![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Image:ESC1981.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Someone wrote that the yugoslavian song was performed in Bosnian language, which is not correct. In 1981, the bosnian language did not exist, as the official languages of Yugoslavia were Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian, and Slovenian, and the song was performed in Serbo-Croatian language, as it was officialy called in that time.
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.
Should an article that is covering an event that happened in a particular year also make references to events that happened several years afterwards? In my opinion this would be "future history" as nobody would be able to know if something would happen in years to come, and thus an event article would need to be written in the the perspective of that particular year or prior to it. Wesley ☮ Mouse 18:08, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
How can we include context written in future tense format? OK we know now that the contest has never been as early as April. But if it were 1981 now, would we know if something were to happen 32 years later? It would be like writing on the 2013 article that such and such a record has not been broken until 2045. We wouldn't know that until the year 2045. Trying to guess that something would happen in the future is very clearly crystal ball gazing. So the same ruling should apply in this case. Which is something that I was told a few times before, that an article needs to be written in a manner that speaks of that particular year and before, not future tense. Wesley ☮ Mouse 12:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
In response to DoctorKubla's comment. It isn't a case of WP:CRYSTAL being misunderstood. I was told that that was one of the reasons why an annual article should not have references to future historical facts. I was told that articles need to stay focused on its subject/topic. The article subject in question here is an event which took place in 1981. So shouldn't we be mainly focusing on what happened in that event, with the possibility of referencing to anything that may have happened prior to the event if required? We have the mother article Eurovision Song Contest that would probably be ideal to cover content such as "this would be the last time the contest would be held as early as April". To put it another way, the contest has been held in May ever since 1982 to present day. Who's to say that in another 20-30 from now that the contest would eventually go back to being hosted in April? We would not know of this until it happened. What then, do we come back to this article and say "the contest would not be held in the month of April again for Nth amount of years"? In my opinion, details such as that would be more beneficial to the parent article which covers everything like that. This subject matter is the 1981 Contest. It wasn't too long ago that I updated one of the earlier ESC pages and updated the location section using data of the modern era. I was told "ooo you can't do that, the article MUST be written as if it was that year". So please could someone decide once and for all what the hell we are suppose to be doing? To be told it MUST be done one way by some, only to get told months later that that is in fact the wrong way to do things, can seriously discombobulate a person. And for the record, I never said there was a prior consensus held by the project regarding this matter. So where is my "claim" that there was one? All I said was that several members in the past had stated that articles should be focusing on the subject matter for the particular contest year in which it is dealing with (in this case that would be 1981). Wesley ☮ Mouse 05:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
The 1981 contest was held on 4 April and up to (and including) 2012 has never been as early again. For one it isn't verified with sources, and two it is overly trivial. Alas though, when I removed it I was told "no it doesn't", and thus we are here discussing the matter. Wesley ☮ Mouse 11:23, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
You made the connection between something you had been told on that "location" discussion, as you applied it to your edits and discussion here. You wrote on one of your above comments: "I updated one of the earlier ESC pages and updated the location section using data of the modern era. I was told "ooo you can't do that, the article MUST be written as if it was that year". So please could someone decide once and for all what the hell we are suppose to be doing?
I understood you refered to the location-discussion on Eurovision Project that included the 1970-ESC example, and so I figured from there you interpreted that all-kinds of post-event details are forbidden. Now, I agree it's trivial to include information about "when was the last time the event was held on X month". But this RFC is also since you deleted all kinds of future information under your view that we should act as if nothing happened after the event's time, and with that you also deleted the cheating-claim story from the Danish singer. So I tried to clear your confusion by explaining to you and others, according to my understanding, what was specificaly talked about over the location-discussion: Non-existing location-facilities at the time of the location choice for the contest, is an issue that revolves around relevance, not around pre/present/post-event time-angles. On the same scale, criticism and acceptance details play a big role of sheding light on the article's subject, so they are relevant regardless of being post-event. So that was my explenation in regards to your question of when and how we can include relative-future information.
And at your last comment you did accept that certain future-information such as cheating-claims can be mentioned, with you proposing to capture it seperately under it's own section. So you had the note that the "aftermath" already exist in this article (at least as sub-section), and so at this point I related this capturing-issue to my offer for "media/public accpetance" title as another proposal I made. And I agree my proposed title as itself is ambiguous, but I'm only mentioning it for general "section-title" when I detailed-demonstrated an example at the Eurovision Project RFC, were I include specific sub-sections titles such as "Other Awards Titles", "Criticism" and "Incidents" - for the sake of both "country in ESC" and "annual ESC" articles. So this specific 1981-cheating-story from the Danish singer - is such "criticism" or "incidents" informtaion that's appropriate within more general title of media/public acceptance in my view - and that's the relevance.
