![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
It seems a bit pointless since there are so few songs this year whose titles warrant translation, with none at all in semi-final 2. That extra column squashes the text in the table which makes it less readable in my opinion. GarethTJennings ( talk) 22:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm surprised that this isn't mentioned in the article (my apologies if indeed it is and I just missed it entirely) and it probably should as it has many viewers baffled. It appears that the United States is the only country where the YouTube broadcast (for both the final and the semifinals) is blocked, and they've specifically redirected US viewers to the LogoTV live-stream in the information box. I know for a fact that last year, both the standard "raw" broadcast and the one for the hearing impaired were open to US viewers. Why the change? As far as I know, in European countries were each national station holds the rights to the broadcast in their respective countries, the YouTube live-stream was made available as well, no? Why not in the US? Whether there is definite information on the subject or not, it's definitely worth mentioning, I think. T.W. ( talk) 18:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
The semifinal votes have been announced on the website so when are the points going to be put? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.36.145.139 ( talk) 22:58, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
I was just looking at the results tables and wondered, perhaps the points awarded to each country should be split into 2 columns for jury votes and public votes, then totalled at the end? It gives quite a different story, for instance Poland only getting 7 points from the other countries' juries, but 222 from the public televotes... (just a thought) KoopaCooper ( talk) 07:08, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
I have started formatting the overall split jury and televote points like there are on all other contest pages and I was wondering if I was ok to put them in once I have finished. C. 22468 Talk to me 09:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
In the televoting of the final, Spain should be over Germany, as this result was announced on the contest. C. 22468 17:59 29 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.62.2.35 ( talk)
Is there any reason for keeping just Portugal and Romania among withdrawing countries in the infobox? Eurovision_Song_Contest_2016#Active_EBU_members mentions other withdrawing countries. Brandmeister talk 12:26, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
The number of suspicious incidents related to the jury voting has increased dramatically this year.
All of those "suspicious incidents" listed are way too much original research and based on personal point of view. Let us remember that Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, it is not a means of advocacy or opinion pieces, and it is most certainly not a place to be speculating theories. Wes Mouse ✒ 13:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Any reason why the stuff about Ukraine-Russia is there? It seems more appropriate for the controversy section to me (With the exception of the sentence that directly relates to Ukraine winning) Hollth ( talk) 14:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Pickette Don't you think the controversy section is appropriate? Although I agree about the POV concerns. What about something along the lines of?
Is there any other info you think needs to be included? Hollth ( talk) 11:47, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
References
I feel like it would be clearer if we had separate 12 point tables for the juries and televotes individually, so that at first glance it is easier to compare the two? Posting here to see the opinion and get consensus. -- ThatJosh ( talk) 15:13, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
This was discussed not so long ago, as it was noted that the new voting system would cause some issues regarding the way we present the 12 points summary tables. The way it has been done at the moment, by having separate tables for jury and televote is perfect and much easier. Although I do not see why some countries are in bold text. I have taken note that the article does provide an explanation to the bold text, but is it necessary to have them in bold typeface at all? Because the explanation comes across as if we are calling the intellect of the average reader. They can see from the tables that some countries awarded 12 points from both jury and televote. Let's not make our readers to look dumb! Wes Mouse ✒ 08:55, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
With one of the Danish jury voting incorrectly, have the EBU released a statement saying that the votes have been rectified? -- AxG / ✉ / 10 years of editing 19:57, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Eurovision Song Contest 2016 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to cite a source for the "Old system vs. New system" part, namely http://eurovisionworld.com/?esc=old-voting-system-australia-would-have-won-eurovision-2016, which is a well-established Eurovision site. Kristian terlien ( talk) 20:55, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Has there been any controversy over the public vote, given the ludicrous situation with the Polish result? In the jury vote they were second-last with just 7 points, to then being vaulted to fourth from top in the public vote. No doubt this is due to the large Polish population all around Europe. Surely a case of people voting for the country not the song. Tuzapicabit ( talk) 11:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a dispute over the choice of image to be used for the venue section. The article currently (and originally) uses an image of the venue that was taken in 2012 ( File:Stockholm Globe Arena 2012.jpg). User:Bruzaholm has changed it twice to their preferred opinion of an image that was taken in 1988 ( File:Globen aug 1988.jpg). Seeing as this contest is in 2016, shouldn't the more recent image taken 4 years be used rather than an version taken 28 years ago? I'm bringing this discussion here so that a consensus can be reached. Wes Mouse ✒ 12:13, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I added in the interval section where Justin Timberlake's performance wasn't shown in the US due to lack of rights and the first semi final interval act was shown instead. Just double checking to make sure that was the right place or if it needed to be in the incident section. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 12:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Is this worth mentioning at all? Guardian source other source anemone projectors 08:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
From one side, Youtube cannot be a trusted information source, but from the other side there is a video uploaded in May of 2015 with this song, "1944": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xivfN-MCjQ&t=240 The only difference that this song had another name in 2015. 176.77.31.1 ( talk) 17:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I wrote a scoreboard table, in white/blue to show the different jury and televoting results. I think it's as easy to read as such a table can be. Anyhow, I prefer the voting countries to be sorted alphabetically, but note that others might prefer it to be sorted by (jury) vote order. The upside with alphabetical order is that it makes it quicker and easier to look up individual countries' votes.
