Talk:2008 Summer Olympics opening ceremony

Order of countries entering stadium

Is the order of countries entering published anywhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.207.242.57 (talk) 07:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Theoretically, someone with a very comprehensive Chinese dictionary and knowledge of Chinese should be able to figure it out. You only have to look up participating members and place them in the order it will appear in that dictionary. But we have no idea if the organizer would be going with the full name or commonly used name. I don't think Chinese themselves have done this in any world event they hosted, so it's going to be wait and see. For security reason, I doubt it will be available before the actual opening ceremony unless some media leaks it.--Revth (talk) 08:43, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that stroke order is nothing new, and is one of the ways Chinese words are sorted. The only issue for laymen interested in it is whether they use full name or short name. 118.90.92.107 (talk) 10:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Petermgiles works for some Canadian thing, so he has the official order. Ask him. Smartyllama (talk) 14:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The order is also now on the 2008 Summer Olympics national flag bearers, although Iraq isn't listed. (I'll try and figure out where they'll be, though.) DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) (talk) 19:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Or, on second thoughts, someone else will have to figure out where Iraq goes - I can't see Chinese characters on my laptop. :( DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) (talk) 19:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You might need to read this. I believe some free fonts for Chinese text are linked at the bottom. Xeltran (talk) 12:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Iraq entered right before Iran, if I remember correctly. CFLeon (talk) 04:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Disgraceful and Insulting CCP Propaganda

A troupe of over a hundred Indigenous Taiwanese dancers travelling from Taiwan, and referred to by Xinhua as "ethnic Taiwanese compatriots", will also perform at the opening ceremony.

This is yet another disgraceful attempt by the CCP to portray native Taiwanese culture as though it were part of Chinese culture. Fortunately, there is no need to delete this paragraph; all we need to do to make the paragraph neutral is to add an explanation for the CCP's motives behind this despicable hijacking of Taiwanese culture (with references to reliable sources of course). David873 (talk) 09:54, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I have just amended the paragraph in order to include a note about Mainland China-Taiwan relations. What we now need is a reliable source to back it up; some elaboration would also be useful. Of course, the alternative is to get rid of the whole paragraph altogether but this would be an act of censorship. David873 (talk) 10:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You may be intrigued to be informed that CCTV productions routinely refers to all Chinese, including even the overseas Chinese all over the world as compatriots aka "tong bao", so by what you are insinuating, they would be attempting to extend their territorial claim to practically all corners of the globe?--Huaiwei (talk) 19:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

No, that was not what I originally said. The point that I have made is that no one in their right mind would regard the indigenous culture of Taiwan as being part of Chinese culture. Of course, the CCP has no interest in portraying indigenous Taiwanese culture as being separate from Chinese culture. On the other hand, whether mainstream Taiwanese culture is part of Chinese culture is another story (though I have to add that many Taiwanese do not seem to think so). So I am afraid the fact that you removed the statement about cross-strait relations may say something about your views that many Taiwanese would certainly disagree with. David873 (talk) 00:01, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I see absolutely no logic that a Taiwanese group performing in the game's opening ceremony would in any way suggest that Taiwanese culture is part of Chinese culture. Even if that is true, kindly quantify "no one", for clearly there are practically 20% of the world's population who thinks so, plus millions of others all around the world who identifies with Chinese culture yet do not identify with the PRC as their "motherland".--Huaiwei (talk) 13:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

In any case, the fact that there will be Taiwanese Aborigines performing at the opening ceremony leads to a question that just cannot be ignored: "Why is this going to happen anyway and what does this have to do with the Olympic Games?" Please do not tell me that Taiwan is part of China or that there are two Chinas with Taiwan being one of them. Most sensible people accept that there is one China and one Taiwan (the later not being part of China in any way). David873 (talk) 09:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't realise that traditional dances performing in a foreign country signifies that the country in which those dancers hail from automatically becomes part of the country where they perform? So when Malay Aborigines perform in Thailand, Malaysia is interpreted to be a part of Thailand? I hope there is a greater dose of simple logic here. You are attempting to insert your POV in supposed sensitivity when none are suggested in any way. Taiwanese Aborigines are free to perform anywhere they wish, and have complete freedom to decline to perform for any reason.--Huaiwei (talk) 03:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course, there is no rule or law saying that Taiwanese Aborigines (or indeed members of any other ethnic group) from performing wherever they wish at international events such as the Olympics. This fact, though, does not address the fundamental questions that I had asked before. Isn't it blatantly obvious that the CCP will only "use" the indigenous Taiwanese performance in order to advance their sickening claims that Taiwan is part of China? After all, New Zealand performers didn't turn up at the 2000 Summer Olympics in Australia in order to "showcase" their culture! Why does the 2008 Olympic Games have to be different in this regard? Perhaps someone out there (other than Huaiwei) actually knows the answer. David873 (talk) 10:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for admitting that your edit in this said article is based purely on your own speculative assumptions, and one that is heavily politically influenced to boot. As long as there is zero adherence to any of the three basic policies of WP:NPOV, WP:V or WP:OR, there is simply nothing to negotiate here for its inclusion.--Huaiwei (talk) 10:25, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Funny you should say this, seeing that you are clearly biased about China-Taiwan relations. Here is the evidence.

