eg the one at Coronation of Charles III and Camilla. Bear in mind that photos are viewed small in a collage, so large, distinct features are strongly preferred. — HTGS (talk) 22:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added the closer-zoomed image as a second option. In the discussion above this one, another user added the larger-zoom image, so I am not going to directly remove it. But you are absolutely right! A smaller image was needed. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:37, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

text: To solve your issue, the proposal is 100% spelled out here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Proposal for a standardized process for yearly collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Is there a better image of the effect Storm Daniel had on the places it impacted? I think it would be more appropriate to showcase that instead of a meteorological image. PaulRKil (talk) 18:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  One could be added as a candidate, but a quick glance at 2005 shows a satellite view of Hurricane Katrina rather than a damage image. Also, the Storm Daniel article doesn’t really have a “damage” style picture on it. The Commons may have one though that could be thrown into the mix. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: , just a head's up, the vote for the collage images isn't yet. This is just a week period for people to submit what images they think should or could be in the collage. Then, we will vote to ensure there is a consensus for a college vote (basically a vote to see if consensus allows us to move forward for a collage). Then we actually vote for the 8 collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thanks. My bad. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment--I support inclusion of a photo for the Flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians, as it relates to the conclusion of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict which was a 35-year old post-Soviet conflict that ended on 1 January 2024 with the dissolution of the Republic of Artsakh. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Good plan. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 01:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: . We aren't voting for the candidates yet. This is just a period of time for everyone to add candidates in without a vote yet. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry about this, I read it wrong before adding a reply.😵 Nagae Iku (talk) 04:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I've explained to you how a meaningful process that complies with NPOV could be introduced. Is there any reason for you to oppose that? Deb (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The process your proposed, if I understand correctly was: RfC on which events are most important. Then using that list, you find the images. That doesn’t work since an important event may not have a good image or even a visually appealing image. Here is a good example. Imagine if the 2024 missile strikes in Yemen was voted to be one of the 6 event candidates. The two actual “images” (excluding the map) for it are very dark due to it being night time. That said, another image from a slightly lesser-known or lesser-important event (random example: Attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria (2023–present)) would be a heck of a lot more ascetically appealing for readers. Decided what is the most important events doesn’t really work well since collages (i.e. images) aren’t events. That is the issue. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: @Deb That approach sounds like a good way to waste time. The current process is already more drawn out than it needs to be IMO, but it does inherently include user selection of important events. If you have important events you think should be included here, suggest them and others can find images for them if you are having a hard time. — HTGS (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The most significant events of 2023 are the events mentioned in the lead of the article. If that's not the case, then the lead needs fixing, separate from any image selection. But it shouldn't be difficult to identify the most significant events of the year, as they'd be the ones in the lead, and ergo the images for the collage should be images of what's mentioned in the lead. However, the collage is going to depict a subset of the events in the lead (because there are too many events for one collage). Image search and selection would be narrowed if editors first decided which events in the lead are important enough to include in the collage. That should be Step 1. That would save time and reduce the number of images to find/look at/discuss. Step 2 would then be finding/agreeing on the "best" image for each lead event that will be depicted in the collage. Lead events that don't make it into the collage should be pictured elsewhere in the article (they're "important" enough for a picture). So, another way to go about this is to just find the "best" images of everything that's mentioned in the lead, and then discuss which of those images should be in the lead collage, and which in the body of the article. Levivich (talk) 00:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this discussion/debate doesn't really apply to "2023", I would invite y'all (, , ) to participate in the discussion about this method over on WP:YEARS: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Proposal for a standardized process for yearly collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