Previous years the vote-order made sense as it gave an idea of when a country "ran away" with the victory. Now that point has been removed, as the decider is delivered by the lump-sum televotes.
Alternatively, the voting order could also be presented in its own row (like this:)
Also, feel free to use the same core to create scoreboard tables for the semi-finals. -- Lejman ( talk) 14:49, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
@ Lejman: I think that is because they have followed specific manual of style guidelines. The scoreboard tables have never been sortable in the 11-year history of WikiProject Eurovision. It causes technical problems. Wes Mouse ✒ 17:07, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
I might be reading the tables wrong but can someone explain to me how a country can have no placing in the semi-finals
and the pop up out of nowhere in the finals.
Pot 1 | Pot 2 | Pot 3 | Pot 4 | Pot 5 | Pot 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
...first semi-final.
...second semi-final.
I looked for France from the beginning and didn't see them until I got to the finals charts.
Is this an error or am I reading the charts wrong?
206.45.207.80 (
talk)
21:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Also, no true sources to back it, but I'll comment it anyway: The 184-point gap between Russia and Bulgaria set a new record for the largest point difference between consecutively placed songs in Eurovision (Previous record was 178 between Norway and Iceland in 2009). Would this be noteworty? Not A Superhero ( talk) 05:31, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
The shows were directed by Robin Hofwander and Daniel Jelinek. Sven Stojanovic was the show producer. Hfwndr ( talk) 11:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
These two sentences are in the lead. 'This was the first time since the introduction of professional jury voting in 2009 that the overall winner won neither the jury vote' 'The contest was also the first to implement a voting system change since 1975' The first seems to contradict the second. An introduction of professional jury voting is presumably a change in voting system. Hollth ( talk) 02:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Knole Johnathan I'm not familiar enough with the history of Eurovision to know what changed. It's obvious something changed and I think the two sentences make it ambiguous. Looking at the [Voting at the Eurovision Song Contest]] it does look like the voting system/calculation changed as recently as 2013, after the 2009 jury changes so I'd say the no changes since 1975 is definitely misleading. From that page it looks like both the calculation and presentation of the points changed. Hollth ( talk) 04:29, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Eurovision Song Contest 2016 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hey, so the semi-final 1 scoreboard has one noticeable error; Azerbaijan's televote has given two sets of 10 points to both San Marino and Malta whilst giving no one 8 points. I checked the official webpage and the results say that Malta got 8; not 10. It appears that this has affected Malta's overall score by two in the televote and combined vote, as well as its position on the full split results ladder. 124.190.38.42 ( talk) 13:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
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.
B E C K Y S A Y L E S
20:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Change:
|- style="font-weight: bold; background: navajowhite;"
| 12
|
Austria
|
French
|
Zoë
| "
Loin d'ici"
| Far from here
|7
|170
|-
| 13
|
Estonia
| English
|
Jüri Pootsmann
| "
Play"
|—
|18
|24
to:
|- style="font-weight: bold; background: navajowhite;"
| 12
|
Austria
|
French
|
Zoë
| "
Loin d'ici"
| Far from here
|7
|170
|-
| 13
|
Estonia
| English
|
Jüri Pootsmann
| "
Play"
|—
|18
|42
because source cited. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 12:49, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
The conflict of interest would occur only if you were actually worked for the website EuroVisionary, purely because of your username. Such name is not allowed on Wikipedia, because of the fact that it also belongs to a website, and that is in accordance with WP:CORPNAME, and unless you request Wikipedia:Changing username from an administrator, then you are facing having your account indefinitely blocked. So if you do wish to continue editing legitimately, then I strongly urge that you request such name change very swiftly before you end up blocked. I shall ping to this conversation @ CT Cooper: who is an admin, who may be able to help you with your change of name request. Wes Mouse ✒ 08:21, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
The Justin Timberlake interval act segment seemingly not included on the official DVD. -- 180.183.136.186 ( talk) 17:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 2016. 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) 12:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 2016. 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) 01:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
It seems a bit pointless since there are so few songs this year whose titles warrant translation, with none at all in semi-final 2. That extra column squashes the text in the table which makes it less readable in my opinion. GarethTJennings ( talk) 22:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm surprised that this isn't mentioned in the article (my apologies if indeed it is and I just missed it entirely) and it probably should as it has many viewers baffled. It appears that the United States is the only country where the YouTube broadcast (for both the final and the semifinals) is blocked, and they've specifically redirected US viewers to the LogoTV live-stream in the information box. I know for a fact that last year, both the standard "raw" broadcast and the one for the hearing impaired were open to US viewers. Why the change? As far as I know, in European countries were each national station holds the rights to the broadcast in their respective countries, the YouTube live-stream was made available as well, no? Why not in the US? Whether there is definite information on the subject or not, it's definitely worth mentioning, I think. T.W. ( talk) 18:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