...there are practically 20% of the world's population who thinks so, plus millions of others all around the world who identifies with Chinese culture yet do not identify with the PRC as their "motherland".

There you go. This is what you wrote earlier, which gave your opinions about Taiwan and its culture away. I am sure many editors of Taiwanese background will at best dismiss your comments as a bad case of cultural cringe; at worst, they will be treated as highly insulting. Any other editor who has an opinion on this should comment too as this is starting to get ridiculous. David873 (talk) 11:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I would certainly love to hear from you just how you would intrepret the comment I made above, how that is supposed to a reflection of my personal views on Taiwanese culture, and whether my personal view has allowed itself to encroach into this debate.--Huaiwei (talk) 15:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Huaiwei has a point, though. I identify as Chinese, but in no way is the PRC my motherland, because when someone asks me where my parents come from, I usually say "Hong Kong" and not "China". But I definitely identify myself as a Chinese. Pandacomics (talk) 03:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

David enough is enough. The fact that they had dancers from Taiwan is not a statement saying Taiwan is all part of China or whatever the hell your point is. Drop it, we've had enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.119.159.183 (talk) 14:33, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Source needed for timing of Opening Ceremony

A source is needed for the statement about when the opening ceremony begins. The previous "source" cited was not a valid source and has been deleted. David873 (talk) 00:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done I don't think anyone will have a problem with linking to the BBC schedule (after all, they *are* showing the Olympics in the United Kingdom. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) (talk) 10:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Is there another source available? Some editors seem to keep changing "8:08:08" to "8:00:00", which is starting to get very annoying. David873 (talk) 12:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Tingo (see below) is correct - This webpage, which was posted in 2006, says that the Mayor of Beijing confirmed its start time as 8pm. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) (talk) 14:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I want to have you attention that the "08:08:08" in the source article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/7498629.stm) does not mean 8:08:08pm but actually 8pm on Aug. 8th. So the correct time is 8pm. --Tingo (talk) 13:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Someone just changed it back again to 8:08 pm. I am wondering which one is correct. Apparently, there was an announcement on Australian television that the opening ceremony will in fact start at eight minutes past the hour. David873 (talk) 12:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Here is a Q&A from the official site[1], it says:"我们都知奥运在08年8月8日开幕,但我却不知8日开幕准确的时间,官方网上也没有明显的说明公布..而流传在网上的信息有人说是早上8:00,有人又说是晚上8点,更有人说是8时8分8秒。麻烦告诉我准确无误的时间。谢谢!回复：8月8日晚上8点。"(Q: We all know that the games begin on Aug 8th, 2008, but I don't know the exact time of it while it is not mentioned clearly in your website. Somebody said that the time is 8 am, some 8 pm, some even said the time is 8:08:08 pm. Please tell me the correct time. Thanks. A: 8 pm on Aug 8th.)--阿pp (talk) 11:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

btw. I am Tingo, this is another id of mine.--阿pp (talk) 11:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Even if the 8:08pm or 8:08:08pm time is incorrect, it may be widespread enough to mention ("...will start at 8pm, not 8:08pm as some sources reported"). Even the official website has some pages mentioning 8:08 [2] [3] [4], though they are from agencies so the site's disclaimer would presumably apply. Its most recent report says 8pm [5]. In any case, we'll soon know the correct answer for sure. jnestorius^(talk) 15:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

It's happened now, and at 8:08. Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/7547074.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.105.30 (talk) 17:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. What?! I have changed it back to 8:00. ALL three citations used in the article confirm an opening time of 8:00 pm. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 17:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Look, even the source you provided states "8pm", not "8:08 pm". Please stop. ~AH1^(TCU) 17:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

It did not start at 8 CST, it started at 8 ET correct? --12.208.151.119 (talk) 00:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