text: So far there has been a lot of discussion about how to discuss the images. How about @Deb or @Levivich you give your takes on which events should be featured? Because that process is not incompatible to the current one. — HTGS (talk) 00:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: In my view, "year in review" sources should be used to determine the most significant events of the year (what should go in the lead). I'm not sure what sources the current lead is based on if any, and I'm not confident the current lead has all the most significant events of the year per RS. But choosing from what's in the lead right now, I'd say: Turkey/Syria earthquake, Gaza war, N-K war, banking crisis. Chandrayaan-3 isn't in the lead but I bet RS would suggest it should be, and if so, I'd say also in the collage as a 5th image. For a 6th, I don't know that you can find an image of AI (that's not an advertisement, e.g. not a logo), so maybe Cyclone Nargis. Levivich (talk) 00:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I know - I've already suggested a process very similar to this. That's where the proposer got the idea. Deb (talk) 09:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Nagae Iku (talk) 02:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2023 Collage Full Discussion 

message: In this discussion, add image and/or event candidates that you think should or could be in the yearly collage image. To add candidates, add the image as  followed by OPTION (Letter next in order). To add a second image candidate for the same event, add it as OPTION X(Number next in order).
This discussion will not be voted on until at least: 14:17, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Strongly suggest swapping coronation for a tighter photo, eg the one at Coronation of Charles III and Camilla. Bear in mind that photos are viewed small in a collage, so large, distinct features are strongly preferred. — HTGS (talk) 22:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added the closer-zoomed image as a second option. In the discussion above this one, another user added the larger-zoom image, so I am not going to directly remove it. But you are absolutely right! A smaller image was needed. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:37, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

text: To solve your issue, the proposal is 100% spelled out here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Proposal for a standardized process for yearly collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Is there a better image of the effect Storm Daniel had on the places it impacted? I think it would be more appropriate to showcase that instead of a meteorological image. PaulRKil (talk) 18:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  One could be added as a candidate, but a quick glance at 2005 shows a satellite view of Hurricane Katrina rather than a damage image. Also, the Storm Daniel article doesn’t really have a “damage” style picture on it. The Commons may have one though that could be thrown into the mix. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: , just a head's up, the vote for the collage images isn't yet. This is just a week period for people to submit what images they think should or could be in the collage. Then, we will vote to ensure there is a consensus for a college vote (basically a vote to see if consensus allows us to move forward for a collage). Then we actually vote for the 8 collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thanks. My bad. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment--I support inclusion of a photo for the Flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians, as it relates to the conclusion of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict which was a 35-year old post-Soviet conflict that ended on 1 January 2024 with the dissolution of the Republic of Artsakh. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Good plan. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 01:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: . We aren't voting for the candidates yet. This is just a period of time for everyone to add candidates in without a vote yet. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry about this, I read it wrong before adding a reply.😵 Nagae Iku (talk) 04:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I've explained to you how a meaningful process that complies with NPOV could be introduced. Is there any reason for you to oppose that? Deb (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The process your proposed, if I understand correctly was: RfC on which events are most important. Then using that list, you find the images. That doesn’t work since an important event may not have a good image or even a visually appealing image. Here is a good example. Imagine if the 2024 missile strikes in Yemen was voted to be one of the 6 event candidates. The two actual “images” (excluding the map) for it are very dark due to it being night time. That said, another image from a slightly lesser-known or lesser-important event (random example: Attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria (2023–present)) would be a heck of a lot more ascetically appealing for readers. Decided what is the most important events doesn’t really work well since collages (i.e. images) aren’t events. That is the issue. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: @Deb That approach sounds like a good way to waste time. The current process is already more drawn out than it needs to be IMO, but it does inherently include user selection of important events. If you have important events you think should be included here, suggest them and others can find images for them if you are having a hard time. — HTGS (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The most significant events of 2023 are the events mentioned in the lead of the article. If that's not the case, then the lead needs fixing, separate from any image selection. But it shouldn't be difficult to identify the most significant events of the year, as they'd be the ones in the lead, and ergo the images for the collage should be images of what's mentioned in the lead. However, the collage is going to depict a subset of the events in the lead (because there are too many events for one collage). Image search and selection would be narrowed if editors first decided which events in the lead are important enough to include in the collage. That should be Step 1. That would save time and reduce the number of images to find/look at/discuss. Step 2 would then be finding/agreeing on the "best" image for each lead event that will be depicted in the collage. Lead events that don't make it into the collage should be pictured elsewhere in the article (they're "important" enough for a picture). So, another way to go about this is to just find the "best" images of everything that's mentioned in the lead, and then discuss which of those images should be in the lead collage, and which in the body of the article. Levivich (talk) 00:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this discussion/debate doesn't really apply to "2023", I would invite y'all (, , ) to participate in the discussion about this method over on WP:YEARS: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Proposal for a standardized process for yearly collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

