Talk:YLE

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please don't delete the controversy section again. That's just lame. If you want to criticise it, do so.

I don't see any reason why the neutrality of the controversy text should be considered disputed. It's true isn't it? Reporadio labeled YLE for ages. Then again, YLE is the only television medium that can claim itself independent from commercial interest. -Christian

In my opinion, having been watching YLE my whole life, YLE has always been neutral and objective in its broadcasting, especially after the beginning of the nineties. Thus I feel compelled to delete the part in the controversy section about taking sides in the Palestine-Israel conflict. It's not YLE giving a harsh picture of Israel & The US, but rather they themselves have conducted indeed harsh and brutal policies. Show me one non-US or non-israeli broadcasting channel that doesn't show these two nations in the aforementioned conflict in a bad light, and this is because it simply is the truth. Also, the part about television taxes and license fees should be edited as "..by some small sections.." as I have never ever encountered anyone, or heard about anyone, who has seen them as unfair or inefficient. 270 e per year for quality tv is a pretty good deal. The only ones who don't like these fees are the private channel executives, trying to pocket more profits. And about the Eino Repo being a member of a communist party is total bullsh*t. He was given the chair of YLE as a candidate of the then Agrarian League, a centrist party. He was accused of favouring student radicalism and young reporters and their socially critical programs in the company, which eventually caused YLE to be dubbed "Reporadio". --AlexKM 09:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Repo was indeed a communist, a quote from Finnish language Wikipedia: "Hänet valittiin 1969 Yleisradion radiojohtajaksi SKDL:n mandaatilla, ja tästä virasta hän jäi eläkkeelle 1974." Most my acquaintaces agree with me that the television licence fee is far too high, and ridiculously risen every year (even though there's a campaign about it that says "If you don't pay, the others pay more). It seems to be more like "If you pay, others pay more." One can also dispute the quality of YLE's programs. Especially Susanne Päivärinta is like the Finnish left version of Bill O'Reily. Also, the current system relies on special tv-licence inspectors who harrass people who don't have the tv-permit. Regardless whether they owned a tv or not. Much more cost efficient system would be just to add that tv-fee to taxes. Then it would also be progressive and fair to everyone. Now the tv-fee is the same to a student and a pensioner then it is to the CEO of multinational corporation. -Argan

first off, we can' be sure whether Repo was indeed communist, as even the finnish quote you added doesn't state that, but rather just that he was given the job of the "radio chief" of YLE under the mandate SKDL. Neither does the finnish wikipedia page. He was given the job of head of YLE by the Agrarian League, backed up by President Kekkonen, and THEN he made his supposedly controversial changes in YLE, again as said in the finnish language wikipedia. AFTER this term, he was elected as the radiochief. Remember, YLE was even in that time more than just a radio channel.As to your opinions about the licence fee, I'll be the lamer, and say no original research. Your acquaintances are not the finnish people, and though I admit I also used the same excuse of "I've never encountered...", a stalemate situation of deleting the whole sentence is I think appropriate. Please do paste it again, when you have something with which to back it up.

-AlexKM 15:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] About Repo and the controversy section in general!

-Ok, what was Repo's connection to Kekkonen, exactly?

AlexKM 13:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

And would you please, state a reason (and very prefereably also a source) for the changes you make! This is not a forum for political opinions, but an encyclopedia! Otherwise, you're just vandals ;). AlexKM 19:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

That's right this isn't SUPPOSED to be a political forum. No, Repo didn't favour just any young reporters, he favoured leftist and communist reporters and that's a fact. Kekkonen's agrarian league is also the cause of the term Finlandization.

But I guess it's too much for some to tell the truth in an "encyclopaedia" that has a HUGE leftist bias to begin with. -Argan

Point is, I don't really care what YOU say is a fact, a care about reasons and references to support these "facts". So go get those references, and THEN come and change stuff. AlexKM 13:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Allright. Maybe I was naiïve to think this would actually be unbiased forum. I guess you are just like most Finns, afraid of the truth and that's why you need to live in denial. Maybe it's better to just remove the controversy section all-together, since it serves no purpose as it is. Maybe Yle's dark communist past won't always be this hush hush. BTW. Check the English language article of Eino Repo. There's still some accurate comments about him. Why don't you censor them out while you are at it? -Argan