It starts at 8 CST, there are timezones outside USA you know. F (talk) 12:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. It started at 8pm CST, 8am EDT, and 12pm (noon) UTC. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 16:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I've checked my recording of the ceremony that, by virtue of the file dates/time stamping can be directly referenced back to an NTP server. The "countdown sequence" ended at 12:00 UTC (20:00 local). For reference the illuminated Olympic Rings were in their fully raised position at 12:08 UTC (20:08 local) 78.105.161.231 (talk) 14:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Justification for the start of the ceremony being 08:08 was given in a few different ways: 20:08's parallel with 2008. 08:08pm being a lucky number. And finally 08:08pm is identical to the date 08/08 which is also Chinese father's day (due to the sound father and number 8 being similar). It also sounds close to 'making money' which is pretty much equivalent to luck in Chinese cultures :D . Popersman (talk) 00:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The first paragraph now says the 60-second countdown marked the time 08:08:08. This was added by Bleedingshoes at 22:07 yesterday but no source is given and it is contradicted both by the Welcoming ceremony section which says the countdown of the final seconds to the Games heralded the start of the opening time of 8:00 p.m. and also by the comment above at 14:26 on 12 August. We keep on hearing about 08:08:08 but what is the truth of it? Did anything significant take place at that time?Treherbert (talk) 10:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Just found http://www.omegawatches.com/index.php?id=1098&L= which says the end of their countdown was 8 p.m., with nothing about 8 minutes or 8 seconds. The Olympics Official Timekeeper must have it right!Treherbert (talk) 11:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Change of the marching order

According to a news report by a Korean newspaper (this is via a Japanese source) [6], North Korea protested marching right after South Korea and now four nations will march between them instead. I don't know if it's actually going to happen, so this will be included when the list is released or when the march actually starts.--Revth (talk) 04:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Beginning time by Greenwich

Why don't to write the time of ceremony beginning by the Greenwich time? I asked just, and I'll answer why. I was wonder to find in newspaper's TV shedule that it begins at 13:08, not at nearly noon by Greenwich (as for me, I'm actually in Moscow, but it only need to add 3 hours every day of year - so no differense about what time I speak). I thought so 'cause accordingly article difference between Beijing and Greenwich is 8 hours (UTC +8), but there is no word about absence the summer time in China, so real difference (for August) is 7 hours. Thus, it begins really at 13:08. Dendr (talk) 07:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Beijing is using UTC/GMT +8 hours with no daylight saving time in 2008. [7]. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 09:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

(UTC)

Korea

QUOTE: "South Korea (韩国) will immediately followed North Korea (朝鲜) because the character 韩 in the name of South Korea has the same stroke count with the character 朝 in North Korea."

So there's no united team this time? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 13:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

There was not a united team last time, but they marched together as one in the opening ceremony. This time they are not. jnestorius^(talk) 13:35, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Watching right now - Notice how when NKorea arrives, the crowd cheers so loud. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 14:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Boycott sectio need updating

Now that the ceremony is done and over with, there will not be any more need for speculation. Such information should be edited out. Also, there really is no point writing who attended the ceremony in the boycott section, that's counter-productive; same with those countries that simply didn't go and didn't boycott. I'll be doing so in the next few days if no one else does or objects. 24.222.53.34 (talk) 17:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Dignitaries

It would be a good idea to alphabetize the countries in the heads of states/dignitaries section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.44.226 (talk) 18:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it really necessary to list dignitaries not attending? It is pretty easy to figure this out from looking at the list who attended and is thus redundant. Also, not every head of state in the world was expected for the ceremony. If there is no objection I will remove it.

The purpose of those not attending shows those that took the cause of the people of Tibet to heart and boycotted the ceremony and those who by chance werent able to make it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.91.46 (talk) 04:56, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Japanese royalty

On the dignitaries section, the names of the Japanese royalty who attended should be added. The commentary said who they were but I can't remember their names now... :) - WikiJohnDoe

Chinese Taipei

Should it be Chinese Taipei or ROC/Taiwan? I know there's an issue with them being at the Olympics as Taiwan, but are we using the name that they are going by there, or the name that the international community knows them as? --Seascic ^T/_C 19:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

It should be left the way it is. The agreement that was reached between China and Taiwan was that the latter should be represented as Zhonghua Taibei; Zhonghua does not imply a connection with either polity but refers to the Chinese identity as a whole. This distinction is not made in English, however, so the term is left intentionally ambiguous. --Taoster (talk) 22:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Iraq ovation

Would a quick mention that a clear ovation for Iraq was heard during the ceremony be good? People cheered loudly at the team (of course not as much as China!), it seems notable enough. (76.69.181.34 (talk) 19:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC))

There were several loud ovations including for the US and Chinese Taipei/Taiwan. We can't mention any of them as it would be a clear cut case of OR Nil Einne (talk) 20:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

More heads of state and dignitaries

[8] [9] [10] [11] [12] Could someone update the list? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.44.226 (talk) 22:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok added heads of state of above source. If someone would like to add the spouses of the heads of state, go for it! 76.71.44.226 (talk) 01:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Could someone change the head of state of Germany? Gerhad Schroeder hasn't been the chancellor since 2005.

