Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2003

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is related to the WikiProject Eurovision. This Project is an attempt to enhance, organise, and standardise articles about the Eurovision Song Contest. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

Hello, Fonzy. I see that you removed "Turkey" from the bit in the opening paragraph which said who won. But aren't people more usually interested in which country has won, rather than who the artist was? I think the winning country should be mentioned in the opening paragraph. -- Oliver P. 13:35 25 May 2003 (UTC)

I was the person who put Turkey in after the singers name. Her name does not tell me which country won unless I go all through the list of singers to find which country she represents. Im baffled. Fonzy, please explain. Thanks Adrian Pingstone 15:29 25 May 2003 (UTC)
I forgot to say well done for the huge amount of work you've put into these Eurovision entries. Very well done. Adrian Pingstone 15:32 25 May 2003 (UTC)
Oh yes, so did I. Sorry. :) Well done, yes. Good stuff. -- Oliver P. 15:34 25 May 2003 (UTC)
I think I understand why you deleted Turkey, is it because it was not a part of your template? How hard would it be to change the template and why shouldn't improvements be made by other Wikipedians, like I just did? After all, the contest is only once a year (or is it twice from now on?) so a small manual addition to your article is trivial for other people to do. Adrian Pingstone 15:41 25 May 2003 (UTC)

Well thankyou for thaking me :-), well at the moment I have, my AS level's to revise, also I have otehr main things to do on the Eurovision Pages, like Scoresheets, more background info on each contest, information about countries partisipation in the contest, each individual year of each countries particpation (national contests for example). Also I am still waiting help form the EBU about conflicting data I have to get sorted. So at the moment I rather keep certain things under same basic layout, rather than make them look all different, which soem already do, altough only slightly. The original reason why i chose just to put the artist('s)/group's name, is they are the ones that get the pretty award for winning. If it was like the Rugby World Cup, where the "country" wins like Australia, I would put that. - fonzy


BTW I am even goign to see If I am allowed to add, the Rules for each Eurovision. -fonzy

Cool. Good luck. :) -- Oliver P. 18:43 25 May 2003 (UTC)

Thankyou I will need it. - fonzy

For those who are putting the tieing ruke for non first place read Section XV point 2, of the ESC Rules 2003:

"Should there be a tie for first place, the Grand Prix shall be awarded to the song that has obtained points from the highest number of countries. If the songs received votes from the same number of countries, then the highest number of 12-point scores shall qualify. If the winner cannot be determined by this procedure, then the number of times ten points have been awarded shall be the deciding factor; if necessary, this method shall continue until account has been taken of the number of times one point has been awarded."


Contents

[edit] Serbia and Montenegro?

I've just removed some info saying that Serbia and Montenegro withdrew their entry (Cija si by Toše Proeski, sung in Serbian). If anyone can provide a source, please feel free to put that info back in, with a link to that source. Thank you! :-) - Lewis R « т · c » 19:17, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

You were correct in removing that information since it was known beforehand that Serbia and Montenegro were not going to participate this year since the final spot was given to Ukraine. Tose Proeski just happened to be the winner of Beovizija which doesnt mean his entry was withdrawn because they didnt enter anything. If you want you can also check out the Eurovision 1995 page because Im a bit confused about the Macedonian withdrawl. Evilperson 20 20:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Contradiction

So, would the Irish televotes give or not the Russians the victory? Zé da Silva 07:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I've added a link to the Irish televote results and cleaned the section up a bit, so the section now answers your question. - Lewis R « т · c » 18:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The article still contradicts itself. The third paragraph of the intro (which by the way is too long) claims that "it was later revealed that the televote results would have given Russia full points, which would have given them the win" while the "Voting structure" section says that "if the Irish televote results had been included, Turkey would still have won, and Russia would not have got any more points (though would have come second)". Alarm 16:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Where is the winners foto

??????

[edit] bosnian song

she sang on croatian/english!

[edit] Removal of voting allegation

I removed the paragraph claiming Russia and Romania's voting was corrupt. No credible source for such an accusation was given and certainly no EBU investigation was ever instigated over this. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 20:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:ESC2003.jpg

Image:ESC2003.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Eurovision03-presenters01.jpg

Image:Eurovision03-presenters01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

Right, I've completely rewritten the article with a view to possibly making it a good article. I thought I should explain some of the major changes—some of which go against the norm for ESC articles, I know—so...

  • I've removed the flags from the infobox per Wikipedia:FLAG#Help_the_reader_rather_than_decorate. There's no other reason, the flags were simply unnecessary.
  • I've removed the list of spokespeople. I just don't see how a list of people who are mostly non-entities (even in their own countries, in some cases) adds to the encyclopedic content of an article. I'm willing to fork the list into its own article, if anyone thinks it's a big problem. The most notable spokespeople are mentioned in the text.
  • I removed a lot of quite random detail, like the bit about the order of tracks on the CD; I mean honestly, why? The 2004 info should have been in the 2004 article, too.
  • There are a lot of esctoday.com references, mainly because they were the only site reporting in depth back in late 2002.
  • I've moved the map so that it's embedded into the text. It's perfectly clear here and takes up less space, in my opinion.

I think that's it, if there's anything I've left out complain here. Chwech 17:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

An additional point: I haven't bolded the 2004 finalists because they're listed in the "Implications" section. I've moved that section because it was likely to be missed at the bottom of the article. Chwech 20:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)