Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision

Eurovision all cities map

For a long time, I have noticed that the map used in List of host cities of the Eurovision Song Contest (displayed above) is not as it should be. I tried fixing the map about two years ago, but I failed as this file is not up to my expertise. I was hoping that someone would fix it, but the issue has gone unresolved for almost 2 years. Can someone with more expertise fix this file? Otherwise, if the file remains the way it is, there really is no point in using it on the page anymore. Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 06:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I found the issue and was able to fix the map. If there are any more issues with the map, please let me know. Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 03:24, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for figuring out how to correct the file! Per my comment in the file history I removed the inset of Australia given that any editions which may be hosted by Australia will only ever be held in another competing country given the terms of their participation, and as this map is to primarily indicate hosting nations and not participating or winning countries it didn't feel right to include Australia, and would perhaps be misleading to the casual reader. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aris Odi: thank you for fixing the map! I don't know how to properly edit it but Stockholm is missing. Could you add it please? dummelaksen (talk • contribs) 21:37, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dummelaksen: Stockholm should be there now. Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 00:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sims2aholic8: I only added Australia because the darker grey colour indicates countries that have competed but never hosted, however, perhaps the darker grey colour is unnecessary because it is not shown in the map key and in Junior Eurovision Kazakhstan is also not allowed to host but would look strange if it remained in a lighter grey colour. Since this map is as you stated to primarily indicate hosting nations and not participating or winning countries, do you think the map should use only one grey colour? Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 00:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to make changes to Infobox song contest

I've been thinking really hard about how we could make the "Participants" section on {{Infobox song contest}} more simple for the reader. Here's what I propose:

We change the heading "Participants" to "Participating countries"
We change the labels "Debuting countries", "Returning countries" and "Non-returning countries" to "Debuted", "Returned" and "Became inactive" respectively, and we only add to these labels after the contest has taken place. This way, the labels won't simultaneously be able to appear as "is returning" or "is debuting" but rather only that they DID return or DID debut, which better reflects that the contest has taken place and helps the issue of people adding the countries to these labels too soon. On that note, as I already briefly mentioned, this means that the labels would only be updated once the contest has taken place, rather than when the final list of participants is released, however, I personally believe this practice would be better as it isn't definite that a country will take part until it has actually taken part in a contest that has taken place. Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 10:13, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aris Odi:, I don't like "Became inactive" and "Non-returning countries", but for the other I think it's a good idea. --Esc0fans -and my 12 points go to... 13:07, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Esc0fans: I mean if we don't use "Became inactive" as opposed to the current "Non-returning", what could we use? We've already established that "Withdrawing" or "Withdrew" doesn't make sense. But I definitely think that the label needs to change somehow because "Non-returning" isn't clear enough to the casual reader in my opinion. Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 08:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I like the proposal, but the one thing that gives me pause is that this infobox section is typically finalized when the official list is published at the participation deadline. We'd be holding off on this quick summary for several months during a time when the article is the most useful for interested readers. It will be very difficult to keep the infobox empty until the contest occurs. Grk1011 (talk) 17:11, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with @Grk1011: that withholding the information until after the contest has happened is a bad idea.
Therefore, using a present progressive tense (debuting) is better than the past tense (debuted), in my opinion. Deancarmeli (talk) 08:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe this proposal has merit, and I certainly believe that there is some work out there to make things simpler or improve the layout of articles, however like Grk1011 and Deancarmeli I also believe the wording proposed above is problematic for the same reasons. While I do agree with your point regarding a country isn't definite until the contest takes place, which is policy for a host of aspects on other Eurovision articles which are not updated until after the contest has occurred (e.g. in country articles, history, facts and figures etc.), I think ignoring the official list for the purposes of the infobox until after the contest takes place would be difficult to maintain; we already have a difficult enough time as it is to stop random updates with each returning country being announced, but to keep that up with an official list would be a lot of wasted effort in my opinion. I do agree with your point regarding the phrasing for "Non-returning" countries, however whether there is a better alternative I'm not sure. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 10:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What about "Non-continuing countries"? Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 04:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Continuing"/"Non-continuing" is inaccurate. ESC is not a continuous broadcast and each year's event is a separate one that countries have to individually sign up to. Furthermore, "returning" and "non-returning" should be aligned. IceWelder [✉] 11:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a big difference between what "Returning" means and what "Non-returning" needs to mean. Using "Non-continuing" works because a country can continue to sign up for the event every year or it doesn't sign up for the contest again the next. Just because ESC is not a continuous broadcast, doesn't remove the fact that a country can continue to sign up for the event every year. It's not like every year the event becomes a different contest. It will always be the Eurovision Song Contest that the country is signing up for. "Non-returning" is a homonym and thus is misleading because if it is as you said aligned with "Returning" then every country that has ever participated in the contest but is not in the said year could be included, i.e. in 2021 Luxembourg, Morocco, Slovakia, Turkey to name a few. The point of this label is to indicate a country that participated the year before but did not participate in the said year. The current label just doesn't make it easily understandable for the casual reader. I believe that "Non-continuing" makes it simpler for the reader to understand what the label means. Also, changing "Returning" to "Continuing" was never in my proposal. Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 13:39, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If "returning" means "participating after not participating in the year prior", as it is currently used, the inverse "non-returning" would mean "not participating after participating in the year prior". In the same way that you define "non-returning", one could argue that "returning" could mean "participating after participating previously". I'm not sure going back-and-forth one the wording is useful, as no three-word piece could be explanatory enough for this. Since the current wording was approved by a small-scale consensus, I would propose to instead add an {{Abbr}} with an explanation to the existing phrasing. The template sandbox had a proposed wording since March, and I just updated it. Please review whether this is a plausible option. As Alucard 16 noted, whatever change to be implemented needs to gain consensus first. IceWelder [✉] 00:08, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Non-continuing" in my opinion is simpler than adding {{Abbr}} to the current "Non-returning". I simply do not believe in any way that "Non-continuing" can be misunderstood by the reader, thus using that label would not require the use of {{Abbr}}. Remember that the two labels "Returning" and "Non-returning/continuing" mean two different things. Their wording can be different. Why make the template overcomplicated with {{Abbr}} when there is a simpler proposal? Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 01:02, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Both "non-returning" and "non-continuing" are misleading in their own ways, like I pointed out above. {{Abbr}} allows us to properly explain the meaning of the field with a short sentence without cluttering the infobox itself. Off-topic, but there are also actual antonyms to "continue", which would be better suited than "non-continuing", in the event this wording was chosen (which would still require consensus). IceWelder [✉] 21:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Turkvision 2020