It's quite unlikely that he attended the ceremony, however I did not watch it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.50.234.254 (talk) 01:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Need more images

I have found one image from Commons, but we need a Commons category for this and we need to get more images, e.g. from Flickr perhaps, even if we have to ask people to change the license. Richard001 (talk) 03:37, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

List of heads of states

For the List of heads of states and dignitaries, should we place notable heads of state in bold, such as George W Bush, Vladimir Putin, Nicolas Sarkozy, etc? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 06:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

In a word, no. Almost by definition all heads of state are noteable hence we only have one red link (and even that it is likely he's noteable simply we don't have an article yet). Going further and deciding which head of states are most noteable is simply a bad idea and liable to lead to pointless edit wars. If editors are interested in knowing whether a certain head of state attended, they can easily look for that specific country Nil Einne (talk) 07:24, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I just want to mention that Gerhard Schröder has not been a part of the German government since 2005. I have not seen this event, so I don't know if Angela Merkel was there or not. 17:54, 10 August 2008 (CET)

Yes, I know that but he was a dignitary at the opening ceremony. Merkel did not attend. Nirvana888 (talk) 16:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

numbering of drummers, in series of events

QUOTE: "After greeting the audience, Hu Jintao and Jacques Rogge, 2008 Fou drummers staged a synchronized presentation." Would it be better to write "2,008" rather than "2008" (as it was before), so the number of drummers is not confused with the year 2008, as I personally would be? Standard notation when counting a number in English is to place a comma for every thousand of digit value. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 06:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, didn't the singing of Sing a Song of Praise to the Motherland occur before the singing of March of the Volunteers? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 11:56, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Original Music

Who wrote the original music soundtrack for the ceremony? It obviously is a fantastic feat to have composed so much music. Whoever it is deserves credit in this article.68.77.29.11 (talk) 18:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Tan Dun is the man, and his name is already in the lead. Pandacomics (talk) 03:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

29 Footprint Fireworks, CGI?

Can I get someone to verify that they are computer generated? It doesn't make sense to me that they would be. AzNwiLD0 (talk) 05:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Apparently the TV show was CGI because they felt that having a helicopter filming the real display would be too dangerous.[13] Seems worth mentioning in the article. 76.197.56.242 (talk) 06:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Greek Head of States

Greek Minister Mrs Bakoyannis and Mr Liapis represented greece in the opening ceremony, ex-king constantine was in the opening ceremony because he is a honorary member of the ioc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdkats (talk • contribs) 01:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, do you have a source for this claim? As long as they represented Greece they should be considered dignitaries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.23.67 (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

yes i do [14] [15] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdkats (talk • contribs) 10:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Blu-ray release?

Seems to me like such a ceremony would be worthy of a blu-ray/HDDVD/DVD release, perhaps even an iMax experience. 1080i sources are available, to boot. Is there any indication that such a release could occur? --92.104.153.110 (talk) 01:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

PLA Involvement - Possible Comment?

Given the fact that, at least with the company I keep, the primary topic of conversation for pertaining to the opening was the active involvement of the PLA in the opening ceremony, I think there ought to be at least a minor comment. This seems to be to be the main topic of criticism for an otherwise stellar Opening Ceremony, summarized by the Sydney Morning Herald, which stated:

"The heavy presence of Chinese Liberation Army officers throughout the proceedings left many wondering exactly what image the hosts were intending to project to the international community...At a time when Tibet, Darfur and China's broader human rights record are proving delicate issues for Beijing organisers, the move to present thousands of drilled, sobersided army officers before a worldwide viewing audience of four billion was surprising for its brazenness; a none too subtle projection of strength."