[edit] Requested move

This has been listed at WP:RM as an "uncontroversial" move, the target being Finnish Broadcasting Company. I don't see this as uncontroversial, and I don't believe that the descriptive term "Finnish Broadcasting Company" is any better than the proper noun "Yleisradio". In this document, the company refers to itself mostly as "YLE" and once states that "The company’s official name is Yleisradio Oy and it was founded in 1926", with no mention of the "Finnish Broadcasting Company" moniker. --Stemonitis 09:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The "Finnish Broadcasting Company" is a proper noun and the official English name used by YLE itself (see bottom of [1]) and in all high-quality printed material published in English in Finland (e.g. Finnish Music Quarterly: [2], [3], [4], [5], Finnish Music Information Centre [6]), in the relevant legislation, and by the regulatory authority [7]. --Espoo 10:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
But worth voting on, I would think. I will save my arguments for a full move request.--Stemonitis 10:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
This is a clear case of your private opinion against the combined authority of all reputable sources listed, i.e. the institutions listed and all serious publishing in English. Even the document you incorrectly searched and incorrectly claimed has no mention of the "Finnish Broadcasting Company" moniker does use the official English name and says ONE WORD. A THOUSAND STORIES • The word is YLE, the Finnish Broadcasting Company. (my emphasis) There is nothing to vote on. Wikipedia is based on reputable sources, not private theories or preferences. --Espoo 11:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
YLE would be a possibility. Yleisradio would be a possibility. They themselves use "YLE - Finnish Broadcasting Company" quite a lot (but "Finnish Broadcasting Company" without the "YLE" more rarely). I am merely trying to indicate that the move is not uncontroversial and that several alternatives exist. The situation could be interpreted in many ways and should be opened up to wider discussion, culminating in a vote. I'm happy with the current title. The burden of proof is on you to show that it is unacceptable and that your replacement is better. My opinions are not the issue here. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just saying that you might be. --Stemonitis 11:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
No, the burden of proof is on you to show why your preference is better than the practice used in all the reputable sources listed and all carefully edited texts. Did you look at the links? YLE is famous for its Finglish. Carefully edited texts in English use only "the Finnish Broadcasting Company"; they may add the Finnish name or the abbreviation, but they never call it that at first mention. And did you read Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Use_English_words? There is absolutely no reason for using a foreign name as an article name, and there is even less reason to use an abbreviation. Please spend some time reading the above links and Wikipedia:Manual of Style instead of continuing your quick and erroneous replies. There is nothing to vote on. Wikipedia is based on reputable sources, not private theories or preferences. --Espoo 11:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The fact that we can have this argument indicates that the move is not uncontroversial. The eventual outcome of the debate is a separate issue. If you are so confident of your view, then it should be no problem to work through the procedure, because others will agree. Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Use_English_words concerns transliterations, which are not an issue here, because Finnish uses (more or less) the same alphabet. --Stemonitis 12:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
You ignored the link provided at that link with more details (Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(use_English)) which says clearly use the most commonly used English version of the name for the article, as you would find it in other encyclopedias and reference works. There is no way that you would find "Yleisradio" in Britannica or any other serious English publication as an article title or first mention. Britannica mentions YLE only once, obviously the same way as all the other reputable sources presented above: "The state-run Finnish Broadcasting Company (Oy Yleisradio Ab [YLE]; established 1926) has...".
This is not a real argument because you are not providing any reputable sources and because you continue to ignore the fact that the current title is in violation of WP policies. WP is based on reputable sources, and they all use "Finnish Broadcasting Company". Please stop wasting my time and that of others at RM. Just admit you're wrong and say the truth at RM; that all reputable sources support the proposed move. The article also needs to be rewritten to reflect normal serious editing practice. --Espoo 13:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The article has been at its current title for over three years, without anyone believing it needed to be moved. I cited one source with clearly indicated that the official name of the company included none of "Finnish", "Broadcasting" and "Company". This is enough to warrant a proper debate. The current name is not in breach of policy if the company is more commonly referred to by its Finnish name, as seems to be the case.
It is never referred to only by its Finnish name in well-edited English texts, as amply shown by the sites listed. Many WP articles have incorrect titles for a long time, especially when they're on anything in a small country. If Finland hadn't won Eurovision and i hadn't happen to notice this, the incorrect title could have remained unchallenged for a much longer time.
And you incorrectly searched the single, lone source you cited. As i explained: Even the document you incorrectly searched and incorrectly claimed has no mention of the "Finnish Broadcasting Company" moniker does use the official English name and says ONE WORD. A THOUSAND STORIES • The word is YLE, the Finnish Broadcasting Company. (my emphasis)
I cannot imagine why you would be so unwilling to go through a proper move request.
I had hoped to save time on such an obvious case.
"Wikipedia is based on reputable sources" — true, but Wikipedia is also based on consensus, and neither you nor I can form a consensus on our own, and consensus cannot be reached without wider community engagement.
Even if the majority of participants in a discussion want something, that should not be accepted if it can't be verified by (or even contradicts!) reputable sources, as explained every time you make an edit: Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. --Espoo 15:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
You may be right that the best title is "Finnish Broadcasting Company", but trying to side-line the issue by calling it uncontroversial is not the right approach. Please list the move at WP:RM and we'll see what happens. I'm prepared to be wrong, but I want a proper debate beforehand. One dissenting voice should be considered enough to demonstrate that a move is not uncontroversial, just as one one dissenting voice is enough to stop a PROD and trigger more detailed debate. To quote:
Things like capitalization and spelling mistakes would be appropriate here [in the uncontroversial section of WP:RM]… If there is any doubt as to whether a page move could be opposed by anyone, do not list it in this section.
--Stemonitis 14:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Clear violations of WP policy in addition to direct proof from the website of the institution concerned are normally uncontroversial proposals. We'll see what the admin does; most similarly supported proposals are accepted without a discussion, and we in addition have more than enough of that here. --Espoo 14:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Move to YLE. Yes, I know it wasn't requested but that actually seems to be the prevalent and unambiguous usage, and used by the company itself as well as throughout the article. Duja► 11:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Yleisradio → Finnish Broadcasting Company – Posting RM poll; arguments can be found above. I think it's pretty clear that Espoo and Stemonitis disagree about this point, and I suspect the best solution will involve bringing in outside opinions. Are there some good Finnish television talk pages where this question could be advertised, in a neutral manner? -GTBacchus(talk) 08:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