That's what I meant and how I refered to this two RFC's, following your comments.
אומנות (
talk)
15:01, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
As was explained to you by few users - you made zigzagging claims and refered to other ambiguous discussions, that made you change your arguments and got complicated to follow. With that you are the one who raised the location futuristic features with writting you are confused on when and if to use future-relative information. I don't have any interest to spread that specific "WT:ESC" as you already agreed in regards to this and it was solved. The opposite - on my above comments I made sincere efforts to follow your claims. Eventually, on my last comment I simplified via mutual-base generalization of non-relevance to use futuristic-features in regards to any contest's location, as in difference to other post-incidents-criticism stuff that were discussed here as valid. And with that, obviously it doesn't imply in any way lack of consideration for the specific-discussion you refered to - the opposite. This was my try to solve this, which I'm entitled to express without being answered in such a way of "who are you to tell me...", after the time and energy I put in order to try and help, as I also actually enjoyed discussing with you so far. It's unfortunate that so often you don't comprehend others good faith, when you so often tell others to be civil. Think about that. אומנות ( talk) 00:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 1981. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 1981. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:07, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Eurovision Song Contest 1981. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:51, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
In the article it's mentioned the mini-skirt reveal on Buzz Fizz's performance. This wasn't the first time it happened in the contest, Germany already did an outfit reveal in 1978, 3 years earlier. In my opinion this should be also mentioned, since the article makes a point about this being a defining moment in the performance and the history of the contest. 80.41.51.190 ( talk) 19:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
The article says it was the first time that the artists were depicted in the city/country during the rehearsals. This is incorrect, this already happened at least in Brighton in 1974. I can't remember if that was the very first time but that already happened then. It is indeed correct that the composers were portrayed in the postcards for the first time. 80.41.51.190 ( talk) 19:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Image:ESC1981.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Someone wrote that the yugoslavian song was performed in Bosnian language, which is not correct. In 1981, the bosnian language did not exist, as the official languages of Yugoslavia were Serbo-Croatian, Macedonian, and Slovenian, and the song was performed in Serbo-Croatian language, as it was officialy called in that time.
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.
Should an article that is covering an event that happened in a particular year also make references to events that happened several years afterwards? In my opinion this would be "future history" as nobody would be able to know if something would happen in years to come, and thus an event article would need to be written in the the perspective of that particular year or prior to it. Wesley ☮ Mouse 18:08, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
How can we include context written in future tense format? OK we know now that the contest has never been as early as April. But if it were 1981 now, would we know if something were to happen 32 years later? It would be like writing on the 2013 article that such and such a record has not been broken until 2045. We wouldn't know that until the year 2045. Trying to guess that something would happen in the future is very clearly crystal ball gazing. So the same ruling should apply in this case. Which is something that I was told a few times before, that an article needs to be written in a manner that speaks of that particular year and before, not future tense. Wesley ☮ Mouse 12:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
In response to DoctorKubla's comment. It isn't a case of WP:CRYSTAL being misunderstood. I was told that that was one of the reasons why an annual article should not have references to future historical facts. I was told that articles need to stay focused on its subject/topic. The article subject in question here is an event which took place in 1981. So shouldn't we be mainly focusing on what happened in that event, with the possibility of referencing to anything that may have happened prior to the event if required? We have the mother article Eurovision Song Contest that would probably be ideal to cover content such as "this would be the last time the contest would be held as early as April". To put it another way, the contest has been held in May ever since 1982 to present day. Who's to say that in another 20-30 from now that the contest would eventually go back to being hosted in April? We would not know of this until it happened. What then, do we come back to this article and say "the contest would not be held in the month of April again for Nth amount of years"? In my opinion, details such as that would be more beneficial to the parent article which covers everything like that. This subject matter is the 1981 Contest. It wasn't too long ago that I updated one of the earlier ESC pages and updated the location section using data of the modern era. I was told "ooo you can't do that, the article MUST be written as if it was that year". So please could someone decide once and for all what the hell we are suppose to be doing? To be told it MUST be done one way by some, only to get told months later that that is in fact the wrong way to do things, can seriously discombobulate a person. And for the record, I never said there was a prior consensus held by the project regarding this matter. So where is my "claim" that there was one? All I said was that several members in the past had stated that articles should be focusing on the subject matter for the particular contest year in which it is dealing with (in this case that would be 1981). Wesley ☮ Mouse 05:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
The 1981 contest was held on 4 April and up to (and including) 2012 has never been as early again. For one it isn't verified with sources, and two it is overly trivial. Alas though, when I removed it I was told "no it doesn't", and thus we are here discussing the matter. Wesley ☮ Mouse 11:23, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
You made the connection between something you had been told on that "location" discussion, as you applied it to your edits and discussion here. You wrote on one of your above comments: "I updated one of the earlier ESC pages and updated the location section using data of the modern era. I was told "ooo you can't do that, the article MUST be written as if it was that year". So please could someone decide once and for all what the hell we are suppose to be doing?