Source: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/olympics_reaction__tv__pix

Regardless of whether or not we believe this to be a justified or unjustified criticism, the fact is that the criticism is mentioned in reliable news sources (Reuters) as a reaction to a major part of the opening of the Games. As a sidenote, I should like to point out a quote from the Daily Telegraph:

"One Olympic ideal -- the separation of sport and politics -- died in the Chinese night. (...) This was the choreographed demonstration of might the like of which the Olympics has never seen; a rebuke to George W. Bush and Nicolas Sarkozy, vocal critics of Chinese foreign and domestic policy sitting in the audience."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080809/wl_uk_afp/oly2008ceremonybritain

Given the sources of these as a legitimate reaction to the Opening Ceremony, I've placed them in the article with the aforementioned citations under the "Reactions" heading. 69.142.30.188 (talk) 03:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Already done.--Huaiwei (talk) 04:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

My mistake, didn't see it. I'll remove my edit. 69.142.30.188 (talk) 04:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Grammar

Could someone please clarify this text: "who actually do not familiar with Chinese culture and people". It is in the Reception section. --Repaxan 07:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Be bold.--Huaiwei (talk) 07:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

fake footprint

According to news the footprint seen at the TV (in the middle of life show) was computer generated and not life. I think this information should be add. in footprint part or in a new controversy chapter? Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/2534499/Beijing-Olympic-2008-opening-ceremony-giant-firework-footprints-faked.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Killy-the-frog (talk • contribs) 11:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I found another news article on the faked footprints that apparently took a year to create digitally: http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Beijing-Olympics-Opening-Ceremony-Faked-Firework-Footprints-Added-For-TV/Article/200808215075291?lpos=World%2BNews_2&lid=ARTICLE_15075291_Beijing%2BOlympics%2BOpening%2BCeremony%2BFaked%253A%2BFirework%2BFootprints%2BAdded%2BFor%2BTV --Yvesnimmo (talk) 14:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Are they "fake" or actually pre-recorded, as other sources allude to? I do understand computers were used to introduce the fogging and shaking effects thou.--Huaiwei (talk) 14:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, the firework footprints were real in the sense that they did take place. But the ones they showed to the audience were pre-recorded and then touched up/enhanced by computer graphics. Wild Panda888 (talk) 09:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Some Opening Ceremony fireworks were faked

Ok, got this info from [16]. Although I can't really find the link to the news article that claimed so but this should be included in the article, right? After verifying the info, of course. Xeltran (talk) 11:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

^^ Ooh, thanks, the link has already been posted on the previous section. Xeltran (talk) 11:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Over 4 Billion viewers?

I'm baffled at how there were over 4 billion viewers when china was at 63-69% and 4 billion is about 60% of the entire world. The US had about 11% and other nations listed are at ~10%, 4 billion definately can't be right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.119.159.180 (talk) 15:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

It is a rough estimate and is properly cited and therefore is legitimate. What is certain is that it was the most viewed ceremony in the history of the Games.

I agree, i was actually thinking this the other day. how could 4 billion people have watched the opening ceremony live. When you consider all the people across the world who were A)sleeping B)at work C)busy walking around cities and stuff D) people who dont have a tv or just dont care. Like 4 billion people is 4 in 7 people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simaloko (talk • contribs) 18:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

4 billion sounds very suspect to me too, I'm having trouble finding viewing figures for individual countries but this site quotes a surprisingly low figure for India, http://www.business-standard.com/india/storypage.php?autono=331135. If that 6 million figure is correct (which I doubt) then between the countries I've seen figures for (Australia, China, France, Germany, India, UK & USA) about 1 billion watched. Those countries make up about half the world population so I can't really believe the other 3.6 billion from around the world all watched it. 217.43.97.130 (talk) 19:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

We are not here to engage in OR and must trust the estimate. Also, a factor that has not been mentioned is that the total viewership includes mediums such as Internet which also garnered a significant audience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.143.65 (talk) 19:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no obligation to believe everything you read in the newspapers. The 4 billion figure originates from 2005 in the Beijing Youth Daily, not a paragon of journalist reliability, and is the aggregate for the entire 19 days, not just the opening ceremony. Most of these global TV audience estimates for major events are plucked out of the air. A lot of them hover conveniently around the one billion mark (Oscars, etc) based on zero statistics. The Olympics has some fairly reliable ratings at national level, but we will never have a definitive source to cite with any confidence for adding them all together. jnestorius^(talk) 21:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Also the media tends to cite two different kinds of statistics without differentiating well: the viewership for opening ceremonies, and the total viewership for the duration of the Olympic Games. The latter does flirt with 4 billion territory ... but this should be understood as including the opening ceremony count as well as everyone who ever tunes into an event, with multiple check-ins often being counted separately. (Taping and TiVo viewings are usually not counted.)