(Sorry, forgot to add the original proposal here with the arguments based on reputable sources:)

Yleisradio → Finnish Broadcasting Company according to Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(use_English). "Finnish Broadcasting Company" is the official English name used by Yleisradio itself (see bottom of [8]) and in all high-quality printed material published in English in Finland (e.g. Finnish Music Quarterly: [9], [10], [11], [12], Finnish Music Information Centre [13]), in the relevant legislation, and by the regulatory authority [14] --Espoo 19:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

I left a note requesting opinions over at Talk:Finland#Input requested. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


  • Support
As this page is in english, and so is targeted for a non-finnish audience, I suppose the move is valid, as Yleisradio is in the end only the finnish name for FBC. This way the status of YLE as national broadcast company will be clearer to non-finnish readers. Also to point out the link to the official site [15] (the same one Espoo pasted already), makes this argument quite valid. - AlexKM 13:25, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose
To my knowledge, even the English news start with "This is YLE news..." and not FBC even though this abbreviation can be found in its English web pages.. Seems actually that even the company itself is confused about its international name... Clarifer 18:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Different rules apply to spoken and written English. No well-edited English text in Finland ever uses YLE without first mentioning the official English name, the "Finnish Broadcasting Company". I will add the summary of the original arguments based on reputable sources because now they're difficult to find in the long discussion. --Espoo 19:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support, we should use the most common English usage. JohnnyBGood t c VIVA! 21:47, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose
Most often used name is YLE, so i recommend you move page Yleisradio -> YLE. FBC sounds too common or generic name. --Zzzzzzzzzz 18:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
You apparently didn't read the nomination or its links or don't know about basic concepts of WP:MOS. WP should use the most common form used in reputable sources. I have never seen a single English text in a well-edited journal or book that uses YLE at first mention. The first mention is always "the Finnish Broadcasting Company" or "the Finnish Broadcasting Company (YLE)" or "the Finnish Broadcasting Company (Yleisradio, YLE)". --Espoo 19:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
That's irrelevant. We're not going to move Tarja Halonen to "President of Finland" or "Finnish president", just because it is usually mentioned before the name. Prolog 12:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
You're confusing two completely different issues, namely synonyms (translations) and professional titles, which are additions, not synonyms. Halonen is not the only president of Finland. --Espoo 13:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. YLE is the most common title in English sources, so that would be fine. Yleisradio is also fine, since it is the official name. 91 Google News hits for "YLE", only 12 for "Finnish Broadcasting Company". The title doesn't need changing, and the first sentence of the article already describes YLE's role in Finland. Prolog 12:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
As shown above, YLE is not the most common name or title in well-edited English sources. A contrary claim without citing equally reputable sources is not a valid discussion contribution. The same is true for claims about the official name.
"Finnish Broadcasting Company" is the official English name used by Yleisradio itself (see bottom of [16]) and in all high-quality printed material published in English in Finland (e.g. Finnish Music Quarterly: [17], [18], [19], [20], Finnish Music Information Centre [21]), in the relevant legislation, and by the regulatory authority [22] --Espoo 13:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose - reasons given above. --Stemonitis 16:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
You did not present any reputable sources that support your opinion so it is only a personal preference. As shown above, Finnish Broadcasting Company is the term always used at first mention in reputable sources. Encyclopedic content has to be verifiable and your personal preferences should not be counted as a valid vote. --Espoo 20:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Espoo, please allow people to vote as they see fit, and do not try to pre-empt the eventual admin. The place for discussion is above, not here. --Stemonitis 09:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I am not preventing people from voting as they see fit. On the contrary, by pointing out that you need to cite reputable sources to have your vote valued and weighted as highly as votes that do cite reputable sources, i'm giving you a chance to improve your case. What you presented in the old discussion is not enough to contradict my reputable sources. In addition, as you can see by its heading, this is the discussion section. The section headed Survey is empty, and it seems that most other WP users find the separation into voting and discussing unintuitive and counterproductive. --Espoo 09:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. --Groshna 17:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Unless you cite reputable sources to back up your opinion, your vote should be ignored by a responsible admin deciding on the outcome of this dicussion. --Espoo 20:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] About the name

I really think that the abbreviation YLE seems to have taken the place as the most well-known trademark nowadays. Finnish Broadcasting Company is more of a description. I mean, look at RAI, for example. I don't think that anyone would change the name of the article to something like Italian Broadcasting Company..? - Aatox 19:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

All corporations should be listed with their primary, untranslated name. In this case, it is Yleisradio. There is, in principle, a translation to all non-English article names. But, these are secondary and not necessarily even generally recognized. --Vuo 20:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../y/l/e/Talk%7EYLE_e8a1.html"