The semifinal votes have been announced on the website so when are the points going to be put? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.36.145.139 ( talk) 22:58, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
I was just looking at the results tables and wondered, perhaps the points awarded to each country should be split into 2 columns for jury votes and public votes, then totalled at the end? It gives quite a different story, for instance Poland only getting 7 points from the other countries' juries, but 222 from the public televotes... (just a thought) KoopaCooper ( talk) 07:08, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
I have started formatting the overall split jury and televote points like there are on all other contest pages and I was wondering if I was ok to put them in once I have finished. C. 22468 Talk to me 09:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
In the televoting of the final, Spain should be over Germany, as this result was announced on the contest. C. 22468 17:59 29 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.62.2.35 ( talk)
Is there any reason for keeping just Portugal and Romania among withdrawing countries in the infobox? Eurovision_Song_Contest_2016#Active_EBU_members mentions other withdrawing countries. Brandmeister talk 12:26, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
The number of suspicious incidents related to the jury voting has increased dramatically this year.
All of those "suspicious incidents" listed are way too much original research and based on personal point of view. Let us remember that Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, it is not a means of advocacy or opinion pieces, and it is most certainly not a place to be speculating theories. Wes Mouse ✒ 13:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Any reason why the stuff about Ukraine-Russia is there? It seems more appropriate for the controversy section to me (With the exception of the sentence that directly relates to Ukraine winning) Hollth ( talk) 14:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Pickette Don't you think the controversy section is appropriate? Although I agree about the POV concerns. What about something along the lines of?
Is there any other info you think needs to be included? Hollth ( talk) 11:47, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
References
I feel like it would be clearer if we had separate 12 point tables for the juries and televotes individually, so that at first glance it is easier to compare the two? Posting here to see the opinion and get consensus. -- ThatJosh ( talk) 15:13, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
This was discussed not so long ago, as it was noted that the new voting system would cause some issues regarding the way we present the 12 points summary tables. The way it has been done at the moment, by having separate tables for jury and televote is perfect and much easier. Although I do not see why some countries are in bold text. I have taken note that the article does provide an explanation to the bold text, but is it necessary to have them in bold typeface at all? Because the explanation comes across as if we are calling the intellect of the average reader. They can see from the tables that some countries awarded 12 points from both jury and televote. Let's not make our readers to look dumb! Wes Mouse ✒ 08:55, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
With one of the Danish jury voting incorrectly, have the EBU released a statement saying that the votes have been rectified? -- AxG / ✉ / 10 years of editing 19:57, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Eurovision Song Contest 2016 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to cite a source for the "Old system vs. New system" part, namely http://eurovisionworld.com/?esc=old-voting-system-australia-would-have-won-eurovision-2016, which is a well-established Eurovision site. Kristian terlien ( talk) 20:55, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Has there been any controversy over the public vote, given the ludicrous situation with the Polish result? In the jury vote they were second-last with just 7 points, to then being vaulted to fourth from top in the public vote. No doubt this is due to the large Polish population all around Europe. Surely a case of people voting for the country not the song. Tuzapicabit ( talk) 11:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a dispute over the choice of image to be used for the venue section. The article currently (and originally) uses an image of the venue that was taken in 2012 ( File:Stockholm Globe Arena 2012.jpg). User:Bruzaholm has changed it twice to their preferred opinion of an image that was taken in 1988 ( File:Globen aug 1988.jpg). Seeing as this contest is in 2016, shouldn't the more recent image taken 4 years be used rather than an version taken 28 years ago? I'm bringing this discussion here so that a consensus can be reached. Wes Mouse ✒ 12:13, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I added in the interval section where Justin Timberlake's performance wasn't shown in the US due to lack of rights and the first semi final interval act was shown instead. Just double checking to make sure that was the right place or if it needed to be in the incident section. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 12:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Is this worth mentioning at all? Guardian source other source anemone projectors 08:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
From one side, Youtube cannot be a trusted information source, but from the other side there is a video uploaded in May of 2015 with this song, "1944": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xivfN-MCjQ&t=240 The only difference that this song had another name in 2015. 176.77.31.1 ( talk) 17:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I wrote a scoreboard table, in white/blue to show the different jury and televoting results. I think it's as easy to read as such a table can be. Anyhow, I prefer the voting countries to be sorted alphabetically, but note that others might prefer it to be sorted by (jury) vote order. The upside with alphabetical order is that it makes it quicker and easier to look up individual countries' votes.