text: So far there has been a lot of discussion about how to discuss the images. How about @Deb or @Levivich you give your takes on which events should be featured? Because that process is not incompatible to the current one. — HTGS (talk) 00:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: In my view, "year in review" sources should be used to determine the most significant events of the year (what should go in the lead). I'm not sure what sources the current lead is based on if any, and I'm not confident the current lead has all the most significant events of the year per RS. But choosing from what's in the lead right now, I'd say: Turkey/Syria earthquake, Gaza war, N-K war, banking crisis. Chandrayaan-3 isn't in the lead but I bet RS would suggest it should be, and if so, I'd say also in the collage as a 5th image. For a 6th, I don't know that you can find an image of AI (that's not an advertisement, e.g. not a logo), so maybe Cyclone Nargis. Levivich (talk) 00:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I know - I've already suggested a process very similar to this. That's where the proposer got the idea. Deb (talk) 09:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Step 1 (Candidates)

message: OPTION A(1): Brazilian Congress attack
OPTION A(2): Brazilian Congress attack
OPTION B: East Ohio trail derailment
OPTION C: Turkey-Syria earthquakes
OPTION D: International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova
OPTION E: United States banking crisis
OPTION F(1): Coronation of Charles III and Camilla
OPTION F(2): Coronation of Charles III and Camilla
OPTION G: SAG-AFTRA strike
OPTION H(1): Hawaii wildfires
Option H(2): Hawaii wildfires
OPTION I: Storm Daniel
250x250px
OPTION J: Israel-Hamas war
OPTION K: Protests against the Israel-Hamas war
OPTION L(1): Chinese balloon incident
OPTION L(2): Chinese balloon incident
OPTION M: 29 December 2023 Russian strikes on Ukraine — Russian invasion of Ukraine
OPTION O Barbie becomes the highest-grossing film of 2023
OPTION P: refugees of the Sudan conflict in Chad 🌺 Cremastra  (talk)
OPTION Q(1): Wildfires in Saskatchewan. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk)
OPTION Q(2): aftermath of fires in NWT. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk)
OPTION R: Flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians. User:JohnAdams1800 (talk)
OPTION S: 2023 Odisha train collision User:Nagae Iku 
OPTION T: Chandrayaan-3 User:Nagae Iku
OPTION U: 2023 Marrakesh–Safi earthquake User:Nagae Iku
OPTION V: 2023 Herat earthquakes User:Nagae Iku
OPTION W: Guyana–Venezuela crisis (2023–present) User:Nagae Iku
OPTION X: Wagner Group rebellion User:Nagae Iku
OPTION Y: Cyclone Freddy User:Nagae Iku  — Preceding undated comment added 03:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Candidates

message: Add discussion for the images here. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Strongly suggest swapping coronation for a tighter photo, eg the one at Coronation of Charles III and Camilla. Bear in mind that photos are viewed small in a collage, so large, distinct features are strongly preferred. — HTGS (talk) 22:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added the closer-zoomed image as a second option. In the discussion above this one, another user added the larger-zoom image, so I am not going to directly remove it. But you are absolutely right! A smaller image was needed. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:37, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

