![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Eurovision Song Contest 1998 has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
France did, in fact, use the violin section of the orchestra but as they did not bring a conductor of their own, no conductor was shown before their entry. On the other hand both Germany and Slovenia presented conductors despite using full backing tracks and no orchestra.
Wow I didnt know about that fact.I only knew that Belgium was singing on a backing track —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChRis ( talk • contribs) 03:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Finland is shown in the map as one of the countries that didn't participate in 1998. Finland actually participated that year. YuckieDuck ( talk) 23:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The score per song differ with the results given at [2]. I suppose those are correct? Miho ( talk) 19:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Why FYR Macedonia and no Former Yougoslav Republic of Macedonia??This is the true and the real name!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.71.240.43 ( talk) 09:07, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
And why not FYROM?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.71.240.43 ( talk) 14:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
The chart says that Israel gave 12 points both to UK and Belgium. Impossible. They only gave it to the UK. Also, no country received 5 points from Israel. So, maybe that country is Belgium? Please someone fix this.. Vuk skywalker ( talk) 15:17, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Despite what it says on Eurovision.tv and other sites, Israel actually got 174 points and not 172, see this YouTube video. -- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 17:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Is it worth detailing the postcards from 1998 - the Irish flag formed from the Tube Map, Spain ish from a hot-dog, Dutch from television interference, that sort of thing? 78.86.102.100 ( talk) 10:13, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzhTFL9gZ0s at 02:14:00 you can see Spanish votation, 12 to Israel, not 10. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.117.203.241 ( talk) 04:27, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
The lead is all wonky. Israel won the competition, but that information is no more than a passing comment in a paragraph about controversy. I missed it altogether on my first reading, and I had to scroll down to the fifth section to find out who won. On the other hand, there is a ton of information in the lead on the UK winning the 1997 contest, which should take up no more than eight words: "following the UK's win in the 1997 contest." The stuff about the G8 summit is given appropriate weight in the "Location" section, and should not be in the lead at all. There is far too much detail on participating countries. It takes up almost one-third of the lead, and at 104 words it is barely shorter than the corresponding paragraph in the "Participation" section. The end result is just a wall of words that left this reader utterly confused. 86.41.46.188 ( talk) 10:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
@ Nickolasemp and LexPro4: to clarify as WP:MOSMAC states:
“ | In historical contexts referring to events between 1992 and 2019, Wikipedia articles will continue to refer to the country by its then-current official name, i.e. "(Republic of) Macedonia". | ” |
-- AxG / ✉ 22:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
We say on the page that 33 European countries showed the 1998 contest. We know that's accounting for the 25 participants plus four of the relegated countries (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Denmark, and Iceland), since we know Italy and Russia didn't show the contest, and Yugoslavia, who were ineligible to compete. But that's thirty countries. Is there any way to know the other three?
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: OliveYouBean ( talk · contribs) 09:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
G'day, seeing as this article's been waiting for a few months I figure it's about time someone reviewed it. I've already given it a quick read-through, gonna start adding comments in the next hour or so.
OliveYouBean (
talk)
09:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
MOS:LEAD:
MOS:LAYOUT: Also, why is there an "Other Awards" heading when the only other award mentioned is the Barbara Dex Award? It feels like that could just be a level 1 heading since there aren't any others.
MOS:WTW:
MOS:WAF: Not relevant.
MOS:EMBED:
|
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
|
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
|
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | All good :) |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | All good :) |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | All good :) |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | All good :) |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All good :) |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | All good :) |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
So I've finished going through the criteria and making notes. Not everything that I've mentioned needs to be changed, I'm open to hearing why you think stuff should stay the same. The most urgent changes needed are:
The other notes also need attention, but like I said I'm open to hearing your point of view if you disagree on something I've said.
Thanks for all your work on the article! Hopefully it doesn't take long before it can be promoted. :) OliveYouBean ( talk) 05:52, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
RoySmith (
talk)
17:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
One element that didn't need to be entirely de-rigged was the press centre. [...] As the G8 political summit was taking place in Birmingham the following week, the booths were left in place, and others added to them[...]
Improved to Good Article status by Sims2aholic8 ( talk). Self-nominated at 16:50, 9 November 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
@
Sims2aholic8: Good article.
Will AGF on the offline sources.