- Tenebris, 15 August 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.26.11 (talk) 07:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Reception Section

The following statement is a bit inaccurate/misleading: "The Globe and Mail had the headline 'The iron hand behind the magic show.' This was supposed to be an example of a hostile report, but I believe it is not representative of tone of the paper's report on this event. The title refers to an opinion column in the Globe and Mail, and is the columnist's opinion, not a news headline. I think the sentence should be deleted. Hammerofdawn (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Agree. --59.149.32.77 (talk) 22:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. 74.78.162.229 (talk) 03:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Before people start deleting comments, they may note that the observation was actually sourced from the Reuters report. Wikipedian's personal opinions do not count.--Huaiwei (talk) 05:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Although it is sourced, I agree to Hammerofdawn because his reason put is right. We have to consider if the sourced report is representative enough. -59.149.32.77 (talk) 05:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

As long as there are no conflicting and credible sources to render Hammerofdawn's view as "correct", adherence to wikipedia policies will still be to restore the said statements, which I will do so accordingly if no further effort is made in this regard. We do not consider whether a report is "representative" or not. We consider whether they are reliable or not based on WP:V, and Rueters certainly fits the bill in this case.--Huaiwei (talk) 18:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

No wish to assert any POV. Just wanted to point out the fact that what was labeled a "headline" would more accurately be described as the title of an opinion column. The substitution of "column" appears to have been made to the sentence in question, and I think that particular edit should remain.Hammerofdawn (talk) 17:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Musical performers during parade of nations

I don't see these performers mentioned anywhere, I think one of them was "The Drum Café" from South Africa. - Xedaf (talk) 22:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

There were Chinese music, African drum music and Scottish pipes playing alternatively during the march in. Yes, I think you might be right, but we need a source. 124.155.207.10 (talk) 10:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect information about Terracotta soldiers?

'The next segment saw ancient terracotta soldiers and Chinese opera'. Although it is sourced, I believe the website is incorrect as I have watched the opening ceremony again and could not see any of this. The Beijing Opera with the puppets entered right after the performance of the 3000 disciples and the moving type set. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.108.49.108 (talk) 01:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it wasn't broadcast, it was seen during the Ceremony ushering in the Chinese opera performance, but a lot of papers have it, so it did happen. 124.155.207.10 (talk) 10:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Faked Space Flight Comment

That was unneeded and unfounded so I deleted it.SChaos1701 (talk) 02:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

7.8 million viewers in Australia is impossible

The article states 7.8 million viewers in Australia watched the Opening Ceremony. The problem with this is that there are only about 7.8 million households in Australia - so this would mean that EVERY single household in Australia watched the Opening Ceremony, which is next to impossible.Davez621 (talk) 13:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I think this could be due to the fact they are assuming multiple people are watching in multiple occupant houses, with 20m people 7.8m is about 39%, still more acceptable to me than 4 billion of the world... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.119.159.189 (talk) 14:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I still think the numbers are way too hyped up. 1% of the USA's population watched it live. Half of the world was sleeping, and millions were at work, busy, etc. I'd say the figure of the world should be around 800 mill —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.182.134.94 (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Dave is assuming that every single household watched it, rather than assuming that at least two people in half the households watched it. I mean seriously, which is easier to believe, that every single person in the world sat in their living room alone in the cold watching it by themselves, or that less than one third of the households saw it as couples or all rugged up with their families of at least one child? Not to mention those that chose to watch it via other means, like those mobile phone Olympic content deals, or at work in groups or on the internets. JayKeaton (talk) 13:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

In Australia, a 'viewer' is always counted as a household, not an individual. The latter is impossible to determine, because in any particular house, or for any particular TV set, you cannot know how many people are sitting behind the screen watching. It would be MUCH more preferable to state the number of householdsDavez621 (talk) 11:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Rubbish. Australia (at least, the Oztam measurement of capital city ratings) uses people meters to measure TV ratings that require participants to record when an extra person enters or leaves the room. Here is the full ratings report. The 7.8 million figure is the cumulative estimate of metro + regional viewers who saw at least some part of the opening ceremony. The average audience over the full broadcast was 3.3 million in the 5 cities. - Mark 04:40, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

800m is a bit low though, there were 840m or so Chinese alone watching. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.119.159.183 (talk) 14:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Faked singer scandal

What's the reason to remove the section of faked singer scandal?--Simpletranslate (talk) 15:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

It's already covered under "Welcoming ceremony". _dk (talk) 15:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

We should emphasis this scandal in a separated section.--Simpletranslate (talk) 15:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Why would we want to do that, if we're not interested in bringing a point across? _dk (talk)

It's a scandal. Chinese government wants to hide it. We should show this scandal clearly in wikipedia. Why do you mention NPOV?--Simpletranslate (talk) 15:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