I understood you refered to the location-discussion on Eurovision Project that included the 1970-ESC example, and so I figured from there you interpreted that all-kinds of post-event details are forbidden. Now, I agree it's trivial to include information about "when was the last time the event was held on X month". But this RFC is also since you deleted all kinds of future information under your view that we should act as if nothing happened after the event's time, and with that you also deleted the cheating-claim story from the Danish singer. So I tried to clear your confusion by explaining to you and others, according to my understanding, what was specificaly talked about over the location-discussion: Non-existing location-facilities at the time of the location choice for the contest, is an issue that revolves around relevance, not around pre/present/post-event time-angles. On the same scale, criticism and acceptance details play a big role of sheding light on the article's subject, so they are relevant regardless of being post-event. So that was my explenation in regards to your question of when and how we can include relative-future information.
And at your last comment you did accept that certain future-information such as cheating-claims can be mentioned, with you proposing to capture it seperately under it's own section. So you had the note that the "aftermath" already exist in this article (at least as sub-section), and so at this point I related this capturing-issue to my offer for "media/public accpetance" title as another proposal I made. And I agree my proposed title as itself is ambiguous, but I'm only mentioning it for general "section-title" when I detailed-demonstrated an example at the Eurovision Project RFC, were I include specific sub-sections titles such as "Other Awards Titles", "Criticism" and "Incidents" - for the sake of both "country in ESC" and "annual ESC" articles. So this specific 1981-cheating-story from the Danish singer - is such "criticism" or "incidents" informtaion that's appropriate within more general title of media/public acceptance in my view - and that's the relevance.
That's what I meant and how I refered to this two RFC's, following your comments.
אומנות (
talk)
15:01, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
As was explained to you by few users - you made zigzagging claims and refered to other ambiguous discussions, that made you change your arguments and got complicated to follow. With that you are the one who raised the location futuristic features with writting you are confused on when and if to use future-relative information. I don't have any interest to spread that specific "WT:ESC" as you already agreed in regards to this and it was solved. The opposite - on my above comments I made sincere efforts to follow your claims. Eventually, on my last comment I simplified via mutual-base generalization of non-relevance to use futuristic-features in regards to any contest's location, as in difference to other post-incidents-criticism stuff that were discussed here as valid. And with that, obviously it doesn't imply in any way lack of consideration for the specific-discussion you refered to - the opposite. This was my try to solve this, which I'm entitled to express without being answered in such a way of "who are you to tell me...", after the time and energy I put in order to try and help, as I also actually enjoyed discussing with you so far. It's unfortunate that so often you don't comprehend others good faith, when you so often tell others to be civil. Think about that. אומנות ( talk) 00:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 1981. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 1981. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:07, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Eurovision Song Contest 1981. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:51, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
In the article it's mentioned the mini-skirt reveal on Buzz Fizz's performance. This wasn't the first time it happened in the contest, Germany already did an outfit reveal in 1978, 3 years earlier. In my opinion this should be also mentioned, since the article makes a point about this being a defining moment in the performance and the history of the contest. 80.41.51.190 ( talk) 19:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
The article says it was the first time that the artists were depicted in the city/country during the rehearsals. This is incorrect, this already happened at least in Brighton in 1974. I can't remember if that was the very first time but that already happened then. It is indeed correct that the composers were portrayed in the postcards for the first time. 80.41.51.190 ( talk) 19:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)