text: To solve your issue, the proposal is 100% spelled out here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Proposal for a standardized process for yearly collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Is there a better image of the effect Storm Daniel had on the places it impacted? I think it would be more appropriate to showcase that instead of a meteorological image. PaulRKil (talk) 18:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  One could be added as a candidate, but a quick glance at 2005 shows a satellite view of Hurricane Katrina rather than a damage image. Also, the Storm Daniel article doesn’t really have a “damage” style picture on it. The Commons may have one though that could be thrown into the mix. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: , just a head's up, the vote for the collage images isn't yet. This is just a week period for people to submit what images they think should or could be in the collage. Then, we will vote to ensure there is a consensus for a college vote (basically a vote to see if consensus allows us to move forward for a collage). Then we actually vote for the 8 collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thanks. My bad. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment--I support inclusion of a photo for the Flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians, as it relates to the conclusion of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict which was a 35-year old post-Soviet conflict that ended on 1 January 2024 with the dissolution of the Republic of Artsakh. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Good plan. 🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 01:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: . We aren't voting for the candidates yet. This is just a period of time for everyone to add candidates in without a vote yet. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry about this, I read it wrong before adding a reply.😵 Nagae Iku (talk) 04:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I've explained to you how a meaningful process that complies with NPOV could be introduced. Is there any reason for you to oppose that? Deb (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The process your proposed, if I understand correctly was: RfC on which events are most important. Then using that list, you find the images. That doesn’t work since an important event may not have a good image or even a visually appealing image. Here is a good example. Imagine if the 2024 missile strikes in Yemen was voted to be one of the 6 event candidates. The two actual “images” (excluding the map) for it are very dark due to it being night time. That said, another image from a slightly lesser-known or lesser-important event (random example: Attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria (2023–present)) would be a heck of a lot more ascetically appealing for readers. Decided what is the most important events doesn’t really work well since collages (i.e. images) aren’t events. That is the issue. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

text: @Deb That approach sounds like a good way to waste time. The current process is already more drawn out than it needs to be IMO, but it does inherently include user selection of important events. If you have important events you think should be included here, suggest them and others can find images for them if you are having a hard time. — HTGS (talk) 22:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The most significant events of 2023 are the events mentioned in the lead of the article. If that's not the case, then the lead needs fixing, separate from any image selection. But it shouldn't be difficult to identify the most significant events of the year, as they'd be the ones in the lead, and ergo the images for the collage should be images of what's mentioned in the lead. However, the collage is going to depict a subset of the events in the lead (because there are too many events for one collage). Image search and selection would be narrowed if editors first decided which events in the lead are important enough to include in the collage. That should be Step 1. That would save time and reduce the number of images to find/look at/discuss. Step 2 would then be finding/agreeing on the "best" image for each lead event that will be depicted in the collage. Lead events that don't make it into the collage should be pictured elsewhere in the article (they're "important" enough for a picture). So, another way to go about this is to just find the "best" images of everything that's mentioned in the lead, and then discuss which of those images should be in the lead collage, and which in the body of the article. Levivich (talk) 00:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this discussion/debate doesn't really apply to "2023", I would invite y'all (, , ) to participate in the discussion about this method over on WP:YEARS: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years#Proposal for a standardized process for yearly collage images. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

text: So far there has been a lot of discussion about how to discuss the images. How about @Deb or @Levivich you give your takes on which events should be featured? Because that process is not incompatible to the current one. — HTGS (talk) 00:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: In my view, "year in review" sources should be used to determine the most significant events of the year (what should go in the lead). I'm not sure what sources the current lead is based on if any, and I'm not confident the current lead has all the most significant events of the year per RS. But choosing from what's in the lead right now, I'd say: Turkey/Syria earthquake, Gaza war, N-K war, banking crisis. Chandrayaan-3 isn't in the lead but I bet RS would suggest it should be, and if so, I'd say also in the collage as a 5th image. For a 6th, I don't know that you can find an image of AI (that's not an advertisement, e.g. not a logo), so maybe Cyclone Nargis. Levivich (talk) 00:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I know - I've already suggested a process very similar to this. That's where the proposer got the idea. Deb (talk) 09:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Candidates discussion

message: #Discussion on the three event candidates which had multiple images proposed. <—— Current Step in Process
#Ratification RfC to determine if we can move on to the collage vote.
====Multiple choice discussion====
=====2023 Brazilian Congress attack=====
Option A(1) or A(2)?
* A(1) - I think it is a better image of "Brazilian Congress attack" than the second one. The first one clearly shows multiple people and a Brazilian flag. The second one, on the other hand, looks like ruins. Without context, it would be hard to tell that this was an attack on the Brazilian Capitol. 27 is my favorite number.  You can ask me why here. 19:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Nagae Iku (talk) 02:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Step 2 (Ratify the Candidates)