You should read what you just said and ask yourself again. _dk (talk) 15:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you think it's a scandal or not?--Simpletranslate (talk) 15:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course not. As I said, the section does not need repeating to prove a point. The girls themselves sure don't see it as a big scandal. Minor controversy, yes, but nothing that warranted accusations of "Fake" and international shaming. _dk (talk) 15:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

It's good for you to answer the questions in the talk page before you undo other's edition. Why is it not a scandal? You think people should ask the two little girls how they think about whether it's a scandal or not?--Simpletranslate (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

If you can read Chinese, I invite you to find what the singer girl said when asked by CCTV how she felt that she didn't appear on the ceremony. Her reply was: "I have no regrets, my voice was in the ceremony and that's enough." [17] _dk (talk) 16:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

How old is the singer girl? Does she know the word of scandal in Chinese? Does she know what a scandal is? Should people follow the opinion of a 7 years old little girl on such kind of issue? What's your own reason to say that it's not a scandal?--Simpletranslate (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it in Wikipedia's business to report on the fact that you supposedly cares for the feelings of the singer girl?--Huaiwei (talk) 18:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place for trivial details. The same applies with the BSoD section and should be shortened or removed altogether. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.136.199 (talk) 16:12, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

What's BSoD?--Simpletranslate (talk) 16:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I assume it means the blue screen of death section. Anyway I think the section should be refractored slightly, and give equal weight to all the important parts as per WP:UNDUE. ~AH1^(TCU) 17:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

The song was lip-synced , but I don't think, unlike User:Simpletranslate suggested, the Chinese government is trying to "hide" it since according the references cited on this article, this news was revealed by the ceremony's musical director with interview on state-owned media.--Balthazarduju (talk) 19:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Not saying its a scandal either but it is getting alot of media coverage and should be set forth in its own section http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/08/12/oly.kids/index.html (top story on cnn). Maybe it will blow over the next few days, but alot of edits seem to suggest on this page that it will keep changing to reflect this. Perhaps a seperated section properely sourced as a controversy is necessary. Ottawa4ever (talk) 20:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

New section created for both the faked singer and fireworks controversies. I agree that since this is getting a lot of attention in the western media that this should be reported. However it appears that the Chinese sources have been "censored" by the great firewall. Allan kuan1992 (talk) 21:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

People are ok with Yang Peiyi becoming a top celebrity overnight. I don't know where these censored talk are coming from. Even the director is pretty open about it. Benjwong (talk) 23:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

It appears that some are intent on turning this article into yet another attempt to circumvent the "great censorship wall of China" then an objective means of assessing true notability in the context of the entire show. This is especially true when the ones insisting on drumming up the issue also allege that there is a cover-up, despite being proven otherwise. The lip-sync issue is being discussed quite extensively in Chinese forums[18], so I suppose they all circumvented censorship as well, if it exists at all? I believe it is merely a matter of time before the so-called "controversy" blows over.--Huaiwei (talk) 08:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This is hilarious. I am amazed at how hard certain individuals editing this page are working to dilute/delete the controversy regarding this lip synching. What is interesting is the comment regarding Luciano Pavarotti’s performance, a man suffering from cancer using a pre recording of his own voice. This event is different, the controversey isnt so much the lip synching in general its that they used a totally different person who singed the song to lip synch. Just because the original girl wasnt 'cute' enough. Sorry guys this isnt going to blow over, it will be remembered, and internationally as a fraud rather than controversy.Shawninmont (talk) 13:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Just don't get too caught up and you can see things in the right perspective. The International Olympics Committee sanctioned it, stating it was perfectly viable and they knew of it. So let's get back to the important parts, the Games. DORC (talk) 14:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

And the efforts of those determined to dig up all kinds of kinks about the ceremony are just as hilarious, if not more so. Perhaps we should report on the "controversy" that the little boy's PRC flag was upside down?[19] That Li Ning "ran" faster then he should and overshot the scroll midway during his run? That one performer jumped up from his wooden box a tad too soon? Anyway someone seems to have similar ideas, now claiming that the failure to air the performances has some "political" reasons behind it, when the far more likely reason is that the ceremony has obviously far exceeded its air-time, and most broadcasters will have to cut it off once the last fireworks goes off. That certainly happened on my local television, where they cut the broadcast even before the source did. So just how far are we going to let this go on?--Huaiwei (talk) 18:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

brackets distracting?

