Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2013/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Do we really need a section for Eric Saade's comment?

It seems pretty low-key compared to the rest of controversies/incidents of the year. If it could be compared to some other incident this year, it would be, in my opinion, to Finland's kiss, and yet that was something that was widely debated and (allegedly) almost made a broadcaster to back off from emiting the contest. Or, comparing to a similar incident, we have in 2011 A Friend In London's vocalist telling the Dutch spokesperson "I wanna f*ck you" when she gave them twelve points. It was covered in the group's article, but wasn't considered relevant enough to include it in the 2011 article. Any opinions? Not A Superhero (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not to sure myself to be honest. It does seem to be very lame, but then what is lame to one person could be melodramatic to another. So I'm not fussed either way on this one, but if it were to disappear, then I wouldn't exactly miss it very much. Wesley♦Mouse 05:50, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

No strong views but on a related note why is he listed as a "presenter" in the info box? A couple of minutes in the green room out of several hours doesn't make you a presenter, it was a reporter role. Plus Mede specifically said at the start of the first semi final that she would be the sole presenter for the Eurovision - to add in Saade contradicts the official position as well as the reality that there was in substance only 1 presenter. @WM I see you commented on this above - can this be changed? Thanks--Zymurgy (talk) 07:45, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you Zymurgy regarding the presenter role. Eric was not a presenter, but a Green Room reporter - there is a huge difference between the two positions. And you are right. Petra Mede did explicitly state that she was "a solo presenter" for the 2013 Contest. If we're going to start including notable Green Room reporters, then perhaps the infobox fields need to be updated to include such information, and then that way we would be OK to include Eric. Although I won't unilaterally change the infobox data without a majority consensus from project members. Which reminds me, I can mention that in the upcoming RfC at WT:ESC once I get it reboted in a few days time. Wesley♦Mouse 12:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

It was considered controversial enough for the BBC to edit out his MILF comment on the night during the UK broadcast and on the version they put on their 'watch again' service for the week after the show. If as broadcaster as notable as the BBC thought it warranted such an action I guess that makes it worth including in the article Vauxhall1964 (talk) 15:50, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

It is funny you should mention the BBC "watch again" service actually, as I downloaded that from BBC iPlayer (I have the iPlayer desktop thingy installed on my laptop). The MILF comment wasn't edited out from that. And Lynda Woodruff's comedy sketch on the final also had a similar blunder that was never edited out both on the live broadcaster and the "watch again" services. It was in the scene where she visited the "Royal Artillery". She makes the comments "I'm surprised more gay... Eurovision fans haven't found this place yet". There is a very notable pause between the blunder of "gay" and "Eurovision", as if she wasn't meant to say the former word. Wesley ☮ Mouse 05:52, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

But that wasn't a blunder, that was the joke (ie referring to the fact many Eurovision fans are gay). Vauxhall1964 (talk) 08:14, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, as a gay man myself, I realised it was a reference joke to the gay community in the end. Too much on my mind lately that I forgot. Wesley ☮ Mouse 13:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Broadcasting

News reports from a selection of reliable sources are stating that China and America both broadcast the Grand Final. I've managed to find a source with broadcasting details for America (which apparently was shown on large outdoor screens at the Swedish Embassy in Washington DC). But I cannot find broadcasting data for China, other than Eurovisiontimes and EuroVisionary. Anyone any ideas on how we can find which TV Station in China broadcast the show, and whether or not they had commentators? Wesley♦Mouse 01:26, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Correct position of Belgium and The Netherlands

The Netherlands has recived once the 12 points so their classify is higher than Belgium (sorry for my English, I'm Italian). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.41.90.119 (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Please place new comments at the bottom of the talk page, thanks. I have reverted your edit, the previous rules of determining placing by highest point received is now no longer used. It's which country received the most sets of points, Netherlands got points from 13 countries and Belgium got 14 sets. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 12:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Spelling in quotations

This article is written in British English - but there is a quotation with 'rumors'. Spa-Franks (talk) 20:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Be bold and correct these if you see them. c: Mr. Gerbear (talk) 20:28, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I know we have the "British English" banner at the top of the talk page. But I'm wondering if it is possible to use the same banner on the main article itself? IMHO, that would be the most logical place to have the banner. Wesley ☮ Mouse 20:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Good news, we can add {{British English|form=editnotice}} to the edit notice. All we need now is an admin to edit the edit notice for us to achieve this goal. Wesley ☮ Mouse 20:41, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Brilliant; that will be useful! Hope it's convenient for them to tag all the past years' entries too (or will that not be needed?) Mr. Gerbear (talk) 02:15, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

That could be an even better idea adding it to all articles, seeing as they are all written in British/European English. I'll hang around the watchlist and grab the nearest admin that I can find and see if they would mind doing this for us. Wesley ☮ Mouse 05:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty to seek admin assistance with this at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive250#Admin help required. Wesley ☮ Mouse 06:33, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I've added the edit notice as requested. Please note, however, that the original spelling of quotations should be preserved even if the article uses a different variety of English - see MOS:QUOTE for the guidelines. (Also, for next time, we have a system of edit requests for this kind of thing.) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I've also added edit notices to all contests back to 2005. Hopefully this should do the trick, but let me know if more are needed. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you ever so much Mr Stradivarius, much appreciated. Any chance of adding the same edit notice to next year's article (Eurovision Song Contest 2014) too? Wesley ☮ Mouse 09:36, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