Good morning everyone!!! Have you heard about the Turkvision 2020?? have you made the page???
to answer me, ping me pls, tank you --Esc0fans -and my 12 points go to... 13:05, 18 October 2020 (UTC) @Aris Odi:--Esc0fans -and my 12 points go to... 13:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Esc0fans: I have added some content on Turkvision 2020 to the articles Turkvision Song Contest and Germany in the Turkvision Song Contest, but have not created the article Turkvision Song Contest 2020 as all the secondary sources I have found come from Eurovoix World, so I am not sure whether the 2020 contest would be notable enough to merit an article. If there are other secondary sources found, then we can consider creating the article. dummelaksen (talk • contribs) 13:13, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:ABU Song Contest 2020

Template:ABU Song Contest 2020 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. dummelaksen (talk • contribs) 20:32, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting! Grk1011 (talk) 16:20, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you made the page of this edition???--Esc0fans -and my 12 points go to... 11:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Esc0fans: ABU Song Contest 2020 dummelaksen (talk • contribs) 11:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dummelaksen:, sorry I mean ABU TV Song Festival--Esc0fans -and my 12 points go to... 16:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dummelaksen:, if you need it here there is the italian page (under construction)

Selection dates

I'm not sure if this has come up on other articles, but @009988aaabbbccc: and I have a disagreement over what dates should be in the "Selection date(s)" section of the Infobox on Cyprus in the Eurovision Song Contest 2021. My view is that both the article and song selection were announced on the same date, therefore that's the selection date. The other viewpoint is that since the song is not "released", then its selection date is later on. The latter appears to be how it was done in previous years. I'm not so sure it makes sense though. Thoughts? Grk1011 (talk) 16:20, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the selection date should be the date when both the artist and song were announced. The label doesn't say "Released", it says "Selection date(s)", so it doesn't make sense for the release date of the song to be placed under that label. Perhaps, therefore, the infobox needs "Released" added in somehow, although, the song's page already covers that information anyway. Aris Odi ❯❯❯ talk 05:16, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2021 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2021 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2021 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

―JochemvanHees (talk) 17:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]