Onegreatjoke (
talk)
18:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Eurovision Song Contest 1998 has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
France did, in fact, use the violin section of the orchestra but as they did not bring a conductor of their own, no conductor was shown before their entry. On the other hand both Germany and Slovenia presented conductors despite using full backing tracks and no orchestra.
Wow I didnt know about that fact.I only knew that Belgium was singing on a backing track —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChRis ( talk • contribs) 03:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Finland is shown in the map as one of the countries that didn't participate in 1998. Finland actually participated that year. YuckieDuck ( talk) 23:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
The score per song differ with the results given at [2]. I suppose those are correct? Miho ( talk) 19:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Why FYR Macedonia and no Former Yougoslav Republic of Macedonia??This is the true and the real name!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.71.240.43 ( talk) 09:07, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
And why not FYROM?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.71.240.43 ( talk) 14:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
The chart says that Israel gave 12 points both to UK and Belgium. Impossible. They only gave it to the UK. Also, no country received 5 points from Israel. So, maybe that country is Belgium? Please someone fix this.. Vuk skywalker ( talk) 15:17, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Despite what it says on Eurovision.tv and other sites, Israel actually got 174 points and not 172, see this YouTube video. -- [[ axg ⁞⁞ talk ]] 17:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Is it worth detailing the postcards from 1998 - the Irish flag formed from the Tube Map, Spain ish from a hot-dog, Dutch from television interference, that sort of thing? 78.86.102.100 ( talk) 10:13, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzhTFL9gZ0s at 02:14:00 you can see Spanish votation, 12 to Israel, not 10. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.117.203.241 ( talk) 04:27, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
The lead is all wonky. Israel won the competition, but that information is no more than a passing comment in a paragraph about controversy. I missed it altogether on my first reading, and I had to scroll down to the fifth section to find out who won. On the other hand, there is a ton of information in the lead on the UK winning the 1997 contest, which should take up no more than eight words: "following the UK's win in the 1997 contest." The stuff about the G8 summit is given appropriate weight in the "Location" section, and should not be in the lead at all. There is far too much detail on participating countries. It takes up almost one-third of the lead, and at 104 words it is barely shorter than the corresponding paragraph in the "Participation" section. The end result is just a wall of words that left this reader utterly confused. 86.41.46.188 ( talk) 10:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
@ Nickolasemp and LexPro4: to clarify as WP:MOSMAC states:
“ | In historical contexts referring to events between 1992 and 2019, Wikipedia articles will continue to refer to the country by its then-current official name, i.e. "(Republic of) Macedonia". | ” |
-- AxG / ✉ 22:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
We say on the page that 33 European countries showed the 1998 contest. We know that's accounting for the 25 participants plus four of the relegated countries (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Denmark, and Iceland), since we know Italy and Russia didn't show the contest, and Yugoslavia, who were ineligible to compete. But that's thirty countries. Is there any way to know the other three?
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: OliveYouBean ( talk · contribs) 09:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
G'day, seeing as this article's been waiting for a few months I figure it's about time someone reviewed it. I've already given it a quick read-through, gonna start adding comments in the next hour or so.
OliveYouBean (
talk)
09:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
MOS:LEAD:
MOS:LAYOUT: Also, why is there an "Other Awards" heading when the only other award mentioned is the Barbara Dex Award? It feels like that could just be a level 1 heading since there aren't any others.
MOS:WTW:
MOS:WAF: Not relevant.
MOS:EMBED:
|
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
|
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
|
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | All good :) |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | All good :) |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | All good :) |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | All good :) |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All good :) |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | All good :) |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
So I've finished going through the criteria and making notes. Not everything that I've mentioned needs to be changed, I'm open to hearing why you think stuff should stay the same. The most urgent changes needed are:
The other notes also need attention, but like I said I'm open to hearing your point of view if you disagree on something I've said.
Thanks for all your work on the article! Hopefully it doesn't take long before it can be promoted. :) OliveYouBean ( talk) 05:52, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
RoySmith (
talk)
17:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
One element that didn't need to be entirely de-rigged was the press centre. [...] As the G8 political summit was taking place in Birmingham the following week, the booths were left in place, and others added to them[...]
Improved to Good Article status by Sims2aholic8 ( talk). Self-nominated at 16:50, 9 November 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
@
Sims2aholic8: Good article.
Will AGF on the offline sources.
Onegreatjoke (
talk)
18:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)