message: =====2023 Brazilian Congress attack=====
Option A(1) or A(2)?
* A(1) - I think it is a better image of "Brazilian Congress attack" than the second one. The first one clearly shows multiple people and a Brazilian flag. The second one, on the other hand, looks like ruins. Without context, it would be hard to tell that this was an attack on the Brazilian Capitol. 27 is my favorite number.  You can ask me why here. 19:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Nagae Iku (talk) 02:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple choice discussion

message: Option A(1) or A(2)?
* A(1) - I think it is a better image of "Brazilian Congress attack" than the second one. The first one clearly shows multiple people and a Brazilian flag. The second one, on the other hand, looks like ruins. Without context, it would be hard to tell that this was an attack on the Brazilian Capitol. 27 is my favorite number.  You can ask me why here. 19:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[2023 Brazilian Congress attack]]

message: Option F(1) or F(2)?
*Option F(2) – The more zoomed-in image is needed as the candidate of choice. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 21:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Nagae Iku (talk) 02:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Coronation of Charles III and Camilla]]

message: Option H(1) or H(2)?
*Option H(2) – This was featured on the mainpage ITN for 8 days, so it is the more valuable image from the wildfires. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 21:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[2023 Hawaii wildfires]]

message: Option L(1) or L(2)?
* L(1) - Clearly depicts a balloon. The second one, at a glance, could easily be misinterpreted as generic fishing. 27 is my favorite number.  You can ask me why here. 19:05, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[2023 Chinese balloon incident]]

message: Option Q(1) or Q(2)?
*Option Q(1) – Seeing the satellie-style view of the wildfires and smoke is a better image to me than the damage image of Q(2). The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 21:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: [[2023 Canadian wildfires]]

message: In 2023 the Bulletin of The Atomic Scientists moved the hands of The Doomsday Clock to 90 seconds to midnight for the first time ever bringing the world closer to midnight than it has ever been. Surely that deserves a mention ? 2.99.81.33 (talk) 08:22, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Where's the reference from a reliable source? Deb (talk) 10:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

text: The doomsday clock is arbitrary. Setarip (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: ...but it is notable! 86.126.88.176 (talk) 07:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doomsday Clock Setting 

message: Can I ask for your question, everyone, should be included the pictures events for 2022 Asian Games? I think that will be the final represent for 2023. HurricaneErl 2022 (talk) 05:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2022 Asian Games 

message: Can someone please add photos of events in 2023 to this page? There is one for 2022, but not 2023. Can someone add photos of events for 2023? Please. 2601:40A:8400:1820:64A9:2954:1D64:EA3B (talk) 00:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. User:CanonNi (talk|contribs) 01:38, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2024 

message: Should this be mentioned on this page? Jarble (talk) 04:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2023 was the warmest year on record 

message: I think that this article should have more notable sports events. For example, championships like the Texas Rangers winning the World Series 4 games to 1 against the Arizona Diamondbacks on Nov. 1, The Kansas City Chiefs defeating the Philadelphia Eagles 38-35 for another Super Bowl win on Feb 12, The Vegas Golden Knights winning their first championship on June 13, beating the Florida Panthers for the Stanly Cup in 5 games, etc. Also good to mention is Buffalo Bills Safety Damar Hamlin suffering a Cardiac Arrest during a game on Jan 2nd, miraculously surviving and went back to football. These are some edits I would like to see on this page. Sethy3 (talk) 18:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Spelt Stanley wrong. oopsies. Sethy3 (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's why we have 2023_in_sports, as well as 2023 in American football and others. You can see the full list in the infobox on the right side of the article. Btw, if you make a typo, you can always go back and edit your comment, no need to create a new one. --McSly (talk) 19:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports 

message: T 2404:1C40:55:EF1E:EBD8:B4CC:C0A3:8DDA (talk) 19:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sk arif khan joy7