As much as I appreciate this input, MOS:QUOTE is not clear on which form of English to use in quotations. I can only presume that 'rumors' is in the quotation. Should quotations change (in this example) to British English, or, at the very least, should it say 'rumo[u]rs'? Spa-Franks (talk) 15:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

I would presume so, yes. Wesley ☮ Mouse 16:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually, looking at MOS:QUOTE, it would appear that we would only use "rumo[u]rs" if we were to use the quotation template. As we haven't done so, and have adopted a normal written prose without the quotation template, then we should be safe to correct the spelling. Wesley ☮ Mouse 16:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

The relevant part of MOS:QUOTE is the part that says "However, national varieties should not be changed, as these may involve changes in vocabulary, and because articles are prone to flipping back and forth. For example, a quotation from a British source should retain British spelling in an article that otherwise uses American spelling." Seems unambiguous to me, but if there's a part you're not sure about just {{ping}} me (so that I know I've been left a reply here) and we can straighten things out. I'll go and add the suggested 2014 edit notice now as well. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:02, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Theme Song

I recently found out that the theme song (used during the butterfly logo transition and credits) is "Wolverine" by Adam Kafe. I did not find an article, but it is on online music retailers. Is it worth mentioning in the article? Dfizzles (talk) 23:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I suppose it could be included under graphic design, which does mention about the butterflies. Are the sources reasonable? (I quite liked that tune too, off to download myself a copy - thanks for the info Dfizzles.)Wesley ☮ Mouse 23:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

No sources but it's clearly it in any preview of the song. A song is a published work (technically)...Dfizzles (talk) 02:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Found a source - iTunes. And it mentioned the fact it was the theme tune for Eurovision 2013 too. Wesley ☮ Mouse 02:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

References

In what has become an annual tradition with myself, I shall be doing some general housekeeping on all of the references prior to the GA review, and will be doing the following:

• Check for linkrots, repairing any with archive URL's.
• Tidying up any raw citations that have not had data fields completed.
• Adding language data to links that have such information missing, and adding "trans_title" to any that do have foreign links.

This action may take some time, so I will do the task section-by-section to reduce edit conflicts, which I would like to avoid. Thank you for your cooperation! Wesley Mᴥuse 01:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

1. Lead, Infobox, and Location  Done 01:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
2. Format  Done 02:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
3. Incidents  Done 02:23, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Participating countries  Done 02:56, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Scoreboard  Done 03:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
6. Other countries  Done 03:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
7. Other awards  Done 03:25, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
8. International broadcasts and voting  Done 04:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

• I've split the reflist into 4 columns for neatness. Wesley Mᴥuse 04:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Parade of Nations

I think the paragraph regarding the "Parade of Nations" in the introduction could be worded a little differently, there was already a "Parade of Artists" of sorts in the opening of Eurovision Song Contest 1983. Xelaxa (talk) 14:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2013/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ViperSnake151 (talk · contribs) 05:20, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Opening remarks

Personally, I think that Cezar should have won for obvious reasons and that "Glorious" feels more like a riff of "Don't You Worry Child", but anyway...

Review

1. Well-written? Y the quality of the prose is good
2. Factually accurate?: N Pas de points; Unfortunately, some of the citations use blogs (I do consider ESCToday reliable and not a blog because of their history, but this "Eurovision Times" looks like a self-published blog) as sources (which is questionable), the paragraph on the Azerbaijan cheating scandal uses YouTube as a source for the claim "it was reported in Lithuanian media that an undercover video recording published on YouTube" (yet there are other proper sources in the same paragraph), while the "Jury in the Netherlands" and pre-mature reveal feel too trivial for inclusion (plus, again, the former appears to be sourced to a blog with "blog" in its domain name). Additionally, the statement about "Glorious" being cleared of plagiarism charges is uncited.
3. Broad in coverage? Y Sufficient for GA status, although those aforementioned trivial controversies should be removed entirely.
4. Neutral?: Y No neutrality problems to report
5. Stable?: Y There has been no recent edit warring of concern.
6. Images: Y All of your images are relevant and correctly tagged.

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

With that, I am placing this article on hold; it's almost ready for GA status, you just need to fix the problems described above. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:20, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

First of all I would like to take this opportunity to thank ViperSnake151 for taking the time to review this article for GA classification and for providing advice on areas that required tidying up. I have carried out work on these areas as follows:

• A source from Eurovision.tv entitled "Eurovision organisers respond to media reports on voting" which was used elsewhere within the article, mentions about the YouTube link. I have therefore used this to also back-up the same YouTube link that is being cited on the article.
• In regards to the short sentence that used EurovisionTimes as a citation. As there are no other sources available that may have been a sufficient replacement, I have decided to remove this part.
• I have also removed the entire part regarding the "Jury in Netherlands". As the sources were from blogs (and I do not know how they slipped through the net), I have been bold in removing this part entirely.
• I've also added a citation to verify the cleared plagiarism claims regarding Cascada's 'Glorious'. Although the original sentence referenced a date and the source I found does not mention a date - thus I have chosen to follow suit and refrain from using dates.

If there are any other areas that you feel need attention before GA can be passed, then feel free to contact me in due course. Again, thank you for taking the time to carry out this review. Wesley Mᴥuse 13:04, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I just think that the YouTube link itself is a primary source; you don't need it when you have secondary sources already discussing the video. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:04, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

• I've removed it. Wesley Mᴥuse 01:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

sync problems in norway

the second semi final went badly out of sync and the comments was lost at least in norway. i am too tired to search for a source but it should be easy enough to find.84.212.73.96 (talk) 17:24, 22 June 2016 (UTC)