Talk:1944 (song)

Lyrics

Hi!

I'm rather surprised why the lyrics is not a part of the article according to User:Jjj1238's reverts. I'm not confident with conventions on that; so I 'll left the lyrics here:

</poem>

Lyrics don't ever belong on a Wikipedia song article. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 11:18, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Lyrics are copyright. See WP:COPYVIO. Removed from talkpage, too. --Richhoncho (talk) 20:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Extracts of lyrics, used to illustrate a point, certainly can belong on Wikipedia articles for songs. But for the time being I've added an external link to the official Eurovision lyrics page. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:40, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I've seen lyrics elsewhere in Wikipedia, though maybe this was against official policy. Regarding copyright, what exactly is the problem? No one would be making money off the lyrics being here, nor would the song producer be losing money from this. Seems like fair use to me. Whatever, I don't claim to understand Wikipedia's policies (or the legal system of the country where Wikipedia was founded).192.173.144.3 (talk) 14:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

The lyrics and the way it is performed is full of hate, and some psychotic anger. Why did they allow such obviously hateful song to be on ESC at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.58.236.233 (talk) 14:40, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Do you have a WP:RS for "full of hate, and some psychotic anger"? It seems you need to take your grievance to some Eurovision chat board, not here. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:49, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Politicisation and Content

Amazing it wasn't disqualified on those grounds alone.

However it should be pointed out that Crimean Tartars are neither Russian nor Ukrainian and the Crimea was not in the Ukraine traditionally - certainly it wasn't in 1944. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.36.53 (talk) 09:50, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

"However it should be pointed out that Crimean Tartars are neither Russian nor Ukrainian and the Crimea was not in the Ukraine traditionally - certainly it wasn't in 1944. - Yes, it's important for better understanding of the song's context.

This is not a forum to promote personal opinions. The talk page is for editors to discuss content and to help improve articles, not discuss personal points of view. Wes Mouse ✒ 14:22, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Not personal opinion, fact. Crimean Tartars are neither Ukrainian nor Russian, but an ethnicity in their own right. Crimea was not part of the Ukraine then, as it was given to the Ukraine about a decade later, by Khrushchev. Again - not my opinion, look it up.--86.180.36.53 (talk) 12

28, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

That said, with what appears to be an anti-Russian agenda, questions about the content within this song are more than a personal view point and should be addressed. Amazing it wasn't disqualified on grounds of anti-Rusian content?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.98.16 (talk) 11:00, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

So you are suggesting that “anti-Stalin-in-1944” = “anti-Russia-in-2016”? In the same way that anti-Hitler would equal anti-German, or anti-Napoleon would equal anti-French? Maybe we should censure ABBA in 1974 for that xenophobic anti-French song "Waterloo"? You’re saying that the Putin actually condones what Stalin did in 1944? But I'm not sure what bearing your view has on the article. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:11, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Martinevans, perhaps you haven't been paying attention to the general tone of a lot of Western mass media these days, but to answer your question, YES, a lot of people, organizations and governments these days are trying to link Stalin to Putin, and the Soviet Union to Russia. There's no doubt in my mind why this particular singer with this particular song came to the forefront just now. I think coverage of the political theme is critical in this article.192.173.144.3 (talk) 14:13, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

IP.192, perhaps you haven't been paying attention to the general development of the article these days. The topic is already covered. Are you suggesting some kind of addition or expansion? If so, please propose one. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I replied to a comment you made today, so I'm not sure what you mean by not "paying attention to the general development of the article these days". Please re-read my comment (and yours), and then let me know if you disagree with something I've written. Thanks.192.173.144.3 (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Are you suggesting some kind of addition or expansion? If so, please propose one. Everyone would be able to follow your contributions much more easily if you simply created an account and signed all of your posts. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:19, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

You seem to be holding me to some standard that you don't want to accept for yourself. Exactly what "addition or expansion" were you proposing in your comment that started this exchange between us? Nothing at all. Yet you still felt it was worthwhile for editors to discuss a particular issue, just as I now feel it's worthwhile to continue discussing it. The issue is: you claim there is no link between this song and anti-Russian propaganda. I claim there may well be a link. You refuse to discuss how my claim relates to yours. Instead you get passive-aggressive (yeah, I noted your eye-rolling repetition of my phrase "perhaps you haven't been paying attention to..."). And then you raise issues about IP addresses, which are none of my concern and which should be taken up with the Wikipedia Foundation if they matter to you. Honestly, this discussion is going in circles because you refuse to respond to criticism of something you said. CARE TO DO SO NOW? If not, let's just stop talking to each other because this is dumb. But keep in mind that I will be watching very carefully what kind of edits you make to the political content of this article.192.171.35.252 (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

By all means watch as carefully as you like. There's nothing I currently plan to add or remove. I'm quite happy to discuss changes you think are needed to the article. I'm not prepared to discuss the political significance of the song in the abstract. This is not a forum or chat board. I'd still warmly advise you to create an account, whereby other editors might see that you were serious about contributing here and not simply breezing by to make a political point. Simply by making an account you tend to make your contributions rise above those of the average random anonymous ip address. It's not clear to me when "this exchange between us" actually began. And TRY NOT TO SHOUT. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:18, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Why was my comment deleted - upset the neo-cons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.227.164 (talk) 13.57, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Your last action here was to delete the entire Talk Page header and the section on Lyrics. Why did you do that? Do you have any suggestions about how to improve the article? Or are you just here to advance a certain political position and to ridicule other editors? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:00, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Jamala has been living in Kyiv for a long time. And she represented the country she lives in currently. --Amakuha (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is also not censored. Just in case people had forgotten. Wes Mouse ✒ 12:20, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Waterloo and ABBA, that song is a very happy uplifting song. Even if it were really about the battle and not just a metaphor, there are no living survivors of that battle today. And there are still many survivors of WW2, that are not happy with siding with Hitler through art. Especially in a way that is so angry against those who fought against Hitler, and in this case were not murdorously genocidal but only relocating for valid reasons — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.58.236.233 (talk) 14:57, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

The song is about the families of those who fought against Hitler who were betrayed by the country they were fighting for. So simply get off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.146.212.182 (talk) 06:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Do you have any suggestions about how to improve the article? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:10, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

All of the veterans of Waterloo were long dead. That's the difference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.36.53 (talk) 12:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)