Previous years the vote-order made sense as it gave an idea of when a country "ran away" with the victory. Now that point has been removed, as the decider is delivered by the lump-sum televotes.
Alternatively, the voting order could also be presented in its own row (like this:)
Also, feel free to use the same core to create scoreboard tables for the semi-finals. -- Lejman ( talk) 14:49, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
@ Lejman: I think that is because they have followed specific manual of style guidelines. The scoreboard tables have never been sortable in the 11-year history of WikiProject Eurovision. It causes technical problems. Wes Mouse ✒ 17:07, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
I might be reading the tables wrong but can someone explain to me how a country can have no placing in the semi-finals
and the pop up out of nowhere in the finals.
Pot 1 | Pot 2 | Pot 3 | Pot 4 | Pot 5 | Pot 6 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
...first semi-final.
...second semi-final.
I looked for France from the beginning and didn't see them until I got to the finals charts.
Is this an error or am I reading the charts wrong?
206.45.207.80 (
talk)
21:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Also, no true sources to back it, but I'll comment it anyway: The 184-point gap between Russia and Bulgaria set a new record for the largest point difference between consecutively placed songs in Eurovision (Previous record was 178 between Norway and Iceland in 2009). Would this be noteworty? Not A Superhero ( talk) 05:31, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
The shows were directed by Robin Hofwander and Daniel Jelinek. Sven Stojanovic was the show producer. Hfwndr ( talk) 11:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
These two sentences are in the lead. 'This was the first time since the introduction of professional jury voting in 2009 that the overall winner won neither the jury vote' 'The contest was also the first to implement a voting system change since 1975' The first seems to contradict the second. An introduction of professional jury voting is presumably a change in voting system. Hollth ( talk) 02:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Knole Johnathan I'm not familiar enough with the history of Eurovision to know what changed. It's obvious something changed and I think the two sentences make it ambiguous. Looking at the [Voting at the Eurovision Song Contest]] it does look like the voting system/calculation changed as recently as 2013, after the 2009 jury changes so I'd say the no changes since 1975 is definitely misleading. From that page it looks like both the calculation and presentation of the points changed. Hollth ( talk) 04:29, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Eurovision Song Contest 2016 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hey, so the semi-final 1 scoreboard has one noticeable error; Azerbaijan's televote has given two sets of 10 points to both San Marino and Malta whilst giving no one 8 points. I checked the official webpage and the results say that Malta got 8; not 10. It appears that this has affected Malta's overall score by two in the televote and combined vote, as well as its position on the full split results ladder. 124.190.38.42 ( talk) 13:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
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.
B E C K Y S A Y L E S
20:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Change:
|- style="font-weight: bold; background: navajowhite;"
| 12
|
Austria
|
French
|
Zoë
| "
Loin d'ici"
| Far from here
|7
|170
|-
| 13
|
Estonia
| English
|
Jüri Pootsmann
| "
Play"
|—
|18
|24
to:
|- style="font-weight: bold; background: navajowhite;"
| 12
|
Austria
|
French
|
Zoë
| "
Loin d'ici"
| Far from here
|7
|170
|-
| 13
|
Estonia
| English
|
Jüri Pootsmann
| "
Play"
|—
|18
|42
because source cited. B E C K Y S A Y L E S 12:49, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
The conflict of interest would occur only if you were actually worked for the website EuroVisionary, purely because of your username. Such name is not allowed on Wikipedia, because of the fact that it also belongs to a website, and that is in accordance with WP:CORPNAME, and unless you request Wikipedia:Changing username from an administrator, then you are facing having your account indefinitely blocked. So if you do wish to continue editing legitimately, then I strongly urge that you request such name change very swiftly before you end up blocked. I shall ping to this conversation @ CT Cooper: who is an admin, who may be able to help you with your change of name request. Wes Mouse ✒ 08:21, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
The Justin Timberlake interval act segment seemingly not included on the official DVD. -- 180.183.136.186 ( talk) 17:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 2016. 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) 12:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Eurovision Song Contest 2016. 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) 01:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)