"[e]xperts estimated ... more than two billion" is in the article. Wouldn't simply stating "Experts estimated ... more than two billion" be easier to read? Or even less distracting to just paraphrase? JayKeaton (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Heads of State

Can someone help add the position held by the "Heads of State"? 59.149.32.77 (talk) 12:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

We've decided to omit titles for the sake of consistency but you are welcome to add the spouses of the heads and dignitaries which are missing from the sources listed above 70.24.136.195 (talk) 13:26, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Are there plans to relase it or is it possible to see it anywhere

Is there any plan to relase the opening ceremony on some media format ? --Molobo (talk) 15:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Children representing 56 ethnic groups of modern China

Someone add this to the section. However, we should know that when the olympic flame is firstly collected in Athens, it is also performed by actors, both two occasions are ceremonies, and the collection of olympic flame is also more "holy" than the entering of National Flag. Why can't the Chinese flag be brought in by actors who can symbolize the fact that Chinese consists of 56 ethnic groups? Why it is put into the glitches section?

I want to say something to some western people, as a Chinese who was born in Hong Kong when it was still under British rule and has been receiving western education in this international city, from my bottom of my heart:

When you intend to add some (demerits) content into the sereral articles about this Games, please take a more neutral, independent and critical view but not biased because of the anti-China feeling that you obtained from the media of western world. I live in Hong Kong where I can access all western agencies' news. More than 50% of them (since Jan 2008) are really biased and many of the reporters are actually not familiar with Chinese affairs. For example, they play the video of Nepal police violence in Tibet issue and claim they are Chinese soliders, do they even know how Chinese police dressed? Do they know the co-existence between the majority of Tibet people and Han Chinese? (I know because I have a study tour there.)

To speak neutrally, I fully admit the political system of Chinese government has much rooms for improvement and it should be blame for several other issues. But, dear western friends, you can blame (as both of us have freedom of speech) but please also look more into the the reality in China and let youself familiar with the Chinese issue to a certain extend first. For example the difficulties met when there are 1.3 billion people.

About the Games, I cannot stop you from blaming the Chinese government (sometimes you are absolutely right, critically), but do consider that the Games is also the dream of 1.3 billion Chinese people who are not bad at all. It's really our dream to hold this Games. 100 years ago, China was invaded by Eight-Nation Alliance—Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—plus Belgium, Spain and the Netherlands, Chinese have been hoping to recover from that, ccan't we? Be objective at least China never sent a solider to the above countries.

In regard to the ceremony, please see the official production documentary (link), and you will see there are really footprint-firework that night, the preparation and you will find it is even with the support of an American manufacturer or expert. Please maintain certain extend of respect to the Chinese people (not government) and I think you will not disagree that over 2000 men acting the same act at one time is amazing in more than one scenes in the ceremony and their effots which you do not know worth praise. (you will know if you see the above documentary video.)

Please forgive me if I am speaking to much or some are not relating to the opening ceremony article. But I have to express those after I have read the whole page of this discussion. Someone is really like "finding bone from a cooked egg" as User:Huaiwei pointed out in the above sections!? All the above contents are true and sources can be provided. -59.149.32.77 (talk) 17:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

To me the whole criticism section is absurd and looks like sinophobia. I would prefer it deleted.--Molobo (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

If BOCOG had stated that "performers will wear ethnic costumes from 56 ethnic groups", this wouldn't be a problem. In fact, as a representative from BOCOG stated and I agree as well, you can have actors dress in ethnic costumes different from their own. But BOCOG instead decided to fake representation and participation of ethnic groups while claiming that those groups were actually appearing in the opening ceremony. Why couldn't BOCOG find one children each from these ethnic groups good enough to appear? What kind of message is BOCOG trying to send by not having any ethnic group appear and replacing them with Han Chinese? If you are from those ethnic groups, you should be angry that your group is not a part of the opening ceremony. BOCOG had turned this into the celebration of Han Chinese and not of China as a whole.--Revth (talk) 00:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

If they are really of the 56 ethnic group, people can still accuse Beijing government of not celebrating with the 56 groups in "action" instead of a "show". I know people always care the right of the ethnic groups in China, I can tell you the majority of them is peacefully coexisting with the Han. I hope wikipedians will not misled by the western media (at least have critically thinking) and those tibet people appear on your home TV are majority? NEVER! I fully admit these are rooms for improvement of the Chinese government, but when people try hard to find tiny demerits from the ceremony to the article while the majority of the world is amazed, I think it is not fair to ALL Chinese people, don't people agree that the efforts of them worth praise? When I see some people biased (report demerit ONLY), it will only make western people farther from the Chinese. -59.149.32.77 (talk) 03:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)